TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 964164344; 15209 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/964164344?accountid=14244 L2 - http://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=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-04-05 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - 14TH STREET BRIDGE CORRIDOR PROJECT, ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA TO WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. AN - 964164309; 15206 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation system improvements within the 14th Street Bridge Corridor in Arlington County, Virginia and southwest Washington, District of Columbia are proposed. The Corridor consists of three four-lane bridges which carry Interstate-395 (I-395) and US Route 1 over the Potomac River. The northbound span of I-395, which opened in 1950, is the Arland D. Williams Bridge. The southbound span, which opened in 1962, is the George Mason Memorial Bridge. The center span was opened in 1972 for express traffic in both directions and is now named the Rochambeau Memorial Bridge. These three spans merge into two bridges that cross the Washington Channel and distribute traffic into downtown Washington. The Outlet Bridge carries traffic north onto 14th Street and the Case Bridge carries I-395 traffic into the Southeast Freeway. As the main gateway into the Nations Capital and northern Virginia, the Corridor provides important access to the National Mall, Constitution Avenue, Capitol Grounds, Lincoln Memorial, Verizon Center, RFK Stadium, East Potomac Park, Potomac River, George Washington Memorial Parkway (GWMP), Mt. Vernon Trail, the Pentagon, and Arlington National Cemetery. The study area extends over four miles along I-395 from VA Route 27 in Arlington County to the New York Avenue tunnel entrance at the National Mall in the southeast section of the District of Columbia. The Corridor experiences congestion in both directions during both the morning and evening peak travel periods. Traffic safety is impaired due to tight curvature on ramps, lane reductions in high volume areas, short weave areas, narrow shoulders, and lack of acceleration and deceleration lanes between ramp movements and mainline segments. The current project focuses on making the existing facilities operate more efficiently, while maintaining the existing number of general purpose highway lanes and managing congestion. This draft EIS evaluates: action alternatives related to bicycle/pedestrian, transit, and highway access; management alternatives; and a No Action Alternative. The seven action alternatives retained for further study include: improvements at each end of the Mason Bridge for bicycle and pedestrian access; construction of a separate bicycle/pedestrian crossing of the Potomac River and a grade-separated bicycle crossing of GWMP; creation of an integrated bicycle system, including signing for commuters and other bikers; construction of geometric improvements at I-395 and 9th Street; reduction of I-395 access points at Boundary Channel Drive; elimination of turn movements at the 14th Street and C Street intersection; and construction of bus lanes between Pentagon Transit Center and 14th Street at C Street, using inside shoulders on Rochambeau Bridge and transit signal priority treatment. Six management alternatives retained for further study include: expansion of incentives for telecommuting; increased participation in flexible work hours programs; parking management strategies; strengthened coordination and management; development of a driver education program specific to the Corridor; and modification of signing to create a uniform look and identity. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would address deficiencies with regards to congestion, capacity, safety, and overhead signing on a critical commuter link for automobile, transit, freight, and rail users. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Two historic properties, the Mount Vernon Memorial Highway and the East and West Potomac Parks Historic District, would be adversely affected. The action alternatives would have minor impacts on three national parks: West Potomac Park, East Potomac Park, and the GWMP. None of the parkland functions or uses would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act (P.L. 104-21) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 120008, 432 pages and maps, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VA/DC-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - National Parks KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - District of Columbia KW - Potomac River KW - Virginia KW - District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act, Funding KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/964164309?accountid=14244 L2 - http://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=2012-01-20&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.title=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Sterling, Virginia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-04-05 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 178 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012744035; 15209-1_0178 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 178 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012744035?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 181 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012744031; 15209-1_0181 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 181 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012744031?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 168 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012744029; 15209-1_0168 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 168 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012744029?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 167 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012744028; 15209-1_0167 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 167 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012744028?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 166 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012744020; 15209-1_0166 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 166 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012744020?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 164 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012744007; 15209-1_0164 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 164 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012744007?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 176 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743997; 15209-1_0176 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 176 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743997?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 175 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743992; 15209-1_0175 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 175 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743992?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 173 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743984; 15209-1_0173 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 173 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743984?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 172 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743981; 15209-1_0172 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 172 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743981?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 171 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743975; 15209-1_0171 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 171 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743975?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 170 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743972; 15209-1_0170 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 170 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743972?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 143 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743970; 15209-1_0143 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 143 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743970?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 155 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743968; 15209-1_0155 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 155 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743968?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 122 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743952; 15209-1_0122 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 122 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743952?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 128 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743945; 15209-1_0128 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 128 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743945?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 127 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743942; 15209-1_0127 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 127 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743942?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 163 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743941; 15209-1_0163 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 163 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743941?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 140 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743939; 15209-1_0140 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 140 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743939?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 139 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743931; 15209-1_0139 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 139 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743931?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 120 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743930; 15209-1_0120 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 120 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743930?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 124 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743928; 15209-1_0124 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 124 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743928?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 123 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743922; 15209-1_0123 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 123 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743922?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 131 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743916; 15209-1_0131 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 131 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743916?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 157 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743915; 15209-1_0157 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 157 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743915?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 101 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743914; 15209-1_0101 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 101 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743914?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 154 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743913; 15209-1_0154 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 154 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743913?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 130 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743912; 15209-1_0130 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 130 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743912?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 138 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743911; 15209-1_0138 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 138 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743911?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 153 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743910; 15209-1_0153 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 153 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743910?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 129 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743909; 15209-1_0129 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 129 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743909?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 137 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743908; 15209-1_0137 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 137 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743908?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 109 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743905; 15209-1_0109 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 109 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743905?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 111 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743904; 15209-1_0111 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 111 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743904?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 136 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743895; 15209-1_0136 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 136 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743895?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 133 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743884; 15209-1_0133 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 133 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743884?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 161 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743878; 15209-1_0161 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 161 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743878?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 132 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743877; 15209-1_0132 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 132 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743877?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 160 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743869; 15209-1_0160 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 160 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743869?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 125 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743865; 15209-1_0125 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 125 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743865?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 159 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743856; 15209-1_0159 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 159 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743856?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 113 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743849; 15209-1_0113 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 113 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743849?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 158 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743836; 15209-1_0158 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 158 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743836?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 112 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743831; 15209-1_0112 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 112 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743831?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 152 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743822; 15209-1_0152 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 152 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743822?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 142 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743821; 15209-1_0142 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 142 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743821?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 146 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743816; 15209-1_0146 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 146 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743816?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 151 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743812; 15209-1_0151 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 151 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743812?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 150 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743802; 15209-1_0150 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 150 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743802?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 116 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743797; 15209-1_0116 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 116 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743797?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 114 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743779; 15209-1_0114 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 114 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743779?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 117 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743772; 15209-1_0117 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 117 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743772?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 145 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743752; 15209-1_0145 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 145 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743752?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 144 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743735; 15209-1_0144 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 144 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743735?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - 14TH STREET BRIDGE CORRIDOR PROJECT, ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA TO WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. [Part 23 of 23] T2 - 14TH STREET BRIDGE CORRIDOR PROJECT, ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA TO WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. AN - 1012743272; 15206-8_0023 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation system improvements within the 14th Street Bridge Corridor in Arlington County, Virginia and southwest Washington, District of Columbia are proposed. The Corridor consists of three four-lane bridges which carry Interstate-395 (I-395) and US Route 1 over the Potomac River. The northbound span of I-395, which opened in 1950, is the Arland D. Williams Bridge. The southbound span, which opened in 1962, is the George Mason Memorial Bridge. The center span was opened in 1972 for express traffic in both directions and is now named the Rochambeau Memorial Bridge. These three spans merge into two bridges that cross the Washington Channel and distribute traffic into downtown Washington. The Outlet Bridge carries traffic north onto 14th Street and the Case Bridge carries I-395 traffic into the Southeast Freeway. As the main gateway into the Nations Capital and northern Virginia, the Corridor provides important access to the National Mall, Constitution Avenue, Capitol Grounds, Lincoln Memorial, Verizon Center, RFK Stadium, East Potomac Park, Potomac River, George Washington Memorial Parkway (GWMP), Mt. Vernon Trail, the Pentagon, and Arlington National Cemetery. The study area extends over four miles along I-395 from VA Route 27 in Arlington County to the New York Avenue tunnel entrance at the National Mall in the southeast section of the District of Columbia. The Corridor experiences congestion in both directions during both the morning and evening peak travel periods. Traffic safety is impaired due to tight curvature on ramps, lane reductions in high volume areas, short weave areas, narrow shoulders, and lack of acceleration and deceleration lanes between ramp movements and mainline segments. The current project focuses on making the existing facilities operate more efficiently, while maintaining the existing number of general purpose highway lanes and managing congestion. This draft EIS evaluates: action alternatives related to bicycle/pedestrian, transit, and highway access; management alternatives; and a No Action Alternative. The seven action alternatives retained for further study include: improvements at each end of the Mason Bridge for bicycle and pedestrian access; construction of a separate bicycle/pedestrian crossing of the Potomac River and a grade-separated bicycle crossing of GWMP; creation of an integrated bicycle system, including signing for commuters and other bikers; construction of geometric improvements at I-395 and 9th Street; reduction of I-395 access points at Boundary Channel Drive; elimination of turn movements at the 14th Street and C Street intersection; and construction of bus lanes between Pentagon Transit Center and 14th Street at C Street, using inside shoulders on Rochambeau Bridge and transit signal priority treatment. Six management alternatives retained for further study include: expansion of incentives for telecommuting; increased participation in flexible work hours programs; parking management strategies; strengthened coordination and management; development of a driver education program specific to the Corridor; and modification of signing to create a uniform look and identity. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would address deficiencies with regards to congestion, capacity, safety, and overhead signing on a critical commuter link for automobile, transit, freight, and rail users. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Two historic properties, the Mount Vernon Memorial Highway and the East and West Potomac Parks Historic District, would be adversely affected. The action alternatives would have minor impacts on three national parks: West Potomac Park, East Potomac Park, and the GWMP. None of the parkland functions or uses would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act (P.L. 104-21) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 120008, 432 pages and maps, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 23 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VA/DC-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - National Parks KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - District of Columbia KW - Potomac River KW - Virginia KW - District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act, Funding KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1012743272?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.title=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Sterling, Virginia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - 14TH STREET BRIDGE CORRIDOR PROJECT, ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA TO WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. [Part 11 of 23] T2 - 14TH STREET BRIDGE CORRIDOR PROJECT, ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA TO WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. AN - 1012743268; 15206-8_0011 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation system improvements within the 14th Street Bridge Corridor in Arlington County, Virginia and southwest Washington, District of Columbia are proposed. The Corridor consists of three four-lane bridges which carry Interstate-395 (I-395) and US Route 1 over the Potomac River. The northbound span of I-395, which opened in 1950, is the Arland D. Williams Bridge. The southbound span, which opened in 1962, is the George Mason Memorial Bridge. The center span was opened in 1972 for express traffic in both directions and is now named the Rochambeau Memorial Bridge. These three spans merge into two bridges that cross the Washington Channel and distribute traffic into downtown Washington. The Outlet Bridge carries traffic north onto 14th Street and the Case Bridge carries I-395 traffic into the Southeast Freeway. As the main gateway into the Nations Capital and northern Virginia, the Corridor provides important access to the National Mall, Constitution Avenue, Capitol Grounds, Lincoln Memorial, Verizon Center, RFK Stadium, East Potomac Park, Potomac River, George Washington Memorial Parkway (GWMP), Mt. Vernon Trail, the Pentagon, and Arlington National Cemetery. The study area extends over four miles along I-395 from VA Route 27 in Arlington County to the New York Avenue tunnel entrance at the National Mall in the southeast section of the District of Columbia. The Corridor experiences congestion in both directions during both the morning and evening peak travel periods. Traffic safety is impaired due to tight curvature on ramps, lane reductions in high volume areas, short weave areas, narrow shoulders, and lack of acceleration and deceleration lanes between ramp movements and mainline segments. The current project focuses on making the existing facilities operate more efficiently, while maintaining the existing number of general purpose highway lanes and managing congestion. This draft EIS evaluates: action alternatives related to bicycle/pedestrian, transit, and highway access; management alternatives; and a No Action Alternative. The seven action alternatives retained for further study include: improvements at each end of the Mason Bridge for bicycle and pedestrian access; construction of a separate bicycle/pedestrian crossing of the Potomac River and a grade-separated bicycle crossing of GWMP; creation of an integrated bicycle system, including signing for commuters and other bikers; construction of geometric improvements at I-395 and 9th Street; reduction of I-395 access points at Boundary Channel Drive; elimination of turn movements at the 14th Street and C Street intersection; and construction of bus lanes between Pentagon Transit Center and 14th Street at C Street, using inside shoulders on Rochambeau Bridge and transit signal priority treatment. Six management alternatives retained for further study include: expansion of incentives for telecommuting; increased participation in flexible work hours programs; parking management strategies; strengthened coordination and management; development of a driver education program specific to the Corridor; and modification of signing to create a uniform look and identity. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would address deficiencies with regards to congestion, capacity, safety, and overhead signing on a critical commuter link for automobile, transit, freight, and rail users. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Two historic properties, the Mount Vernon Memorial Highway and the East and West Potomac Parks Historic District, would be adversely affected. The action alternatives would have minor impacts on three national parks: West Potomac Park, East Potomac Park, and the GWMP. None of the parkland functions or uses would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act (P.L. 104-21) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 120008, 432 pages and maps, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 11 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VA/DC-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - National Parks KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - District of Columbia KW - Potomac River KW - Virginia KW - District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act, Funding KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1012743268?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.title=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Sterling, Virginia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - 14TH STREET BRIDGE CORRIDOR PROJECT, ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA TO WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. [Part 10 of 23] T2 - 14TH STREET BRIDGE CORRIDOR PROJECT, ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA TO WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. AN - 1012743264; 15206-8_0010 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation system improvements within the 14th Street Bridge Corridor in Arlington County, Virginia and southwest Washington, District of Columbia are proposed. The Corridor consists of three four-lane bridges which carry Interstate-395 (I-395) and US Route 1 over the Potomac River. The northbound span of I-395, which opened in 1950, is the Arland D. Williams Bridge. The southbound span, which opened in 1962, is the George Mason Memorial Bridge. The center span was opened in 1972 for express traffic in both directions and is now named the Rochambeau Memorial Bridge. These three spans merge into two bridges that cross the Washington Channel and distribute traffic into downtown Washington. The Outlet Bridge carries traffic north onto 14th Street and the Case Bridge carries I-395 traffic into the Southeast Freeway. As the main gateway into the Nations Capital and northern Virginia, the Corridor provides important access to the National Mall, Constitution Avenue, Capitol Grounds, Lincoln Memorial, Verizon Center, RFK Stadium, East Potomac Park, Potomac River, George Washington Memorial Parkway (GWMP), Mt. Vernon Trail, the Pentagon, and Arlington National Cemetery. The study area extends over four miles along I-395 from VA Route 27 in Arlington County to the New York Avenue tunnel entrance at the National Mall in the southeast section of the District of Columbia. The Corridor experiences congestion in both directions during both the morning and evening peak travel periods. Traffic safety is impaired due to tight curvature on ramps, lane reductions in high volume areas, short weave areas, narrow shoulders, and lack of acceleration and deceleration lanes between ramp movements and mainline segments. The current project focuses on making the existing facilities operate more efficiently, while maintaining the existing number of general purpose highway lanes and managing congestion. This draft EIS evaluates: action alternatives related to bicycle/pedestrian, transit, and highway access; management alternatives; and a No Action Alternative. The seven action alternatives retained for further study include: improvements at each end of the Mason Bridge for bicycle and pedestrian access; construction of a separate bicycle/pedestrian crossing of the Potomac River and a grade-separated bicycle crossing of GWMP; creation of an integrated bicycle system, including signing for commuters and other bikers; construction of geometric improvements at I-395 and 9th Street; reduction of I-395 access points at Boundary Channel Drive; elimination of turn movements at the 14th Street and C Street intersection; and construction of bus lanes between Pentagon Transit Center and 14th Street at C Street, using inside shoulders on Rochambeau Bridge and transit signal priority treatment. Six management alternatives retained for further study include: expansion of incentives for telecommuting; increased participation in flexible work hours programs; parking management strategies; strengthened coordination and management; development of a driver education program specific to the Corridor; and modification of signing to create a uniform look and identity. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would address deficiencies with regards to congestion, capacity, safety, and overhead signing on a critical commuter link for automobile, transit, freight, and rail users. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Two historic properties, the Mount Vernon Memorial Highway and the East and West Potomac Parks Historic District, would be adversely affected. The action alternatives would have minor impacts on three national parks: West Potomac Park, East Potomac Park, and the GWMP. None of the parkland functions or uses would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act (P.L. 104-21) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 120008, 432 pages and maps, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VA/DC-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - National Parks KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - District of Columbia KW - Potomac River KW - Virginia KW - District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act, Funding KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1012743264?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.title=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Sterling, Virginia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - 14TH STREET BRIDGE CORRIDOR PROJECT, ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA TO WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. [Part 9 of 23] T2 - 14TH STREET BRIDGE CORRIDOR PROJECT, ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA TO WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. AN - 1012743258; 15206-8_0009 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation system improvements within the 14th Street Bridge Corridor in Arlington County, Virginia and southwest Washington, District of Columbia are proposed. The Corridor consists of three four-lane bridges which carry Interstate-395 (I-395) and US Route 1 over the Potomac River. The northbound span of I-395, which opened in 1950, is the Arland D. Williams Bridge. The southbound span, which opened in 1962, is the George Mason Memorial Bridge. The center span was opened in 1972 for express traffic in both directions and is now named the Rochambeau Memorial Bridge. These three spans merge into two bridges that cross the Washington Channel and distribute traffic into downtown Washington. The Outlet Bridge carries traffic north onto 14th Street and the Case Bridge carries I-395 traffic into the Southeast Freeway. As the main gateway into the Nations Capital and northern Virginia, the Corridor provides important access to the National Mall, Constitution Avenue, Capitol Grounds, Lincoln Memorial, Verizon Center, RFK Stadium, East Potomac Park, Potomac River, George Washington Memorial Parkway (GWMP), Mt. Vernon Trail, the Pentagon, and Arlington National Cemetery. The study area extends over four miles along I-395 from VA Route 27 in Arlington County to the New York Avenue tunnel entrance at the National Mall in the southeast section of the District of Columbia. The Corridor experiences congestion in both directions during both the morning and evening peak travel periods. Traffic safety is impaired due to tight curvature on ramps, lane reductions in high volume areas, short weave areas, narrow shoulders, and lack of acceleration and deceleration lanes between ramp movements and mainline segments. The current project focuses on making the existing facilities operate more efficiently, while maintaining the existing number of general purpose highway lanes and managing congestion. This draft EIS evaluates: action alternatives related to bicycle/pedestrian, transit, and highway access; management alternatives; and a No Action Alternative. The seven action alternatives retained for further study include: improvements at each end of the Mason Bridge for bicycle and pedestrian access; construction of a separate bicycle/pedestrian crossing of the Potomac River and a grade-separated bicycle crossing of GWMP; creation of an integrated bicycle system, including signing for commuters and other bikers; construction of geometric improvements at I-395 and 9th Street; reduction of I-395 access points at Boundary Channel Drive; elimination of turn movements at the 14th Street and C Street intersection; and construction of bus lanes between Pentagon Transit Center and 14th Street at C Street, using inside shoulders on Rochambeau Bridge and transit signal priority treatment. Six management alternatives retained for further study include: expansion of incentives for telecommuting; increased participation in flexible work hours programs; parking management strategies; strengthened coordination and management; development of a driver education program specific to the Corridor; and modification of signing to create a uniform look and identity. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would address deficiencies with regards to congestion, capacity, safety, and overhead signing on a critical commuter link for automobile, transit, freight, and rail users. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Two historic properties, the Mount Vernon Memorial Highway and the East and West Potomac Parks Historic District, would be adversely affected. The action alternatives would have minor impacts on three national parks: West Potomac Park, East Potomac Park, and the GWMP. None of the parkland functions or uses would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act (P.L. 104-21) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 120008, 432 pages and maps, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 9 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VA/DC-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - National Parks KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - District of Columbia KW - Potomac River KW - Virginia KW - District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act, Funding KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1012743258?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.title=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Sterling, Virginia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - 14TH STREET BRIDGE CORRIDOR PROJECT, ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA TO WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. [Part 5 of 23] T2 - 14TH STREET BRIDGE CORRIDOR PROJECT, ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA TO WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. AN - 1012743252; 15206-8_0005 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation system improvements within the 14th Street Bridge Corridor in Arlington County, Virginia and southwest Washington, District of Columbia are proposed. The Corridor consists of three four-lane bridges which carry Interstate-395 (I-395) and US Route 1 over the Potomac River. The northbound span of I-395, which opened in 1950, is the Arland D. Williams Bridge. The southbound span, which opened in 1962, is the George Mason Memorial Bridge. The center span was opened in 1972 for express traffic in both directions and is now named the Rochambeau Memorial Bridge. These three spans merge into two bridges that cross the Washington Channel and distribute traffic into downtown Washington. The Outlet Bridge carries traffic north onto 14th Street and the Case Bridge carries I-395 traffic into the Southeast Freeway. As the main gateway into the Nations Capital and northern Virginia, the Corridor provides important access to the National Mall, Constitution Avenue, Capitol Grounds, Lincoln Memorial, Verizon Center, RFK Stadium, East Potomac Park, Potomac River, George Washington Memorial Parkway (GWMP), Mt. Vernon Trail, the Pentagon, and Arlington National Cemetery. The study area extends over four miles along I-395 from VA Route 27 in Arlington County to the New York Avenue tunnel entrance at the National Mall in the southeast section of the District of Columbia. The Corridor experiences congestion in both directions during both the morning and evening peak travel periods. Traffic safety is impaired due to tight curvature on ramps, lane reductions in high volume areas, short weave areas, narrow shoulders, and lack of acceleration and deceleration lanes between ramp movements and mainline segments. The current project focuses on making the existing facilities operate more efficiently, while maintaining the existing number of general purpose highway lanes and managing congestion. This draft EIS evaluates: action alternatives related to bicycle/pedestrian, transit, and highway access; management alternatives; and a No Action Alternative. The seven action alternatives retained for further study include: improvements at each end of the Mason Bridge for bicycle and pedestrian access; construction of a separate bicycle/pedestrian crossing of the Potomac River and a grade-separated bicycle crossing of GWMP; creation of an integrated bicycle system, including signing for commuters and other bikers; construction of geometric improvements at I-395 and 9th Street; reduction of I-395 access points at Boundary Channel Drive; elimination of turn movements at the 14th Street and C Street intersection; and construction of bus lanes between Pentagon Transit Center and 14th Street at C Street, using inside shoulders on Rochambeau Bridge and transit signal priority treatment. Six management alternatives retained for further study include: expansion of incentives for telecommuting; increased participation in flexible work hours programs; parking management strategies; strengthened coordination and management; development of a driver education program specific to the Corridor; and modification of signing to create a uniform look and identity. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would address deficiencies with regards to congestion, capacity, safety, and overhead signing on a critical commuter link for automobile, transit, freight, and rail users. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Two historic properties, the Mount Vernon Memorial Highway and the East and West Potomac Parks Historic District, would be adversely affected. The action alternatives would have minor impacts on three national parks: West Potomac Park, East Potomac Park, and the GWMP. None of the parkland functions or uses would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act (P.L. 104-21) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 120008, 432 pages and maps, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VA/DC-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - National Parks KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - District of Columbia KW - Potomac River KW - Virginia KW - District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act, Funding KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1012743252?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.title=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Sterling, Virginia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - 14TH STREET BRIDGE CORRIDOR PROJECT, ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA TO WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. [Part 4 of 23] T2 - 14TH STREET BRIDGE CORRIDOR PROJECT, ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA TO WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. AN - 1012743247; 15206-8_0004 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation system improvements within the 14th Street Bridge Corridor in Arlington County, Virginia and southwest Washington, District of Columbia are proposed. The Corridor consists of three four-lane bridges which carry Interstate-395 (I-395) and US Route 1 over the Potomac River. The northbound span of I-395, which opened in 1950, is the Arland D. Williams Bridge. The southbound span, which opened in 1962, is the George Mason Memorial Bridge. The center span was opened in 1972 for express traffic in both directions and is now named the Rochambeau Memorial Bridge. These three spans merge into two bridges that cross the Washington Channel and distribute traffic into downtown Washington. The Outlet Bridge carries traffic north onto 14th Street and the Case Bridge carries I-395 traffic into the Southeast Freeway. As the main gateway into the Nations Capital and northern Virginia, the Corridor provides important access to the National Mall, Constitution Avenue, Capitol Grounds, Lincoln Memorial, Verizon Center, RFK Stadium, East Potomac Park, Potomac River, George Washington Memorial Parkway (GWMP), Mt. Vernon Trail, the Pentagon, and Arlington National Cemetery. The study area extends over four miles along I-395 from VA Route 27 in Arlington County to the New York Avenue tunnel entrance at the National Mall in the southeast section of the District of Columbia. The Corridor experiences congestion in both directions during both the morning and evening peak travel periods. Traffic safety is impaired due to tight curvature on ramps, lane reductions in high volume areas, short weave areas, narrow shoulders, and lack of acceleration and deceleration lanes between ramp movements and mainline segments. The current project focuses on making the existing facilities operate more efficiently, while maintaining the existing number of general purpose highway lanes and managing congestion. This draft EIS evaluates: action alternatives related to bicycle/pedestrian, transit, and highway access; management alternatives; and a No Action Alternative. The seven action alternatives retained for further study include: improvements at each end of the Mason Bridge for bicycle and pedestrian access; construction of a separate bicycle/pedestrian crossing of the Potomac River and a grade-separated bicycle crossing of GWMP; creation of an integrated bicycle system, including signing for commuters and other bikers; construction of geometric improvements at I-395 and 9th Street; reduction of I-395 access points at Boundary Channel Drive; elimination of turn movements at the 14th Street and C Street intersection; and construction of bus lanes between Pentagon Transit Center and 14th Street at C Street, using inside shoulders on Rochambeau Bridge and transit signal priority treatment. Six management alternatives retained for further study include: expansion of incentives for telecommuting; increased participation in flexible work hours programs; parking management strategies; strengthened coordination and management; development of a driver education program specific to the Corridor; and modification of signing to create a uniform look and identity. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would address deficiencies with regards to congestion, capacity, safety, and overhead signing on a critical commuter link for automobile, transit, freight, and rail users. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Two historic properties, the Mount Vernon Memorial Highway and the East and West Potomac Parks Historic District, would be adversely affected. The action alternatives would have minor impacts on three national parks: West Potomac Park, East Potomac Park, and the GWMP. None of the parkland functions or uses would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act (P.L. 104-21) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 120008, 432 pages and maps, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VA/DC-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - National Parks KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - District of Columbia KW - Potomac River KW - Virginia KW - District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act, Funding KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1012743247?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.title=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Sterling, Virginia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - 14TH STREET BRIDGE CORRIDOR PROJECT, ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA TO WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. [Part 3 of 23] T2 - 14TH STREET BRIDGE CORRIDOR PROJECT, ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA TO WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. AN - 1012743241; 15206-8_0003 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation system improvements within the 14th Street Bridge Corridor in Arlington County, Virginia and southwest Washington, District of Columbia are proposed. The Corridor consists of three four-lane bridges which carry Interstate-395 (I-395) and US Route 1 over the Potomac River. The northbound span of I-395, which opened in 1950, is the Arland D. Williams Bridge. The southbound span, which opened in 1962, is the George Mason Memorial Bridge. The center span was opened in 1972 for express traffic in both directions and is now named the Rochambeau Memorial Bridge. These three spans merge into two bridges that cross the Washington Channel and distribute traffic into downtown Washington. The Outlet Bridge carries traffic north onto 14th Street and the Case Bridge carries I-395 traffic into the Southeast Freeway. As the main gateway into the Nations Capital and northern Virginia, the Corridor provides important access to the National Mall, Constitution Avenue, Capitol Grounds, Lincoln Memorial, Verizon Center, RFK Stadium, East Potomac Park, Potomac River, George Washington Memorial Parkway (GWMP), Mt. Vernon Trail, the Pentagon, and Arlington National Cemetery. The study area extends over four miles along I-395 from VA Route 27 in Arlington County to the New York Avenue tunnel entrance at the National Mall in the southeast section of the District of Columbia. The Corridor experiences congestion in both directions during both the morning and evening peak travel periods. Traffic safety is impaired due to tight curvature on ramps, lane reductions in high volume areas, short weave areas, narrow shoulders, and lack of acceleration and deceleration lanes between ramp movements and mainline segments. The current project focuses on making the existing facilities operate more efficiently, while maintaining the existing number of general purpose highway lanes and managing congestion. This draft EIS evaluates: action alternatives related to bicycle/pedestrian, transit, and highway access; management alternatives; and a No Action Alternative. The seven action alternatives retained for further study include: improvements at each end of the Mason Bridge for bicycle and pedestrian access; construction of a separate bicycle/pedestrian crossing of the Potomac River and a grade-separated bicycle crossing of GWMP; creation of an integrated bicycle system, including signing for commuters and other bikers; construction of geometric improvements at I-395 and 9th Street; reduction of I-395 access points at Boundary Channel Drive; elimination of turn movements at the 14th Street and C Street intersection; and construction of bus lanes between Pentagon Transit Center and 14th Street at C Street, using inside shoulders on Rochambeau Bridge and transit signal priority treatment. Six management alternatives retained for further study include: expansion of incentives for telecommuting; increased participation in flexible work hours programs; parking management strategies; strengthened coordination and management; development of a driver education program specific to the Corridor; and modification of signing to create a uniform look and identity. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would address deficiencies with regards to congestion, capacity, safety, and overhead signing on a critical commuter link for automobile, transit, freight, and rail users. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Two historic properties, the Mount Vernon Memorial Highway and the East and West Potomac Parks Historic District, would be adversely affected. The action alternatives would have minor impacts on three national parks: West Potomac Park, East Potomac Park, and the GWMP. None of the parkland functions or uses would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act (P.L. 104-21) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 120008, 432 pages and maps, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VA/DC-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - National Parks KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - District of Columbia KW - Potomac River KW - Virginia KW - District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act, Funding KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1012743241?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.title=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Sterling, Virginia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - 14TH STREET BRIDGE CORRIDOR PROJECT, ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA TO WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. [Part 2 of 23] T2 - 14TH STREET BRIDGE CORRIDOR PROJECT, ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA TO WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. AN - 1012743236; 15206-8_0002 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation system improvements within the 14th Street Bridge Corridor in Arlington County, Virginia and southwest Washington, District of Columbia are proposed. The Corridor consists of three four-lane bridges which carry Interstate-395 (I-395) and US Route 1 over the Potomac River. The northbound span of I-395, which opened in 1950, is the Arland D. Williams Bridge. The southbound span, which opened in 1962, is the George Mason Memorial Bridge. The center span was opened in 1972 for express traffic in both directions and is now named the Rochambeau Memorial Bridge. These three spans merge into two bridges that cross the Washington Channel and distribute traffic into downtown Washington. The Outlet Bridge carries traffic north onto 14th Street and the Case Bridge carries I-395 traffic into the Southeast Freeway. As the main gateway into the Nations Capital and northern Virginia, the Corridor provides important access to the National Mall, Constitution Avenue, Capitol Grounds, Lincoln Memorial, Verizon Center, RFK Stadium, East Potomac Park, Potomac River, George Washington Memorial Parkway (GWMP), Mt. Vernon Trail, the Pentagon, and Arlington National Cemetery. The study area extends over four miles along I-395 from VA Route 27 in Arlington County to the New York Avenue tunnel entrance at the National Mall in the southeast section of the District of Columbia. The Corridor experiences congestion in both directions during both the morning and evening peak travel periods. Traffic safety is impaired due to tight curvature on ramps, lane reductions in high volume areas, short weave areas, narrow shoulders, and lack of acceleration and deceleration lanes between ramp movements and mainline segments. The current project focuses on making the existing facilities operate more efficiently, while maintaining the existing number of general purpose highway lanes and managing congestion. This draft EIS evaluates: action alternatives related to bicycle/pedestrian, transit, and highway access; management alternatives; and a No Action Alternative. The seven action alternatives retained for further study include: improvements at each end of the Mason Bridge for bicycle and pedestrian access; construction of a separate bicycle/pedestrian crossing of the Potomac River and a grade-separated bicycle crossing of GWMP; creation of an integrated bicycle system, including signing for commuters and other bikers; construction of geometric improvements at I-395 and 9th Street; reduction of I-395 access points at Boundary Channel Drive; elimination of turn movements at the 14th Street and C Street intersection; and construction of bus lanes between Pentagon Transit Center and 14th Street at C Street, using inside shoulders on Rochambeau Bridge and transit signal priority treatment. Six management alternatives retained for further study include: expansion of incentives for telecommuting; increased participation in flexible work hours programs; parking management strategies; strengthened coordination and management; development of a driver education program specific to the Corridor; and modification of signing to create a uniform look and identity. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would address deficiencies with regards to congestion, capacity, safety, and overhead signing on a critical commuter link for automobile, transit, freight, and rail users. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Two historic properties, the Mount Vernon Memorial Highway and the East and West Potomac Parks Historic District, would be adversely affected. The action alternatives would have minor impacts on three national parks: West Potomac Park, East Potomac Park, and the GWMP. None of the parkland functions or uses would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act (P.L. 104-21) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 120008, 432 pages and maps, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VA/DC-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - National Parks KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - District of Columbia KW - Potomac River KW - Virginia KW - District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act, Funding KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1012743236?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.title=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Sterling, Virginia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - 14TH STREET BRIDGE CORRIDOR PROJECT, ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA TO WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. [Part 1 of 23] T2 - 14TH STREET BRIDGE CORRIDOR PROJECT, ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA TO WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. AN - 1012743231; 15206-8_0001 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation system improvements within the 14th Street Bridge Corridor in Arlington County, Virginia and southwest Washington, District of Columbia are proposed. The Corridor consists of three four-lane bridges which carry Interstate-395 (I-395) and US Route 1 over the Potomac River. The northbound span of I-395, which opened in 1950, is the Arland D. Williams Bridge. The southbound span, which opened in 1962, is the George Mason Memorial Bridge. The center span was opened in 1972 for express traffic in both directions and is now named the Rochambeau Memorial Bridge. These three spans merge into two bridges that cross the Washington Channel and distribute traffic into downtown Washington. The Outlet Bridge carries traffic north onto 14th Street and the Case Bridge carries I-395 traffic into the Southeast Freeway. As the main gateway into the Nations Capital and northern Virginia, the Corridor provides important access to the National Mall, Constitution Avenue, Capitol Grounds, Lincoln Memorial, Verizon Center, RFK Stadium, East Potomac Park, Potomac River, George Washington Memorial Parkway (GWMP), Mt. Vernon Trail, the Pentagon, and Arlington National Cemetery. The study area extends over four miles along I-395 from VA Route 27 in Arlington County to the New York Avenue tunnel entrance at the National Mall in the southeast section of the District of Columbia. The Corridor experiences congestion in both directions during both the morning and evening peak travel periods. Traffic safety is impaired due to tight curvature on ramps, lane reductions in high volume areas, short weave areas, narrow shoulders, and lack of acceleration and deceleration lanes between ramp movements and mainline segments. The current project focuses on making the existing facilities operate more efficiently, while maintaining the existing number of general purpose highway lanes and managing congestion. This draft EIS evaluates: action alternatives related to bicycle/pedestrian, transit, and highway access; management alternatives; and a No Action Alternative. The seven action alternatives retained for further study include: improvements at each end of the Mason Bridge for bicycle and pedestrian access; construction of a separate bicycle/pedestrian crossing of the Potomac River and a grade-separated bicycle crossing of GWMP; creation of an integrated bicycle system, including signing for commuters and other bikers; construction of geometric improvements at I-395 and 9th Street; reduction of I-395 access points at Boundary Channel Drive; elimination of turn movements at the 14th Street and C Street intersection; and construction of bus lanes between Pentagon Transit Center and 14th Street at C Street, using inside shoulders on Rochambeau Bridge and transit signal priority treatment. Six management alternatives retained for further study include: expansion of incentives for telecommuting; increased participation in flexible work hours programs; parking management strategies; strengthened coordination and management; development of a driver education program specific to the Corridor; and modification of signing to create a uniform look and identity. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would address deficiencies with regards to congestion, capacity, safety, and overhead signing on a critical commuter link for automobile, transit, freight, and rail users. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Two historic properties, the Mount Vernon Memorial Highway and the East and West Potomac Parks Historic District, would be adversely affected. The action alternatives would have minor impacts on three national parks: West Potomac Park, East Potomac Park, and the GWMP. None of the parkland functions or uses would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act (P.L. 104-21) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 120008, 432 pages and maps, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VA/DC-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - National Parks KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - District of Columbia KW - Potomac River KW - Virginia KW - District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act, Funding KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1012743231?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.title=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Sterling, Virginia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 67 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743143; 15209-1_0067 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 67 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743143?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 100 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743088; 15209-1_0100 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 100 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743088?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 45 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743085; 15209-1_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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 45 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743085?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 92 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743055; 15209-1_0092 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 92 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743055?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 44 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743052; 15209-1_0044 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 44 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743052?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 80 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743015; 15209-1_0080 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 80 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743015?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 13 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012743011; 15209-1_0013 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 13 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012743011?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - 14TH STREET BRIDGE CORRIDOR PROJECT, ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA TO WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. [Part 22 of 23] T2 - 14TH STREET BRIDGE CORRIDOR PROJECT, ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA TO WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. AN - 1012742995; 15206-8_0022 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation system improvements within the 14th Street Bridge Corridor in Arlington County, Virginia and southwest Washington, District of Columbia are proposed. The Corridor consists of three four-lane bridges which carry Interstate-395 (I-395) and US Route 1 over the Potomac River. The northbound span of I-395, which opened in 1950, is the Arland D. Williams Bridge. The southbound span, which opened in 1962, is the George Mason Memorial Bridge. The center span was opened in 1972 for express traffic in both directions and is now named the Rochambeau Memorial Bridge. These three spans merge into two bridges that cross the Washington Channel and distribute traffic into downtown Washington. The Outlet Bridge carries traffic north onto 14th Street and the Case Bridge carries I-395 traffic into the Southeast Freeway. As the main gateway into the Nations Capital and northern Virginia, the Corridor provides important access to the National Mall, Constitution Avenue, Capitol Grounds, Lincoln Memorial, Verizon Center, RFK Stadium, East Potomac Park, Potomac River, George Washington Memorial Parkway (GWMP), Mt. Vernon Trail, the Pentagon, and Arlington National Cemetery. The study area extends over four miles along I-395 from VA Route 27 in Arlington County to the New York Avenue tunnel entrance at the National Mall in the southeast section of the District of Columbia. The Corridor experiences congestion in both directions during both the morning and evening peak travel periods. Traffic safety is impaired due to tight curvature on ramps, lane reductions in high volume areas, short weave areas, narrow shoulders, and lack of acceleration and deceleration lanes between ramp movements and mainline segments. The current project focuses on making the existing facilities operate more efficiently, while maintaining the existing number of general purpose highway lanes and managing congestion. This draft EIS evaluates: action alternatives related to bicycle/pedestrian, transit, and highway access; management alternatives; and a No Action Alternative. The seven action alternatives retained for further study include: improvements at each end of the Mason Bridge for bicycle and pedestrian access; construction of a separate bicycle/pedestrian crossing of the Potomac River and a grade-separated bicycle crossing of GWMP; creation of an integrated bicycle system, including signing for commuters and other bikers; construction of geometric improvements at I-395 and 9th Street; reduction of I-395 access points at Boundary Channel Drive; elimination of turn movements at the 14th Street and C Street intersection; and construction of bus lanes between Pentagon Transit Center and 14th Street at C Street, using inside shoulders on Rochambeau Bridge and transit signal priority treatment. Six management alternatives retained for further study include: expansion of incentives for telecommuting; increased participation in flexible work hours programs; parking management strategies; strengthened coordination and management; development of a driver education program specific to the Corridor; and modification of signing to create a uniform look and identity. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would address deficiencies with regards to congestion, capacity, safety, and overhead signing on a critical commuter link for automobile, transit, freight, and rail users. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Two historic properties, the Mount Vernon Memorial Highway and the East and West Potomac Parks Historic District, would be adversely affected. The action alternatives would have minor impacts on three national parks: West Potomac Park, East Potomac Park, and the GWMP. None of the parkland functions or uses would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act (P.L. 104-21) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 120008, 432 pages and maps, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 22 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VA/DC-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - National Parks KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - District of Columbia KW - Potomac River KW - Virginia KW - District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act, Funding KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1012742995?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.title=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Sterling, Virginia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - 14TH STREET BRIDGE CORRIDOR PROJECT, ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA TO WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. [Part 8 of 23] T2 - 14TH STREET BRIDGE CORRIDOR PROJECT, ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA TO WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. AN - 1012742986; 15206-8_0008 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation system improvements within the 14th Street Bridge Corridor in Arlington County, Virginia and southwest Washington, District of Columbia are proposed. The Corridor consists of three four-lane bridges which carry Interstate-395 (I-395) and US Route 1 over the Potomac River. The northbound span of I-395, which opened in 1950, is the Arland D. Williams Bridge. The southbound span, which opened in 1962, is the George Mason Memorial Bridge. The center span was opened in 1972 for express traffic in both directions and is now named the Rochambeau Memorial Bridge. These three spans merge into two bridges that cross the Washington Channel and distribute traffic into downtown Washington. The Outlet Bridge carries traffic north onto 14th Street and the Case Bridge carries I-395 traffic into the Southeast Freeway. As the main gateway into the Nations Capital and northern Virginia, the Corridor provides important access to the National Mall, Constitution Avenue, Capitol Grounds, Lincoln Memorial, Verizon Center, RFK Stadium, East Potomac Park, Potomac River, George Washington Memorial Parkway (GWMP), Mt. Vernon Trail, the Pentagon, and Arlington National Cemetery. The study area extends over four miles along I-395 from VA Route 27 in Arlington County to the New York Avenue tunnel entrance at the National Mall in the southeast section of the District of Columbia. The Corridor experiences congestion in both directions during both the morning and evening peak travel periods. Traffic safety is impaired due to tight curvature on ramps, lane reductions in high volume areas, short weave areas, narrow shoulders, and lack of acceleration and deceleration lanes between ramp movements and mainline segments. The current project focuses on making the existing facilities operate more efficiently, while maintaining the existing number of general purpose highway lanes and managing congestion. This draft EIS evaluates: action alternatives related to bicycle/pedestrian, transit, and highway access; management alternatives; and a No Action Alternative. The seven action alternatives retained for further study include: improvements at each end of the Mason Bridge for bicycle and pedestrian access; construction of a separate bicycle/pedestrian crossing of the Potomac River and a grade-separated bicycle crossing of GWMP; creation of an integrated bicycle system, including signing for commuters and other bikers; construction of geometric improvements at I-395 and 9th Street; reduction of I-395 access points at Boundary Channel Drive; elimination of turn movements at the 14th Street and C Street intersection; and construction of bus lanes between Pentagon Transit Center and 14th Street at C Street, using inside shoulders on Rochambeau Bridge and transit signal priority treatment. Six management alternatives retained for further study include: expansion of incentives for telecommuting; increased participation in flexible work hours programs; parking management strategies; strengthened coordination and management; development of a driver education program specific to the Corridor; and modification of signing to create a uniform look and identity. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would address deficiencies with regards to congestion, capacity, safety, and overhead signing on a critical commuter link for automobile, transit, freight, and rail users. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Two historic properties, the Mount Vernon Memorial Highway and the East and West Potomac Parks Historic District, would be adversely affected. The action alternatives would have minor impacts on three national parks: West Potomac Park, East Potomac Park, and the GWMP. None of the parkland functions or uses would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act (P.L. 104-21) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 120008, 432 pages and maps, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VA/DC-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - National Parks KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - District of Columbia KW - Potomac River KW - Virginia KW - District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act, Funding KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1012742986?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.title=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Sterling, Virginia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 104 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742982; 15209-1_0104 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 104 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742982?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 12 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742975; 15209-1_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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 12 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742975?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 90 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742959; 15209-1_0090 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 90 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742959?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 99 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742957; 15209-1_0099 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 99 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742957?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 11 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742933; 15209-1_0011 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 11 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742933?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 89 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742918; 15209-1_0089 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 89 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742918?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 76 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742906; 15209-1_0076 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 76 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742906?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 97 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742896; 15209-1_0097 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 97 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742896?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 108 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742887; 15209-1_0108 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 108 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742887?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 62 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742879; 15209-1_0062 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 62 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742879?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - 14TH STREET BRIDGE CORRIDOR PROJECT, ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA TO WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. [Part 7 of 23] T2 - 14TH STREET BRIDGE CORRIDOR PROJECT, ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA TO WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. AN - 1012742856; 15206-8_0007 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation system improvements within the 14th Street Bridge Corridor in Arlington County, Virginia and southwest Washington, District of Columbia are proposed. The Corridor consists of three four-lane bridges which carry Interstate-395 (I-395) and US Route 1 over the Potomac River. The northbound span of I-395, which opened in 1950, is the Arland D. Williams Bridge. The southbound span, which opened in 1962, is the George Mason Memorial Bridge. The center span was opened in 1972 for express traffic in both directions and is now named the Rochambeau Memorial Bridge. These three spans merge into two bridges that cross the Washington Channel and distribute traffic into downtown Washington. The Outlet Bridge carries traffic north onto 14th Street and the Case Bridge carries I-395 traffic into the Southeast Freeway. As the main gateway into the Nations Capital and northern Virginia, the Corridor provides important access to the National Mall, Constitution Avenue, Capitol Grounds, Lincoln Memorial, Verizon Center, RFK Stadium, East Potomac Park, Potomac River, George Washington Memorial Parkway (GWMP), Mt. Vernon Trail, the Pentagon, and Arlington National Cemetery. The study area extends over four miles along I-395 from VA Route 27 in Arlington County to the New York Avenue tunnel entrance at the National Mall in the southeast section of the District of Columbia. The Corridor experiences congestion in both directions during both the morning and evening peak travel periods. Traffic safety is impaired due to tight curvature on ramps, lane reductions in high volume areas, short weave areas, narrow shoulders, and lack of acceleration and deceleration lanes between ramp movements and mainline segments. The current project focuses on making the existing facilities operate more efficiently, while maintaining the existing number of general purpose highway lanes and managing congestion. This draft EIS evaluates: action alternatives related to bicycle/pedestrian, transit, and highway access; management alternatives; and a No Action Alternative. The seven action alternatives retained for further study include: improvements at each end of the Mason Bridge for bicycle and pedestrian access; construction of a separate bicycle/pedestrian crossing of the Potomac River and a grade-separated bicycle crossing of GWMP; creation of an integrated bicycle system, including signing for commuters and other bikers; construction of geometric improvements at I-395 and 9th Street; reduction of I-395 access points at Boundary Channel Drive; elimination of turn movements at the 14th Street and C Street intersection; and construction of bus lanes between Pentagon Transit Center and 14th Street at C Street, using inside shoulders on Rochambeau Bridge and transit signal priority treatment. Six management alternatives retained for further study include: expansion of incentives for telecommuting; increased participation in flexible work hours programs; parking management strategies; strengthened coordination and management; development of a driver education program specific to the Corridor; and modification of signing to create a uniform look and identity. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would address deficiencies with regards to congestion, capacity, safety, and overhead signing on a critical commuter link for automobile, transit, freight, and rail users. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Two historic properties, the Mount Vernon Memorial Highway and the East and West Potomac Parks Historic District, would be adversely affected. The action alternatives would have minor impacts on three national parks: West Potomac Park, East Potomac Park, and the GWMP. None of the parkland functions or uses would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act (P.L. 104-21) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 120008, 432 pages and maps, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VA/DC-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - National Parks KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - District of Columbia KW - Potomac River KW - Virginia KW - District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act, Funding KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1012742856?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.title=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Sterling, Virginia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - 14TH STREET BRIDGE CORRIDOR PROJECT, ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA TO WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. [Part 6 of 23] T2 - 14TH STREET BRIDGE CORRIDOR PROJECT, ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA TO WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. AN - 1012742848; 15206-8_0006 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation system improvements within the 14th Street Bridge Corridor in Arlington County, Virginia and southwest Washington, District of Columbia are proposed. The Corridor consists of three four-lane bridges which carry Interstate-395 (I-395) and US Route 1 over the Potomac River. The northbound span of I-395, which opened in 1950, is the Arland D. Williams Bridge. The southbound span, which opened in 1962, is the George Mason Memorial Bridge. The center span was opened in 1972 for express traffic in both directions and is now named the Rochambeau Memorial Bridge. These three spans merge into two bridges that cross the Washington Channel and distribute traffic into downtown Washington. The Outlet Bridge carries traffic north onto 14th Street and the Case Bridge carries I-395 traffic into the Southeast Freeway. As the main gateway into the Nations Capital and northern Virginia, the Corridor provides important access to the National Mall, Constitution Avenue, Capitol Grounds, Lincoln Memorial, Verizon Center, RFK Stadium, East Potomac Park, Potomac River, George Washington Memorial Parkway (GWMP), Mt. Vernon Trail, the Pentagon, and Arlington National Cemetery. The study area extends over four miles along I-395 from VA Route 27 in Arlington County to the New York Avenue tunnel entrance at the National Mall in the southeast section of the District of Columbia. The Corridor experiences congestion in both directions during both the morning and evening peak travel periods. Traffic safety is impaired due to tight curvature on ramps, lane reductions in high volume areas, short weave areas, narrow shoulders, and lack of acceleration and deceleration lanes between ramp movements and mainline segments. The current project focuses on making the existing facilities operate more efficiently, while maintaining the existing number of general purpose highway lanes and managing congestion. This draft EIS evaluates: action alternatives related to bicycle/pedestrian, transit, and highway access; management alternatives; and a No Action Alternative. The seven action alternatives retained for further study include: improvements at each end of the Mason Bridge for bicycle and pedestrian access; construction of a separate bicycle/pedestrian crossing of the Potomac River and a grade-separated bicycle crossing of GWMP; creation of an integrated bicycle system, including signing for commuters and other bikers; construction of geometric improvements at I-395 and 9th Street; reduction of I-395 access points at Boundary Channel Drive; elimination of turn movements at the 14th Street and C Street intersection; and construction of bus lanes between Pentagon Transit Center and 14th Street at C Street, using inside shoulders on Rochambeau Bridge and transit signal priority treatment. Six management alternatives retained for further study include: expansion of incentives for telecommuting; increased participation in flexible work hours programs; parking management strategies; strengthened coordination and management; development of a driver education program specific to the Corridor; and modification of signing to create a uniform look and identity. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would address deficiencies with regards to congestion, capacity, safety, and overhead signing on a critical commuter link for automobile, transit, freight, and rail users. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Two historic properties, the Mount Vernon Memorial Highway and the East and West Potomac Parks Historic District, would be adversely affected. The action alternatives would have minor impacts on three national parks: West Potomac Park, East Potomac Park, and the GWMP. None of the parkland functions or uses would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act (P.L. 104-21) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 120008, 432 pages and maps, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VA/DC-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - National Parks KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - District of Columbia KW - Potomac River KW - Virginia KW - District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act, Funding KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1012742848?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.title=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Sterling, Virginia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 107 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742846; 15209-1_0107 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 107 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742846?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 87 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742843; 15209-1_0087 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 87 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742843?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 61 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742834; 15209-1_0061 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 61 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742834?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 78 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742816; 15209-1_0078 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 78 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742816?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 79 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742804; 15209-1_0079 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 79 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742804?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 86 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742803; 15209-1_0086 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 86 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742803?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 43 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742795; 15209-1_0043 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 43 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742795?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 105 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742769; 15209-1_0105 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 105 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742769?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 60 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742753; 15209-1_0060 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 60 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742753?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 96 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742722; 15209-1_0096 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 96 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742722?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 73 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742713; 15209-1_0073 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 73 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742713?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 64 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742709; 15209-1_0064 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 64 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742709?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 95 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742675; 15209-1_0095 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 95 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742675?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 55 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742670; 15209-1_0055 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 55 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742670?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 94 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742669; 15209-1_0094 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 94 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742669?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 63 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742667; 15209-1_0063 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 63 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742667?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 81 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742661; 15209-1_0081 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 81 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742661?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 40 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742660; 15209-1_0040 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 40 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742660?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - 14TH STREET BRIDGE CORRIDOR PROJECT, ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA TO WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. [Part 21 of 23] T2 - 14TH STREET BRIDGE CORRIDOR PROJECT, ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA TO WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. AN - 1012742653; 15206-8_0021 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation system improvements within the 14th Street Bridge Corridor in Arlington County, Virginia and southwest Washington, District of Columbia are proposed. The Corridor consists of three four-lane bridges which carry Interstate-395 (I-395) and US Route 1 over the Potomac River. The northbound span of I-395, which opened in 1950, is the Arland D. Williams Bridge. The southbound span, which opened in 1962, is the George Mason Memorial Bridge. The center span was opened in 1972 for express traffic in both directions and is now named the Rochambeau Memorial Bridge. These three spans merge into two bridges that cross the Washington Channel and distribute traffic into downtown Washington. The Outlet Bridge carries traffic north onto 14th Street and the Case Bridge carries I-395 traffic into the Southeast Freeway. As the main gateway into the Nations Capital and northern Virginia, the Corridor provides important access to the National Mall, Constitution Avenue, Capitol Grounds, Lincoln Memorial, Verizon Center, RFK Stadium, East Potomac Park, Potomac River, George Washington Memorial Parkway (GWMP), Mt. Vernon Trail, the Pentagon, and Arlington National Cemetery. The study area extends over four miles along I-395 from VA Route 27 in Arlington County to the New York Avenue tunnel entrance at the National Mall in the southeast section of the District of Columbia. The Corridor experiences congestion in both directions during both the morning and evening peak travel periods. Traffic safety is impaired due to tight curvature on ramps, lane reductions in high volume areas, short weave areas, narrow shoulders, and lack of acceleration and deceleration lanes between ramp movements and mainline segments. The current project focuses on making the existing facilities operate more efficiently, while maintaining the existing number of general purpose highway lanes and managing congestion. This draft EIS evaluates: action alternatives related to bicycle/pedestrian, transit, and highway access; management alternatives; and a No Action Alternative. The seven action alternatives retained for further study include: improvements at each end of the Mason Bridge for bicycle and pedestrian access; construction of a separate bicycle/pedestrian crossing of the Potomac River and a grade-separated bicycle crossing of GWMP; creation of an integrated bicycle system, including signing for commuters and other bikers; construction of geometric improvements at I-395 and 9th Street; reduction of I-395 access points at Boundary Channel Drive; elimination of turn movements at the 14th Street and C Street intersection; and construction of bus lanes between Pentagon Transit Center and 14th Street at C Street, using inside shoulders on Rochambeau Bridge and transit signal priority treatment. Six management alternatives retained for further study include: expansion of incentives for telecommuting; increased participation in flexible work hours programs; parking management strategies; strengthened coordination and management; development of a driver education program specific to the Corridor; and modification of signing to create a uniform look and identity. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would address deficiencies with regards to congestion, capacity, safety, and overhead signing on a critical commuter link for automobile, transit, freight, and rail users. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Two historic properties, the Mount Vernon Memorial Highway and the East and West Potomac Parks Historic District, would be adversely affected. The action alternatives would have minor impacts on three national parks: West Potomac Park, East Potomac Park, and the GWMP. None of the parkland functions or uses would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act (P.L. 104-21) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 120008, 432 pages and maps, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 21 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VA/DC-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - National Parks KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - District of Columbia KW - Potomac River KW - Virginia KW - District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act, Funding KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1012742653?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.title=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Sterling, Virginia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - 14TH STREET BRIDGE CORRIDOR PROJECT, ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA TO WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. [Part 20 of 23] T2 - 14TH STREET BRIDGE CORRIDOR PROJECT, ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA TO WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. AN - 1012742642; 15206-8_0020 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation system improvements within the 14th Street Bridge Corridor in Arlington County, Virginia and southwest Washington, District of Columbia are proposed. The Corridor consists of three four-lane bridges which carry Interstate-395 (I-395) and US Route 1 over the Potomac River. The northbound span of I-395, which opened in 1950, is the Arland D. Williams Bridge. The southbound span, which opened in 1962, is the George Mason Memorial Bridge. The center span was opened in 1972 for express traffic in both directions and is now named the Rochambeau Memorial Bridge. These three spans merge into two bridges that cross the Washington Channel and distribute traffic into downtown Washington. The Outlet Bridge carries traffic north onto 14th Street and the Case Bridge carries I-395 traffic into the Southeast Freeway. As the main gateway into the Nations Capital and northern Virginia, the Corridor provides important access to the National Mall, Constitution Avenue, Capitol Grounds, Lincoln Memorial, Verizon Center, RFK Stadium, East Potomac Park, Potomac River, George Washington Memorial Parkway (GWMP), Mt. Vernon Trail, the Pentagon, and Arlington National Cemetery. The study area extends over four miles along I-395 from VA Route 27 in Arlington County to the New York Avenue tunnel entrance at the National Mall in the southeast section of the District of Columbia. The Corridor experiences congestion in both directions during both the morning and evening peak travel periods. Traffic safety is impaired due to tight curvature on ramps, lane reductions in high volume areas, short weave areas, narrow shoulders, and lack of acceleration and deceleration lanes between ramp movements and mainline segments. The current project focuses on making the existing facilities operate more efficiently, while maintaining the existing number of general purpose highway lanes and managing congestion. This draft EIS evaluates: action alternatives related to bicycle/pedestrian, transit, and highway access; management alternatives; and a No Action Alternative. The seven action alternatives retained for further study include: improvements at each end of the Mason Bridge for bicycle and pedestrian access; construction of a separate bicycle/pedestrian crossing of the Potomac River and a grade-separated bicycle crossing of GWMP; creation of an integrated bicycle system, including signing for commuters and other bikers; construction of geometric improvements at I-395 and 9th Street; reduction of I-395 access points at Boundary Channel Drive; elimination of turn movements at the 14th Street and C Street intersection; and construction of bus lanes between Pentagon Transit Center and 14th Street at C Street, using inside shoulders on Rochambeau Bridge and transit signal priority treatment. Six management alternatives retained for further study include: expansion of incentives for telecommuting; increased participation in flexible work hours programs; parking management strategies; strengthened coordination and management; development of a driver education program specific to the Corridor; and modification of signing to create a uniform look and identity. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would address deficiencies with regards to congestion, capacity, safety, and overhead signing on a critical commuter link for automobile, transit, freight, and rail users. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Two historic properties, the Mount Vernon Memorial Highway and the East and West Potomac Parks Historic District, would be adversely affected. The action alternatives would have minor impacts on three national parks: West Potomac Park, East Potomac Park, and the GWMP. None of the parkland functions or uses would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act (P.L. 104-21) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 120008, 432 pages and maps, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 20 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VA/DC-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - National Parks KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - District of Columbia KW - Potomac River KW - Virginia KW - District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act, Funding KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1012742642?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.title=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Sterling, Virginia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 72 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742634; 15209-1_0072 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 72 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742634?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - 14TH STREET BRIDGE CORRIDOR PROJECT, ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA TO WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. [Part 19 of 23] T2 - 14TH STREET BRIDGE CORRIDOR PROJECT, ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA TO WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. AN - 1012742631; 15206-8_0019 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation system improvements within the 14th Street Bridge Corridor in Arlington County, Virginia and southwest Washington, District of Columbia are proposed. The Corridor consists of three four-lane bridges which carry Interstate-395 (I-395) and US Route 1 over the Potomac River. The northbound span of I-395, which opened in 1950, is the Arland D. Williams Bridge. The southbound span, which opened in 1962, is the George Mason Memorial Bridge. The center span was opened in 1972 for express traffic in both directions and is now named the Rochambeau Memorial Bridge. These three spans merge into two bridges that cross the Washington Channel and distribute traffic into downtown Washington. The Outlet Bridge carries traffic north onto 14th Street and the Case Bridge carries I-395 traffic into the Southeast Freeway. As the main gateway into the Nations Capital and northern Virginia, the Corridor provides important access to the National Mall, Constitution Avenue, Capitol Grounds, Lincoln Memorial, Verizon Center, RFK Stadium, East Potomac Park, Potomac River, George Washington Memorial Parkway (GWMP), Mt. Vernon Trail, the Pentagon, and Arlington National Cemetery. The study area extends over four miles along I-395 from VA Route 27 in Arlington County to the New York Avenue tunnel entrance at the National Mall in the southeast section of the District of Columbia. The Corridor experiences congestion in both directions during both the morning and evening peak travel periods. Traffic safety is impaired due to tight curvature on ramps, lane reductions in high volume areas, short weave areas, narrow shoulders, and lack of acceleration and deceleration lanes between ramp movements and mainline segments. The current project focuses on making the existing facilities operate more efficiently, while maintaining the existing number of general purpose highway lanes and managing congestion. This draft EIS evaluates: action alternatives related to bicycle/pedestrian, transit, and highway access; management alternatives; and a No Action Alternative. The seven action alternatives retained for further study include: improvements at each end of the Mason Bridge for bicycle and pedestrian access; construction of a separate bicycle/pedestrian crossing of the Potomac River and a grade-separated bicycle crossing of GWMP; creation of an integrated bicycle system, including signing for commuters and other bikers; construction of geometric improvements at I-395 and 9th Street; reduction of I-395 access points at Boundary Channel Drive; elimination of turn movements at the 14th Street and C Street intersection; and construction of bus lanes between Pentagon Transit Center and 14th Street at C Street, using inside shoulders on Rochambeau Bridge and transit signal priority treatment. Six management alternatives retained for further study include: expansion of incentives for telecommuting; increased participation in flexible work hours programs; parking management strategies; strengthened coordination and management; development of a driver education program specific to the Corridor; and modification of signing to create a uniform look and identity. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would address deficiencies with regards to congestion, capacity, safety, and overhead signing on a critical commuter link for automobile, transit, freight, and rail users. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Two historic properties, the Mount Vernon Memorial Highway and the East and West Potomac Parks Historic District, would be adversely affected. The action alternatives would have minor impacts on three national parks: West Potomac Park, East Potomac Park, and the GWMP. None of the parkland functions or uses would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act (P.L. 104-21) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 120008, 432 pages and maps, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 19 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VA/DC-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - National Parks KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - District of Columbia KW - Potomac River KW - Virginia KW - District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act, Funding KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1012742631?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.title=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Sterling, Virginia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 54 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742627; 15209-1_0054 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 54 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742627?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - 14TH STREET BRIDGE CORRIDOR PROJECT, ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA TO WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. [Part 18 of 23] T2 - 14TH STREET BRIDGE CORRIDOR PROJECT, ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA TO WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. AN - 1012742617; 15206-8_0018 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation system improvements within the 14th Street Bridge Corridor in Arlington County, Virginia and southwest Washington, District of Columbia are proposed. The Corridor consists of three four-lane bridges which carry Interstate-395 (I-395) and US Route 1 over the Potomac River. The northbound span of I-395, which opened in 1950, is the Arland D. Williams Bridge. The southbound span, which opened in 1962, is the George Mason Memorial Bridge. The center span was opened in 1972 for express traffic in both directions and is now named the Rochambeau Memorial Bridge. These three spans merge into two bridges that cross the Washington Channel and distribute traffic into downtown Washington. The Outlet Bridge carries traffic north onto 14th Street and the Case Bridge carries I-395 traffic into the Southeast Freeway. As the main gateway into the Nations Capital and northern Virginia, the Corridor provides important access to the National Mall, Constitution Avenue, Capitol Grounds, Lincoln Memorial, Verizon Center, RFK Stadium, East Potomac Park, Potomac River, George Washington Memorial Parkway (GWMP), Mt. Vernon Trail, the Pentagon, and Arlington National Cemetery. The study area extends over four miles along I-395 from VA Route 27 in Arlington County to the New York Avenue tunnel entrance at the National Mall in the southeast section of the District of Columbia. The Corridor experiences congestion in both directions during both the morning and evening peak travel periods. Traffic safety is impaired due to tight curvature on ramps, lane reductions in high volume areas, short weave areas, narrow shoulders, and lack of acceleration and deceleration lanes between ramp movements and mainline segments. The current project focuses on making the existing facilities operate more efficiently, while maintaining the existing number of general purpose highway lanes and managing congestion. This draft EIS evaluates: action alternatives related to bicycle/pedestrian, transit, and highway access; management alternatives; and a No Action Alternative. The seven action alternatives retained for further study include: improvements at each end of the Mason Bridge for bicycle and pedestrian access; construction of a separate bicycle/pedestrian crossing of the Potomac River and a grade-separated bicycle crossing of GWMP; creation of an integrated bicycle system, including signing for commuters and other bikers; construction of geometric improvements at I-395 and 9th Street; reduction of I-395 access points at Boundary Channel Drive; elimination of turn movements at the 14th Street and C Street intersection; and construction of bus lanes between Pentagon Transit Center and 14th Street at C Street, using inside shoulders on Rochambeau Bridge and transit signal priority treatment. Six management alternatives retained for further study include: expansion of incentives for telecommuting; increased participation in flexible work hours programs; parking management strategies; strengthened coordination and management; development of a driver education program specific to the Corridor; and modification of signing to create a uniform look and identity. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would address deficiencies with regards to congestion, capacity, safety, and overhead signing on a critical commuter link for automobile, transit, freight, and rail users. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Two historic properties, the Mount Vernon Memorial Highway and the East and West Potomac Parks Historic District, would be adversely affected. The action alternatives would have minor impacts on three national parks: West Potomac Park, East Potomac Park, and the GWMP. None of the parkland functions or uses would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act (P.L. 104-21) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 120008, 432 pages and maps, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 18 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VA/DC-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - National Parks KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - District of Columbia KW - Potomac River KW - Virginia KW - District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act, Funding KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1012742617?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.title=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Sterling, Virginia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 33 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742608; 15209-1_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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 33 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742608?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 52 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742607; 15209-1_0052 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 52 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742607?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 48 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742606; 15209-1_0048 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 48 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742606?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - 14TH STREET BRIDGE CORRIDOR PROJECT, ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA TO WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. [Part 17 of 23] T2 - 14TH STREET BRIDGE CORRIDOR PROJECT, ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA TO WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. AN - 1012742604; 15206-8_0017 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation system improvements within the 14th Street Bridge Corridor in Arlington County, Virginia and southwest Washington, District of Columbia are proposed. The Corridor consists of three four-lane bridges which carry Interstate-395 (I-395) and US Route 1 over the Potomac River. The northbound span of I-395, which opened in 1950, is the Arland D. Williams Bridge. The southbound span, which opened in 1962, is the George Mason Memorial Bridge. The center span was opened in 1972 for express traffic in both directions and is now named the Rochambeau Memorial Bridge. These three spans merge into two bridges that cross the Washington Channel and distribute traffic into downtown Washington. The Outlet Bridge carries traffic north onto 14th Street and the Case Bridge carries I-395 traffic into the Southeast Freeway. As the main gateway into the Nations Capital and northern Virginia, the Corridor provides important access to the National Mall, Constitution Avenue, Capitol Grounds, Lincoln Memorial, Verizon Center, RFK Stadium, East Potomac Park, Potomac River, George Washington Memorial Parkway (GWMP), Mt. Vernon Trail, the Pentagon, and Arlington National Cemetery. The study area extends over four miles along I-395 from VA Route 27 in Arlington County to the New York Avenue tunnel entrance at the National Mall in the southeast section of the District of Columbia. The Corridor experiences congestion in both directions during both the morning and evening peak travel periods. Traffic safety is impaired due to tight curvature on ramps, lane reductions in high volume areas, short weave areas, narrow shoulders, and lack of acceleration and deceleration lanes between ramp movements and mainline segments. The current project focuses on making the existing facilities operate more efficiently, while maintaining the existing number of general purpose highway lanes and managing congestion. This draft EIS evaluates: action alternatives related to bicycle/pedestrian, transit, and highway access; management alternatives; and a No Action Alternative. The seven action alternatives retained for further study include: improvements at each end of the Mason Bridge for bicycle and pedestrian access; construction of a separate bicycle/pedestrian crossing of the Potomac River and a grade-separated bicycle crossing of GWMP; creation of an integrated bicycle system, including signing for commuters and other bikers; construction of geometric improvements at I-395 and 9th Street; reduction of I-395 access points at Boundary Channel Drive; elimination of turn movements at the 14th Street and C Street intersection; and construction of bus lanes between Pentagon Transit Center and 14th Street at C Street, using inside shoulders on Rochambeau Bridge and transit signal priority treatment. Six management alternatives retained for further study include: expansion of incentives for telecommuting; increased participation in flexible work hours programs; parking management strategies; strengthened coordination and management; development of a driver education program specific to the Corridor; and modification of signing to create a uniform look and identity. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would address deficiencies with regards to congestion, capacity, safety, and overhead signing on a critical commuter link for automobile, transit, freight, and rail users. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Two historic properties, the Mount Vernon Memorial Highway and the East and West Potomac Parks Historic District, would be adversely affected. The action alternatives would have minor impacts on three national parks: West Potomac Park, East Potomac Park, and the GWMP. None of the parkland functions or uses would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act (P.L. 104-21) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 120008, 432 pages and maps, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 17 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VA/DC-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - National Parks KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - District of Columbia KW - Potomac River KW - Virginia KW - District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act, Funding KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1012742604?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.title=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Sterling, Virginia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 28 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742591; 15209-1_0028 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 28 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742591?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - 14TH STREET BRIDGE CORRIDOR PROJECT, ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA TO WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. [Part 16 of 23] T2 - 14TH STREET BRIDGE CORRIDOR PROJECT, ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA TO WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. AN - 1012742590; 15206-8_0016 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation system improvements within the 14th Street Bridge Corridor in Arlington County, Virginia and southwest Washington, District of Columbia are proposed. The Corridor consists of three four-lane bridges which carry Interstate-395 (I-395) and US Route 1 over the Potomac River. The northbound span of I-395, which opened in 1950, is the Arland D. Williams Bridge. The southbound span, which opened in 1962, is the George Mason Memorial Bridge. The center span was opened in 1972 for express traffic in both directions and is now named the Rochambeau Memorial Bridge. These three spans merge into two bridges that cross the Washington Channel and distribute traffic into downtown Washington. The Outlet Bridge carries traffic north onto 14th Street and the Case Bridge carries I-395 traffic into the Southeast Freeway. As the main gateway into the Nations Capital and northern Virginia, the Corridor provides important access to the National Mall, Constitution Avenue, Capitol Grounds, Lincoln Memorial, Verizon Center, RFK Stadium, East Potomac Park, Potomac River, George Washington Memorial Parkway (GWMP), Mt. Vernon Trail, the Pentagon, and Arlington National Cemetery. The study area extends over four miles along I-395 from VA Route 27 in Arlington County to the New York Avenue tunnel entrance at the National Mall in the southeast section of the District of Columbia. The Corridor experiences congestion in both directions during both the morning and evening peak travel periods. Traffic safety is impaired due to tight curvature on ramps, lane reductions in high volume areas, short weave areas, narrow shoulders, and lack of acceleration and deceleration lanes between ramp movements and mainline segments. The current project focuses on making the existing facilities operate more efficiently, while maintaining the existing number of general purpose highway lanes and managing congestion. This draft EIS evaluates: action alternatives related to bicycle/pedestrian, transit, and highway access; management alternatives; and a No Action Alternative. The seven action alternatives retained for further study include: improvements at each end of the Mason Bridge for bicycle and pedestrian access; construction of a separate bicycle/pedestrian crossing of the Potomac River and a grade-separated bicycle crossing of GWMP; creation of an integrated bicycle system, including signing for commuters and other bikers; construction of geometric improvements at I-395 and 9th Street; reduction of I-395 access points at Boundary Channel Drive; elimination of turn movements at the 14th Street and C Street intersection; and construction of bus lanes between Pentagon Transit Center and 14th Street at C Street, using inside shoulders on Rochambeau Bridge and transit signal priority treatment. Six management alternatives retained for further study include: expansion of incentives for telecommuting; increased participation in flexible work hours programs; parking management strategies; strengthened coordination and management; development of a driver education program specific to the Corridor; and modification of signing to create a uniform look and identity. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would address deficiencies with regards to congestion, capacity, safety, and overhead signing on a critical commuter link for automobile, transit, freight, and rail users. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Two historic properties, the Mount Vernon Memorial Highway and the East and West Potomac Parks Historic District, would be adversely affected. The action alternatives would have minor impacts on three national parks: West Potomac Park, East Potomac Park, and the GWMP. None of the parkland functions or uses would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act (P.L. 104-21) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 120008, 432 pages and maps, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 16 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VA/DC-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - National Parks KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - District of Columbia KW - Potomac River KW - Virginia KW - District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act, Funding KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1012742590?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.title=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Sterling, Virginia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 53 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742576; 15209-1_0053 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 53 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742576?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 71 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742569; 15209-1_0071 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 71 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742569?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 32 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742554; 15209-1_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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 32 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742554?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 47 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742548; 15209-1_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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 47 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742548?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 103 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742547; 15209-1_0103 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 103 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742547?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 51 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742543; 15209-1_0051 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 51 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742543?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 27 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742540; 15209-1_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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 27 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742540?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 2 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742519; 15209-1_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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742519?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 70 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742514; 15209-1_0070 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 70 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742514?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 46 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742493; 15209-1_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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 46 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742493?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 39 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742485; 15209-1_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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 39 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742485?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 91 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742484; 15209-1_0091 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 91 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742484?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 8 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742478; 15209-1_0008 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742478?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 1 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742463; 15209-1_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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742463?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 83 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742459; 15209-1_0083 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 83 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742459?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 23 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742443; 15209-1_0023 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 23 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742443?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 37 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742442; 15209-1_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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 37 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742442?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 24 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742427; 15209-1_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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 24 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742427?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 38 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742422; 15209-1_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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 38 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742422?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 7 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742410; 15209-1_0007 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742410?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 82 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742404; 15209-1_0082 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 82 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742404?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - 14TH STREET BRIDGE CORRIDOR PROJECT, ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA TO WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. [Part 15 of 23] T2 - 14TH STREET BRIDGE CORRIDOR PROJECT, ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA TO WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. AN - 1012742401; 15206-8_0015 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation system improvements within the 14th Street Bridge Corridor in Arlington County, Virginia and southwest Washington, District of Columbia are proposed. The Corridor consists of three four-lane bridges which carry Interstate-395 (I-395) and US Route 1 over the Potomac River. The northbound span of I-395, which opened in 1950, is the Arland D. Williams Bridge. The southbound span, which opened in 1962, is the George Mason Memorial Bridge. The center span was opened in 1972 for express traffic in both directions and is now named the Rochambeau Memorial Bridge. These three spans merge into two bridges that cross the Washington Channel and distribute traffic into downtown Washington. The Outlet Bridge carries traffic north onto 14th Street and the Case Bridge carries I-395 traffic into the Southeast Freeway. As the main gateway into the Nations Capital and northern Virginia, the Corridor provides important access to the National Mall, Constitution Avenue, Capitol Grounds, Lincoln Memorial, Verizon Center, RFK Stadium, East Potomac Park, Potomac River, George Washington Memorial Parkway (GWMP), Mt. Vernon Trail, the Pentagon, and Arlington National Cemetery. The study area extends over four miles along I-395 from VA Route 27 in Arlington County to the New York Avenue tunnel entrance at the National Mall in the southeast section of the District of Columbia. The Corridor experiences congestion in both directions during both the morning and evening peak travel periods. Traffic safety is impaired due to tight curvature on ramps, lane reductions in high volume areas, short weave areas, narrow shoulders, and lack of acceleration and deceleration lanes between ramp movements and mainline segments. The current project focuses on making the existing facilities operate more efficiently, while maintaining the existing number of general purpose highway lanes and managing congestion. This draft EIS evaluates: action alternatives related to bicycle/pedestrian, transit, and highway access; management alternatives; and a No Action Alternative. The seven action alternatives retained for further study include: improvements at each end of the Mason Bridge for bicycle and pedestrian access; construction of a separate bicycle/pedestrian crossing of the Potomac River and a grade-separated bicycle crossing of GWMP; creation of an integrated bicycle system, including signing for commuters and other bikers; construction of geometric improvements at I-395 and 9th Street; reduction of I-395 access points at Boundary Channel Drive; elimination of turn movements at the 14th Street and C Street intersection; and construction of bus lanes between Pentagon Transit Center and 14th Street at C Street, using inside shoulders on Rochambeau Bridge and transit signal priority treatment. Six management alternatives retained for further study include: expansion of incentives for telecommuting; increased participation in flexible work hours programs; parking management strategies; strengthened coordination and management; development of a driver education program specific to the Corridor; and modification of signing to create a uniform look and identity. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would address deficiencies with regards to congestion, capacity, safety, and overhead signing on a critical commuter link for automobile, transit, freight, and rail users. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Two historic properties, the Mount Vernon Memorial Highway and the East and West Potomac Parks Historic District, would be adversely affected. The action alternatives would have minor impacts on three national parks: West Potomac Park, East Potomac Park, and the GWMP. None of the parkland functions or uses would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act (P.L. 104-21) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 120008, 432 pages and maps, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 15 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VA/DC-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - National Parks KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - District of Columbia KW - Potomac River KW - Virginia KW - District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act, Funding KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1012742401?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.title=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Sterling, Virginia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 21 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742389; 15209-1_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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 21 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742389?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 22 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742388; 15209-1_0022 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 22 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742388?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - 14TH STREET BRIDGE CORRIDOR PROJECT, ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA TO WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. [Part 14 of 23] T2 - 14TH STREET BRIDGE CORRIDOR PROJECT, ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA TO WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. AN - 1012742386; 15206-8_0014 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation system improvements within the 14th Street Bridge Corridor in Arlington County, Virginia and southwest Washington, District of Columbia are proposed. The Corridor consists of three four-lane bridges which carry Interstate-395 (I-395) and US Route 1 over the Potomac River. The northbound span of I-395, which opened in 1950, is the Arland D. Williams Bridge. The southbound span, which opened in 1962, is the George Mason Memorial Bridge. The center span was opened in 1972 for express traffic in both directions and is now named the Rochambeau Memorial Bridge. These three spans merge into two bridges that cross the Washington Channel and distribute traffic into downtown Washington. The Outlet Bridge carries traffic north onto 14th Street and the Case Bridge carries I-395 traffic into the Southeast Freeway. As the main gateway into the Nations Capital and northern Virginia, the Corridor provides important access to the National Mall, Constitution Avenue, Capitol Grounds, Lincoln Memorial, Verizon Center, RFK Stadium, East Potomac Park, Potomac River, George Washington Memorial Parkway (GWMP), Mt. Vernon Trail, the Pentagon, and Arlington National Cemetery. The study area extends over four miles along I-395 from VA Route 27 in Arlington County to the New York Avenue tunnel entrance at the National Mall in the southeast section of the District of Columbia. The Corridor experiences congestion in both directions during both the morning and evening peak travel periods. Traffic safety is impaired due to tight curvature on ramps, lane reductions in high volume areas, short weave areas, narrow shoulders, and lack of acceleration and deceleration lanes between ramp movements and mainline segments. The current project focuses on making the existing facilities operate more efficiently, while maintaining the existing number of general purpose highway lanes and managing congestion. This draft EIS evaluates: action alternatives related to bicycle/pedestrian, transit, and highway access; management alternatives; and a No Action Alternative. The seven action alternatives retained for further study include: improvements at each end of the Mason Bridge for bicycle and pedestrian access; construction of a separate bicycle/pedestrian crossing of the Potomac River and a grade-separated bicycle crossing of GWMP; creation of an integrated bicycle system, including signing for commuters and other bikers; construction of geometric improvements at I-395 and 9th Street; reduction of I-395 access points at Boundary Channel Drive; elimination of turn movements at the 14th Street and C Street intersection; and construction of bus lanes between Pentagon Transit Center and 14th Street at C Street, using inside shoulders on Rochambeau Bridge and transit signal priority treatment. Six management alternatives retained for further study include: expansion of incentives for telecommuting; increased participation in flexible work hours programs; parking management strategies; strengthened coordination and management; development of a driver education program specific to the Corridor; and modification of signing to create a uniform look and identity. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would address deficiencies with regards to congestion, capacity, safety, and overhead signing on a critical commuter link for automobile, transit, freight, and rail users. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Two historic properties, the Mount Vernon Memorial Highway and the East and West Potomac Parks Historic District, would be adversely affected. The action alternatives would have minor impacts on three national parks: West Potomac Park, East Potomac Park, and the GWMP. None of the parkland functions or uses would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act (P.L. 104-21) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 120008, 432 pages and maps, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 14 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VA/DC-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - National Parks KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - District of Columbia KW - Potomac River KW - Virginia KW - District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act, Funding KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1012742386?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.title=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Sterling, Virginia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 36 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742383; 15209-1_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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 36 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742383?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 19 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742372; 15209-1_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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 19 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742372?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - 14TH STREET BRIDGE CORRIDOR PROJECT, ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA TO WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. [Part 13 of 23] T2 - 14TH STREET BRIDGE CORRIDOR PROJECT, ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA TO WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. AN - 1012742369; 15206-8_0013 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation system improvements within the 14th Street Bridge Corridor in Arlington County, Virginia and southwest Washington, District of Columbia are proposed. The Corridor consists of three four-lane bridges which carry Interstate-395 (I-395) and US Route 1 over the Potomac River. The northbound span of I-395, which opened in 1950, is the Arland D. Williams Bridge. The southbound span, which opened in 1962, is the George Mason Memorial Bridge. The center span was opened in 1972 for express traffic in both directions and is now named the Rochambeau Memorial Bridge. These three spans merge into two bridges that cross the Washington Channel and distribute traffic into downtown Washington. The Outlet Bridge carries traffic north onto 14th Street and the Case Bridge carries I-395 traffic into the Southeast Freeway. As the main gateway into the Nations Capital and northern Virginia, the Corridor provides important access to the National Mall, Constitution Avenue, Capitol Grounds, Lincoln Memorial, Verizon Center, RFK Stadium, East Potomac Park, Potomac River, George Washington Memorial Parkway (GWMP), Mt. Vernon Trail, the Pentagon, and Arlington National Cemetery. The study area extends over four miles along I-395 from VA Route 27 in Arlington County to the New York Avenue tunnel entrance at the National Mall in the southeast section of the District of Columbia. The Corridor experiences congestion in both directions during both the morning and evening peak travel periods. Traffic safety is impaired due to tight curvature on ramps, lane reductions in high volume areas, short weave areas, narrow shoulders, and lack of acceleration and deceleration lanes between ramp movements and mainline segments. The current project focuses on making the existing facilities operate more efficiently, while maintaining the existing number of general purpose highway lanes and managing congestion. This draft EIS evaluates: action alternatives related to bicycle/pedestrian, transit, and highway access; management alternatives; and a No Action Alternative. The seven action alternatives retained for further study include: improvements at each end of the Mason Bridge for bicycle and pedestrian access; construction of a separate bicycle/pedestrian crossing of the Potomac River and a grade-separated bicycle crossing of GWMP; creation of an integrated bicycle system, including signing for commuters and other bikers; construction of geometric improvements at I-395 and 9th Street; reduction of I-395 access points at Boundary Channel Drive; elimination of turn movements at the 14th Street and C Street intersection; and construction of bus lanes between Pentagon Transit Center and 14th Street at C Street, using inside shoulders on Rochambeau Bridge and transit signal priority treatment. Six management alternatives retained for further study include: expansion of incentives for telecommuting; increased participation in flexible work hours programs; parking management strategies; strengthened coordination and management; development of a driver education program specific to the Corridor; and modification of signing to create a uniform look and identity. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would address deficiencies with regards to congestion, capacity, safety, and overhead signing on a critical commuter link for automobile, transit, freight, and rail users. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Two historic properties, the Mount Vernon Memorial Highway and the East and West Potomac Parks Historic District, would be adversely affected. The action alternatives would have minor impacts on three national parks: West Potomac Park, East Potomac Park, and the GWMP. None of the parkland functions or uses would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act (P.L. 104-21) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 120008, 432 pages and maps, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 13 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VA/DC-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - National Parks KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - District of Columbia KW - Potomac River KW - Virginia KW - District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act, Funding KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1012742369?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.title=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Sterling, Virginia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - 14TH STREET BRIDGE CORRIDOR PROJECT, ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA TO WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. [Part 12 of 23] T2 - 14TH STREET BRIDGE CORRIDOR PROJECT, ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA TO WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. AN - 1012742356; 15206-8_0012 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation system improvements within the 14th Street Bridge Corridor in Arlington County, Virginia and southwest Washington, District of Columbia are proposed. The Corridor consists of three four-lane bridges which carry Interstate-395 (I-395) and US Route 1 over the Potomac River. The northbound span of I-395, which opened in 1950, is the Arland D. Williams Bridge. The southbound span, which opened in 1962, is the George Mason Memorial Bridge. The center span was opened in 1972 for express traffic in both directions and is now named the Rochambeau Memorial Bridge. These three spans merge into two bridges that cross the Washington Channel and distribute traffic into downtown Washington. The Outlet Bridge carries traffic north onto 14th Street and the Case Bridge carries I-395 traffic into the Southeast Freeway. As the main gateway into the Nations Capital and northern Virginia, the Corridor provides important access to the National Mall, Constitution Avenue, Capitol Grounds, Lincoln Memorial, Verizon Center, RFK Stadium, East Potomac Park, Potomac River, George Washington Memorial Parkway (GWMP), Mt. Vernon Trail, the Pentagon, and Arlington National Cemetery. The study area extends over four miles along I-395 from VA Route 27 in Arlington County to the New York Avenue tunnel entrance at the National Mall in the southeast section of the District of Columbia. The Corridor experiences congestion in both directions during both the morning and evening peak travel periods. Traffic safety is impaired due to tight curvature on ramps, lane reductions in high volume areas, short weave areas, narrow shoulders, and lack of acceleration and deceleration lanes between ramp movements and mainline segments. The current project focuses on making the existing facilities operate more efficiently, while maintaining the existing number of general purpose highway lanes and managing congestion. This draft EIS evaluates: action alternatives related to bicycle/pedestrian, transit, and highway access; management alternatives; and a No Action Alternative. The seven action alternatives retained for further study include: improvements at each end of the Mason Bridge for bicycle and pedestrian access; construction of a separate bicycle/pedestrian crossing of the Potomac River and a grade-separated bicycle crossing of GWMP; creation of an integrated bicycle system, including signing for commuters and other bikers; construction of geometric improvements at I-395 and 9th Street; reduction of I-395 access points at Boundary Channel Drive; elimination of turn movements at the 14th Street and C Street intersection; and construction of bus lanes between Pentagon Transit Center and 14th Street at C Street, using inside shoulders on Rochambeau Bridge and transit signal priority treatment. Six management alternatives retained for further study include: expansion of incentives for telecommuting; increased participation in flexible work hours programs; parking management strategies; strengthened coordination and management; development of a driver education program specific to the Corridor; and modification of signing to create a uniform look and identity. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would address deficiencies with regards to congestion, capacity, safety, and overhead signing on a critical commuter link for automobile, transit, freight, and rail users. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Two historic properties, the Mount Vernon Memorial Highway and the East and West Potomac Parks Historic District, would be adversely affected. The action alternatives would have minor impacts on three national parks: West Potomac Park, East Potomac Park, and the GWMP. None of the parkland functions or uses would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act (P.L. 104-21) and National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 120008, 432 pages and maps, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 12 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-VA/DC-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Highways KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - National Parks KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - District of Columbia KW - Potomac River KW - Virginia KW - District of Columbia Emergency Highway Relief Act, Funding KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1012742356?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.title=14TH+STREET+BRIDGE+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+ARLINGTON+COUNTY%2C+VIRGINIA+TO+WASHINGTON%2C+DISTRICT+OF+COLUMBIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Sterling, Virginia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 26 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742351; 15209-1_0026 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 26 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742351?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 34 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742349; 15209-1_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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 34 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742349?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 6 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742346; 15209-1_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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742346?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 20 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742323; 15209-1_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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 20 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742323?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 16 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742321; 15209-1_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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 16 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742321?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 18 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742319; 15209-1_0018 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 18 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742319?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 9 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742318; 15209-1_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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 9 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742318?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 25 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742295; 15209-1_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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 25 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742295?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 15 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742276; 15209-1_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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 15 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742276?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 57 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742267; 15209-1_0057 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 57 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742267?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 14 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742234; 15209-1_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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 14 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742234?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 56 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742219; 15209-1_0056 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 56 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742219?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 4 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742185; 15209-1_0004 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742185?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 50 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742097; 15209-1_0050 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 50 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742097?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 49 of 181] T2 - REGIONAL CONNECTOR TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 1012742061; 15209-1_0049 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 encompasses two square miles of 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 State Route 110 freeway. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation system management alternative, and three light rail transit (LRT) build alternatives that would provide for electric trains powered by overhead wires and running on conventional steel tracks. 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 stations at the Civic Center, Grand Avenue, and the Financial District. Portions of 2nd Street 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 and 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, which is the locally preferred alternative (LPA), would provide for three new underground stations. The alignment would travel under the intersection of 1st and Alameda, and then connect to the Metro Gold Line within 1st Street and north of Temple Street. Tracks would extend underground from the 7th Street/Metro Center Station under Flower Street to 2nd Street, and then proceed east underneath the 2nd Street tunnel 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. Two portals would be located to the north and east of the junction between the Regional Connector and the Pasadena/Azusa and East Los Angeles/Interstate 605 branches of the Metro Gold Line. Capital costs of the LPA are estimated at $1.17 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The light rail extension would improve travel times, reduce transfers, reduce traffic congestion, and improve air quality. 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: Construction emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter would affect air quality. Temporary closure of traffic lanes would impede motor vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. After mitigation measures are implemented for the LPA, the intersection of 4th and Flower Streets would continue to be adversely affected during the morning peak hour. Acquisitions required for the LPA would displace 270 off-street parking spaces, including 130 spaces in Little Tokyo, a unique cultural community. Required easements and land acquisitions would displace businesses. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0495D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 120011, Final EIS--1,020 pages, Appendices--134 pages, Responses to Comments--CD-ROM, January 20, 2012 PY - 2012 VL - 49 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality 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/1012742061?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2012-01-20&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 - 2012-04-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: January 20, 2012 N1 - Last updated - 2012-05-14 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Comparison of fluence-to-dose conversion coefficients for deuterons, tritons and helions AN - 923199577; 16297884 AB - Secondary radiation in aircraft and spacecraft includes deuterons, tritons and helions. Two sets of fluence-to-effective dose conversion coefficients for isotropic exposure to these particles were compared: one used the particle and heavy ion transport code system (PHITS) radiation transport code coupled with the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) reference phantoms (PHITS-ICRP) and the other the Monte Carlo N-Particle eXtended (MCNPX) radiation transport code coupled with modified BodyBuilder registered phantoms (MCNPX-BB). Also, two sets of fluence-to-effective dose equivalent conversion coefficients calculated using the PHITS-ICRP combination were compared: one used quality factors based on linear energy transfer; the other used quality factors based on lineal energy (y). Finally, PHITS-ICRP effective dose coefficients were compared with PHITS-ICRP effective dose equivalent coefficients. The PHITS-ICRP and MCNPX-BB effective dose coefficients were similar, except at high energies, where MCNPX-BB coefficients were higher. For helions, at most energies effective dose coefficients were much greater than effective dose equivalent coefficients. For deuterons and tritons, coefficients were similar when their radiation weighting factor was set to 2. JF - Radiation Protection Dosimetry AU - Copeland, Kyle AU - Friedberg, Wallace AU - Sato, Tatsuhiko AU - Niita, Koji AD - Federal Aviation Administration, Civil Aerospace Medical Institute, 6500 S Y1 - 2012 PY - 2012 DA - 2012 SP - 344 EP - 351 PB - Oxford University Press, Great Clarendon Street Oxford OX2 6DP United Kingdom VL - 148 IS - 3 SN - 0144-8420, 0144-8420 KW - Environment Abstracts KW - Aircraft KW - Dose-response effects KW - Dosimetry KW - Monte Carlo simulation KW - Particulates KW - Spacecraft KW - commissions KW - ion transport KW - ENA 02:Toxicology & Environmental Safety UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/923199577?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=Radiation+Protection+Dosimetry&rft.atitle=Comparison+of+fluence-to-dose+conversion+coefficients+for+deuterons%2C+tritons+and+helions&rft.au=Copeland%2C+Kyle%3BFriedberg%2C+Wallace%3BSato%2C+Tatsuhiko%3BNiita%2C+Koji&rft.aulast=Copeland&rft.aufirst=Kyle&rft.date=2012-01-01&rft.volume=148&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=344&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Radiation+Protection+Dosimetry&rft.issn=01448420&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - Last updated - 2012-06-18 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Monte Carlo simulation; commissions; Aircraft; Dose-response effects; Dosimetry; ion transport; Particulates; Spacecraft ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Analysis of water level variations in Brazilian basins using GRACE AN - 1855318708; 2017-000834 AB - A comparison between daily in-situ water level time series measured at ground-based hydrometric stations (HS - 1,899 stations located in twelve Brazilian basins) of the Agencia Nacional de Aguas (ANA) with vertically-integrated water height anomaly deduced from the Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) geoid is carried out in Brazil. The equivalent water height (EWH) of 10-day intervals of GRACE models were computed by GRGS/CNES. It is a 6-year analysis (July-2002 to May-2008). The coefficient of determination is computed between the ANA water level and GRACE EWH. Values higher than 0.6 were detected in the following basins: Amazon, north of Paraguay, Tocantins-Araguaia, Western North-East Atlantic and north of the Parnaiba. In the Uruguay (Pampas region) and the west of Sao Francisco basins, the coefficient of determination is around 0.5 and 0.6. These results were adjusted with a linear transfer function and two second degree polynomials (flood and ebb period) between GRACE EWH and ANA water level. The behavior of these two polynomials is related to the phase difference of the two time series and yielded four different types of responses. This paper shows seven ANA stations that represent these responses and relates them with their hydro-geological domain. JF - Journal of Geodetic Science AU - Matos, A AU - Blitzkow, D AU - Almeida, F AU - Costa, S AU - Campos, I AU - Barbosa, A Y1 - 2012/01/01/ PY - 2012 DA - 2012 Jan 01 SP - 76 EP - 87 PB - De Gruyter Open, Warsaw VL - 2 IS - 2 KW - hydrology KW - Global Positioning System KW - sedimentary basins KW - statistical analysis KW - water management KW - GRACE KW - mathematical models KW - mapping KW - correlation KW - geodesy KW - satellite methods KW - evapotranspiration KW - South America KW - hydrologic cycle KW - Sao Francisco Basin KW - Navier-Stokes equations KW - levels KW - Brazil KW - basins KW - regression analysis KW - Amazon Basin KW - 21:Hydrogeology KW - 20:Applied geophysics UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1855318708?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=Journal+of+Geodetic+Science&rft.atitle=Analysis+of+water+level+variations+in+Brazilian+basins+using+GRACE&rft.au=Matos%2C+A%3BBlitzkow%2C+D%3BAlmeida%2C+F%3BCosta%2C+S%3BCampos%2C+I%3BBarbosa%2C+A&rft.aulast=Matos&rft.aufirst=A&rft.date=2012-01-01&rft.volume=2&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=76&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Journal+of+Geodetic+Science&rft.issn=2081-9943&rft_id=info:doi/10.2478%2Fv10156-011-0034-7 L2 - http://www.degruyter.com/view/j/jogs LA - English DB - GeoRef N1 - Copyright - GeoRef, Copyright 2017, American Geosciences Institute. Reference includes data supplied by Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin, Germany N1 - Date revised - 2017-01-01 N1 - Number of references - 23 N1 - Document feature - illus. incl. 2 tables, geol. sketch maps N1 - Last updated - 2017-01-05 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Amazon Basin; basins; Brazil; correlation; evapotranspiration; geodesy; Global Positioning System; GRACE; hydrologic cycle; hydrology; levels; mapping; mathematical models; Navier-Stokes equations; regression analysis; Sao Francisco Basin; satellite methods; sedimentary basins; South America; statistical analysis; water management DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/v10156-011-0034-7 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - An evaluation of recent GOCE geopotential models in Brazil AN - 1855318425; 2017-000838 AB - Several global geopotential models based on Gravity field and steady-state Ocean Circulation Explorer (GOCE) data have been published in the last two years. Some of these models use combinations of different satellite missions, while others use only GOCE data. This paper presents the evaluation and analysis of each approach using GOCE data in the Southeast of Brazil. Two assessments have been made. We compared the geoid heights derived from GOCE-based models with the geoidal heights from 176 GPS stations on leveling benchmarks. The findings show an improvement in GOCE-based models TIM_R3 (0.40 m) and DIR_R3 (0.39 m) for degree and order 210 in relation to EGM2008 (0.44 m) in terms of RMS. For the other models the results did not exceed 0.44 m. The second evaluation reports the comparison in terms of gravity disturbances between terrestrial gravity data and the models. The results, in terms of RMS and up to degree and order 210, indicate slightly low GOCO 02S values (10.34 mGal), TIM_R2 (10.37 mGal) and TIM_R3 (10.47 mGal) compared to EGM2008 (10.66 mGal). We also applied the residual terrain model and, as a result, the RMS errors were reduced by approximately 35% ( approximately 6.0 mGal) in the entire area and by approximately 45% in the mountain region. JF - Journal of Geodetic Science AU - Guimaraes, G AU - Matos, A AU - Blitzkow, D Y1 - 2012/01/01/ PY - 2012 DA - 2012 Jan 01 SP - 144 EP - 155 PB - De Gruyter Open, Warsaw VL - 2 IS - 2 KW - GOCE KW - Global Positioning System KW - Earth KW - Sao Paulo Brazil KW - leveling KW - geodesy KW - evaluation KW - spherical harmonic analysis KW - gravity anomalies KW - South America KW - gravity field KW - Brazil KW - geoid KW - 20:Applied geophysics UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1855318425?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=Journal+of+Geodetic+Science&rft.atitle=An+evaluation+of+recent+GOCE+geopotential+models+in+Brazil&rft.au=Guimaraes%2C+G%3BMatos%2C+A%3BBlitzkow%2C+D&rft.aulast=Guimaraes&rft.aufirst=G&rft.date=2012-01-01&rft.volume=2&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=144&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Journal+of+Geodetic+Science&rft.issn=2081-9943&rft_id=info:doi/10.2478%2Fv10156-011-0033-8 L2 - http://www.degruyter.com/view/j/jogs LA - English DB - GeoRef N1 - Copyright - GeoRef, Copyright 2017, American Geosciences Institute. Reference includes data supplied by Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin, Germany N1 - Date revised - 2017-01-01 N1 - Number of references - 38 N1 - Document feature - illus. incl. 5 tables, geol. sketch maps N1 - Last updated - 2017-01-05 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Brazil; Earth; evaluation; geodesy; geoid; Global Positioning System; GOCE; gravity anomalies; gravity field; leveling; Sao Paulo Brazil; South America; spherical harmonic analysis DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/v10156-011-0033-8 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Performance Evaluation for Implementation of Port Community System AN - 1685816463; 17526014 AB - The shipping and port industry must respond to a new reality that has been created by the continuing growth of world trade and the emergence of global operators. This combination has resulted in increased demand for seaports and their related services while they are divided into competing nodal points in the entire global logistic chain. To improve their competitive positions, many ports have begun developing and implementing the port community system (PCS), which constitutes an electronic platform that connects multiple systems operated by a variety of organizations that constitute the seaport community and is believed to be a significant contributing factor to a more efficient movement of cargo across international borders. Related research on the integration of PCSs has only recently started to develop. To this end, this paper proposes a methodology to evaluate port performance changes with the introduction of PCS, which, under a competitive environment is of significant importance to port management. The proposed evaluation methodology introduces, among others, key port performance indicators to account for system implementation. An application of the methodology is carried out for the real case of a port that is kept anonymous to maintain confidentiality. The methodology can constitute an effective decision-making tool for port managers, as well as regional and national authorities, to perform port improvement analysis, encouraging these to be proactive in PCS development-ultimately leading to efficiency, productivity, and competitiveness gains. JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Tsamboulas, Dimitrios AU - Moraiti, Panayota AU - Lekka, Anna M AD - Department of Transportation Planning and Engineering, School of Civil Engineering, National Technical University of Athens, 5 Iroon Polytechniou Street, Zografou Campus, Zografou, Athens, GR 15773, Greece Y1 - 2012///0, PY - 2012 DA - 0, 2012 SP - 29 EP - 37 PB - Transportation Research Board VL - 2 IS - 2273 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Environmental Engineering Abstracts (EN); CSA / ASCE Civil Engineering Abstracts (CE) KW - Communities KW - Performance evaluation KW - Demand KW - Emergence KW - Electronics KW - Tools KW - Ports KW - Methodology UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1685816463?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=Performance+Evaluation+for+Implementation+of+Port+Community+System&rft.au=Tsamboulas%2C+Dimitrios%3BMoraiti%2C+Panayota%3BLekka%2C+Anna+M&rft.aulast=Tsamboulas&rft.aufirst=Dimitrios&rft.date=2012-01-01&rft.volume=2&rft.issue=2273&rft.spage=29&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2273-04 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2013-02-01 N1 - Number of references - 29 N1 - Last updated - 2016-06-30 DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2273-04 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Analysis of the crust displacement in Amazon Basin AN - 1648908346; 2015-010242 JF - International Association of Geodesy Symposia AU - Blitzkow, D AU - de Matos, A C O C AU - Almedida, F G V AU - Barbosa, A C B Y1 - 2012 PY - 2012 DA - 2012 SP - 885 EP - 891 PB - Springer-Verlag, Berlin-Heidelberg VL - 136 SN - 0939-9585, 0939-9585 KW - hydrology KW - Global Positioning System KW - rainfall KW - statistical analysis KW - GRACE KW - continental crust KW - geodesy KW - displacements KW - satellite methods KW - South America KW - faults KW - crust KW - Amazon Basin KW - remote sensing KW - 18:Solid-earth geophysics KW - 20:Applied geophysics UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1648908346?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=International+Association+of+Geodesy+Symposia&rft.atitle=Analysis+of+the+crust+displacement+in+Amazon+Basin&rft.au=Blitzkow%2C+D%3Bde+Matos%2C+A+C+O+C%3BAlmedida%2C+F+G+V%3BBarbosa%2C+A+C+B&rft.aulast=Blitzkow&rft.aufirst=D&rft.date=2012-01-01&rft.volume=136&rft.issue=&rft.spage=885&rft.isbn=9783642203381&rft.btitle=&rft.title=International+Association+of+Geodesy+Symposia&rft.issn=09399585&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007%2F978-3-642-20338-1_111 LA - English DB - GeoRef N1 - Conference title - 2009 IAG symposium N1 - Copyright - GeoRef, Copyright 2015, American Geosciences Institute. N1 - Date revised - 2015-01-01 N1 - Number of references - 19 N1 - Document feature - illus. incl. 1 table N1 - Last updated - 2015-01-29 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Amazon Basin; continental crust; crust; displacements; faults; geodesy; Global Positioning System; GRACE; hydrology; rainfall; remote sensing; satellite methods; South America; statistical analysis DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-20338-1_111 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Exploring the Service Needs of Pregnant Air Passengers AN - 1349469066; 17905961 AB - Several studies have found that women in good health are able to fly without concern for safety at any point before the 36th week of pregnancy. However, air transportation facilities and services are designed for general passengers and seldom consider the service needs of pregnant women. To understand the pregnant traveler's wants and needs, this study examined the perception of and satisfaction with air transportation services in a sample of female air passengers who boarded international flights during pregnancy. The results showed that the performance of service attributes, such as seat selection, user-friendly onboard restrooms, and assistance in boarding the aircraft, did not meet the respondents' expectations. It was also found that the service needs of women less than 6 months pregnant differed from those of women more than 6 months pregnant. JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Chang, Yu-Chun AD - Department of Transportation Science, National Taiwan Ocean University, 2 Pei Ning Road, Keelung 202-24, Taiwan ycchang@mail.ntou.edu.tw Y1 - 2012 PY - 2012 DA - 2012 SP - 97 EP - 101 PB - Transportation Research Board IS - 2320 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Environmental Engineering Abstracts (EN); CSA / ASCE Civil Engineering Abstracts (CE) KW - Passengers KW - Transportation KW - Seats KW - Perception KW - Air transportation KW - Boarding KW - Onboard KW - Pregnancy UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1349469066?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=Exploring+the+Service+Needs+of+Pregnant+Air+Passengers&rft.au=Chang%2C+Yu-Chun&rft.aulast=Chang&rft.aufirst=Yu-Chun&rft.date=2012-01-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=2320&rft.spage=97&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F232012 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2013-05-01 N1 - Number of references - 10 N1 - Last updated - 2013-11-06 DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/232012 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Construction of Dynamic Modulus Master Curves with Resilient Modulus and Creep Test Data AN - 1323236951; 17757575 AB - For the past few decades, the stiffness of materials used for roadway design and construction has been commonly characterized by the resilient modulus, defined as the ratio of the applied stress to the recoverable strain. However, the resilient modulus is not a fundamental material property of a viscoelastic material. Therefore, the concept of resilient modulus has been subsequently diminished in the latest Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design Guide. Although that design guide could not endorse the use of the resilient modulus test protocol as the primary means of characterizing the asphalt concrete modulus in the design of flexible pavements, that protocol has been a primary mixture test, and much laboratory testing has been completed to date. Analysis methodologies are introduced for backcalculating the dynamic modulus from the resilient modulus test data. To assess the usefulness of the proposed algorithm, laboratory experiments in both the uniaxial compression and indirect tensile test modes were carried out on asphalt specimens compacted with the Superpave( registered ) gyratory compactor. The backcalculated dynamic modulus was used to generate the master curve, and the creep test data were used to enhance the accuracy of the master curve. The advantage of such a methodology is that the existing resilient modulus and creep test data can be leveraged for estimating the dynamic modulus. The approach would significantly save time and effort in reevaluating the dynamic modulus of an asphalt mixture when the resilient modulus and creep test data are available. JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Lee, Hyung Suk AU - Kim, Sungho AU - Choubane, Bouzid AU - Upshaw, Patrick AD - Florida Department of Transportation, 5007 Northeast 39th Avenue, Gainesville, FL 32609 hyung.lee@dot.myflorida.com Y1 - 2012 PY - 2012 DA - 2012 SP - 1 EP - 14 PB - Transportation Research Board VL - 4 IS - 2294 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Environmental Engineering Abstracts (EN); CSA / ASCE Civil Engineering Abstracts (CE) KW - Design engineering KW - Asphalt KW - Estimating KW - Tensile tests KW - Algorithms KW - Creep tests KW - Compacting KW - Dynamics UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1323236951?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=Construction+of+Dynamic+Modulus+Master+Curves+with+Resilient+Modulus+and+Creep+Test+Data&rft.au=Lee%2C+Hyung+Suk%3BKim%2C+Sungho%3BChoubane%2C+Bouzid%3BUpshaw%2C+Patrick&rft.aulast=Lee&rft.aufirst=Hyung&rft.date=2012-01-01&rft.volume=4&rft.issue=2294&rft.spage=1&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2296-01 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2013-04-01 N1 - Number of references - 23 N1 - Last updated - 2013-11-06 DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2296-01 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Field Evaluation of Surface Friction Performance of Chip Seals in Indiana AN - 1315663194; 17607890 AB - Chip seal has been widely used as an effective surface treatment for pavement preservation. The Indiana Department of Transportation (DOT) chip sealed a total of 373 lane mile pavements in 2008 and 700 lane mile pavements in 2009. However, many issues, such as the optimal use of local materials and new aggregates, remained unsolved. No original information was available at the time for Indiana DOT engineers to assess the performance of chip seal pavements. A research study was initiated by the Indiana DOT to evaluate the field performance of chip seal pavements, particularly the surface friction properties. Eighteen chip seal projects were selected as the test sections for this study. Field testing was conducted to measure pavement surface friction and texture properties. The true surface friction numbers were identified for chip seals after 12 months of service. The variation of surface friction on chip seals was analyzed. Factors affecting chip seal surface friction, such as aggregate, traffic volume, and existing pavement condition, were identified and examined. Three traffic levels were defined for better chip seal application. The international roughness index on the existing pavement affected chip seal friction performance. A criterion was recommended for assessing the friction performance of chip seal and identifying the possible failure of a chip seal. JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Li, Shuo AU - Shields, Todd AU - Noureldin, Samy AU - Jiang, Yi AD - Indiana Department of Transportation, Division of Research and Development, 1205 Montgomery Street, West Lafayette, IN 479D6 sli@indot.in.gov Y1 - 2012 PY - 2012 DA - 2012 SP - 11 EP - 18 PB - Transportation Research Board VL - 3 IS - 2295 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Environmental Engineering Abstracts (EN); CSA / ASCE Civil Engineering Abstracts (CE) KW - Chips KW - Friction KW - Lanes KW - Pavements KW - Seals KW - Texture KW - Traffic engineering KW - Traffic flow UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1315663194?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=Field+Evaluation+of+Surface+Friction+Performance+of+Chip+Seals+in+Indiana&rft.au=Li%2C+Shuo%3BShields%2C+Todd%3BNoureldin%2C+Samy%3BJiang%2C+Yi&rft.aulast=Li&rft.aufirst=Shuo&rft.date=2012-01-01&rft.volume=3&rft.issue=2295&rft.spage=11&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2295-02 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2013-03-01 N1 - Number of references - 10 N1 - Last updated - 2013-03-11 DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2295-02 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Project Selection and Prioritization of Pavement Preservation: Competitive Approach AN - 1315656373; 17660177 AB - Several methods help agencies select and prioritize pavement preservation projects. Often these methods are built within an agency's pavement management system. Unfortunately, these decision support tools often produce recommendations that do not match actual decisions, particularly for project selection of pavement management. Ad hoc selection procedures for preservation projects may be effective for many highway agencies. Fiscal constraints and pressure from administrators and legislators, however, have forced agencies to justify their use of funds. This paper offers a new method for the selection and prioritization of pavement projects, with the use of the analytic hierarchy process as its multicriteria decision-making platform. The new method uses several parameters and input from decision makers to create a prioritized preservation project list. The method was applied in a case study in Texas; projects suggested by the method matched actual decisions 75% of the time. The ability to capture multiple parameters and determine weights for each parameter on the basis of decision-maker input, along with the high level of agreement between the method and actual decisions, indicated that the method could be a viable decision support tool. JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Gurganus, Charles F AU - Gharaibeh, Nasir G AD - Texas Department of Transportation, 205 Northeast Loop 564, Mineola, TX 75773 Y1 - 2012 PY - 2012 DA - 2012 SP - 36 EP - 44 PB - Transportation Research Board IS - 2292 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Environmental Engineering Abstracts (EN); CSA / ASCE Civil Engineering Abstracts (CE) KW - Pavements KW - Decision making KW - Transportation KW - Management systems KW - Decision support systems KW - Preservation KW - Highways KW - Platforms UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1315656373?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=Project+Selection+and+Prioritization+of+Pavement+Preservation%3A+Competitive+Approach&rft.au=Gurganus%2C+Charles+F%3BGharaibeh%2C+Nasir+G&rft.aulast=Gurganus&rft.aufirst=Charles&rft.date=2012-01-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=2292&rft.spage=36&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2292-05 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2013-03-01 N1 - Number of references - 21 N1 - Last updated - 2013-11-06 DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2292-05 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - The elephant in the mist: What we dont know about the design, development, test and management of complex systems AN - 1291620440; 17652127 AB - The authors survey the literature on complex systems to develop a fundamental critique of the systems engineering methods that value-driven design will attempt to replace. The current approach to systems engineering applies industrial revolution methods to information revolution problems. Not only the flowdown of requirements, but also the ability to verify and validate large engineered systems is brought into question. JF - Journal of Aerospace Operations AU - Felder, Wilson N AU - Collopy, Paul AD - Federal Aviation Administration, Wm J Hughes Technical Center, Atlantic City, NJ, USA Y1 - 2012 PY - 2012 DA - 2012 SP - 317 EP - 327 PB - IOS Press, Nieuwe Hemweg 6B Amsterdam 1013 BG Netherlands VL - 1 IS - 4 SN - 2211-002X, 2211-002X KW - Health & Safety Science Abstracts KW - Design KW - systems engineering KW - complex systems KW - socio-technical systems KW - validation KW - Mists KW - Elephantidae KW - H 0500:General UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1291620440?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=conference&rft.jtitle=Journal+of+Aerospace+Operations&rft.atitle=The+elephant+in+the+mist%3A+What+we+dont+know+about+the+design%2C+development%2C+test+and+management+of+complex+systems&rft.au=Felder%2C+Wilson+N%3BCollopy%2C+Paul&rft.aulast=Felder&rft.aufirst=Wilson&rft.date=2012-01-01&rft.volume=1&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=317&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Journal+of+Aerospace+Operations&rft.issn=2211002X&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2013-02-01 N1 - Last updated - 2015-04-09 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Mists; Design; Elephantidae ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Effect of Train Arrival Time on Crash Frequency at Highway-Railroad Grade Crossings General Classification Regression Model AN - 1285089967; 17566243 AB - With the use of a general classification regression model, this study investigated the causal relationship between time to train arrival (TTA) and crash frequency at highway-railroad grade crossings. In particular, a stratified structure in the explanatory variables was used to avoid the collinearity problem generally confronted in linear regression models. TTA is a good estimate of rail sight distance and time to collision, and it could be used to predict crash frequency at a grade crossing. A 14-year crash data set accompanied by crossing inventory data including TTAs was collected for the empirical study. Study results indicated that a negative relationship between TTAs and crash frequencies was generally found for all types of trains. Similar causal relationships were also found in various combinations of both crossing attributes and crash characteristics. Sensitivity analysis on the variable combinations was also conducted to investigate the key risk factors that might result in traffic collisions at grade crossings. Policy implications based on the empirical study are discussed, and future research directions are recommended. JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Hu, Shou-Ren AU - Lin, Jhy-Pyng AD - Department of Transportation and Communication Management Science, National Cheng Kung University, No, 1 University Road, Tainan City 70101, Taiwan, shouren@mail.ncku.edu.tw Y1 - 2012 PY - 2012 DA - 2012 SP - 61 EP - 69 PB - Transportation Research Board IS - 2298 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Risk Abstracts KW - Accidents KW - Transportation KW - Classification KW - Sensitivity analysis KW - Risk factors KW - R2 23020:Technological risks UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1285089967?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=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.atitle=Effect+of+Train+Arrival+Time+on+Crash+Frequency+at+Highway-Railroad+Grade+Crossings+General+Classification+Regression+Model&rft.au=Hu%2C+Shou-Ren%3BLin%2C+Jhy-Pyng&rft.aulast=Hu&rft.aufirst=Shou-Ren&rft.date=2012-01-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=2298&rft.spage=61&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2298-07 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2013-02-01 N1 - Number of references - 20 N1 - Last updated - 2015-03-19 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Accidents; Transportation; Sensitivity analysis; Classification; Risk factors DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2298-07 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Estimating Right-Turn-on-Red Capacity for Dual Right-Turn Lanes at Signalized Intersections AN - 1283653451; 17526084 AB - Dual right-turn lanes are increasingly used as a design alternative at urban intersections, primarily to accommodate high right-turn demand. For dual right-turn lanes, an accurate estimate of right-turn-on-red (RTOR) capacity can contribute to better decisions about whether RTOR should be allowed or prohibited and may lead to refined delay estimation and improved signal timing. A gap-acceptance model was formulated for predicting lane-specific RTOR capacities at dual right-turn lanes. The proposed model can represent the unequal effects of conflicting traffic streams from different cross-street lanes on RTOR capacities of dual right-turn lanes. Existing probabilistic methods were adapted to adjust RTOR capacity for shared through and right-turn lanes. Microsimula-tion models were developed, calibrated based on field data, and used as benchmarks to validate the proposed model. Numerical experiments indicated that the proposed model exhibits a significantly improved ability to predict RTOR capacities for dual right-turn lanes compared with the classical Harders model. JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Chen, Xiaoming AU - Qi, Yi AU - Li, Da AD - Department of Transportation Studies, Texas Southern University, 3100 Cleburne Street, Houston, TX 77004-9986 Y1 - 2012 PY - 2012 DA - 2012 SP - 29 EP - 38 PB - Transportation Research Board IS - 2286 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Environmental Engineering Abstracts (EN); CSA / ASCE Civil Engineering Abstracts (CE) KW - Intersections KW - Mathematical models KW - Lanes KW - Demand KW - Estimating KW - Delay KW - Traffic flow KW - Decisions UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1283653451?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=Estimating+Right-Turn-on-Red+Capacity+for+Dual+Right-Turn+Lanes+at+Signalized+Intersections&rft.au=Chen%2C+Xiaoming%3BQi%2C+Yi%3BLi%2C+Da&rft.aulast=Chen&rft.aufirst=Xiaoming&rft.date=2012-01-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=2286&rft.spage=29&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2286-04 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2013-02-01 N1 - Number of references - 10 N1 - Last updated - 2013-11-06 DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2286-04 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Safety Evaluation of Automated Section Speed Enforcement System AN - 1283653213; 17526043 AB - Because speeding is one of the most significant contributing factors to fatal crashes, most road agencies attempt to achieve the right operating speed by imposing speed limits. Speed limit violations are prevalent, even on motorways with speed cameras. A problem with speed camera enforcement is that some motorists brake before passing a camera location and then exceed the speed limit after passing. This sudden braking can cause dangerous situations, crashes, and traffic jams. Furthermore, safe operating speed is not achieved where there are no cameras, especially where enforcement is overt, as in Italy. A new technique to overcome these problems is an automated section speed enforcement system, Safety Tutor. Unlike conventional speed meters, which measure vehicle speed at one point, the new technique determines average speed over a long distance. This study evaluated the safety effectiveness of the Safety Tutor system installed on Italian Motorway A1 Milan-Naples in 2007. An empirical Bayes observational before-and-after study was performed. The estimate of the total crash reduction is 31.2%, with a lower 95% confidence limit of 24.3%. The greatest crash reductions were observed for severe crashes and crashes at curves. Reduction was 55.6% for severe crashes, 26.6% for nonsevere crashes, 43.4% at curves, and 28.4% at tangents. However, the system's effectiveness decreased over time. The crash reduction was 39.4% in the first semester after the system's activation and 18.7% in the fifth semester after activation. Results strongly support activation of the new automated system owing to highly significant and substantial safety effects. The decrease in system effectiveness over time may be correctible with higher levels of enforcement. JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Montella, Alfonso AU - Persaud, Bhagwant AU - D'Apuzzo, Mauro AU - Imbriani, Leila Liana AD - Department of Transportation Engineering Luigi Tocchetti, University of Naples Federico II, Via Claudio 21, 8D125 Naples, Italy alfonso.montella@unina.it Y1 - 2012///0, PY - 2012 DA - 0, 2012 SP - 16 EP - 25 PB - Transportation Research Board IS - 2281 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Environmental Engineering Abstracts (EN); CSA / ASCE Civil Engineering Abstracts (CE) KW - Crashes KW - Activation KW - Speed limits KW - Reduction KW - Safety KW - Cameras KW - Motorways KW - Automated UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1283653213?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=Safety+Evaluation+of+Automated+Section+Speed+Enforcement+System&rft.au=Montella%2C+Alfonso%3BPersaud%2C+Bhagwant%3BD%27Apuzzo%2C+Mauro%3BImbriani%2C+Leila+Liana&rft.aulast=Montella&rft.aufirst=Alfonso&rft.date=2012-01-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=2281&rft.spage=16&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2281-03 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2013-02-01 N1 - Number of references - 30 N1 - Last updated - 2016-08-08 DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2281-03 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Alternative Uses of Highway Rights-of-Way Accommodating Renewable Energy Technologies AN - 1257744916; 17431509 AB - In recent years, the capacity, generation, and consumption of energy derived from renewable sources have grown significantly on a global level. To increase renewable energy production in the near term, state and local transportation agencies have recently expressed more interest in installing decentralized renewable energy technologies on spaces not traditionally considered for energy generation. Many transportation agencies have demonstrated the viability of utilizing the highway right-of-way (ROW) for decentralized renewable energy production. Following these leads, several U.S. state departments of transportation are exploring similar prospects, given that the ample lands that they manage are in proximity to power loads and, in some cases, have already been disturbed or are no longer held for their environmental attributes. From a highway ROW perspective, however, considerable economic, ecological, legal, and political uncertainties are related to whether accommodating renewable energy technologies can be a practical highway land management practice. This study provides transportation agencies with information that will enable them to consider better the implications and evaluate the feasibility of implementing renewable energy and fuel options in the ROW. The lessons that early adopters have learned should inform others. JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Poe, Carson AU - Filosa, Gina AD - Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, U.S. Department of Transportation, 55 Broadway, RVT-22, Cambridge, MA 02142-1093, Carson.Poe@dot.gov Y1 - 2012 PY - 2012 DA - 2012 SP - 23 EP - 30 PB - Transportation Research Board IS - 2270 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Sustainability Science Abstracts KW - Feasibility studies KW - USA KW - Transportation KW - Land management KW - Politics KW - Renewable energy KW - Fuels KW - Economics KW - Highways KW - Technology KW - M3 1010:Issues in Sustainable Development UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1257744916?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=Alternative+Uses+of+Highway+Rights-of-Way+Accommodating+Renewable+Energy+Technologies&rft.au=Poe%2C+Carson%3BFilosa%2C+Gina&rft.aulast=Poe&rft.aufirst=Carson&rft.date=2012-01-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=2270&rft.spage=23&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2270-04 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2012-12-01 N1 - Number of references - 16 N1 - Last updated - 2015-04-09 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Feasibility studies; Transportation; Land management; Politics; Fuels; Renewable energy; Economics; Highways; Technology; USA DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2270-04 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Nondestructive Tests of Thickness Measurements for Concrete Pavements Tests Really Work AN - 1113229939; 17209439 AB - Magnetic pulse induction can be used to determine the thickness of concrete pavement in a nondestructive manner. This induction provides the same level of accuracy and can save time and money for state agencies when compared with coring the pavement for thickness determination. The MIT-SCAN-T2 is a commercially available device that uses magnetic pulse induction to measure pavement thickness. The technology and operation of this device are described. Field experience from various states is provided. The accuracy and the repeatability, when compared with measuring core lengths, are good on the basis of data collected to date. The advantages of this nondestructive testing are presented. A specification developed by the Iowa Department of Transportation is included. The paper also includes a discussion of other issues that may be raised when this technique is used or there is ongoing work related to implementation. JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Grove, Jim AU - Jones, Kevin AU - Ye, Dan AU - Gudimettla, Jagan M AD - FHWA and Global Consulting, Inc., Office of Pavement Technology, 2711 South Loop, Suite 4502, Ames, IA 50010, jim.grove@dot.gov Y1 - 2012 PY - 2012 DA - 2012 SP - 61 EP - 67 PB - Transportation Research Board IS - 2268 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Health & Safety Science Abstracts KW - Transportation KW - USA, Iowa KW - nondestructive testing KW - Concrete KW - Technology KW - H 2000:Transportation UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1113229939?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=Nondestructive+Tests+of+Thickness+Measurements+for+Concrete+Pavements+Tests+Really+Work&rft.au=Grove%2C+Jim%3BJones%2C+Kevin%3BYe%2C+Dan%3BGudimettla%2C+Jagan+M&rft.aulast=Grove&rft.aufirst=Jim&rft.date=2012-01-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=2268&rft.spage=61&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2268-08 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2012-10-01 N1 - Number of references - 6 N1 - Last updated - 2015-03-19 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Transportation; nondestructive testing; Concrete; Technology; USA, Iowa DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2268-08 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Enterprise Risk Management for Transportation Agencies AN - 1113214964; 17230675 AB - Risk management is implicit in transportation business practices. Administrators, planners, and engineers coordinate many organizational and technical resources to manage transportation network performance. Transportation agencies manage some of the largest and highest-valued public assets and budgets in federal, state, and local governments. It is the agencies' corporate responsibility to set clear strategic goals and objectives to manage these assets so economic growth and livability of their regions improves and the public gets the best value. Risks can affect an agency's ability to meet its goals and objectives. As network and delivery managers, these agencies must identify risks, assess the possible impacts, develop plans to manage the risks, and monitor the effectiveness of their actions. This paper presents the results of (a) a comprehensive literature review, (b) a state-of-the-practice survey of 43 U.S. transportation agencies, and (c) seven case studies from leading transportation organizations in Australia, England, Germany, the Netherlands, and Scotland. The paper concludes with recommendations for achieving enterprise risk management in U.S. highway agencies. Recommendations pertain to formalizing enterprise risk management approaches, embedding risk management in existing business processes, using risk management to build trust with transportation stakeholders, defining leadership and organizational responsibilities for risk management, identifying risk owners, supporting risk allocation strategies, and reexamining existing policies, processes, and standards through rigorous risk management analysis. JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Curtis, Joyce A AU - D'Angelo, Daniel AU - Hallowell, Matthew R AU - Henkel, Timothy A AU - Molenaar, Keith R AD - Federal Highway Administration, 10 South Howard Street, Suite 4000, Baltimore, MD 21201, keith.molenaar@colorado.edu Y1 - 2012 PY - 2012 DA - 2012 SP - 57 EP - 65 PB - Transportation Research Board IS - 2271 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Risk Abstracts; Sustainability Science Abstracts KW - Stakeholders KW - British Isles, England KW - Responsibility KW - Economic growth KW - Risk management KW - USA KW - Transportation KW - Case studies KW - Literature reviews KW - Australia KW - Budgets KW - Germany KW - Netherlands KW - Highways KW - British Isles, Scotland KW - M3 1010:Issues in Sustainable Development KW - R2 23070:Economics, organization UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1113214964?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=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.atitle=Enterprise+Risk+Management+for+Transportation+Agencies&rft.au=Curtis%2C+Joyce+A%3BD%27Angelo%2C+Daniel%3BHallowell%2C+Matthew+R%3BHenkel%2C+Timothy+A%3BMolenaar%2C+Keith+R&rft.aulast=Curtis&rft.aufirst=Joyce&rft.date=2012-01-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=2271&rft.spage=57&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2271-07 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2012-10-01 N1 - Number of references - 9 N1 - Last updated - 2015-03-19 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Stakeholders; Risk management; Case studies; Transportation; Literature reviews; Responsibility; Budgets; Economic growth; Highways; USA; British Isles, England; Australia; Netherlands; Germany; British Isles, Scotland DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2271-07 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Burnout and Work Engagement Among Cabin Crew: Antecedents and Consequences AN - 1017957572; 16562464 AB - Flight attendants play an essential role in ensuring cabin safety and offering services on board. This study applied the job demands-resources model to explore burnout and work engagement among cabin crew and investigate the possible antecedents and consequences, using a sample of 305 Taiwanese flight attendants. The health problems caused by heavy workloads under specific working environments and significant rates of turnover intention were noted. Using structural equation modeling to test the conceptual model, the results reveal that job demands positively relate to burnout, whereas job resources positively relate to work engagement but negatively relate to burnout. In addition, health problems directly induce turnover intention and mediate the relationship between burnout and turnover intention. Elevating the levels of work engagement might be effective in reducing cabin crew's turnover intention. JF - International Journal of Aviation Psychology AU - Chen, Ching-Fu AU - Chen, Shu-Chuan AD - Department of Transportation and Communication Management Science, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan Y1 - 2012/01// PY - 2012 DA - Jan 2012 SP - 41 EP - 58 PB - Taylor & Francis Group Ltd., 2 Park Square Oxford OX14 4RN United Kingdom VL - 22 IS - 1 SN - 1050-8414, 1050-8414 KW - Health & Safety Science Abstracts KW - health problems KW - burnout KW - working conditions KW - Occupational health KW - H 1000:Occupational Safety and Health UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1017957572?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=International+Journal+of+Aviation+Psychology&rft.atitle=Burnout+and+Work+Engagement+Among+Cabin+Crew%3A+Antecedents+and+Consequences&rft.au=Chen%2C+Ching-Fu%3BChen%2C+Shu-Chuan&rft.aulast=Chen&rft.aufirst=Ching-Fu&rft.date=2012-01-01&rft.volume=22&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=41&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=International+Journal+of+Aviation+Psychology&rft.issn=10508414&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080%2F10508414.2012.635125 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2012-05-01 N1 - Last updated - 2015-03-19 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - health problems; burnout; working conditions; Occupational health DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10508414.2012.635125 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - A manual for conducting preliminary environmental site assessments for Illinois Department of Transportation infrastructure projects AN - 1015460360; 2012-050025 JF - Open File Series - Illinois State Geological Survey AU - Erdmann, Anne L AU - Adomaitis, Daniel J AU - Bannon-Nilles, Phyllis L AU - Kientop, Gregory A AU - Schmidt, Dale R Y1 - 2012 PY - 2012 DA - 2012 SP - 47 PB - Illinois State Geological Survey, Champaign, IL KW - United States KW - programs KW - Illinois KW - geologic hazards KW - site exploration KW - data processing KW - pollution KW - environmental effects KW - safety KW - geographic information systems KW - natural hazards KW - data bases KW - manuals KW - information systems KW - infrastructure KW - construction KW - 30:Engineering geology KW - 22:Environmental geology UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1015460360?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/GeoRef&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=book&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=Erdmann%2C+Anne+L%3BAdomaitis%2C+Daniel+J%3BBannon-Nilles%2C+Phyllis+L%3BKientop%2C+Gregory+A%3BSchmidt%2C+Dale+R&rft.aulast=Erdmann&rft.aufirst=Anne&rft.date=2012-01-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=A+manual+for+conducting+preliminary+environmental+site+assessments+for+Illinois+Department+of+Transportation+infrastructure+projects&rft.title=A+manual+for+conducting+preliminary+environmental+site+assessments+for+Illinois+Department+of+Transportation+infrastructure+projects&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://www.isgs.uiuc.edu/servs/pubs/ofhome.htm LA - English DB - GeoRef N1 - Copyright - GeoRef, Copyright 2012, American Geosciences Institute. N1 - Date revised - 2012-01-01 N1 - Number of references - 50 N1 - PubXState - IL N1 - Last updated - 2012-06-07 N1 - CODEN - #03572 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - construction; data bases; data processing; environmental effects; geographic information systems; geologic hazards; Illinois; information systems; infrastructure; manuals; natural hazards; pollution; programs; safety; site exploration; United States ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Evaluation of tunnel face stability by transparent soil models AN - 1008817018; 2012-037455 JF - Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology AU - Ahmed, Mahmoud AU - Iskander, Magued Y1 - 2012/01// PY - 2012 DA - January 2012 SP - 101 EP - 110 PB - Elsevier, Oxford-New York VL - 27 IS - 1 SN - 0886-7798, 0886-7798 KW - soil mechanics KW - sand KW - earth pressure KW - clastic sediments KW - cohesionless materials KW - stability KW - soil treatment KW - evaluation KW - tunnel boring machines KW - tunnels KW - slurries KW - sediments KW - risk assessment KW - polymers KW - hydrostatic pressure KW - 30:Engineering geology UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1008817018?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=Tunnelling+and+Underground+Space+Technology&rft.atitle=Evaluation+of+tunnel+face+stability+by+transparent+soil+models&rft.au=Ahmed%2C+Mahmoud%3BIskander%2C+Magued&rft.aulast=Ahmed&rft.aufirst=Mahmoud&rft.date=2012-01-01&rft.volume=27&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=101&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Tunnelling+and+Underground+Space+Technology&rft.issn=08867798&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016%2Fj.tust.2011.08.001 L2 - http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/08867798 LA - English DB - GeoRef N1 - Copyright - GeoRef, Copyright 2012, American Geosciences Institute. N1 - Date revised - 2012-01-01 N1 - Number of references - 34 N1 - Document feature - illus. incl. 1 table N1 - Last updated - 2012-06-07 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - clastic sediments; cohesionless materials; earth pressure; evaluation; hydrostatic pressure; polymers; risk assessment; sand; sediments; slurries; soil mechanics; soil treatment; stability; tunnel boring machines; tunnels DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2011.08.001 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTH HILLSIDE ROAD EXTENSION, MANSFIELD, CONNECTICUT. [Part 1 of 1] T2 - NORTH HILLSIDE ROAD EXTENSION, MANSFIELD, CONNECTICUT. AN - 963636679; 15181-5_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of North Hillside Road on the Storrs campus of the University of Connecticut from its current terminus northward to US 44 in the town of Mansfield, Connecticut is proposed. The existing two-lane North Hillside Road begins at North Eagleville Road and extends 4,000 feet to the north terminating just north of the Charter Apartments. The proposed 3,400-foot extension would pass through a tract of land adjacent to the Storrs core academic campus, known as the North Campus, to US 44 between two parcels occupied by New Alliance Bank and Bank of America across from Professional Park Drive, creating a four-way intersection, approximately 2,000 feet west of Route 195 (Storrs Road). US 44 would be widened at the intersection with the proposed extension to add exclusive east bound and westbound left-turn lanes, an eastbound right-turn lane and a new traffic signal. The North Hillside Road approach to this intersection would be treated as a primary university entrance. The roadway extension has been contemplated since the 1970s, when the North Campus core area was considered for the development of a research and technology park. In 2005, approximately $6.0 million was appropriated by the federal government for the construction of North Hillside Road. Five alignment alternatives and a No Action Alternative were considered in the draft EIS of December 2008. This final EIS identifies the roadway alignment Option A and the North Campus development Alternative 2C as the preferred alternatives. Two wetland crossings have been re-designed to essentially eliminate wetland impacts and maintain habitat connectivity for aquatic resources and other wildlife. Additionally, the North Campus concept development plan (Alternative 2C) has been modified to eliminate the previously proposed development on Parcel A and preserve an additional 76 acres of land on the North Campus through a conservation easement. Alternative 2C would provide 1.2 million square feet of total building area and 4,475 parking spaces, while limiting total wetland disturbance. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new roadway would provide an additional entrance to the university, relieve traffic congestion on surrounding roads, and facilitate the development of the North Campus area. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New right-of-way would displace 2.3 acres of farmland, while the development of the North Campus parcels would impact 29.6 acres of farmland soils. Forested areas, encompassing 0.3 acre of wetlands, would be filled. These impacts would be mitigated through acre-for-acre replacement and conservation. Additional traffic expected in the North Campus area would reduce the level of service at several local intersections. Noise levels along the new facility would increase by 2.2 decibels, but remain below federal limits. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0086D, Volume 33, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110425, 257 pages and maps, December 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CT-EIS-08-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Easements KW - Farmlands KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Noise Assessments KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Universities KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Connecticut KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/963636679?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTH+HILLSIDE+ROAD+EXTENSION%2C+MANSFIELD%2C+CONNECTICUT.&rft.title=NORTH+HILLSIDE+ROAD+EXTENSION%2C+MANSFIELD%2C+CONNECTICUT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Glastonbury, Connecticut; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-04-03 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTH HILLSIDE ROAD EXTENSION, MANSFIELD, CONNECTICUT. AN - 16387972; 15181 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of North Hillside Road on the Storrs campus of the University of Connecticut from its current terminus northward to US 44 in the town of Mansfield, Connecticut is proposed. The existing two-lane North Hillside Road begins at North Eagleville Road and extends 4,000 feet to the north terminating just north of the Charter Apartments. The proposed 3,400-foot extension would pass through a tract of land adjacent to the Storrs core academic campus, known as the North Campus, to US 44 between two parcels occupied by New Alliance Bank and Bank of America across from Professional Park Drive, creating a four-way intersection, approximately 2,000 feet west of Route 195 (Storrs Road). US 44 would be widened at the intersection with the proposed extension to add exclusive east bound and westbound left-turn lanes, an eastbound right-turn lane and a new traffic signal. The North Hillside Road approach to this intersection would be treated as a primary university entrance. The roadway extension has been contemplated since the 1970s, when the North Campus core area was considered for the development of a research and technology park. In 2005, approximately $6.0 million was appropriated by the federal government for the construction of North Hillside Road. Five alignment alternatives and a No Action Alternative were considered in the draft EIS of December 2008. This final EIS identifies the roadway alignment Option A and the North Campus development Alternative 2C as the preferred alternatives. Two wetland crossings have been re-designed to essentially eliminate wetland impacts and maintain habitat connectivity for aquatic resources and other wildlife. Additionally, the North Campus concept development plan (Alternative 2C) has been modified to eliminate the previously proposed development on Parcel A and preserve an additional 76 acres of land on the North Campus through a conservation easement. Alternative 2C would provide 1.2 million square feet of total building area and 4,475 parking spaces, while limiting total wetland disturbance. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new roadway would provide an additional entrance to the university, relieve traffic congestion on surrounding roads, and facilitate the development of the North Campus area. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New right-of-way would displace 2.3 acres of farmland, while the development of the North Campus parcels would impact 29.6 acres of farmland soils. Forested areas, encompassing 0.3 acre of wetlands, would be filled. These impacts would be mitigated through acre-for-acre replacement and conservation. Additional traffic expected in the North Campus area would reduce the level of service at several local intersections. Noise levels along the new facility would increase by 2.2 decibels, but remain below federal limits. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0086D, Volume 33, Number 1. JF - EPA number: 110425, 257 pages and maps, December 23, 2011 PY - 2011 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CT-EIS-08-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Easements KW - Farmlands KW - Impact Assessment Methodology KW - Noise Assessments KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Universities KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - Connecticut KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/16387972?accountid=14244 L2 - http://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=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Glastonbury, Connecticut; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: December 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-02-24 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTHERN BRANCH CORRIDOR, BERGEN COUNTY AND HUDSON COUNTY, NEW JERSEY. AN - 16373625; 15185 AB - PURPOSE: The restoration of passenger rail service on the Northern Branch line, an active freight rail line in northeastern Hudson and southeastern Bergen counties, New Jersey is proposed. The Northern Branch Corridor study area has a growing population and a high proportion of residents that work in business districts outside of the area including Manhattan and the Hudson County waterfront. The current transportation system within the densely-settled corridor includes limited-access highways as well as a variety of local and commuter bus routes, all of which contribute to the recurring traffic congestion on the regions roadways and crossings. This draft EIS evaluates two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative. The build alternatives would involve construction of an electric light rail system, an extension of the existing Hudson-Bergen Light Rail (HBLR), which would operate along an existing rail right-of-way (ROW). The preferred Light Rail to Tenafly Alternative would extend 12 miles from North Bergen, Hudson County to Tenafly in Bergen County and would include nine stations. The Light Rail to Englewood Route 4 Alternative would follow the same alignment as the preferred alternative, but would terminate in Englewood at Route 4 for a total distance of eight miles and five proposed stations. The project would include a direct connection to the HBLR system at Tonnelle Avenue in North Bergen. The reinstatement of passenger rail service would require the rehabilitation of the rail line, construction of passenger stations and a vehicle base facility (VBF), and associated infrastructure improvements, such as viaducts. Both build alternatives would locate the VBF in the vicinity of North Bergen or at an optional location in the vicinity of the Englewood Route 4 Station. Due to the need to separate light rail vehicles from freight vehicles, freight service would be moved to the overnight hours. The Northern Branch service would operate primarily on existing railroad ROW owned by the New York, Susquehanna & Western in North Bergen and CSX Transportation between North Bergen and Tenafly or Englewood and would introduce new station stops in North Bergen, Ridgefield, Palisades Park, Leonia, and Englewood (three stations), as well as Tenafly (two stations) under the preferred alternative. Total project costs to construct the Tenafly and the Englewood Route 4 alternatives are estimated at $865.9 million and $686 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The reinstatement of passenger rail service should decrease roadway congestion and improve overall mobility in the region. The preferred alternative would provide a connection through to the Hudson Riverfront via the existing HBLR service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Several proposed station sites, the North Bergen VBF, and adjacent ROW would be constructed within floodplains and 4.3 to 4.7 acres of wetlands would be impacted. Both build alternatives would require the acquisition of eight commercial properties and six public properties. The preferred alternative would require the acquisition of 12 additional private properties and one additional public property, representing six businesses and 85 jobs, along with five residences. Estimated displacements associated with the North Bergen VBF include 14 businesses and 236 jobs, and with the Englewood VBF, 18 businesses and 321 jobs. Noise would impact 1,393 to 1,467 residences. Traffic generated by commuters going to new stations would add to existing and future congested conditions. The visual context of historical resources could be changed by the proposed overhead catenary wires, but these impacts can be mitigated through the application of context-sensitive design elements. 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). JF - EPA number: 110429, Draft EIS--651 pages, Appendices--245 pages, December 23, 2011 PY - 2011 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Floodplains KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - New Jersey 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/16373625?accountid=14244 L2 - http://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=2011-12-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTHERN+BRANCH+CORRIDOR%2C+BERGEN+COUNTY+AND+HUDSON+COUNTY%2C+NEW+JERSEY.&rft.title=NORTHERN+BRANCH+CORRIDOR%2C+BERGEN+COUNTY+AND+HUDSON+COUNTY%2C+NEW+JERSEY.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, New York, New York; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-02-24 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 44 of 74] T2 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 928982923; 15166-0_0044 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of an existing runway at Gnoss Field Airport, a general aviation airport located adjacent to the city of Novato, Marin County, California is proposed. Gnoss Field is a reliever airport owned and operated by the county and serves as an essential regional transportation resource by providing general aviation facilities in the northern portion of the San Francisco Bay area. Most of the aircraft served are single-engine propeller aircraft, but there are also twin-engine propeller and business jet aircraft. The airport is built in an area of reclaimed salt water tidal marshlands that are part of the formerly extensive salt marshes present around the northwest corner of San Pablo Bay, characterized by muds and clays found in marshes, swamps, and waterways. The area comprises an element of the extensive wetlands associated with San Francisco Bay, which once formed the largest contiguous tidal marsh system present on the Pacific Coast of North America. Gnoss Field lies within the original flood plain of the Petaluma River at sea level. The current 3,300-foot single runway at Gnoss Field requires pilots to restrict the weight of the aircraft well below what the aircraft could accommodate, which is done by either reducing fuel or by reducing passengers and/or cargo. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action (Alternative B) would involve extending Runway 13/31 to the northwest by 1,100 feet while maintaining its current 75-foot width and making corresponding changes to taxiways, runway safety areas (RSAs), drainage channels, and levees. Additionally, in order for the extended runway to become operational, the Federal Aviation Administration would need to develop air traffic control and airspace management procedures that affect the safe and efficient movement of air traffic to and from the runway. Such actions could include the establishment or modification of flight procedures and the installation and/or relocation of navigational aids. Under Alternative D, the runway would be extended to the southeast by 240 feet and to the northwest by 860 feet. Under both action alternatives, the runway extension and northern RSA would be located almost entirely on wetlands that would require filling. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A 4,400-foot runway would allow existing aircraft at Gnoss Field Airport to operate at maximum gross takeoff weight under hot weather and other adverse weather conditions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would require the acquisition of 0.1 acre of undeveloped land, enclose 13 additional acres of the 3,875-acre floodplain behind the airport levee, impact 11.8 acres of wetlands, and remove 22.9 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 6.9 acres of permanent habitat loss and 16.1 acres of temporary habitat loss. Alternative D would require acquisition of 3.7 acres of undeveloped land, enclose 15 additional acres of the floodplain, impact 12.7 acres of wetlands, and remove 26.7 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 8.2 acres of permanent habitat loss and 18.4 acres of temporary habitat loss. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110410, Draft EIS--368 pages, Appendices--1,209 pages, December 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 44 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928982923?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Brisbane, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 43 of 74] T2 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 928982922; 15166-0_0043 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of an existing runway at Gnoss Field Airport, a general aviation airport located adjacent to the city of Novato, Marin County, California is proposed. Gnoss Field is a reliever airport owned and operated by the county and serves as an essential regional transportation resource by providing general aviation facilities in the northern portion of the San Francisco Bay area. Most of the aircraft served are single-engine propeller aircraft, but there are also twin-engine propeller and business jet aircraft. The airport is built in an area of reclaimed salt water tidal marshlands that are part of the formerly extensive salt marshes present around the northwest corner of San Pablo Bay, characterized by muds and clays found in marshes, swamps, and waterways. The area comprises an element of the extensive wetlands associated with San Francisco Bay, which once formed the largest contiguous tidal marsh system present on the Pacific Coast of North America. Gnoss Field lies within the original flood plain of the Petaluma River at sea level. The current 3,300-foot single runway at Gnoss Field requires pilots to restrict the weight of the aircraft well below what the aircraft could accommodate, which is done by either reducing fuel or by reducing passengers and/or cargo. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action (Alternative B) would involve extending Runway 13/31 to the northwest by 1,100 feet while maintaining its current 75-foot width and making corresponding changes to taxiways, runway safety areas (RSAs), drainage channels, and levees. Additionally, in order for the extended runway to become operational, the Federal Aviation Administration would need to develop air traffic control and airspace management procedures that affect the safe and efficient movement of air traffic to and from the runway. Such actions could include the establishment or modification of flight procedures and the installation and/or relocation of navigational aids. Under Alternative D, the runway would be extended to the southeast by 240 feet and to the northwest by 860 feet. Under both action alternatives, the runway extension and northern RSA would be located almost entirely on wetlands that would require filling. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A 4,400-foot runway would allow existing aircraft at Gnoss Field Airport to operate at maximum gross takeoff weight under hot weather and other adverse weather conditions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would require the acquisition of 0.1 acre of undeveloped land, enclose 13 additional acres of the 3,875-acre floodplain behind the airport levee, impact 11.8 acres of wetlands, and remove 22.9 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 6.9 acres of permanent habitat loss and 16.1 acres of temporary habitat loss. Alternative D would require acquisition of 3.7 acres of undeveloped land, enclose 15 additional acres of the floodplain, impact 12.7 acres of wetlands, and remove 26.7 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 8.2 acres of permanent habitat loss and 18.4 acres of temporary habitat loss. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110410, Draft EIS--368 pages, Appendices--1,209 pages, December 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 43 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928982922?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Brisbane, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 42 of 74] T2 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 928982921; 15166-0_0042 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of an existing runway at Gnoss Field Airport, a general aviation airport located adjacent to the city of Novato, Marin County, California is proposed. Gnoss Field is a reliever airport owned and operated by the county and serves as an essential regional transportation resource by providing general aviation facilities in the northern portion of the San Francisco Bay area. Most of the aircraft served are single-engine propeller aircraft, but there are also twin-engine propeller and business jet aircraft. The airport is built in an area of reclaimed salt water tidal marshlands that are part of the formerly extensive salt marshes present around the northwest corner of San Pablo Bay, characterized by muds and clays found in marshes, swamps, and waterways. The area comprises an element of the extensive wetlands associated with San Francisco Bay, which once formed the largest contiguous tidal marsh system present on the Pacific Coast of North America. Gnoss Field lies within the original flood plain of the Petaluma River at sea level. The current 3,300-foot single runway at Gnoss Field requires pilots to restrict the weight of the aircraft well below what the aircraft could accommodate, which is done by either reducing fuel or by reducing passengers and/or cargo. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action (Alternative B) would involve extending Runway 13/31 to the northwest by 1,100 feet while maintaining its current 75-foot width and making corresponding changes to taxiways, runway safety areas (RSAs), drainage channels, and levees. Additionally, in order for the extended runway to become operational, the Federal Aviation Administration would need to develop air traffic control and airspace management procedures that affect the safe and efficient movement of air traffic to and from the runway. Such actions could include the establishment or modification of flight procedures and the installation and/or relocation of navigational aids. Under Alternative D, the runway would be extended to the southeast by 240 feet and to the northwest by 860 feet. Under both action alternatives, the runway extension and northern RSA would be located almost entirely on wetlands that would require filling. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A 4,400-foot runway would allow existing aircraft at Gnoss Field Airport to operate at maximum gross takeoff weight under hot weather and other adverse weather conditions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would require the acquisition of 0.1 acre of undeveloped land, enclose 13 additional acres of the 3,875-acre floodplain behind the airport levee, impact 11.8 acres of wetlands, and remove 22.9 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 6.9 acres of permanent habitat loss and 16.1 acres of temporary habitat loss. Alternative D would require acquisition of 3.7 acres of undeveloped land, enclose 15 additional acres of the floodplain, impact 12.7 acres of wetlands, and remove 26.7 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 8.2 acres of permanent habitat loss and 18.4 acres of temporary habitat loss. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110410, Draft EIS--368 pages, Appendices--1,209 pages, December 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 42 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928982921?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Brisbane, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 41 of 74] T2 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 928982920; 15166-0_0041 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of an existing runway at Gnoss Field Airport, a general aviation airport located adjacent to the city of Novato, Marin County, California is proposed. Gnoss Field is a reliever airport owned and operated by the county and serves as an essential regional transportation resource by providing general aviation facilities in the northern portion of the San Francisco Bay area. Most of the aircraft served are single-engine propeller aircraft, but there are also twin-engine propeller and business jet aircraft. The airport is built in an area of reclaimed salt water tidal marshlands that are part of the formerly extensive salt marshes present around the northwest corner of San Pablo Bay, characterized by muds and clays found in marshes, swamps, and waterways. The area comprises an element of the extensive wetlands associated with San Francisco Bay, which once formed the largest contiguous tidal marsh system present on the Pacific Coast of North America. Gnoss Field lies within the original flood plain of the Petaluma River at sea level. The current 3,300-foot single runway at Gnoss Field requires pilots to restrict the weight of the aircraft well below what the aircraft could accommodate, which is done by either reducing fuel or by reducing passengers and/or cargo. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action (Alternative B) would involve extending Runway 13/31 to the northwest by 1,100 feet while maintaining its current 75-foot width and making corresponding changes to taxiways, runway safety areas (RSAs), drainage channels, and levees. Additionally, in order for the extended runway to become operational, the Federal Aviation Administration would need to develop air traffic control and airspace management procedures that affect the safe and efficient movement of air traffic to and from the runway. Such actions could include the establishment or modification of flight procedures and the installation and/or relocation of navigational aids. Under Alternative D, the runway would be extended to the southeast by 240 feet and to the northwest by 860 feet. Under both action alternatives, the runway extension and northern RSA would be located almost entirely on wetlands that would require filling. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A 4,400-foot runway would allow existing aircraft at Gnoss Field Airport to operate at maximum gross takeoff weight under hot weather and other adverse weather conditions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would require the acquisition of 0.1 acre of undeveloped land, enclose 13 additional acres of the 3,875-acre floodplain behind the airport levee, impact 11.8 acres of wetlands, and remove 22.9 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 6.9 acres of permanent habitat loss and 16.1 acres of temporary habitat loss. Alternative D would require acquisition of 3.7 acres of undeveloped land, enclose 15 additional acres of the floodplain, impact 12.7 acres of wetlands, and remove 26.7 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 8.2 acres of permanent habitat loss and 18.4 acres of temporary habitat loss. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110410, Draft EIS--368 pages, Appendices--1,209 pages, December 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 41 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928982920?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Brisbane, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 40 of 74] T2 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 928982919; 15166-0_0040 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of an existing runway at Gnoss Field Airport, a general aviation airport located adjacent to the city of Novato, Marin County, California is proposed. Gnoss Field is a reliever airport owned and operated by the county and serves as an essential regional transportation resource by providing general aviation facilities in the northern portion of the San Francisco Bay area. Most of the aircraft served are single-engine propeller aircraft, but there are also twin-engine propeller and business jet aircraft. The airport is built in an area of reclaimed salt water tidal marshlands that are part of the formerly extensive salt marshes present around the northwest corner of San Pablo Bay, characterized by muds and clays found in marshes, swamps, and waterways. The area comprises an element of the extensive wetlands associated with San Francisco Bay, which once formed the largest contiguous tidal marsh system present on the Pacific Coast of North America. Gnoss Field lies within the original flood plain of the Petaluma River at sea level. The current 3,300-foot single runway at Gnoss Field requires pilots to restrict the weight of the aircraft well below what the aircraft could accommodate, which is done by either reducing fuel or by reducing passengers and/or cargo. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action (Alternative B) would involve extending Runway 13/31 to the northwest by 1,100 feet while maintaining its current 75-foot width and making corresponding changes to taxiways, runway safety areas (RSAs), drainage channels, and levees. Additionally, in order for the extended runway to become operational, the Federal Aviation Administration would need to develop air traffic control and airspace management procedures that affect the safe and efficient movement of air traffic to and from the runway. Such actions could include the establishment or modification of flight procedures and the installation and/or relocation of navigational aids. Under Alternative D, the runway would be extended to the southeast by 240 feet and to the northwest by 860 feet. Under both action alternatives, the runway extension and northern RSA would be located almost entirely on wetlands that would require filling. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A 4,400-foot runway would allow existing aircraft at Gnoss Field Airport to operate at maximum gross takeoff weight under hot weather and other adverse weather conditions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would require the acquisition of 0.1 acre of undeveloped land, enclose 13 additional acres of the 3,875-acre floodplain behind the airport levee, impact 11.8 acres of wetlands, and remove 22.9 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 6.9 acres of permanent habitat loss and 16.1 acres of temporary habitat loss. Alternative D would require acquisition of 3.7 acres of undeveloped land, enclose 15 additional acres of the floodplain, impact 12.7 acres of wetlands, and remove 26.7 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 8.2 acres of permanent habitat loss and 18.4 acres of temporary habitat loss. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110410, Draft EIS--368 pages, Appendices--1,209 pages, December 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 40 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928982919?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Brisbane, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 23 of 74] T2 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 928982917; 15166-0_0023 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of an existing runway at Gnoss Field Airport, a general aviation airport located adjacent to the city of Novato, Marin County, California is proposed. Gnoss Field is a reliever airport owned and operated by the county and serves as an essential regional transportation resource by providing general aviation facilities in the northern portion of the San Francisco Bay area. Most of the aircraft served are single-engine propeller aircraft, but there are also twin-engine propeller and business jet aircraft. The airport is built in an area of reclaimed salt water tidal marshlands that are part of the formerly extensive salt marshes present around the northwest corner of San Pablo Bay, characterized by muds and clays found in marshes, swamps, and waterways. The area comprises an element of the extensive wetlands associated with San Francisco Bay, which once formed the largest contiguous tidal marsh system present on the Pacific Coast of North America. Gnoss Field lies within the original flood plain of the Petaluma River at sea level. The current 3,300-foot single runway at Gnoss Field requires pilots to restrict the weight of the aircraft well below what the aircraft could accommodate, which is done by either reducing fuel or by reducing passengers and/or cargo. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action (Alternative B) would involve extending Runway 13/31 to the northwest by 1,100 feet while maintaining its current 75-foot width and making corresponding changes to taxiways, runway safety areas (RSAs), drainage channels, and levees. Additionally, in order for the extended runway to become operational, the Federal Aviation Administration would need to develop air traffic control and airspace management procedures that affect the safe and efficient movement of air traffic to and from the runway. Such actions could include the establishment or modification of flight procedures and the installation and/or relocation of navigational aids. Under Alternative D, the runway would be extended to the southeast by 240 feet and to the northwest by 860 feet. Under both action alternatives, the runway extension and northern RSA would be located almost entirely on wetlands that would require filling. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A 4,400-foot runway would allow existing aircraft at Gnoss Field Airport to operate at maximum gross takeoff weight under hot weather and other adverse weather conditions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would require the acquisition of 0.1 acre of undeveloped land, enclose 13 additional acres of the 3,875-acre floodplain behind the airport levee, impact 11.8 acres of wetlands, and remove 22.9 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 6.9 acres of permanent habitat loss and 16.1 acres of temporary habitat loss. Alternative D would require acquisition of 3.7 acres of undeveloped land, enclose 15 additional acres of the floodplain, impact 12.7 acres of wetlands, and remove 26.7 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 8.2 acres of permanent habitat loss and 18.4 acres of temporary habitat loss. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110410, Draft EIS--368 pages, Appendices--1,209 pages, December 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 23 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928982917?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Brisbane, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 22 of 74] T2 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 928982916; 15166-0_0022 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of an existing runway at Gnoss Field Airport, a general aviation airport located adjacent to the city of Novato, Marin County, California is proposed. Gnoss Field is a reliever airport owned and operated by the county and serves as an essential regional transportation resource by providing general aviation facilities in the northern portion of the San Francisco Bay area. Most of the aircraft served are single-engine propeller aircraft, but there are also twin-engine propeller and business jet aircraft. The airport is built in an area of reclaimed salt water tidal marshlands that are part of the formerly extensive salt marshes present around the northwest corner of San Pablo Bay, characterized by muds and clays found in marshes, swamps, and waterways. The area comprises an element of the extensive wetlands associated with San Francisco Bay, which once formed the largest contiguous tidal marsh system present on the Pacific Coast of North America. Gnoss Field lies within the original flood plain of the Petaluma River at sea level. The current 3,300-foot single runway at Gnoss Field requires pilots to restrict the weight of the aircraft well below what the aircraft could accommodate, which is done by either reducing fuel or by reducing passengers and/or cargo. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action (Alternative B) would involve extending Runway 13/31 to the northwest by 1,100 feet while maintaining its current 75-foot width and making corresponding changes to taxiways, runway safety areas (RSAs), drainage channels, and levees. Additionally, in order for the extended runway to become operational, the Federal Aviation Administration would need to develop air traffic control and airspace management procedures that affect the safe and efficient movement of air traffic to and from the runway. Such actions could include the establishment or modification of flight procedures and the installation and/or relocation of navigational aids. Under Alternative D, the runway would be extended to the southeast by 240 feet and to the northwest by 860 feet. Under both action alternatives, the runway extension and northern RSA would be located almost entirely on wetlands that would require filling. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A 4,400-foot runway would allow existing aircraft at Gnoss Field Airport to operate at maximum gross takeoff weight under hot weather and other adverse weather conditions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would require the acquisition of 0.1 acre of undeveloped land, enclose 13 additional acres of the 3,875-acre floodplain behind the airport levee, impact 11.8 acres of wetlands, and remove 22.9 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 6.9 acres of permanent habitat loss and 16.1 acres of temporary habitat loss. Alternative D would require acquisition of 3.7 acres of undeveloped land, enclose 15 additional acres of the floodplain, impact 12.7 acres of wetlands, and remove 26.7 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 8.2 acres of permanent habitat loss and 18.4 acres of temporary habitat loss. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110410, Draft EIS--368 pages, Appendices--1,209 pages, December 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 22 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928982916?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Brisbane, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 20 of 74] T2 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 928982908; 15166-0_0020 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of an existing runway at Gnoss Field Airport, a general aviation airport located adjacent to the city of Novato, Marin County, California is proposed. Gnoss Field is a reliever airport owned and operated by the county and serves as an essential regional transportation resource by providing general aviation facilities in the northern portion of the San Francisco Bay area. Most of the aircraft served are single-engine propeller aircraft, but there are also twin-engine propeller and business jet aircraft. The airport is built in an area of reclaimed salt water tidal marshlands that are part of the formerly extensive salt marshes present around the northwest corner of San Pablo Bay, characterized by muds and clays found in marshes, swamps, and waterways. The area comprises an element of the extensive wetlands associated with San Francisco Bay, which once formed the largest contiguous tidal marsh system present on the Pacific Coast of North America. Gnoss Field lies within the original flood plain of the Petaluma River at sea level. The current 3,300-foot single runway at Gnoss Field requires pilots to restrict the weight of the aircraft well below what the aircraft could accommodate, which is done by either reducing fuel or by reducing passengers and/or cargo. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action (Alternative B) would involve extending Runway 13/31 to the northwest by 1,100 feet while maintaining its current 75-foot width and making corresponding changes to taxiways, runway safety areas (RSAs), drainage channels, and levees. Additionally, in order for the extended runway to become operational, the Federal Aviation Administration would need to develop air traffic control and airspace management procedures that affect the safe and efficient movement of air traffic to and from the runway. Such actions could include the establishment or modification of flight procedures and the installation and/or relocation of navigational aids. Under Alternative D, the runway would be extended to the southeast by 240 feet and to the northwest by 860 feet. Under both action alternatives, the runway extension and northern RSA would be located almost entirely on wetlands that would require filling. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A 4,400-foot runway would allow existing aircraft at Gnoss Field Airport to operate at maximum gross takeoff weight under hot weather and other adverse weather conditions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would require the acquisition of 0.1 acre of undeveloped land, enclose 13 additional acres of the 3,875-acre floodplain behind the airport levee, impact 11.8 acres of wetlands, and remove 22.9 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 6.9 acres of permanent habitat loss and 16.1 acres of temporary habitat loss. Alternative D would require acquisition of 3.7 acres of undeveloped land, enclose 15 additional acres of the floodplain, impact 12.7 acres of wetlands, and remove 26.7 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 8.2 acres of permanent habitat loss and 18.4 acres of temporary habitat loss. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110410, Draft EIS--368 pages, Appendices--1,209 pages, December 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 20 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928982908?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Brisbane, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 36 of 74] T2 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 928982903; 15166-0_0036 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of an existing runway at Gnoss Field Airport, a general aviation airport located adjacent to the city of Novato, Marin County, California is proposed. Gnoss Field is a reliever airport owned and operated by the county and serves as an essential regional transportation resource by providing general aviation facilities in the northern portion of the San Francisco Bay area. Most of the aircraft served are single-engine propeller aircraft, but there are also twin-engine propeller and business jet aircraft. The airport is built in an area of reclaimed salt water tidal marshlands that are part of the formerly extensive salt marshes present around the northwest corner of San Pablo Bay, characterized by muds and clays found in marshes, swamps, and waterways. The area comprises an element of the extensive wetlands associated with San Francisco Bay, which once formed the largest contiguous tidal marsh system present on the Pacific Coast of North America. Gnoss Field lies within the original flood plain of the Petaluma River at sea level. The current 3,300-foot single runway at Gnoss Field requires pilots to restrict the weight of the aircraft well below what the aircraft could accommodate, which is done by either reducing fuel or by reducing passengers and/or cargo. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action (Alternative B) would involve extending Runway 13/31 to the northwest by 1,100 feet while maintaining its current 75-foot width and making corresponding changes to taxiways, runway safety areas (RSAs), drainage channels, and levees. Additionally, in order for the extended runway to become operational, the Federal Aviation Administration would need to develop air traffic control and airspace management procedures that affect the safe and efficient movement of air traffic to and from the runway. Such actions could include the establishment or modification of flight procedures and the installation and/or relocation of navigational aids. Under Alternative D, the runway would be extended to the southeast by 240 feet and to the northwest by 860 feet. Under both action alternatives, the runway extension and northern RSA would be located almost entirely on wetlands that would require filling. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A 4,400-foot runway would allow existing aircraft at Gnoss Field Airport to operate at maximum gross takeoff weight under hot weather and other adverse weather conditions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would require the acquisition of 0.1 acre of undeveloped land, enclose 13 additional acres of the 3,875-acre floodplain behind the airport levee, impact 11.8 acres of wetlands, and remove 22.9 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 6.9 acres of permanent habitat loss and 16.1 acres of temporary habitat loss. Alternative D would require acquisition of 3.7 acres of undeveloped land, enclose 15 additional acres of the floodplain, impact 12.7 acres of wetlands, and remove 26.7 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 8.2 acres of permanent habitat loss and 18.4 acres of temporary habitat loss. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110410, Draft EIS--368 pages, Appendices--1,209 pages, December 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 36 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928982903?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Brisbane, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 33 of 74] T2 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 928982900; 15166-0_0033 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of an existing runway at Gnoss Field Airport, a general aviation airport located adjacent to the city of Novato, Marin County, California is proposed. Gnoss Field is a reliever airport owned and operated by the county and serves as an essential regional transportation resource by providing general aviation facilities in the northern portion of the San Francisco Bay area. Most of the aircraft served are single-engine propeller aircraft, but there are also twin-engine propeller and business jet aircraft. The airport is built in an area of reclaimed salt water tidal marshlands that are part of the formerly extensive salt marshes present around the northwest corner of San Pablo Bay, characterized by muds and clays found in marshes, swamps, and waterways. The area comprises an element of the extensive wetlands associated with San Francisco Bay, which once formed the largest contiguous tidal marsh system present on the Pacific Coast of North America. Gnoss Field lies within the original flood plain of the Petaluma River at sea level. The current 3,300-foot single runway at Gnoss Field requires pilots to restrict the weight of the aircraft well below what the aircraft could accommodate, which is done by either reducing fuel or by reducing passengers and/or cargo. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action (Alternative B) would involve extending Runway 13/31 to the northwest by 1,100 feet while maintaining its current 75-foot width and making corresponding changes to taxiways, runway safety areas (RSAs), drainage channels, and levees. Additionally, in order for the extended runway to become operational, the Federal Aviation Administration would need to develop air traffic control and airspace management procedures that affect the safe and efficient movement of air traffic to and from the runway. Such actions could include the establishment or modification of flight procedures and the installation and/or relocation of navigational aids. Under Alternative D, the runway would be extended to the southeast by 240 feet and to the northwest by 860 feet. Under both action alternatives, the runway extension and northern RSA would be located almost entirely on wetlands that would require filling. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A 4,400-foot runway would allow existing aircraft at Gnoss Field Airport to operate at maximum gross takeoff weight under hot weather and other adverse weather conditions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would require the acquisition of 0.1 acre of undeveloped land, enclose 13 additional acres of the 3,875-acre floodplain behind the airport levee, impact 11.8 acres of wetlands, and remove 22.9 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 6.9 acres of permanent habitat loss and 16.1 acres of temporary habitat loss. Alternative D would require acquisition of 3.7 acres of undeveloped land, enclose 15 additional acres of the floodplain, impact 12.7 acres of wetlands, and remove 26.7 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 8.2 acres of permanent habitat loss and 18.4 acres of temporary habitat loss. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110410, Draft EIS--368 pages, Appendices--1,209 pages, December 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 33 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928982900?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Brisbane, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 19 of 74] T2 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 928982898; 15166-0_0019 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of an existing runway at Gnoss Field Airport, a general aviation airport located adjacent to the city of Novato, Marin County, California is proposed. Gnoss Field is a reliever airport owned and operated by the county and serves as an essential regional transportation resource by providing general aviation facilities in the northern portion of the San Francisco Bay area. Most of the aircraft served are single-engine propeller aircraft, but there are also twin-engine propeller and business jet aircraft. The airport is built in an area of reclaimed salt water tidal marshlands that are part of the formerly extensive salt marshes present around the northwest corner of San Pablo Bay, characterized by muds and clays found in marshes, swamps, and waterways. The area comprises an element of the extensive wetlands associated with San Francisco Bay, which once formed the largest contiguous tidal marsh system present on the Pacific Coast of North America. Gnoss Field lies within the original flood plain of the Petaluma River at sea level. The current 3,300-foot single runway at Gnoss Field requires pilots to restrict the weight of the aircraft well below what the aircraft could accommodate, which is done by either reducing fuel or by reducing passengers and/or cargo. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action (Alternative B) would involve extending Runway 13/31 to the northwest by 1,100 feet while maintaining its current 75-foot width and making corresponding changes to taxiways, runway safety areas (RSAs), drainage channels, and levees. Additionally, in order for the extended runway to become operational, the Federal Aviation Administration would need to develop air traffic control and airspace management procedures that affect the safe and efficient movement of air traffic to and from the runway. Such actions could include the establishment or modification of flight procedures and the installation and/or relocation of navigational aids. Under Alternative D, the runway would be extended to the southeast by 240 feet and to the northwest by 860 feet. Under both action alternatives, the runway extension and northern RSA would be located almost entirely on wetlands that would require filling. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A 4,400-foot runway would allow existing aircraft at Gnoss Field Airport to operate at maximum gross takeoff weight under hot weather and other adverse weather conditions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would require the acquisition of 0.1 acre of undeveloped land, enclose 13 additional acres of the 3,875-acre floodplain behind the airport levee, impact 11.8 acres of wetlands, and remove 22.9 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 6.9 acres of permanent habitat loss and 16.1 acres of temporary habitat loss. Alternative D would require acquisition of 3.7 acres of undeveloped land, enclose 15 additional acres of the floodplain, impact 12.7 acres of wetlands, and remove 26.7 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 8.2 acres of permanent habitat loss and 18.4 acres of temporary habitat loss. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110410, Draft EIS--368 pages, Appendices--1,209 pages, December 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 19 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928982898?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Brisbane, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 18 of 74] T2 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 928982897; 15166-0_0018 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of an existing runway at Gnoss Field Airport, a general aviation airport located adjacent to the city of Novato, Marin County, California is proposed. Gnoss Field is a reliever airport owned and operated by the county and serves as an essential regional transportation resource by providing general aviation facilities in the northern portion of the San Francisco Bay area. Most of the aircraft served are single-engine propeller aircraft, but there are also twin-engine propeller and business jet aircraft. The airport is built in an area of reclaimed salt water tidal marshlands that are part of the formerly extensive salt marshes present around the northwest corner of San Pablo Bay, characterized by muds and clays found in marshes, swamps, and waterways. The area comprises an element of the extensive wetlands associated with San Francisco Bay, which once formed the largest contiguous tidal marsh system present on the Pacific Coast of North America. Gnoss Field lies within the original flood plain of the Petaluma River at sea level. The current 3,300-foot single runway at Gnoss Field requires pilots to restrict the weight of the aircraft well below what the aircraft could accommodate, which is done by either reducing fuel or by reducing passengers and/or cargo. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action (Alternative B) would involve extending Runway 13/31 to the northwest by 1,100 feet while maintaining its current 75-foot width and making corresponding changes to taxiways, runway safety areas (RSAs), drainage channels, and levees. Additionally, in order for the extended runway to become operational, the Federal Aviation Administration would need to develop air traffic control and airspace management procedures that affect the safe and efficient movement of air traffic to and from the runway. Such actions could include the establishment or modification of flight procedures and the installation and/or relocation of navigational aids. Under Alternative D, the runway would be extended to the southeast by 240 feet and to the northwest by 860 feet. Under both action alternatives, the runway extension and northern RSA would be located almost entirely on wetlands that would require filling. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A 4,400-foot runway would allow existing aircraft at Gnoss Field Airport to operate at maximum gross takeoff weight under hot weather and other adverse weather conditions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would require the acquisition of 0.1 acre of undeveloped land, enclose 13 additional acres of the 3,875-acre floodplain behind the airport levee, impact 11.8 acres of wetlands, and remove 22.9 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 6.9 acres of permanent habitat loss and 16.1 acres of temporary habitat loss. Alternative D would require acquisition of 3.7 acres of undeveloped land, enclose 15 additional acres of the floodplain, impact 12.7 acres of wetlands, and remove 26.7 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 8.2 acres of permanent habitat loss and 18.4 acres of temporary habitat loss. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110410, Draft EIS--368 pages, Appendices--1,209 pages, December 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 18 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928982897?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Brisbane, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 17 of 74] T2 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 928982896; 15166-0_0017 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of an existing runway at Gnoss Field Airport, a general aviation airport located adjacent to the city of Novato, Marin County, California is proposed. Gnoss Field is a reliever airport owned and operated by the county and serves as an essential regional transportation resource by providing general aviation facilities in the northern portion of the San Francisco Bay area. Most of the aircraft served are single-engine propeller aircraft, but there are also twin-engine propeller and business jet aircraft. The airport is built in an area of reclaimed salt water tidal marshlands that are part of the formerly extensive salt marshes present around the northwest corner of San Pablo Bay, characterized by muds and clays found in marshes, swamps, and waterways. The area comprises an element of the extensive wetlands associated with San Francisco Bay, which once formed the largest contiguous tidal marsh system present on the Pacific Coast of North America. Gnoss Field lies within the original flood plain of the Petaluma River at sea level. The current 3,300-foot single runway at Gnoss Field requires pilots to restrict the weight of the aircraft well below what the aircraft could accommodate, which is done by either reducing fuel or by reducing passengers and/or cargo. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action (Alternative B) would involve extending Runway 13/31 to the northwest by 1,100 feet while maintaining its current 75-foot width and making corresponding changes to taxiways, runway safety areas (RSAs), drainage channels, and levees. Additionally, in order for the extended runway to become operational, the Federal Aviation Administration would need to develop air traffic control and airspace management procedures that affect the safe and efficient movement of air traffic to and from the runway. Such actions could include the establishment or modification of flight procedures and the installation and/or relocation of navigational aids. Under Alternative D, the runway would be extended to the southeast by 240 feet and to the northwest by 860 feet. Under both action alternatives, the runway extension and northern RSA would be located almost entirely on wetlands that would require filling. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A 4,400-foot runway would allow existing aircraft at Gnoss Field Airport to operate at maximum gross takeoff weight under hot weather and other adverse weather conditions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would require the acquisition of 0.1 acre of undeveloped land, enclose 13 additional acres of the 3,875-acre floodplain behind the airport levee, impact 11.8 acres of wetlands, and remove 22.9 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 6.9 acres of permanent habitat loss and 16.1 acres of temporary habitat loss. Alternative D would require acquisition of 3.7 acres of undeveloped land, enclose 15 additional acres of the floodplain, impact 12.7 acres of wetlands, and remove 26.7 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 8.2 acres of permanent habitat loss and 18.4 acres of temporary habitat loss. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110410, Draft EIS--368 pages, Appendices--1,209 pages, December 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 17 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928982896?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Brisbane, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 29 of 74] T2 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 928982893; 15166-0_0029 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of an existing runway at Gnoss Field Airport, a general aviation airport located adjacent to the city of Novato, Marin County, California is proposed. Gnoss Field is a reliever airport owned and operated by the county and serves as an essential regional transportation resource by providing general aviation facilities in the northern portion of the San Francisco Bay area. Most of the aircraft served are single-engine propeller aircraft, but there are also twin-engine propeller and business jet aircraft. The airport is built in an area of reclaimed salt water tidal marshlands that are part of the formerly extensive salt marshes present around the northwest corner of San Pablo Bay, characterized by muds and clays found in marshes, swamps, and waterways. The area comprises an element of the extensive wetlands associated with San Francisco Bay, which once formed the largest contiguous tidal marsh system present on the Pacific Coast of North America. Gnoss Field lies within the original flood plain of the Petaluma River at sea level. The current 3,300-foot single runway at Gnoss Field requires pilots to restrict the weight of the aircraft well below what the aircraft could accommodate, which is done by either reducing fuel or by reducing passengers and/or cargo. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action (Alternative B) would involve extending Runway 13/31 to the northwest by 1,100 feet while maintaining its current 75-foot width and making corresponding changes to taxiways, runway safety areas (RSAs), drainage channels, and levees. Additionally, in order for the extended runway to become operational, the Federal Aviation Administration would need to develop air traffic control and airspace management procedures that affect the safe and efficient movement of air traffic to and from the runway. Such actions could include the establishment or modification of flight procedures and the installation and/or relocation of navigational aids. Under Alternative D, the runway would be extended to the southeast by 240 feet and to the northwest by 860 feet. Under both action alternatives, the runway extension and northern RSA would be located almost entirely on wetlands that would require filling. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A 4,400-foot runway would allow existing aircraft at Gnoss Field Airport to operate at maximum gross takeoff weight under hot weather and other adverse weather conditions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would require the acquisition of 0.1 acre of undeveloped land, enclose 13 additional acres of the 3,875-acre floodplain behind the airport levee, impact 11.8 acres of wetlands, and remove 22.9 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 6.9 acres of permanent habitat loss and 16.1 acres of temporary habitat loss. Alternative D would require acquisition of 3.7 acres of undeveloped land, enclose 15 additional acres of the floodplain, impact 12.7 acres of wetlands, and remove 26.7 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 8.2 acres of permanent habitat loss and 18.4 acres of temporary habitat loss. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110410, Draft EIS--368 pages, Appendices--1,209 pages, December 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 29 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928982893?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Brisbane, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 28 of 74] T2 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 928982892; 15166-0_0028 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of an existing runway at Gnoss Field Airport, a general aviation airport located adjacent to the city of Novato, Marin County, California is proposed. Gnoss Field is a reliever airport owned and operated by the county and serves as an essential regional transportation resource by providing general aviation facilities in the northern portion of the San Francisco Bay area. Most of the aircraft served are single-engine propeller aircraft, but there are also twin-engine propeller and business jet aircraft. The airport is built in an area of reclaimed salt water tidal marshlands that are part of the formerly extensive salt marshes present around the northwest corner of San Pablo Bay, characterized by muds and clays found in marshes, swamps, and waterways. The area comprises an element of the extensive wetlands associated with San Francisco Bay, which once formed the largest contiguous tidal marsh system present on the Pacific Coast of North America. Gnoss Field lies within the original flood plain of the Petaluma River at sea level. The current 3,300-foot single runway at Gnoss Field requires pilots to restrict the weight of the aircraft well below what the aircraft could accommodate, which is done by either reducing fuel or by reducing passengers and/or cargo. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action (Alternative B) would involve extending Runway 13/31 to the northwest by 1,100 feet while maintaining its current 75-foot width and making corresponding changes to taxiways, runway safety areas (RSAs), drainage channels, and levees. Additionally, in order for the extended runway to become operational, the Federal Aviation Administration would need to develop air traffic control and airspace management procedures that affect the safe and efficient movement of air traffic to and from the runway. Such actions could include the establishment or modification of flight procedures and the installation and/or relocation of navigational aids. Under Alternative D, the runway would be extended to the southeast by 240 feet and to the northwest by 860 feet. Under both action alternatives, the runway extension and northern RSA would be located almost entirely on wetlands that would require filling. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A 4,400-foot runway would allow existing aircraft at Gnoss Field Airport to operate at maximum gross takeoff weight under hot weather and other adverse weather conditions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would require the acquisition of 0.1 acre of undeveloped land, enclose 13 additional acres of the 3,875-acre floodplain behind the airport levee, impact 11.8 acres of wetlands, and remove 22.9 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 6.9 acres of permanent habitat loss and 16.1 acres of temporary habitat loss. Alternative D would require acquisition of 3.7 acres of undeveloped land, enclose 15 additional acres of the floodplain, impact 12.7 acres of wetlands, and remove 26.7 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 8.2 acres of permanent habitat loss and 18.4 acres of temporary habitat loss. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110410, Draft EIS--368 pages, Appendices--1,209 pages, December 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 28 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928982892?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Brisbane, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 27 of 74] T2 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 928982891; 15166-0_0027 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of an existing runway at Gnoss Field Airport, a general aviation airport located adjacent to the city of Novato, Marin County, California is proposed. Gnoss Field is a reliever airport owned and operated by the county and serves as an essential regional transportation resource by providing general aviation facilities in the northern portion of the San Francisco Bay area. Most of the aircraft served are single-engine propeller aircraft, but there are also twin-engine propeller and business jet aircraft. The airport is built in an area of reclaimed salt water tidal marshlands that are part of the formerly extensive salt marshes present around the northwest corner of San Pablo Bay, characterized by muds and clays found in marshes, swamps, and waterways. The area comprises an element of the extensive wetlands associated with San Francisco Bay, which once formed the largest contiguous tidal marsh system present on the Pacific Coast of North America. Gnoss Field lies within the original flood plain of the Petaluma River at sea level. The current 3,300-foot single runway at Gnoss Field requires pilots to restrict the weight of the aircraft well below what the aircraft could accommodate, which is done by either reducing fuel or by reducing passengers and/or cargo. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action (Alternative B) would involve extending Runway 13/31 to the northwest by 1,100 feet while maintaining its current 75-foot width and making corresponding changes to taxiways, runway safety areas (RSAs), drainage channels, and levees. Additionally, in order for the extended runway to become operational, the Federal Aviation Administration would need to develop air traffic control and airspace management procedures that affect the safe and efficient movement of air traffic to and from the runway. Such actions could include the establishment or modification of flight procedures and the installation and/or relocation of navigational aids. Under Alternative D, the runway would be extended to the southeast by 240 feet and to the northwest by 860 feet. Under both action alternatives, the runway extension and northern RSA would be located almost entirely on wetlands that would require filling. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A 4,400-foot runway would allow existing aircraft at Gnoss Field Airport to operate at maximum gross takeoff weight under hot weather and other adverse weather conditions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would require the acquisition of 0.1 acre of undeveloped land, enclose 13 additional acres of the 3,875-acre floodplain behind the airport levee, impact 11.8 acres of wetlands, and remove 22.9 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 6.9 acres of permanent habitat loss and 16.1 acres of temporary habitat loss. Alternative D would require acquisition of 3.7 acres of undeveloped land, enclose 15 additional acres of the floodplain, impact 12.7 acres of wetlands, and remove 26.7 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 8.2 acres of permanent habitat loss and 18.4 acres of temporary habitat loss. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110410, Draft EIS--368 pages, Appendices--1,209 pages, December 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 27 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928982891?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Brisbane, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 26 of 74] T2 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 928982890; 15166-0_0026 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of an existing runway at Gnoss Field Airport, a general aviation airport located adjacent to the city of Novato, Marin County, California is proposed. Gnoss Field is a reliever airport owned and operated by the county and serves as an essential regional transportation resource by providing general aviation facilities in the northern portion of the San Francisco Bay area. Most of the aircraft served are single-engine propeller aircraft, but there are also twin-engine propeller and business jet aircraft. The airport is built in an area of reclaimed salt water tidal marshlands that are part of the formerly extensive salt marshes present around the northwest corner of San Pablo Bay, characterized by muds and clays found in marshes, swamps, and waterways. The area comprises an element of the extensive wetlands associated with San Francisco Bay, which once formed the largest contiguous tidal marsh system present on the Pacific Coast of North America. Gnoss Field lies within the original flood plain of the Petaluma River at sea level. The current 3,300-foot single runway at Gnoss Field requires pilots to restrict the weight of the aircraft well below what the aircraft could accommodate, which is done by either reducing fuel or by reducing passengers and/or cargo. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action (Alternative B) would involve extending Runway 13/31 to the northwest by 1,100 feet while maintaining its current 75-foot width and making corresponding changes to taxiways, runway safety areas (RSAs), drainage channels, and levees. Additionally, in order for the extended runway to become operational, the Federal Aviation Administration would need to develop air traffic control and airspace management procedures that affect the safe and efficient movement of air traffic to and from the runway. Such actions could include the establishment or modification of flight procedures and the installation and/or relocation of navigational aids. Under Alternative D, the runway would be extended to the southeast by 240 feet and to the northwest by 860 feet. Under both action alternatives, the runway extension and northern RSA would be located almost entirely on wetlands that would require filling. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A 4,400-foot runway would allow existing aircraft at Gnoss Field Airport to operate at maximum gross takeoff weight under hot weather and other adverse weather conditions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would require the acquisition of 0.1 acre of undeveloped land, enclose 13 additional acres of the 3,875-acre floodplain behind the airport levee, impact 11.8 acres of wetlands, and remove 22.9 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 6.9 acres of permanent habitat loss and 16.1 acres of temporary habitat loss. Alternative D would require acquisition of 3.7 acres of undeveloped land, enclose 15 additional acres of the floodplain, impact 12.7 acres of wetlands, and remove 26.7 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 8.2 acres of permanent habitat loss and 18.4 acres of temporary habitat loss. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110410, Draft EIS--368 pages, Appendices--1,209 pages, December 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 26 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928982890?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Brisbane, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 25 of 74] T2 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 928982889; 15166-0_0025 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of an existing runway at Gnoss Field Airport, a general aviation airport located adjacent to the city of Novato, Marin County, California is proposed. Gnoss Field is a reliever airport owned and operated by the county and serves as an essential regional transportation resource by providing general aviation facilities in the northern portion of the San Francisco Bay area. Most of the aircraft served are single-engine propeller aircraft, but there are also twin-engine propeller and business jet aircraft. The airport is built in an area of reclaimed salt water tidal marshlands that are part of the formerly extensive salt marshes present around the northwest corner of San Pablo Bay, characterized by muds and clays found in marshes, swamps, and waterways. The area comprises an element of the extensive wetlands associated with San Francisco Bay, which once formed the largest contiguous tidal marsh system present on the Pacific Coast of North America. Gnoss Field lies within the original flood plain of the Petaluma River at sea level. The current 3,300-foot single runway at Gnoss Field requires pilots to restrict the weight of the aircraft well below what the aircraft could accommodate, which is done by either reducing fuel or by reducing passengers and/or cargo. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action (Alternative B) would involve extending Runway 13/31 to the northwest by 1,100 feet while maintaining its current 75-foot width and making corresponding changes to taxiways, runway safety areas (RSAs), drainage channels, and levees. Additionally, in order for the extended runway to become operational, the Federal Aviation Administration would need to develop air traffic control and airspace management procedures that affect the safe and efficient movement of air traffic to and from the runway. Such actions could include the establishment or modification of flight procedures and the installation and/or relocation of navigational aids. Under Alternative D, the runway would be extended to the southeast by 240 feet and to the northwest by 860 feet. Under both action alternatives, the runway extension and northern RSA would be located almost entirely on wetlands that would require filling. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A 4,400-foot runway would allow existing aircraft at Gnoss Field Airport to operate at maximum gross takeoff weight under hot weather and other adverse weather conditions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would require the acquisition of 0.1 acre of undeveloped land, enclose 13 additional acres of the 3,875-acre floodplain behind the airport levee, impact 11.8 acres of wetlands, and remove 22.9 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 6.9 acres of permanent habitat loss and 16.1 acres of temporary habitat loss. Alternative D would require acquisition of 3.7 acres of undeveloped land, enclose 15 additional acres of the floodplain, impact 12.7 acres of wetlands, and remove 26.7 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 8.2 acres of permanent habitat loss and 18.4 acres of temporary habitat loss. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110410, Draft EIS--368 pages, Appendices--1,209 pages, December 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 25 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928982889?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Brisbane, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 30 of 74] T2 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 928982887; 15166-0_0030 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of an existing runway at Gnoss Field Airport, a general aviation airport located adjacent to the city of Novato, Marin County, California is proposed. Gnoss Field is a reliever airport owned and operated by the county and serves as an essential regional transportation resource by providing general aviation facilities in the northern portion of the San Francisco Bay area. Most of the aircraft served are single-engine propeller aircraft, but there are also twin-engine propeller and business jet aircraft. The airport is built in an area of reclaimed salt water tidal marshlands that are part of the formerly extensive salt marshes present around the northwest corner of San Pablo Bay, characterized by muds and clays found in marshes, swamps, and waterways. The area comprises an element of the extensive wetlands associated with San Francisco Bay, which once formed the largest contiguous tidal marsh system present on the Pacific Coast of North America. Gnoss Field lies within the original flood plain of the Petaluma River at sea level. The current 3,300-foot single runway at Gnoss Field requires pilots to restrict the weight of the aircraft well below what the aircraft could accommodate, which is done by either reducing fuel or by reducing passengers and/or cargo. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action (Alternative B) would involve extending Runway 13/31 to the northwest by 1,100 feet while maintaining its current 75-foot width and making corresponding changes to taxiways, runway safety areas (RSAs), drainage channels, and levees. Additionally, in order for the extended runway to become operational, the Federal Aviation Administration would need to develop air traffic control and airspace management procedures that affect the safe and efficient movement of air traffic to and from the runway. Such actions could include the establishment or modification of flight procedures and the installation and/or relocation of navigational aids. Under Alternative D, the runway would be extended to the southeast by 240 feet and to the northwest by 860 feet. Under both action alternatives, the runway extension and northern RSA would be located almost entirely on wetlands that would require filling. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A 4,400-foot runway would allow existing aircraft at Gnoss Field Airport to operate at maximum gross takeoff weight under hot weather and other adverse weather conditions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would require the acquisition of 0.1 acre of undeveloped land, enclose 13 additional acres of the 3,875-acre floodplain behind the airport levee, impact 11.8 acres of wetlands, and remove 22.9 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 6.9 acres of permanent habitat loss and 16.1 acres of temporary habitat loss. Alternative D would require acquisition of 3.7 acres of undeveloped land, enclose 15 additional acres of the floodplain, impact 12.7 acres of wetlands, and remove 26.7 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 8.2 acres of permanent habitat loss and 18.4 acres of temporary habitat loss. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110410, Draft EIS--368 pages, Appendices--1,209 pages, December 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 30 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928982887?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Brisbane, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 12 of 74] T2 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 928982628; 15166-0_0012 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of an existing runway at Gnoss Field Airport, a general aviation airport located adjacent to the city of Novato, Marin County, California is proposed. Gnoss Field is a reliever airport owned and operated by the county and serves as an essential regional transportation resource by providing general aviation facilities in the northern portion of the San Francisco Bay area. Most of the aircraft served are single-engine propeller aircraft, but there are also twin-engine propeller and business jet aircraft. The airport is built in an area of reclaimed salt water tidal marshlands that are part of the formerly extensive salt marshes present around the northwest corner of San Pablo Bay, characterized by muds and clays found in marshes, swamps, and waterways. The area comprises an element of the extensive wetlands associated with San Francisco Bay, which once formed the largest contiguous tidal marsh system present on the Pacific Coast of North America. Gnoss Field lies within the original flood plain of the Petaluma River at sea level. The current 3,300-foot single runway at Gnoss Field requires pilots to restrict the weight of the aircraft well below what the aircraft could accommodate, which is done by either reducing fuel or by reducing passengers and/or cargo. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action (Alternative B) would involve extending Runway 13/31 to the northwest by 1,100 feet while maintaining its current 75-foot width and making corresponding changes to taxiways, runway safety areas (RSAs), drainage channels, and levees. Additionally, in order for the extended runway to become operational, the Federal Aviation Administration would need to develop air traffic control and airspace management procedures that affect the safe and efficient movement of air traffic to and from the runway. Such actions could include the establishment or modification of flight procedures and the installation and/or relocation of navigational aids. Under Alternative D, the runway would be extended to the southeast by 240 feet and to the northwest by 860 feet. Under both action alternatives, the runway extension and northern RSA would be located almost entirely on wetlands that would require filling. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A 4,400-foot runway would allow existing aircraft at Gnoss Field Airport to operate at maximum gross takeoff weight under hot weather and other adverse weather conditions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would require the acquisition of 0.1 acre of undeveloped land, enclose 13 additional acres of the 3,875-acre floodplain behind the airport levee, impact 11.8 acres of wetlands, and remove 22.9 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 6.9 acres of permanent habitat loss and 16.1 acres of temporary habitat loss. Alternative D would require acquisition of 3.7 acres of undeveloped land, enclose 15 additional acres of the floodplain, impact 12.7 acres of wetlands, and remove 26.7 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 8.2 acres of permanent habitat loss and 18.4 acres of temporary habitat loss. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110410, Draft EIS--368 pages, Appendices--1,209 pages, December 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 12 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928982628?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Brisbane, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 11 of 74] T2 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 928982611; 15166-0_0011 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of an existing runway at Gnoss Field Airport, a general aviation airport located adjacent to the city of Novato, Marin County, California is proposed. Gnoss Field is a reliever airport owned and operated by the county and serves as an essential regional transportation resource by providing general aviation facilities in the northern portion of the San Francisco Bay area. Most of the aircraft served are single-engine propeller aircraft, but there are also twin-engine propeller and business jet aircraft. The airport is built in an area of reclaimed salt water tidal marshlands that are part of the formerly extensive salt marshes present around the northwest corner of San Pablo Bay, characterized by muds and clays found in marshes, swamps, and waterways. The area comprises an element of the extensive wetlands associated with San Francisco Bay, which once formed the largest contiguous tidal marsh system present on the Pacific Coast of North America. Gnoss Field lies within the original flood plain of the Petaluma River at sea level. The current 3,300-foot single runway at Gnoss Field requires pilots to restrict the weight of the aircraft well below what the aircraft could accommodate, which is done by either reducing fuel or by reducing passengers and/or cargo. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action (Alternative B) would involve extending Runway 13/31 to the northwest by 1,100 feet while maintaining its current 75-foot width and making corresponding changes to taxiways, runway safety areas (RSAs), drainage channels, and levees. Additionally, in order for the extended runway to become operational, the Federal Aviation Administration would need to develop air traffic control and airspace management procedures that affect the safe and efficient movement of air traffic to and from the runway. Such actions could include the establishment or modification of flight procedures and the installation and/or relocation of navigational aids. Under Alternative D, the runway would be extended to the southeast by 240 feet and to the northwest by 860 feet. Under both action alternatives, the runway extension and northern RSA would be located almost entirely on wetlands that would require filling. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A 4,400-foot runway would allow existing aircraft at Gnoss Field Airport to operate at maximum gross takeoff weight under hot weather and other adverse weather conditions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would require the acquisition of 0.1 acre of undeveloped land, enclose 13 additional acres of the 3,875-acre floodplain behind the airport levee, impact 11.8 acres of wetlands, and remove 22.9 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 6.9 acres of permanent habitat loss and 16.1 acres of temporary habitat loss. Alternative D would require acquisition of 3.7 acres of undeveloped land, enclose 15 additional acres of the floodplain, impact 12.7 acres of wetlands, and remove 26.7 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 8.2 acres of permanent habitat loss and 18.4 acres of temporary habitat loss. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110410, Draft EIS--368 pages, Appendices--1,209 pages, December 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 11 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928982611?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Brisbane, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 10 of 74] T2 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 928982593; 15166-0_0010 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of an existing runway at Gnoss Field Airport, a general aviation airport located adjacent to the city of Novato, Marin County, California is proposed. Gnoss Field is a reliever airport owned and operated by the county and serves as an essential regional transportation resource by providing general aviation facilities in the northern portion of the San Francisco Bay area. Most of the aircraft served are single-engine propeller aircraft, but there are also twin-engine propeller and business jet aircraft. The airport is built in an area of reclaimed salt water tidal marshlands that are part of the formerly extensive salt marshes present around the northwest corner of San Pablo Bay, characterized by muds and clays found in marshes, swamps, and waterways. The area comprises an element of the extensive wetlands associated with San Francisco Bay, which once formed the largest contiguous tidal marsh system present on the Pacific Coast of North America. Gnoss Field lies within the original flood plain of the Petaluma River at sea level. The current 3,300-foot single runway at Gnoss Field requires pilots to restrict the weight of the aircraft well below what the aircraft could accommodate, which is done by either reducing fuel or by reducing passengers and/or cargo. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action (Alternative B) would involve extending Runway 13/31 to the northwest by 1,100 feet while maintaining its current 75-foot width and making corresponding changes to taxiways, runway safety areas (RSAs), drainage channels, and levees. Additionally, in order for the extended runway to become operational, the Federal Aviation Administration would need to develop air traffic control and airspace management procedures that affect the safe and efficient movement of air traffic to and from the runway. Such actions could include the establishment or modification of flight procedures and the installation and/or relocation of navigational aids. Under Alternative D, the runway would be extended to the southeast by 240 feet and to the northwest by 860 feet. Under both action alternatives, the runway extension and northern RSA would be located almost entirely on wetlands that would require filling. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A 4,400-foot runway would allow existing aircraft at Gnoss Field Airport to operate at maximum gross takeoff weight under hot weather and other adverse weather conditions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would require the acquisition of 0.1 acre of undeveloped land, enclose 13 additional acres of the 3,875-acre floodplain behind the airport levee, impact 11.8 acres of wetlands, and remove 22.9 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 6.9 acres of permanent habitat loss and 16.1 acres of temporary habitat loss. Alternative D would require acquisition of 3.7 acres of undeveloped land, enclose 15 additional acres of the floodplain, impact 12.7 acres of wetlands, and remove 26.7 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 8.2 acres of permanent habitat loss and 18.4 acres of temporary habitat loss. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110410, Draft EIS--368 pages, Appendices--1,209 pages, December 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 10 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928982593?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Brisbane, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 9 of 74] T2 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 928982538; 15166-0_0009 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of an existing runway at Gnoss Field Airport, a general aviation airport located adjacent to the city of Novato, Marin County, California is proposed. Gnoss Field is a reliever airport owned and operated by the county and serves as an essential regional transportation resource by providing general aviation facilities in the northern portion of the San Francisco Bay area. Most of the aircraft served are single-engine propeller aircraft, but there are also twin-engine propeller and business jet aircraft. The airport is built in an area of reclaimed salt water tidal marshlands that are part of the formerly extensive salt marshes present around the northwest corner of San Pablo Bay, characterized by muds and clays found in marshes, swamps, and waterways. The area comprises an element of the extensive wetlands associated with San Francisco Bay, which once formed the largest contiguous tidal marsh system present on the Pacific Coast of North America. Gnoss Field lies within the original flood plain of the Petaluma River at sea level. The current 3,300-foot single runway at Gnoss Field requires pilots to restrict the weight of the aircraft well below what the aircraft could accommodate, which is done by either reducing fuel or by reducing passengers and/or cargo. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action (Alternative B) would involve extending Runway 13/31 to the northwest by 1,100 feet while maintaining its current 75-foot width and making corresponding changes to taxiways, runway safety areas (RSAs), drainage channels, and levees. Additionally, in order for the extended runway to become operational, the Federal Aviation Administration would need to develop air traffic control and airspace management procedures that affect the safe and efficient movement of air traffic to and from the runway. Such actions could include the establishment or modification of flight procedures and the installation and/or relocation of navigational aids. Under Alternative D, the runway would be extended to the southeast by 240 feet and to the northwest by 860 feet. Under both action alternatives, the runway extension and northern RSA would be located almost entirely on wetlands that would require filling. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A 4,400-foot runway would allow existing aircraft at Gnoss Field Airport to operate at maximum gross takeoff weight under hot weather and other adverse weather conditions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would require the acquisition of 0.1 acre of undeveloped land, enclose 13 additional acres of the 3,875-acre floodplain behind the airport levee, impact 11.8 acres of wetlands, and remove 22.9 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 6.9 acres of permanent habitat loss and 16.1 acres of temporary habitat loss. Alternative D would require acquisition of 3.7 acres of undeveloped land, enclose 15 additional acres of the floodplain, impact 12.7 acres of wetlands, and remove 26.7 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 8.2 acres of permanent habitat loss and 18.4 acres of temporary habitat loss. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110410, Draft EIS--368 pages, Appendices--1,209 pages, December 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 9 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928982538?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Brisbane, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 8 of 74] T2 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 928982518; 15166-0_0008 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of an existing runway at Gnoss Field Airport, a general aviation airport located adjacent to the city of Novato, Marin County, California is proposed. Gnoss Field is a reliever airport owned and operated by the county and serves as an essential regional transportation resource by providing general aviation facilities in the northern portion of the San Francisco Bay area. Most of the aircraft served are single-engine propeller aircraft, but there are also twin-engine propeller and business jet aircraft. The airport is built in an area of reclaimed salt water tidal marshlands that are part of the formerly extensive salt marshes present around the northwest corner of San Pablo Bay, characterized by muds and clays found in marshes, swamps, and waterways. The area comprises an element of the extensive wetlands associated with San Francisco Bay, which once formed the largest contiguous tidal marsh system present on the Pacific Coast of North America. Gnoss Field lies within the original flood plain of the Petaluma River at sea level. The current 3,300-foot single runway at Gnoss Field requires pilots to restrict the weight of the aircraft well below what the aircraft could accommodate, which is done by either reducing fuel or by reducing passengers and/or cargo. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action (Alternative B) would involve extending Runway 13/31 to the northwest by 1,100 feet while maintaining its current 75-foot width and making corresponding changes to taxiways, runway safety areas (RSAs), drainage channels, and levees. Additionally, in order for the extended runway to become operational, the Federal Aviation Administration would need to develop air traffic control and airspace management procedures that affect the safe and efficient movement of air traffic to and from the runway. Such actions could include the establishment or modification of flight procedures and the installation and/or relocation of navigational aids. Under Alternative D, the runway would be extended to the southeast by 240 feet and to the northwest by 860 feet. Under both action alternatives, the runway extension and northern RSA would be located almost entirely on wetlands that would require filling. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A 4,400-foot runway would allow existing aircraft at Gnoss Field Airport to operate at maximum gross takeoff weight under hot weather and other adverse weather conditions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would require the acquisition of 0.1 acre of undeveloped land, enclose 13 additional acres of the 3,875-acre floodplain behind the airport levee, impact 11.8 acres of wetlands, and remove 22.9 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 6.9 acres of permanent habitat loss and 16.1 acres of temporary habitat loss. Alternative D would require acquisition of 3.7 acres of undeveloped land, enclose 15 additional acres of the floodplain, impact 12.7 acres of wetlands, and remove 26.7 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 8.2 acres of permanent habitat loss and 18.4 acres of temporary habitat loss. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110410, Draft EIS--368 pages, Appendices--1,209 pages, December 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 8 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928982518?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Brisbane, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 7 of 74] T2 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 928982491; 15166-0_0007 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of an existing runway at Gnoss Field Airport, a general aviation airport located adjacent to the city of Novato, Marin County, California is proposed. Gnoss Field is a reliever airport owned and operated by the county and serves as an essential regional transportation resource by providing general aviation facilities in the northern portion of the San Francisco Bay area. Most of the aircraft served are single-engine propeller aircraft, but there are also twin-engine propeller and business jet aircraft. The airport is built in an area of reclaimed salt water tidal marshlands that are part of the formerly extensive salt marshes present around the northwest corner of San Pablo Bay, characterized by muds and clays found in marshes, swamps, and waterways. The area comprises an element of the extensive wetlands associated with San Francisco Bay, which once formed the largest contiguous tidal marsh system present on the Pacific Coast of North America. Gnoss Field lies within the original flood plain of the Petaluma River at sea level. The current 3,300-foot single runway at Gnoss Field requires pilots to restrict the weight of the aircraft well below what the aircraft could accommodate, which is done by either reducing fuel or by reducing passengers and/or cargo. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action (Alternative B) would involve extending Runway 13/31 to the northwest by 1,100 feet while maintaining its current 75-foot width and making corresponding changes to taxiways, runway safety areas (RSAs), drainage channels, and levees. Additionally, in order for the extended runway to become operational, the Federal Aviation Administration would need to develop air traffic control and airspace management procedures that affect the safe and efficient movement of air traffic to and from the runway. Such actions could include the establishment or modification of flight procedures and the installation and/or relocation of navigational aids. Under Alternative D, the runway would be extended to the southeast by 240 feet and to the northwest by 860 feet. Under both action alternatives, the runway extension and northern RSA would be located almost entirely on wetlands that would require filling. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A 4,400-foot runway would allow existing aircraft at Gnoss Field Airport to operate at maximum gross takeoff weight under hot weather and other adverse weather conditions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would require the acquisition of 0.1 acre of undeveloped land, enclose 13 additional acres of the 3,875-acre floodplain behind the airport levee, impact 11.8 acres of wetlands, and remove 22.9 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 6.9 acres of permanent habitat loss and 16.1 acres of temporary habitat loss. Alternative D would require acquisition of 3.7 acres of undeveloped land, enclose 15 additional acres of the floodplain, impact 12.7 acres of wetlands, and remove 26.7 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 8.2 acres of permanent habitat loss and 18.4 acres of temporary habitat loss. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110410, Draft EIS--368 pages, Appendices--1,209 pages, December 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 7 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928982491?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Brisbane, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 5 of 74] T2 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 928982408; 15166-0_0005 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of an existing runway at Gnoss Field Airport, a general aviation airport located adjacent to the city of Novato, Marin County, California is proposed. Gnoss Field is a reliever airport owned and operated by the county and serves as an essential regional transportation resource by providing general aviation facilities in the northern portion of the San Francisco Bay area. Most of the aircraft served are single-engine propeller aircraft, but there are also twin-engine propeller and business jet aircraft. The airport is built in an area of reclaimed salt water tidal marshlands that are part of the formerly extensive salt marshes present around the northwest corner of San Pablo Bay, characterized by muds and clays found in marshes, swamps, and waterways. The area comprises an element of the extensive wetlands associated with San Francisco Bay, which once formed the largest contiguous tidal marsh system present on the Pacific Coast of North America. Gnoss Field lies within the original flood plain of the Petaluma River at sea level. The current 3,300-foot single runway at Gnoss Field requires pilots to restrict the weight of the aircraft well below what the aircraft could accommodate, which is done by either reducing fuel or by reducing passengers and/or cargo. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action (Alternative B) would involve extending Runway 13/31 to the northwest by 1,100 feet while maintaining its current 75-foot width and making corresponding changes to taxiways, runway safety areas (RSAs), drainage channels, and levees. Additionally, in order for the extended runway to become operational, the Federal Aviation Administration would need to develop air traffic control and airspace management procedures that affect the safe and efficient movement of air traffic to and from the runway. Such actions could include the establishment or modification of flight procedures and the installation and/or relocation of navigational aids. Under Alternative D, the runway would be extended to the southeast by 240 feet and to the northwest by 860 feet. Under both action alternatives, the runway extension and northern RSA would be located almost entirely on wetlands that would require filling. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A 4,400-foot runway would allow existing aircraft at Gnoss Field Airport to operate at maximum gross takeoff weight under hot weather and other adverse weather conditions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would require the acquisition of 0.1 acre of undeveloped land, enclose 13 additional acres of the 3,875-acre floodplain behind the airport levee, impact 11.8 acres of wetlands, and remove 22.9 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 6.9 acres of permanent habitat loss and 16.1 acres of temporary habitat loss. Alternative D would require acquisition of 3.7 acres of undeveloped land, enclose 15 additional acres of the floodplain, impact 12.7 acres of wetlands, and remove 26.7 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 8.2 acres of permanent habitat loss and 18.4 acres of temporary habitat loss. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110410, Draft EIS--368 pages, Appendices--1,209 pages, December 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 5 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928982408?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Brisbane, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 73 of 74] T2 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 928981538; 15166-0_0073 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of an existing runway at Gnoss Field Airport, a general aviation airport located adjacent to the city of Novato, Marin County, California is proposed. Gnoss Field is a reliever airport owned and operated by the county and serves as an essential regional transportation resource by providing general aviation facilities in the northern portion of the San Francisco Bay area. Most of the aircraft served are single-engine propeller aircraft, but there are also twin-engine propeller and business jet aircraft. The airport is built in an area of reclaimed salt water tidal marshlands that are part of the formerly extensive salt marshes present around the northwest corner of San Pablo Bay, characterized by muds and clays found in marshes, swamps, and waterways. The area comprises an element of the extensive wetlands associated with San Francisco Bay, which once formed the largest contiguous tidal marsh system present on the Pacific Coast of North America. Gnoss Field lies within the original flood plain of the Petaluma River at sea level. The current 3,300-foot single runway at Gnoss Field requires pilots to restrict the weight of the aircraft well below what the aircraft could accommodate, which is done by either reducing fuel or by reducing passengers and/or cargo. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action (Alternative B) would involve extending Runway 13/31 to the northwest by 1,100 feet while maintaining its current 75-foot width and making corresponding changes to taxiways, runway safety areas (RSAs), drainage channels, and levees. Additionally, in order for the extended runway to become operational, the Federal Aviation Administration would need to develop air traffic control and airspace management procedures that affect the safe and efficient movement of air traffic to and from the runway. Such actions could include the establishment or modification of flight procedures and the installation and/or relocation of navigational aids. Under Alternative D, the runway would be extended to the southeast by 240 feet and to the northwest by 860 feet. Under both action alternatives, the runway extension and northern RSA would be located almost entirely on wetlands that would require filling. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A 4,400-foot runway would allow existing aircraft at Gnoss Field Airport to operate at maximum gross takeoff weight under hot weather and other adverse weather conditions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would require the acquisition of 0.1 acre of undeveloped land, enclose 13 additional acres of the 3,875-acre floodplain behind the airport levee, impact 11.8 acres of wetlands, and remove 22.9 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 6.9 acres of permanent habitat loss and 16.1 acres of temporary habitat loss. Alternative D would require acquisition of 3.7 acres of undeveloped land, enclose 15 additional acres of the floodplain, impact 12.7 acres of wetlands, and remove 26.7 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 8.2 acres of permanent habitat loss and 18.4 acres of temporary habitat loss. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110410, Draft EIS--368 pages, Appendices--1,209 pages, December 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 73 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928981538?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Brisbane, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 70 of 74] T2 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 928981506; 15166-0_0070 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of an existing runway at Gnoss Field Airport, a general aviation airport located adjacent to the city of Novato, Marin County, California is proposed. Gnoss Field is a reliever airport owned and operated by the county and serves as an essential regional transportation resource by providing general aviation facilities in the northern portion of the San Francisco Bay area. Most of the aircraft served are single-engine propeller aircraft, but there are also twin-engine propeller and business jet aircraft. The airport is built in an area of reclaimed salt water tidal marshlands that are part of the formerly extensive salt marshes present around the northwest corner of San Pablo Bay, characterized by muds and clays found in marshes, swamps, and waterways. The area comprises an element of the extensive wetlands associated with San Francisco Bay, which once formed the largest contiguous tidal marsh system present on the Pacific Coast of North America. Gnoss Field lies within the original flood plain of the Petaluma River at sea level. The current 3,300-foot single runway at Gnoss Field requires pilots to restrict the weight of the aircraft well below what the aircraft could accommodate, which is done by either reducing fuel or by reducing passengers and/or cargo. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action (Alternative B) would involve extending Runway 13/31 to the northwest by 1,100 feet while maintaining its current 75-foot width and making corresponding changes to taxiways, runway safety areas (RSAs), drainage channels, and levees. Additionally, in order for the extended runway to become operational, the Federal Aviation Administration would need to develop air traffic control and airspace management procedures that affect the safe and efficient movement of air traffic to and from the runway. Such actions could include the establishment or modification of flight procedures and the installation and/or relocation of navigational aids. Under Alternative D, the runway would be extended to the southeast by 240 feet and to the northwest by 860 feet. Under both action alternatives, the runway extension and northern RSA would be located almost entirely on wetlands that would require filling. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A 4,400-foot runway would allow existing aircraft at Gnoss Field Airport to operate at maximum gross takeoff weight under hot weather and other adverse weather conditions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would require the acquisition of 0.1 acre of undeveloped land, enclose 13 additional acres of the 3,875-acre floodplain behind the airport levee, impact 11.8 acres of wetlands, and remove 22.9 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 6.9 acres of permanent habitat loss and 16.1 acres of temporary habitat loss. Alternative D would require acquisition of 3.7 acres of undeveloped land, enclose 15 additional acres of the floodplain, impact 12.7 acres of wetlands, and remove 26.7 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 8.2 acres of permanent habitat loss and 18.4 acres of temporary habitat loss. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110410, Draft EIS--368 pages, Appendices--1,209 pages, December 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 70 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928981506?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Brisbane, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 69 of 74] T2 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 928981496; 15166-0_0069 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of an existing runway at Gnoss Field Airport, a general aviation airport located adjacent to the city of Novato, Marin County, California is proposed. Gnoss Field is a reliever airport owned and operated by the county and serves as an essential regional transportation resource by providing general aviation facilities in the northern portion of the San Francisco Bay area. Most of the aircraft served are single-engine propeller aircraft, but there are also twin-engine propeller and business jet aircraft. The airport is built in an area of reclaimed salt water tidal marshlands that are part of the formerly extensive salt marshes present around the northwest corner of San Pablo Bay, characterized by muds and clays found in marshes, swamps, and waterways. The area comprises an element of the extensive wetlands associated with San Francisco Bay, which once formed the largest contiguous tidal marsh system present on the Pacific Coast of North America. Gnoss Field lies within the original flood plain of the Petaluma River at sea level. The current 3,300-foot single runway at Gnoss Field requires pilots to restrict the weight of the aircraft well below what the aircraft could accommodate, which is done by either reducing fuel or by reducing passengers and/or cargo. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action (Alternative B) would involve extending Runway 13/31 to the northwest by 1,100 feet while maintaining its current 75-foot width and making corresponding changes to taxiways, runway safety areas (RSAs), drainage channels, and levees. Additionally, in order for the extended runway to become operational, the Federal Aviation Administration would need to develop air traffic control and airspace management procedures that affect the safe and efficient movement of air traffic to and from the runway. Such actions could include the establishment or modification of flight procedures and the installation and/or relocation of navigational aids. Under Alternative D, the runway would be extended to the southeast by 240 feet and to the northwest by 860 feet. Under both action alternatives, the runway extension and northern RSA would be located almost entirely on wetlands that would require filling. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A 4,400-foot runway would allow existing aircraft at Gnoss Field Airport to operate at maximum gross takeoff weight under hot weather and other adverse weather conditions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would require the acquisition of 0.1 acre of undeveloped land, enclose 13 additional acres of the 3,875-acre floodplain behind the airport levee, impact 11.8 acres of wetlands, and remove 22.9 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 6.9 acres of permanent habitat loss and 16.1 acres of temporary habitat loss. Alternative D would require acquisition of 3.7 acres of undeveloped land, enclose 15 additional acres of the floodplain, impact 12.7 acres of wetlands, and remove 26.7 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 8.2 acres of permanent habitat loss and 18.4 acres of temporary habitat loss. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110410, Draft EIS--368 pages, Appendices--1,209 pages, December 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 69 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928981496?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Brisbane, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 54 of 74] T2 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 928981485; 15166-0_0054 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of an existing runway at Gnoss Field Airport, a general aviation airport located adjacent to the city of Novato, Marin County, California is proposed. Gnoss Field is a reliever airport owned and operated by the county and serves as an essential regional transportation resource by providing general aviation facilities in the northern portion of the San Francisco Bay area. Most of the aircraft served are single-engine propeller aircraft, but there are also twin-engine propeller and business jet aircraft. The airport is built in an area of reclaimed salt water tidal marshlands that are part of the formerly extensive salt marshes present around the northwest corner of San Pablo Bay, characterized by muds and clays found in marshes, swamps, and waterways. The area comprises an element of the extensive wetlands associated with San Francisco Bay, which once formed the largest contiguous tidal marsh system present on the Pacific Coast of North America. Gnoss Field lies within the original flood plain of the Petaluma River at sea level. The current 3,300-foot single runway at Gnoss Field requires pilots to restrict the weight of the aircraft well below what the aircraft could accommodate, which is done by either reducing fuel or by reducing passengers and/or cargo. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action (Alternative B) would involve extending Runway 13/31 to the northwest by 1,100 feet while maintaining its current 75-foot width and making corresponding changes to taxiways, runway safety areas (RSAs), drainage channels, and levees. Additionally, in order for the extended runway to become operational, the Federal Aviation Administration would need to develop air traffic control and airspace management procedures that affect the safe and efficient movement of air traffic to and from the runway. Such actions could include the establishment or modification of flight procedures and the installation and/or relocation of navigational aids. Under Alternative D, the runway would be extended to the southeast by 240 feet and to the northwest by 860 feet. Under both action alternatives, the runway extension and northern RSA would be located almost entirely on wetlands that would require filling. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A 4,400-foot runway would allow existing aircraft at Gnoss Field Airport to operate at maximum gross takeoff weight under hot weather and other adverse weather conditions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would require the acquisition of 0.1 acre of undeveloped land, enclose 13 additional acres of the 3,875-acre floodplain behind the airport levee, impact 11.8 acres of wetlands, and remove 22.9 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 6.9 acres of permanent habitat loss and 16.1 acres of temporary habitat loss. Alternative D would require acquisition of 3.7 acres of undeveloped land, enclose 15 additional acres of the floodplain, impact 12.7 acres of wetlands, and remove 26.7 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 8.2 acres of permanent habitat loss and 18.4 acres of temporary habitat loss. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110410, Draft EIS--368 pages, Appendices--1,209 pages, December 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 54 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928981485?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Brisbane, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 51 of 74] T2 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 928981447; 15166-0_0051 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of an existing runway at Gnoss Field Airport, a general aviation airport located adjacent to the city of Novato, Marin County, California is proposed. Gnoss Field is a reliever airport owned and operated by the county and serves as an essential regional transportation resource by providing general aviation facilities in the northern portion of the San Francisco Bay area. Most of the aircraft served are single-engine propeller aircraft, but there are also twin-engine propeller and business jet aircraft. The airport is built in an area of reclaimed salt water tidal marshlands that are part of the formerly extensive salt marshes present around the northwest corner of San Pablo Bay, characterized by muds and clays found in marshes, swamps, and waterways. The area comprises an element of the extensive wetlands associated with San Francisco Bay, which once formed the largest contiguous tidal marsh system present on the Pacific Coast of North America. Gnoss Field lies within the original flood plain of the Petaluma River at sea level. The current 3,300-foot single runway at Gnoss Field requires pilots to restrict the weight of the aircraft well below what the aircraft could accommodate, which is done by either reducing fuel or by reducing passengers and/or cargo. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action (Alternative B) would involve extending Runway 13/31 to the northwest by 1,100 feet while maintaining its current 75-foot width and making corresponding changes to taxiways, runway safety areas (RSAs), drainage channels, and levees. Additionally, in order for the extended runway to become operational, the Federal Aviation Administration would need to develop air traffic control and airspace management procedures that affect the safe and efficient movement of air traffic to and from the runway. Such actions could include the establishment or modification of flight procedures and the installation and/or relocation of navigational aids. Under Alternative D, the runway would be extended to the southeast by 240 feet and to the northwest by 860 feet. Under both action alternatives, the runway extension and northern RSA would be located almost entirely on wetlands that would require filling. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A 4,400-foot runway would allow existing aircraft at Gnoss Field Airport to operate at maximum gross takeoff weight under hot weather and other adverse weather conditions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would require the acquisition of 0.1 acre of undeveloped land, enclose 13 additional acres of the 3,875-acre floodplain behind the airport levee, impact 11.8 acres of wetlands, and remove 22.9 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 6.9 acres of permanent habitat loss and 16.1 acres of temporary habitat loss. Alternative D would require acquisition of 3.7 acres of undeveloped land, enclose 15 additional acres of the floodplain, impact 12.7 acres of wetlands, and remove 26.7 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 8.2 acres of permanent habitat loss and 18.4 acres of temporary habitat loss. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110410, Draft EIS--368 pages, Appendices--1,209 pages, December 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 51 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928981447?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Brisbane, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 50 of 74] T2 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 928981439; 15166-0_0050 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of an existing runway at Gnoss Field Airport, a general aviation airport located adjacent to the city of Novato, Marin County, California is proposed. Gnoss Field is a reliever airport owned and operated by the county and serves as an essential regional transportation resource by providing general aviation facilities in the northern portion of the San Francisco Bay area. Most of the aircraft served are single-engine propeller aircraft, but there are also twin-engine propeller and business jet aircraft. The airport is built in an area of reclaimed salt water tidal marshlands that are part of the formerly extensive salt marshes present around the northwest corner of San Pablo Bay, characterized by muds and clays found in marshes, swamps, and waterways. The area comprises an element of the extensive wetlands associated with San Francisco Bay, which once formed the largest contiguous tidal marsh system present on the Pacific Coast of North America. Gnoss Field lies within the original flood plain of the Petaluma River at sea level. The current 3,300-foot single runway at Gnoss Field requires pilots to restrict the weight of the aircraft well below what the aircraft could accommodate, which is done by either reducing fuel or by reducing passengers and/or cargo. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action (Alternative B) would involve extending Runway 13/31 to the northwest by 1,100 feet while maintaining its current 75-foot width and making corresponding changes to taxiways, runway safety areas (RSAs), drainage channels, and levees. Additionally, in order for the extended runway to become operational, the Federal Aviation Administration would need to develop air traffic control and airspace management procedures that affect the safe and efficient movement of air traffic to and from the runway. Such actions could include the establishment or modification of flight procedures and the installation and/or relocation of navigational aids. Under Alternative D, the runway would be extended to the southeast by 240 feet and to the northwest by 860 feet. Under both action alternatives, the runway extension and northern RSA would be located almost entirely on wetlands that would require filling. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A 4,400-foot runway would allow existing aircraft at Gnoss Field Airport to operate at maximum gross takeoff weight under hot weather and other adverse weather conditions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would require the acquisition of 0.1 acre of undeveloped land, enclose 13 additional acres of the 3,875-acre floodplain behind the airport levee, impact 11.8 acres of wetlands, and remove 22.9 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 6.9 acres of permanent habitat loss and 16.1 acres of temporary habitat loss. Alternative D would require acquisition of 3.7 acres of undeveloped land, enclose 15 additional acres of the floodplain, impact 12.7 acres of wetlands, and remove 26.7 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 8.2 acres of permanent habitat loss and 18.4 acres of temporary habitat loss. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110410, Draft EIS--368 pages, Appendices--1,209 pages, December 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 50 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928981439?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Brisbane, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 74 of 74] T2 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 928981435; 15166-0_0074 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of an existing runway at Gnoss Field Airport, a general aviation airport located adjacent to the city of Novato, Marin County, California is proposed. Gnoss Field is a reliever airport owned and operated by the county and serves as an essential regional transportation resource by providing general aviation facilities in the northern portion of the San Francisco Bay area. Most of the aircraft served are single-engine propeller aircraft, but there are also twin-engine propeller and business jet aircraft. The airport is built in an area of reclaimed salt water tidal marshlands that are part of the formerly extensive salt marshes present around the northwest corner of San Pablo Bay, characterized by muds and clays found in marshes, swamps, and waterways. The area comprises an element of the extensive wetlands associated with San Francisco Bay, which once formed the largest contiguous tidal marsh system present on the Pacific Coast of North America. Gnoss Field lies within the original flood plain of the Petaluma River at sea level. The current 3,300-foot single runway at Gnoss Field requires pilots to restrict the weight of the aircraft well below what the aircraft could accommodate, which is done by either reducing fuel or by reducing passengers and/or cargo. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action (Alternative B) would involve extending Runway 13/31 to the northwest by 1,100 feet while maintaining its current 75-foot width and making corresponding changes to taxiways, runway safety areas (RSAs), drainage channels, and levees. Additionally, in order for the extended runway to become operational, the Federal Aviation Administration would need to develop air traffic control and airspace management procedures that affect the safe and efficient movement of air traffic to and from the runway. Such actions could include the establishment or modification of flight procedures and the installation and/or relocation of navigational aids. Under Alternative D, the runway would be extended to the southeast by 240 feet and to the northwest by 860 feet. Under both action alternatives, the runway extension and northern RSA would be located almost entirely on wetlands that would require filling. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A 4,400-foot runway would allow existing aircraft at Gnoss Field Airport to operate at maximum gross takeoff weight under hot weather and other adverse weather conditions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would require the acquisition of 0.1 acre of undeveloped land, enclose 13 additional acres of the 3,875-acre floodplain behind the airport levee, impact 11.8 acres of wetlands, and remove 22.9 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 6.9 acres of permanent habitat loss and 16.1 acres of temporary habitat loss. Alternative D would require acquisition of 3.7 acres of undeveloped land, enclose 15 additional acres of the floodplain, impact 12.7 acres of wetlands, and remove 26.7 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 8.2 acres of permanent habitat loss and 18.4 acres of temporary habitat loss. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110410, Draft EIS--368 pages, Appendices--1,209 pages, December 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 74 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928981435?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Brisbane, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 49 of 74] T2 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 928981421; 15166-0_0049 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of an existing runway at Gnoss Field Airport, a general aviation airport located adjacent to the city of Novato, Marin County, California is proposed. Gnoss Field is a reliever airport owned and operated by the county and serves as an essential regional transportation resource by providing general aviation facilities in the northern portion of the San Francisco Bay area. Most of the aircraft served are single-engine propeller aircraft, but there are also twin-engine propeller and business jet aircraft. The airport is built in an area of reclaimed salt water tidal marshlands that are part of the formerly extensive salt marshes present around the northwest corner of San Pablo Bay, characterized by muds and clays found in marshes, swamps, and waterways. The area comprises an element of the extensive wetlands associated with San Francisco Bay, which once formed the largest contiguous tidal marsh system present on the Pacific Coast of North America. Gnoss Field lies within the original flood plain of the Petaluma River at sea level. The current 3,300-foot single runway at Gnoss Field requires pilots to restrict the weight of the aircraft well below what the aircraft could accommodate, which is done by either reducing fuel or by reducing passengers and/or cargo. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action (Alternative B) would involve extending Runway 13/31 to the northwest by 1,100 feet while maintaining its current 75-foot width and making corresponding changes to taxiways, runway safety areas (RSAs), drainage channels, and levees. Additionally, in order for the extended runway to become operational, the Federal Aviation Administration would need to develop air traffic control and airspace management procedures that affect the safe and efficient movement of air traffic to and from the runway. Such actions could include the establishment or modification of flight procedures and the installation and/or relocation of navigational aids. Under Alternative D, the runway would be extended to the southeast by 240 feet and to the northwest by 860 feet. Under both action alternatives, the runway extension and northern RSA would be located almost entirely on wetlands that would require filling. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A 4,400-foot runway would allow existing aircraft at Gnoss Field Airport to operate at maximum gross takeoff weight under hot weather and other adverse weather conditions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would require the acquisition of 0.1 acre of undeveloped land, enclose 13 additional acres of the 3,875-acre floodplain behind the airport levee, impact 11.8 acres of wetlands, and remove 22.9 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 6.9 acres of permanent habitat loss and 16.1 acres of temporary habitat loss. Alternative D would require acquisition of 3.7 acres of undeveloped land, enclose 15 additional acres of the floodplain, impact 12.7 acres of wetlands, and remove 26.7 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 8.2 acres of permanent habitat loss and 18.4 acres of temporary habitat loss. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110410, Draft EIS--368 pages, Appendices--1,209 pages, December 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 49 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928981421?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Brisbane, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 48 of 74] T2 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 928981420; 15166-0_0048 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of an existing runway at Gnoss Field Airport, a general aviation airport located adjacent to the city of Novato, Marin County, California is proposed. Gnoss Field is a reliever airport owned and operated by the county and serves as an essential regional transportation resource by providing general aviation facilities in the northern portion of the San Francisco Bay area. Most of the aircraft served are single-engine propeller aircraft, but there are also twin-engine propeller and business jet aircraft. The airport is built in an area of reclaimed salt water tidal marshlands that are part of the formerly extensive salt marshes present around the northwest corner of San Pablo Bay, characterized by muds and clays found in marshes, swamps, and waterways. The area comprises an element of the extensive wetlands associated with San Francisco Bay, which once formed the largest contiguous tidal marsh system present on the Pacific Coast of North America. Gnoss Field lies within the original flood plain of the Petaluma River at sea level. The current 3,300-foot single runway at Gnoss Field requires pilots to restrict the weight of the aircraft well below what the aircraft could accommodate, which is done by either reducing fuel or by reducing passengers and/or cargo. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action (Alternative B) would involve extending Runway 13/31 to the northwest by 1,100 feet while maintaining its current 75-foot width and making corresponding changes to taxiways, runway safety areas (RSAs), drainage channels, and levees. Additionally, in order for the extended runway to become operational, the Federal Aviation Administration would need to develop air traffic control and airspace management procedures that affect the safe and efficient movement of air traffic to and from the runway. Such actions could include the establishment or modification of flight procedures and the installation and/or relocation of navigational aids. Under Alternative D, the runway would be extended to the southeast by 240 feet and to the northwest by 860 feet. Under both action alternatives, the runway extension and northern RSA would be located almost entirely on wetlands that would require filling. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A 4,400-foot runway would allow existing aircraft at Gnoss Field Airport to operate at maximum gross takeoff weight under hot weather and other adverse weather conditions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would require the acquisition of 0.1 acre of undeveloped land, enclose 13 additional acres of the 3,875-acre floodplain behind the airport levee, impact 11.8 acres of wetlands, and remove 22.9 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 6.9 acres of permanent habitat loss and 16.1 acres of temporary habitat loss. Alternative D would require acquisition of 3.7 acres of undeveloped land, enclose 15 additional acres of the floodplain, impact 12.7 acres of wetlands, and remove 26.7 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 8.2 acres of permanent habitat loss and 18.4 acres of temporary habitat loss. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110410, Draft EIS--368 pages, Appendices--1,209 pages, December 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 48 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928981420?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Brisbane, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 68 of 74] T2 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 928981241; 15166-0_0068 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of an existing runway at Gnoss Field Airport, a general aviation airport located adjacent to the city of Novato, Marin County, California is proposed. Gnoss Field is a reliever airport owned and operated by the county and serves as an essential regional transportation resource by providing general aviation facilities in the northern portion of the San Francisco Bay area. Most of the aircraft served are single-engine propeller aircraft, but there are also twin-engine propeller and business jet aircraft. The airport is built in an area of reclaimed salt water tidal marshlands that are part of the formerly extensive salt marshes present around the northwest corner of San Pablo Bay, characterized by muds and clays found in marshes, swamps, and waterways. The area comprises an element of the extensive wetlands associated with San Francisco Bay, which once formed the largest contiguous tidal marsh system present on the Pacific Coast of North America. Gnoss Field lies within the original flood plain of the Petaluma River at sea level. The current 3,300-foot single runway at Gnoss Field requires pilots to restrict the weight of the aircraft well below what the aircraft could accommodate, which is done by either reducing fuel or by reducing passengers and/or cargo. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action (Alternative B) would involve extending Runway 13/31 to the northwest by 1,100 feet while maintaining its current 75-foot width and making corresponding changes to taxiways, runway safety areas (RSAs), drainage channels, and levees. Additionally, in order for the extended runway to become operational, the Federal Aviation Administration would need to develop air traffic control and airspace management procedures that affect the safe and efficient movement of air traffic to and from the runway. Such actions could include the establishment or modification of flight procedures and the installation and/or relocation of navigational aids. Under Alternative D, the runway would be extended to the southeast by 240 feet and to the northwest by 860 feet. Under both action alternatives, the runway extension and northern RSA would be located almost entirely on wetlands that would require filling. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A 4,400-foot runway would allow existing aircraft at Gnoss Field Airport to operate at maximum gross takeoff weight under hot weather and other adverse weather conditions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would require the acquisition of 0.1 acre of undeveloped land, enclose 13 additional acres of the 3,875-acre floodplain behind the airport levee, impact 11.8 acres of wetlands, and remove 22.9 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 6.9 acres of permanent habitat loss and 16.1 acres of temporary habitat loss. Alternative D would require acquisition of 3.7 acres of undeveloped land, enclose 15 additional acres of the floodplain, impact 12.7 acres of wetlands, and remove 26.7 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 8.2 acres of permanent habitat loss and 18.4 acres of temporary habitat loss. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110410, Draft EIS--368 pages, Appendices--1,209 pages, December 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 68 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928981241?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Brisbane, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 67 of 74] T2 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 928981229; 15166-0_0067 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of an existing runway at Gnoss Field Airport, a general aviation airport located adjacent to the city of Novato, Marin County, California is proposed. Gnoss Field is a reliever airport owned and operated by the county and serves as an essential regional transportation resource by providing general aviation facilities in the northern portion of the San Francisco Bay area. Most of the aircraft served are single-engine propeller aircraft, but there are also twin-engine propeller and business jet aircraft. The airport is built in an area of reclaimed salt water tidal marshlands that are part of the formerly extensive salt marshes present around the northwest corner of San Pablo Bay, characterized by muds and clays found in marshes, swamps, and waterways. The area comprises an element of the extensive wetlands associated with San Francisco Bay, which once formed the largest contiguous tidal marsh system present on the Pacific Coast of North America. Gnoss Field lies within the original flood plain of the Petaluma River at sea level. The current 3,300-foot single runway at Gnoss Field requires pilots to restrict the weight of the aircraft well below what the aircraft could accommodate, which is done by either reducing fuel or by reducing passengers and/or cargo. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action (Alternative B) would involve extending Runway 13/31 to the northwest by 1,100 feet while maintaining its current 75-foot width and making corresponding changes to taxiways, runway safety areas (RSAs), drainage channels, and levees. Additionally, in order for the extended runway to become operational, the Federal Aviation Administration would need to develop air traffic control and airspace management procedures that affect the safe and efficient movement of air traffic to and from the runway. Such actions could include the establishment or modification of flight procedures and the installation and/or relocation of navigational aids. Under Alternative D, the runway would be extended to the southeast by 240 feet and to the northwest by 860 feet. Under both action alternatives, the runway extension and northern RSA would be located almost entirely on wetlands that would require filling. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A 4,400-foot runway would allow existing aircraft at Gnoss Field Airport to operate at maximum gross takeoff weight under hot weather and other adverse weather conditions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would require the acquisition of 0.1 acre of undeveloped land, enclose 13 additional acres of the 3,875-acre floodplain behind the airport levee, impact 11.8 acres of wetlands, and remove 22.9 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 6.9 acres of permanent habitat loss and 16.1 acres of temporary habitat loss. Alternative D would require acquisition of 3.7 acres of undeveloped land, enclose 15 additional acres of the floodplain, impact 12.7 acres of wetlands, and remove 26.7 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 8.2 acres of permanent habitat loss and 18.4 acres of temporary habitat loss. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110410, Draft EIS--368 pages, Appendices--1,209 pages, December 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 67 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928981229?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Brisbane, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 66 of 74] T2 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 928981216; 15166-0_0066 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of an existing runway at Gnoss Field Airport, a general aviation airport located adjacent to the city of Novato, Marin County, California is proposed. Gnoss Field is a reliever airport owned and operated by the county and serves as an essential regional transportation resource by providing general aviation facilities in the northern portion of the San Francisco Bay area. Most of the aircraft served are single-engine propeller aircraft, but there are also twin-engine propeller and business jet aircraft. The airport is built in an area of reclaimed salt water tidal marshlands that are part of the formerly extensive salt marshes present around the northwest corner of San Pablo Bay, characterized by muds and clays found in marshes, swamps, and waterways. The area comprises an element of the extensive wetlands associated with San Francisco Bay, which once formed the largest contiguous tidal marsh system present on the Pacific Coast of North America. Gnoss Field lies within the original flood plain of the Petaluma River at sea level. The current 3,300-foot single runway at Gnoss Field requires pilots to restrict the weight of the aircraft well below what the aircraft could accommodate, which is done by either reducing fuel or by reducing passengers and/or cargo. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action (Alternative B) would involve extending Runway 13/31 to the northwest by 1,100 feet while maintaining its current 75-foot width and making corresponding changes to taxiways, runway safety areas (RSAs), drainage channels, and levees. Additionally, in order for the extended runway to become operational, the Federal Aviation Administration would need to develop air traffic control and airspace management procedures that affect the safe and efficient movement of air traffic to and from the runway. Such actions could include the establishment or modification of flight procedures and the installation and/or relocation of navigational aids. Under Alternative D, the runway would be extended to the southeast by 240 feet and to the northwest by 860 feet. Under both action alternatives, the runway extension and northern RSA would be located almost entirely on wetlands that would require filling. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A 4,400-foot runway would allow existing aircraft at Gnoss Field Airport to operate at maximum gross takeoff weight under hot weather and other adverse weather conditions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would require the acquisition of 0.1 acre of undeveloped land, enclose 13 additional acres of the 3,875-acre floodplain behind the airport levee, impact 11.8 acres of wetlands, and remove 22.9 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 6.9 acres of permanent habitat loss and 16.1 acres of temporary habitat loss. Alternative D would require acquisition of 3.7 acres of undeveloped land, enclose 15 additional acres of the floodplain, impact 12.7 acres of wetlands, and remove 26.7 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 8.2 acres of permanent habitat loss and 18.4 acres of temporary habitat loss. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110410, Draft EIS--368 pages, Appendices--1,209 pages, December 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 66 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928981216?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Brisbane, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 65 of 74] T2 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 928981202; 15166-0_0065 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of an existing runway at Gnoss Field Airport, a general aviation airport located adjacent to the city of Novato, Marin County, California is proposed. Gnoss Field is a reliever airport owned and operated by the county and serves as an essential regional transportation resource by providing general aviation facilities in the northern portion of the San Francisco Bay area. Most of the aircraft served are single-engine propeller aircraft, but there are also twin-engine propeller and business jet aircraft. The airport is built in an area of reclaimed salt water tidal marshlands that are part of the formerly extensive salt marshes present around the northwest corner of San Pablo Bay, characterized by muds and clays found in marshes, swamps, and waterways. The area comprises an element of the extensive wetlands associated with San Francisco Bay, which once formed the largest contiguous tidal marsh system present on the Pacific Coast of North America. Gnoss Field lies within the original flood plain of the Petaluma River at sea level. The current 3,300-foot single runway at Gnoss Field requires pilots to restrict the weight of the aircraft well below what the aircraft could accommodate, which is done by either reducing fuel or by reducing passengers and/or cargo. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action (Alternative B) would involve extending Runway 13/31 to the northwest by 1,100 feet while maintaining its current 75-foot width and making corresponding changes to taxiways, runway safety areas (RSAs), drainage channels, and levees. Additionally, in order for the extended runway to become operational, the Federal Aviation Administration would need to develop air traffic control and airspace management procedures that affect the safe and efficient movement of air traffic to and from the runway. Such actions could include the establishment or modification of flight procedures and the installation and/or relocation of navigational aids. Under Alternative D, the runway would be extended to the southeast by 240 feet and to the northwest by 860 feet. Under both action alternatives, the runway extension and northern RSA would be located almost entirely on wetlands that would require filling. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A 4,400-foot runway would allow existing aircraft at Gnoss Field Airport to operate at maximum gross takeoff weight under hot weather and other adverse weather conditions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would require the acquisition of 0.1 acre of undeveloped land, enclose 13 additional acres of the 3,875-acre floodplain behind the airport levee, impact 11.8 acres of wetlands, and remove 22.9 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 6.9 acres of permanent habitat loss and 16.1 acres of temporary habitat loss. Alternative D would require acquisition of 3.7 acres of undeveloped land, enclose 15 additional acres of the floodplain, impact 12.7 acres of wetlands, and remove 26.7 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 8.2 acres of permanent habitat loss and 18.4 acres of temporary habitat loss. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110410, Draft EIS--368 pages, Appendices--1,209 pages, December 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 65 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928981202?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Brisbane, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 64 of 74] T2 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 928981190; 15166-0_0064 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of an existing runway at Gnoss Field Airport, a general aviation airport located adjacent to the city of Novato, Marin County, California is proposed. Gnoss Field is a reliever airport owned and operated by the county and serves as an essential regional transportation resource by providing general aviation facilities in the northern portion of the San Francisco Bay area. Most of the aircraft served are single-engine propeller aircraft, but there are also twin-engine propeller and business jet aircraft. The airport is built in an area of reclaimed salt water tidal marshlands that are part of the formerly extensive salt marshes present around the northwest corner of San Pablo Bay, characterized by muds and clays found in marshes, swamps, and waterways. The area comprises an element of the extensive wetlands associated with San Francisco Bay, which once formed the largest contiguous tidal marsh system present on the Pacific Coast of North America. Gnoss Field lies within the original flood plain of the Petaluma River at sea level. The current 3,300-foot single runway at Gnoss Field requires pilots to restrict the weight of the aircraft well below what the aircraft could accommodate, which is done by either reducing fuel or by reducing passengers and/or cargo. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action (Alternative B) would involve extending Runway 13/31 to the northwest by 1,100 feet while maintaining its current 75-foot width and making corresponding changes to taxiways, runway safety areas (RSAs), drainage channels, and levees. Additionally, in order for the extended runway to become operational, the Federal Aviation Administration would need to develop air traffic control and airspace management procedures that affect the safe and efficient movement of air traffic to and from the runway. Such actions could include the establishment or modification of flight procedures and the installation and/or relocation of navigational aids. Under Alternative D, the runway would be extended to the southeast by 240 feet and to the northwest by 860 feet. Under both action alternatives, the runway extension and northern RSA would be located almost entirely on wetlands that would require filling. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A 4,400-foot runway would allow existing aircraft at Gnoss Field Airport to operate at maximum gross takeoff weight under hot weather and other adverse weather conditions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would require the acquisition of 0.1 acre of undeveloped land, enclose 13 additional acres of the 3,875-acre floodplain behind the airport levee, impact 11.8 acres of wetlands, and remove 22.9 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 6.9 acres of permanent habitat loss and 16.1 acres of temporary habitat loss. Alternative D would require acquisition of 3.7 acres of undeveloped land, enclose 15 additional acres of the floodplain, impact 12.7 acres of wetlands, and remove 26.7 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 8.2 acres of permanent habitat loss and 18.4 acres of temporary habitat loss. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110410, Draft EIS--368 pages, Appendices--1,209 pages, December 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 64 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928981190?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Brisbane, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 60 of 74] T2 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 928981175; 15166-0_0060 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of an existing runway at Gnoss Field Airport, a general aviation airport located adjacent to the city of Novato, Marin County, California is proposed. Gnoss Field is a reliever airport owned and operated by the county and serves as an essential regional transportation resource by providing general aviation facilities in the northern portion of the San Francisco Bay area. Most of the aircraft served are single-engine propeller aircraft, but there are also twin-engine propeller and business jet aircraft. The airport is built in an area of reclaimed salt water tidal marshlands that are part of the formerly extensive salt marshes present around the northwest corner of San Pablo Bay, characterized by muds and clays found in marshes, swamps, and waterways. The area comprises an element of the extensive wetlands associated with San Francisco Bay, which once formed the largest contiguous tidal marsh system present on the Pacific Coast of North America. Gnoss Field lies within the original flood plain of the Petaluma River at sea level. The current 3,300-foot single runway at Gnoss Field requires pilots to restrict the weight of the aircraft well below what the aircraft could accommodate, which is done by either reducing fuel or by reducing passengers and/or cargo. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action (Alternative B) would involve extending Runway 13/31 to the northwest by 1,100 feet while maintaining its current 75-foot width and making corresponding changes to taxiways, runway safety areas (RSAs), drainage channels, and levees. Additionally, in order for the extended runway to become operational, the Federal Aviation Administration would need to develop air traffic control and airspace management procedures that affect the safe and efficient movement of air traffic to and from the runway. Such actions could include the establishment or modification of flight procedures and the installation and/or relocation of navigational aids. Under Alternative D, the runway would be extended to the southeast by 240 feet and to the northwest by 860 feet. Under both action alternatives, the runway extension and northern RSA would be located almost entirely on wetlands that would require filling. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A 4,400-foot runway would allow existing aircraft at Gnoss Field Airport to operate at maximum gross takeoff weight under hot weather and other adverse weather conditions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would require the acquisition of 0.1 acre of undeveloped land, enclose 13 additional acres of the 3,875-acre floodplain behind the airport levee, impact 11.8 acres of wetlands, and remove 22.9 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 6.9 acres of permanent habitat loss and 16.1 acres of temporary habitat loss. Alternative D would require acquisition of 3.7 acres of undeveloped land, enclose 15 additional acres of the floodplain, impact 12.7 acres of wetlands, and remove 26.7 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 8.2 acres of permanent habitat loss and 18.4 acres of temporary habitat loss. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110410, Draft EIS--368 pages, Appendices--1,209 pages, December 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 60 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928981175?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Brisbane, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 59 of 74] T2 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 928981164; 15166-0_0059 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of an existing runway at Gnoss Field Airport, a general aviation airport located adjacent to the city of Novato, Marin County, California is proposed. Gnoss Field is a reliever airport owned and operated by the county and serves as an essential regional transportation resource by providing general aviation facilities in the northern portion of the San Francisco Bay area. Most of the aircraft served are single-engine propeller aircraft, but there are also twin-engine propeller and business jet aircraft. The airport is built in an area of reclaimed salt water tidal marshlands that are part of the formerly extensive salt marshes present around the northwest corner of San Pablo Bay, characterized by muds and clays found in marshes, swamps, and waterways. The area comprises an element of the extensive wetlands associated with San Francisco Bay, which once formed the largest contiguous tidal marsh system present on the Pacific Coast of North America. Gnoss Field lies within the original flood plain of the Petaluma River at sea level. The current 3,300-foot single runway at Gnoss Field requires pilots to restrict the weight of the aircraft well below what the aircraft could accommodate, which is done by either reducing fuel or by reducing passengers and/or cargo. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action (Alternative B) would involve extending Runway 13/31 to the northwest by 1,100 feet while maintaining its current 75-foot width and making corresponding changes to taxiways, runway safety areas (RSAs), drainage channels, and levees. Additionally, in order for the extended runway to become operational, the Federal Aviation Administration would need to develop air traffic control and airspace management procedures that affect the safe and efficient movement of air traffic to and from the runway. Such actions could include the establishment or modification of flight procedures and the installation and/or relocation of navigational aids. Under Alternative D, the runway would be extended to the southeast by 240 feet and to the northwest by 860 feet. Under both action alternatives, the runway extension and northern RSA would be located almost entirely on wetlands that would require filling. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A 4,400-foot runway would allow existing aircraft at Gnoss Field Airport to operate at maximum gross takeoff weight under hot weather and other adverse weather conditions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would require the acquisition of 0.1 acre of undeveloped land, enclose 13 additional acres of the 3,875-acre floodplain behind the airport levee, impact 11.8 acres of wetlands, and remove 22.9 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 6.9 acres of permanent habitat loss and 16.1 acres of temporary habitat loss. Alternative D would require acquisition of 3.7 acres of undeveloped land, enclose 15 additional acres of the floodplain, impact 12.7 acres of wetlands, and remove 26.7 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 8.2 acres of permanent habitat loss and 18.4 acres of temporary habitat loss. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110410, Draft EIS--368 pages, Appendices--1,209 pages, December 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 59 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928981164?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Brisbane, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 58 of 74] T2 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 928981153; 15166-0_0058 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of an existing runway at Gnoss Field Airport, a general aviation airport located adjacent to the city of Novato, Marin County, California is proposed. Gnoss Field is a reliever airport owned and operated by the county and serves as an essential regional transportation resource by providing general aviation facilities in the northern portion of the San Francisco Bay area. Most of the aircraft served are single-engine propeller aircraft, but there are also twin-engine propeller and business jet aircraft. The airport is built in an area of reclaimed salt water tidal marshlands that are part of the formerly extensive salt marshes present around the northwest corner of San Pablo Bay, characterized by muds and clays found in marshes, swamps, and waterways. The area comprises an element of the extensive wetlands associated with San Francisco Bay, which once formed the largest contiguous tidal marsh system present on the Pacific Coast of North America. Gnoss Field lies within the original flood plain of the Petaluma River at sea level. The current 3,300-foot single runway at Gnoss Field requires pilots to restrict the weight of the aircraft well below what the aircraft could accommodate, which is done by either reducing fuel or by reducing passengers and/or cargo. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action (Alternative B) would involve extending Runway 13/31 to the northwest by 1,100 feet while maintaining its current 75-foot width and making corresponding changes to taxiways, runway safety areas (RSAs), drainage channels, and levees. Additionally, in order for the extended runway to become operational, the Federal Aviation Administration would need to develop air traffic control and airspace management procedures that affect the safe and efficient movement of air traffic to and from the runway. Such actions could include the establishment or modification of flight procedures and the installation and/or relocation of navigational aids. Under Alternative D, the runway would be extended to the southeast by 240 feet and to the northwest by 860 feet. Under both action alternatives, the runway extension and northern RSA would be located almost entirely on wetlands that would require filling. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A 4,400-foot runway would allow existing aircraft at Gnoss Field Airport to operate at maximum gross takeoff weight under hot weather and other adverse weather conditions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would require the acquisition of 0.1 acre of undeveloped land, enclose 13 additional acres of the 3,875-acre floodplain behind the airport levee, impact 11.8 acres of wetlands, and remove 22.9 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 6.9 acres of permanent habitat loss and 16.1 acres of temporary habitat loss. Alternative D would require acquisition of 3.7 acres of undeveloped land, enclose 15 additional acres of the floodplain, impact 12.7 acres of wetlands, and remove 26.7 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 8.2 acres of permanent habitat loss and 18.4 acres of temporary habitat loss. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110410, Draft EIS--368 pages, Appendices--1,209 pages, December 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 58 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928981153?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Brisbane, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 57 of 74] T2 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 928981138; 15166-0_0057 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of an existing runway at Gnoss Field Airport, a general aviation airport located adjacent to the city of Novato, Marin County, California is proposed. Gnoss Field is a reliever airport owned and operated by the county and serves as an essential regional transportation resource by providing general aviation facilities in the northern portion of the San Francisco Bay area. Most of the aircraft served are single-engine propeller aircraft, but there are also twin-engine propeller and business jet aircraft. The airport is built in an area of reclaimed salt water tidal marshlands that are part of the formerly extensive salt marshes present around the northwest corner of San Pablo Bay, characterized by muds and clays found in marshes, swamps, and waterways. The area comprises an element of the extensive wetlands associated with San Francisco Bay, which once formed the largest contiguous tidal marsh system present on the Pacific Coast of North America. Gnoss Field lies within the original flood plain of the Petaluma River at sea level. The current 3,300-foot single runway at Gnoss Field requires pilots to restrict the weight of the aircraft well below what the aircraft could accommodate, which is done by either reducing fuel or by reducing passengers and/or cargo. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action (Alternative B) would involve extending Runway 13/31 to the northwest by 1,100 feet while maintaining its current 75-foot width and making corresponding changes to taxiways, runway safety areas (RSAs), drainage channels, and levees. Additionally, in order for the extended runway to become operational, the Federal Aviation Administration would need to develop air traffic control and airspace management procedures that affect the safe and efficient movement of air traffic to and from the runway. Such actions could include the establishment or modification of flight procedures and the installation and/or relocation of navigational aids. Under Alternative D, the runway would be extended to the southeast by 240 feet and to the northwest by 860 feet. Under both action alternatives, the runway extension and northern RSA would be located almost entirely on wetlands that would require filling. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A 4,400-foot runway would allow existing aircraft at Gnoss Field Airport to operate at maximum gross takeoff weight under hot weather and other adverse weather conditions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would require the acquisition of 0.1 acre of undeveloped land, enclose 13 additional acres of the 3,875-acre floodplain behind the airport levee, impact 11.8 acres of wetlands, and remove 22.9 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 6.9 acres of permanent habitat loss and 16.1 acres of temporary habitat loss. Alternative D would require acquisition of 3.7 acres of undeveloped land, enclose 15 additional acres of the floodplain, impact 12.7 acres of wetlands, and remove 26.7 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 8.2 acres of permanent habitat loss and 18.4 acres of temporary habitat loss. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110410, Draft EIS--368 pages, Appendices--1,209 pages, December 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 57 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928981138?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Brisbane, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 55 of 74] T2 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 928981103; 15166-0_0055 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of an existing runway at Gnoss Field Airport, a general aviation airport located adjacent to the city of Novato, Marin County, California is proposed. Gnoss Field is a reliever airport owned and operated by the county and serves as an essential regional transportation resource by providing general aviation facilities in the northern portion of the San Francisco Bay area. Most of the aircraft served are single-engine propeller aircraft, but there are also twin-engine propeller and business jet aircraft. The airport is built in an area of reclaimed salt water tidal marshlands that are part of the formerly extensive salt marshes present around the northwest corner of San Pablo Bay, characterized by muds and clays found in marshes, swamps, and waterways. The area comprises an element of the extensive wetlands associated with San Francisco Bay, which once formed the largest contiguous tidal marsh system present on the Pacific Coast of North America. Gnoss Field lies within the original flood plain of the Petaluma River at sea level. The current 3,300-foot single runway at Gnoss Field requires pilots to restrict the weight of the aircraft well below what the aircraft could accommodate, which is done by either reducing fuel or by reducing passengers and/or cargo. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action (Alternative B) would involve extending Runway 13/31 to the northwest by 1,100 feet while maintaining its current 75-foot width and making corresponding changes to taxiways, runway safety areas (RSAs), drainage channels, and levees. Additionally, in order for the extended runway to become operational, the Federal Aviation Administration would need to develop air traffic control and airspace management procedures that affect the safe and efficient movement of air traffic to and from the runway. Such actions could include the establishment or modification of flight procedures and the installation and/or relocation of navigational aids. Under Alternative D, the runway would be extended to the southeast by 240 feet and to the northwest by 860 feet. Under both action alternatives, the runway extension and northern RSA would be located almost entirely on wetlands that would require filling. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A 4,400-foot runway would allow existing aircraft at Gnoss Field Airport to operate at maximum gross takeoff weight under hot weather and other adverse weather conditions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would require the acquisition of 0.1 acre of undeveloped land, enclose 13 additional acres of the 3,875-acre floodplain behind the airport levee, impact 11.8 acres of wetlands, and remove 22.9 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 6.9 acres of permanent habitat loss and 16.1 acres of temporary habitat loss. Alternative D would require acquisition of 3.7 acres of undeveloped land, enclose 15 additional acres of the floodplain, impact 12.7 acres of wetlands, and remove 26.7 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 8.2 acres of permanent habitat loss and 18.4 acres of temporary habitat loss. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110410, Draft EIS--368 pages, Appendices--1,209 pages, December 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 55 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928981103?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Brisbane, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 61 of 74] T2 - GNOSS FIELD AIRPORT, PROPOSED EXTENSION OF RUNWAY 13/31, MARIN COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 928980808; 15166-0_0061 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of an existing runway at Gnoss Field Airport, a general aviation airport located adjacent to the city of Novato, Marin County, California is proposed. Gnoss Field is a reliever airport owned and operated by the county and serves as an essential regional transportation resource by providing general aviation facilities in the northern portion of the San Francisco Bay area. Most of the aircraft served are single-engine propeller aircraft, but there are also twin-engine propeller and business jet aircraft. The airport is built in an area of reclaimed salt water tidal marshlands that are part of the formerly extensive salt marshes present around the northwest corner of San Pablo Bay, characterized by muds and clays found in marshes, swamps, and waterways. The area comprises an element of the extensive wetlands associated with San Francisco Bay, which once formed the largest contiguous tidal marsh system present on the Pacific Coast of North America. Gnoss Field lies within the original flood plain of the Petaluma River at sea level. The current 3,300-foot single runway at Gnoss Field requires pilots to restrict the weight of the aircraft well below what the aircraft could accommodate, which is done by either reducing fuel or by reducing passengers and/or cargo. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), are considered in this draft EIS. The proposed action (Alternative B) would involve extending Runway 13/31 to the northwest by 1,100 feet while maintaining its current 75-foot width and making corresponding changes to taxiways, runway safety areas (RSAs), drainage channels, and levees. Additionally, in order for the extended runway to become operational, the Federal Aviation Administration would need to develop air traffic control and airspace management procedures that affect the safe and efficient movement of air traffic to and from the runway. Such actions could include the establishment or modification of flight procedures and the installation and/or relocation of navigational aids. Under Alternative D, the runway would be extended to the southeast by 240 feet and to the northwest by 860 feet. Under both action alternatives, the runway extension and northern RSA would be located almost entirely on wetlands that would require filling. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A 4,400-foot runway would allow existing aircraft at Gnoss Field Airport to operate at maximum gross takeoff weight under hot weather and other adverse weather conditions. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the proposed action would require the acquisition of 0.1 acre of undeveloped land, enclose 13 additional acres of the 3,875-acre floodplain behind the airport levee, impact 11.8 acres of wetlands, and remove 22.9 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 6.9 acres of permanent habitat loss and 16.1 acres of temporary habitat loss. Alternative D would require acquisition of 3.7 acres of undeveloped land, enclose 15 additional acres of the floodplain, impact 12.7 acres of wetlands, and remove 26.7 acres of plant and wildlife habitat including 8.2 acres of permanent habitat loss and 18.4 acres of temporary habitat loss. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110410, Draft EIS--368 pages, Appendices--1,209 pages, December 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 61 KW - Air Transportation KW - Aircraft Noise KW - Airports KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Dikes KW - Drainage KW - Floodplains KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Navigation Aids KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/928980808?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=GNOSS+FIELD+AIRPORT%2C+PROPOSED+EXTENSION+OF+RUNWAY+13%2F31%2C+MARIN+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Brisbane, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-03-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE, ENTRY CONTROL RECONFIGURATION AND BASE PERIMETER FENCE RELOCATION IN AREA A, GREENE AND MONTGOMERY COUNTIES, OHIO. [Part 4 of 4] T2 - WRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE, ENTRY CONTROL RECONFIGURATION AND BASE PERIMETER FENCE RELOCATION IN AREA A, GREENE AND MONTGOMERY COUNTIES, OHIO. AN - 921422340; 15158-2_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The reconfiguration and relocation of entry control facilities (ECFs) and the base perimeter fence at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base (WPAFB), Greene and Montgomery counties, Ohio are proposed. WPAFB is located 10 miles east of the city of Dayton and encompasses 8,145 acres classified as non-industrial with mixed development. The base is subdivided into two areas: Area A, which consists primarily of administrative offices and an active airfield; and Area B, which consists primarily of research and development facilities and is located across State Route (SR) 444 to the southwest of Area A. The unsecured corridor of SR 444 that currently bisects the base between Area A and the Kittyhawk Center comes within 60 feet of buildings on WPAFB, which is less than the minimum standoff distance under current anti-terrorism standards. In addition, the nine existing ECFs for Area A create multiple high volume traffic entry points, thereby reducing traffic safety. This EIS evaluates the proposed action, a No Action Alternative, and one action alternative (Alternative A). Under the proposed action, the nine public access gates would be consolidated to three gates. Gates 1A and 26A would be relocated and designed to allow for security improvement and greater traffic flow. Gate 15A would be expanded and redesigned to meet security guidelines and increases in traffic flow. Gates 8A, 9A, 12A, 16A, 38A, and 39A would no longer serve as regularly used ECFs. Alternative A would involve enclosing the Kittyhawk Center within Area A by extending the base perimeter fence across SR 444 at existing Gate 9A, along the eastern border of SR 444 up to the Kittyhawk Center fence, and then again across SR 444 north of existing Gate 39A at Redwood Street to tie in to the main fence on the west side of SR 444. Cabled fence with a gate, temporary guard shack, and utility connections at the north end would be constructed. The southern end of the Kittyhawk Center at SR 444 would have fencing making the Kittyhawk Center contiguous with Area A. Gate 1A would remain as is and not be relocated. Existing Gate 9A would remain open and unmanned and be accessible from the south. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A smaller set of strategically-placed ECFs and a relocated perimeter would minimize the likelihood of mass casualties from terrorist attacks and would improve safety and reduce traffic congestion on WPAFB roads and at the gate approaches for local roads providing access to WPAFB. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would remove common vegetation and cause intermittent roadway closures. Culvert extensions would have a moderate impact on a tributary of Hebble Creek in the area of Gate 15A. Level of service would decrease on local streets as traffic diverts from the closure of a segment of SR 444. Vehicles and pedestrians traversing the railroad tracks at SR 444 and Kauffman Avenue and crossing Central Avenue to access Central Park would experience moderately increased risk to safety. Traffic noise levels would increase at: Dayton-Yellow Springs Road, Kauffman Avenue, Central Avenue, Dayton Drive, and Broad Street. JF - EPA number: 110402, Draft EIS--627 pages and maps, Cultural Resources Survey--323 pages, December 2, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 4 KW - Defense Programs KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Ohio KW - Wright-Patterson Air Force Base UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/921422340?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WRIGHT-PATTERSON+AIR+FORCE+BASE%2C+ENTRY+CONTROL+RECONFIGURATION+AND+BASE+PERIMETER+FENCE+RELOCATION+IN+AREA+A%2C+GREENE+AND+MONTGOMERY+COUNTIES%2C+OHIO.&rft.title=WRIGHT-PATTERSON+AIR+FORCE+BASE%2C+ENTRY+CONTROL+RECONFIGURATION+AND+BASE+PERIMETER+FENCE+RELOCATION+IN+AREA+A%2C+GREENE+AND+MONTGOMERY+COUNTIES%2C+OHIO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, 88th Air Base Wing, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio; AF N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 2, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-02-15 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE, ENTRY CONTROL RECONFIGURATION AND BASE PERIMETER FENCE RELOCATION IN AREA A, GREENE AND MONTGOMERY COUNTIES, OHIO. [Part 3 of 4] T2 - WRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE, ENTRY CONTROL RECONFIGURATION AND BASE PERIMETER FENCE RELOCATION IN AREA A, GREENE AND MONTGOMERY COUNTIES, OHIO. AN - 921422335; 15158-2_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The reconfiguration and relocation of entry control facilities (ECFs) and the base perimeter fence at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base (WPAFB), Greene and Montgomery counties, Ohio are proposed. WPAFB is located 10 miles east of the city of Dayton and encompasses 8,145 acres classified as non-industrial with mixed development. The base is subdivided into two areas: Area A, which consists primarily of administrative offices and an active airfield; and Area B, which consists primarily of research and development facilities and is located across State Route (SR) 444 to the southwest of Area A. The unsecured corridor of SR 444 that currently bisects the base between Area A and the Kittyhawk Center comes within 60 feet of buildings on WPAFB, which is less than the minimum standoff distance under current anti-terrorism standards. In addition, the nine existing ECFs for Area A create multiple high volume traffic entry points, thereby reducing traffic safety. This EIS evaluates the proposed action, a No Action Alternative, and one action alternative (Alternative A). Under the proposed action, the nine public access gates would be consolidated to three gates. Gates 1A and 26A would be relocated and designed to allow for security improvement and greater traffic flow. Gate 15A would be expanded and redesigned to meet security guidelines and increases in traffic flow. Gates 8A, 9A, 12A, 16A, 38A, and 39A would no longer serve as regularly used ECFs. Alternative A would involve enclosing the Kittyhawk Center within Area A by extending the base perimeter fence across SR 444 at existing Gate 9A, along the eastern border of SR 444 up to the Kittyhawk Center fence, and then again across SR 444 north of existing Gate 39A at Redwood Street to tie in to the main fence on the west side of SR 444. Cabled fence with a gate, temporary guard shack, and utility connections at the north end would be constructed. The southern end of the Kittyhawk Center at SR 444 would have fencing making the Kittyhawk Center contiguous with Area A. Gate 1A would remain as is and not be relocated. Existing Gate 9A would remain open and unmanned and be accessible from the south. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A smaller set of strategically-placed ECFs and a relocated perimeter would minimize the likelihood of mass casualties from terrorist attacks and would improve safety and reduce traffic congestion on WPAFB roads and at the gate approaches for local roads providing access to WPAFB. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would remove common vegetation and cause intermittent roadway closures. Culvert extensions would have a moderate impact on a tributary of Hebble Creek in the area of Gate 15A. Level of service would decrease on local streets as traffic diverts from the closure of a segment of SR 444. Vehicles and pedestrians traversing the railroad tracks at SR 444 and Kauffman Avenue and crossing Central Avenue to access Central Park would experience moderately increased risk to safety. Traffic noise levels would increase at: Dayton-Yellow Springs Road, Kauffman Avenue, Central Avenue, Dayton Drive, and Broad Street. JF - EPA number: 110402, Draft EIS--627 pages and maps, Cultural Resources Survey--323 pages, December 2, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 3 KW - Defense Programs KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Ohio KW - Wright-Patterson Air Force Base UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/921422335?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WRIGHT-PATTERSON+AIR+FORCE+BASE%2C+ENTRY+CONTROL+RECONFIGURATION+AND+BASE+PERIMETER+FENCE+RELOCATION+IN+AREA+A%2C+GREENE+AND+MONTGOMERY+COUNTIES%2C+OHIO.&rft.title=WRIGHT-PATTERSON+AIR+FORCE+BASE%2C+ENTRY+CONTROL+RECONFIGURATION+AND+BASE+PERIMETER+FENCE+RELOCATION+IN+AREA+A%2C+GREENE+AND+MONTGOMERY+COUNTIES%2C+OHIO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, 88th Air Base Wing, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio; AF N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 2, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-02-15 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE, ENTRY CONTROL RECONFIGURATION AND BASE PERIMETER FENCE RELOCATION IN AREA A, GREENE AND MONTGOMERY COUNTIES, OHIO. [Part 2 of 4] T2 - WRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE, ENTRY CONTROL RECONFIGURATION AND BASE PERIMETER FENCE RELOCATION IN AREA A, GREENE AND MONTGOMERY COUNTIES, OHIO. AN - 921422333; 15158-2_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The reconfiguration and relocation of entry control facilities (ECFs) and the base perimeter fence at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base (WPAFB), Greene and Montgomery counties, Ohio are proposed. WPAFB is located 10 miles east of the city of Dayton and encompasses 8,145 acres classified as non-industrial with mixed development. The base is subdivided into two areas: Area A, which consists primarily of administrative offices and an active airfield; and Area B, which consists primarily of research and development facilities and is located across State Route (SR) 444 to the southwest of Area A. The unsecured corridor of SR 444 that currently bisects the base between Area A and the Kittyhawk Center comes within 60 feet of buildings on WPAFB, which is less than the minimum standoff distance under current anti-terrorism standards. In addition, the nine existing ECFs for Area A create multiple high volume traffic entry points, thereby reducing traffic safety. This EIS evaluates the proposed action, a No Action Alternative, and one action alternative (Alternative A). Under the proposed action, the nine public access gates would be consolidated to three gates. Gates 1A and 26A would be relocated and designed to allow for security improvement and greater traffic flow. Gate 15A would be expanded and redesigned to meet security guidelines and increases in traffic flow. Gates 8A, 9A, 12A, 16A, 38A, and 39A would no longer serve as regularly used ECFs. Alternative A would involve enclosing the Kittyhawk Center within Area A by extending the base perimeter fence across SR 444 at existing Gate 9A, along the eastern border of SR 444 up to the Kittyhawk Center fence, and then again across SR 444 north of existing Gate 39A at Redwood Street to tie in to the main fence on the west side of SR 444. Cabled fence with a gate, temporary guard shack, and utility connections at the north end would be constructed. The southern end of the Kittyhawk Center at SR 444 would have fencing making the Kittyhawk Center contiguous with Area A. Gate 1A would remain as is and not be relocated. Existing Gate 9A would remain open and unmanned and be accessible from the south. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A smaller set of strategically-placed ECFs and a relocated perimeter would minimize the likelihood of mass casualties from terrorist attacks and would improve safety and reduce traffic congestion on WPAFB roads and at the gate approaches for local roads providing access to WPAFB. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would remove common vegetation and cause intermittent roadway closures. Culvert extensions would have a moderate impact on a tributary of Hebble Creek in the area of Gate 15A. Level of service would decrease on local streets as traffic diverts from the closure of a segment of SR 444. Vehicles and pedestrians traversing the railroad tracks at SR 444 and Kauffman Avenue and crossing Central Avenue to access Central Park would experience moderately increased risk to safety. Traffic noise levels would increase at: Dayton-Yellow Springs Road, Kauffman Avenue, Central Avenue, Dayton Drive, and Broad Street. JF - EPA number: 110402, Draft EIS--627 pages and maps, Cultural Resources Survey--323 pages, December 2, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 2 KW - Defense Programs KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Ohio KW - Wright-Patterson Air Force Base UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/921422333?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WRIGHT-PATTERSON+AIR+FORCE+BASE%2C+ENTRY+CONTROL+RECONFIGURATION+AND+BASE+PERIMETER+FENCE+RELOCATION+IN+AREA+A%2C+GREENE+AND+MONTGOMERY+COUNTIES%2C+OHIO.&rft.title=WRIGHT-PATTERSON+AIR+FORCE+BASE%2C+ENTRY+CONTROL+RECONFIGURATION+AND+BASE+PERIMETER+FENCE+RELOCATION+IN+AREA+A%2C+GREENE+AND+MONTGOMERY+COUNTIES%2C+OHIO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, 88th Air Base Wing, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio; AF N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 2, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-02-15 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - WRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE, ENTRY CONTROL RECONFIGURATION AND BASE PERIMETER FENCE RELOCATION IN AREA A, GREENE AND MONTGOMERY COUNTIES, OHIO. [Part 1 of 4] T2 - WRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE, ENTRY CONTROL RECONFIGURATION AND BASE PERIMETER FENCE RELOCATION IN AREA A, GREENE AND MONTGOMERY COUNTIES, OHIO. AN - 921422324; 15158-2_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The reconfiguration and relocation of entry control facilities (ECFs) and the base perimeter fence at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base (WPAFB), Greene and Montgomery counties, Ohio are proposed. WPAFB is located 10 miles east of the city of Dayton and encompasses 8,145 acres classified as non-industrial with mixed development. The base is subdivided into two areas: Area A, which consists primarily of administrative offices and an active airfield; and Area B, which consists primarily of research and development facilities and is located across State Route (SR) 444 to the southwest of Area A. The unsecured corridor of SR 444 that currently bisects the base between Area A and the Kittyhawk Center comes within 60 feet of buildings on WPAFB, which is less than the minimum standoff distance under current anti-terrorism standards. In addition, the nine existing ECFs for Area A create multiple high volume traffic entry points, thereby reducing traffic safety. This EIS evaluates the proposed action, a No Action Alternative, and one action alternative (Alternative A). Under the proposed action, the nine public access gates would be consolidated to three gates. Gates 1A and 26A would be relocated and designed to allow for security improvement and greater traffic flow. Gate 15A would be expanded and redesigned to meet security guidelines and increases in traffic flow. Gates 8A, 9A, 12A, 16A, 38A, and 39A would no longer serve as regularly used ECFs. Alternative A would involve enclosing the Kittyhawk Center within Area A by extending the base perimeter fence across SR 444 at existing Gate 9A, along the eastern border of SR 444 up to the Kittyhawk Center fence, and then again across SR 444 north of existing Gate 39A at Redwood Street to tie in to the main fence on the west side of SR 444. Cabled fence with a gate, temporary guard shack, and utility connections at the north end would be constructed. The southern end of the Kittyhawk Center at SR 444 would have fencing making the Kittyhawk Center contiguous with Area A. Gate 1A would remain as is and not be relocated. Existing Gate 9A would remain open and unmanned and be accessible from the south. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A smaller set of strategically-placed ECFs and a relocated perimeter would minimize the likelihood of mass casualties from terrorist attacks and would improve safety and reduce traffic congestion on WPAFB roads and at the gate approaches for local roads providing access to WPAFB. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would remove common vegetation and cause intermittent roadway closures. Culvert extensions would have a moderate impact on a tributary of Hebble Creek in the area of Gate 15A. Level of service would decrease on local streets as traffic diverts from the closure of a segment of SR 444. Vehicles and pedestrians traversing the railroad tracks at SR 444 and Kauffman Avenue and crossing Central Avenue to access Central Park would experience moderately increased risk to safety. Traffic noise levels would increase at: Dayton-Yellow Springs Road, Kauffman Avenue, Central Avenue, Dayton Drive, and Broad Street. JF - EPA number: 110402, Draft EIS--627 pages and maps, Cultural Resources Survey--323 pages, December 2, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Defense Programs KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Military Facilities (Air Force) KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Socioeconomic Assessments KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Ohio KW - Wright-Patterson Air Force Base UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/921422324?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-12-02&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=WRIGHT-PATTERSON+AIR+FORCE+BASE%2C+ENTRY+CONTROL+RECONFIGURATION+AND+BASE+PERIMETER+FENCE+RELOCATION+IN+AREA+A%2C+GREENE+AND+MONTGOMERY+COUNTIES%2C+OHIO.&rft.title=WRIGHT-PATTERSON+AIR+FORCE+BASE%2C+ENTRY+CONTROL+RECONFIGURATION+AND+BASE+PERIMETER+FENCE+RELOCATION+IN+AREA+A%2C+GREENE+AND+MONTGOMERY+COUNTIES%2C+OHIO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Air Force, 88th Air Base Wing, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio; AF N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: December 2, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-02-15 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Load and resistance factor design (FRFD) calibration for steel grid reinforced soil walls AN - 902066161; 2011-091445 JF - Georisk AU - Bathurst, Richard J AU - Huang, Bingquan AU - Allen, Tony M Y1 - 2011/12// PY - 2011 DA - December 2011 SP - 218 EP - 228 PB - Taylor & Francis, Abingdon VL - 5 IS - 3-4 SN - 1749-9518, 1749-9518 KW - soil mechanics KW - foundations KW - yield strength KW - stiffness KW - statistical analysis KW - reinforced materials KW - load tests KW - friction KW - probability KW - steel KW - design KW - 30:Engineering geology UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/902066161?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=Georisk&rft.atitle=Load+and+resistance+factor+design+%28FRFD%29+calibration+for+steel+grid+reinforced+soil+walls&rft.au=Bathurst%2C+Richard+J%3BHuang%2C+Bingquan%3BAllen%2C+Tony+M&rft.aulast=Bathurst&rft.aufirst=Richard&rft.date=2011-12-01&rft.volume=5&rft.issue=3-4&rft.spage=218&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Georisk&rft.issn=17499518&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080%2F17499518.2010.489828 L2 - http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/titles/17499518.asp LA - English DB - GeoRef N1 - Copyright - GeoRef, Copyright 2012, American Geosciences Institute. N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - Number of references - 23 N1 - Document feature - illus. incl. 4 tables N1 - Last updated - 2012-06-07 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - design; foundations; friction; load tests; probability; reinforced materials; soil mechanics; statistical analysis; steel; stiffness; yield strength DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17499518.2010.489828 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Another large landslide closes highway near Cedar City, UT AN - 1469622222; 2013-099324 JF - AEG News AU - Lund, William R AU - Knudsen, Tyler R AU - Fadling, David Y1 - 2011/12// PY - 2011 DA - December 2011 SP - 24 EP - 25 PB - Association of Environmental & Engineering Geologists, Lawrence, KS VL - 54 IS - 4 SN - 0899-5788, 0899-5788 KW - United States KW - geologic hazards KW - landslides KW - Iron County Utah KW - slope environment KW - marine environment KW - mass movements KW - natural hazards KW - Cedar Canyon KW - Utah KW - slope stability KW - Cedar City Utah KW - 30:Engineering geology UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1469622222?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=AEG+News&rft.atitle=Another+large+landslide+closes+highway+near+Cedar+City%2C+UT&rft.au=Lund%2C+William+R%3BKnudsen%2C+Tyler+R%3BFadling%2C+David&rft.aulast=Lund&rft.aufirst=William&rft.date=2011-12-01&rft.volume=54&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=24&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=AEG+News&rft.issn=08995788&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - GeoRef N1 - Copyright - GeoRef, Copyright 2013, American Geosciences Institute. N1 - Date revised - 2013-01-01 N1 - PubXState - KS N1 - Document feature - illus. N1 - Last updated - 2013-12-20 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Cedar Canyon; Cedar City Utah; geologic hazards; Iron County Utah; landslides; marine environment; mass movements; natural hazards; slope environment; slope stability; United States; Utah ER - TY - RPRT T1 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116). [Part 17 of 17] T2 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116). AN - 920070255; 15157-1_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 include those related to the proposed landfill, quarry, and industrial park development, and the planned transport of municipal solid waste and ethanol, a regulated hazardous material, over the rail line. Concerns include the potential for odors and vermin, containment during transport, environmental damage associated with a potential derailment, and quality of life issues for adjacent property owners. In addition to the proposed action, this final EIS evaluates 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. The modified proposed action is the environmentally preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide rail transportation service to RRLLC and several other shippers while keeping up to 1,164 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: 110401, 280 pages, November 25, 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/920070255?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-25&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.&rft.title=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%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 - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-02-07 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116). [Part 16 of 17] T2 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116). AN - 920070249; 15157-1_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 include those related to the proposed landfill, quarry, and industrial park development, and the planned transport of municipal solid waste and ethanol, a regulated hazardous material, over the rail line. Concerns include the potential for odors and vermin, containment during transport, environmental damage associated with a potential derailment, and quality of life issues for adjacent property owners. In addition to the proposed action, this final EIS evaluates 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. The modified proposed action is the environmentally preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide rail transportation service to RRLLC and several other shippers while keeping up to 1,164 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: 110401, 280 pages, November 25, 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/920070249?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-25&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.&rft.title=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%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 - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-02-07 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116). [Part 15 of 17] T2 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116). AN - 920070243; 15157-1_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 include those related to the proposed landfill, quarry, and industrial park development, and the planned transport of municipal solid waste and ethanol, a regulated hazardous material, over the rail line. Concerns include the potential for odors and vermin, containment during transport, environmental damage associated with a potential derailment, and quality of life issues for adjacent property owners. In addition to the proposed action, this final EIS evaluates 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. The modified proposed action is the environmentally preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide rail transportation service to RRLLC and several other shippers while keeping up to 1,164 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: 110401, 280 pages, November 25, 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/920070243?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-25&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.&rft.title=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%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 - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-02-07 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116). [Part 14 of 17] T2 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116). AN - 920070237; 15157-1_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 include those related to the proposed landfill, quarry, and industrial park development, and the planned transport of municipal solid waste and ethanol, a regulated hazardous material, over the rail line. Concerns include the potential for odors and vermin, containment during transport, environmental damage associated with a potential derailment, and quality of life issues for adjacent property owners. In addition to the proposed action, this final EIS evaluates 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. The modified proposed action is the environmentally preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide rail transportation service to RRLLC and several other shippers while keeping up to 1,164 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: 110401, 280 pages, November 25, 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/920070237?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-25&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.&rft.title=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%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 - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-02-07 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116). [Part 13 of 17] T2 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116). AN - 920070233; 15157-1_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 include those related to the proposed landfill, quarry, and industrial park development, and the planned transport of municipal solid waste and ethanol, a regulated hazardous material, over the rail line. Concerns include the potential for odors and vermin, containment during transport, environmental damage associated with a potential derailment, and quality of life issues for adjacent property owners. In addition to the proposed action, this final EIS evaluates 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. The modified proposed action is the environmentally preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide rail transportation service to RRLLC and several other shippers while keeping up to 1,164 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: 110401, 280 pages, November 25, 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/920070233?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-25&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.&rft.title=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%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 - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-02-07 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116). [Part 12 of 17] T2 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116). AN - 920070228; 15157-1_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 include those related to the proposed landfill, quarry, and industrial park development, and the planned transport of municipal solid waste and ethanol, a regulated hazardous material, over the rail line. Concerns include the potential for odors and vermin, containment during transport, environmental damage associated with a potential derailment, and quality of life issues for adjacent property owners. In addition to the proposed action, this final EIS evaluates 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. The modified proposed action is the environmentally preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide rail transportation service to RRLLC and several other shippers while keeping up to 1,164 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: 110401, 280 pages, November 25, 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/920070228?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-25&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.&rft.title=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%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 - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-02-07 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116). [Part 11 of 17] T2 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116). AN - 920070224; 15157-1_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 include those related to the proposed landfill, quarry, and industrial park development, and the planned transport of municipal solid waste and ethanol, a regulated hazardous material, over the rail line. Concerns include the potential for odors and vermin, containment during transport, environmental damage associated with a potential derailment, and quality of life issues for adjacent property owners. In addition to the proposed action, this final EIS evaluates 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. The modified proposed action is the environmentally preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide rail transportation service to RRLLC and several other shippers while keeping up to 1,164 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: 110401, 280 pages, November 25, 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/920070224?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-25&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.&rft.title=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%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 - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-02-07 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CORPORATE AVERAGE FUEL ECONOMY STANDARDS, PASSENGER CARS AND LIGHT TRUCKS, MODEL YEARS 2017-2025. [Part 1 of 2] T2 - CORPORATE AVERAGE FUEL ECONOMY STANDARDS, PASSENGER CARS AND LIGHT TRUCKS, MODEL YEARS 2017-2025. AN - 920067557; 15155-9_0001 AB - PURPOSE: Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards and vehicle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions standards for the total U.S. fleet of passenger cars and light trucks built in model years (MY) 2017-2025 are proposed. Under the Energy Independence and Security Act, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) must establish separate standards for passenger cars and light trucks for each model year, subject to two principal requirements. First, in certain years, the standards must be set at levels high enough to ensure that the combined U.S. passenger car and light-truck fleet achieves an average fuel economy level of not less than 35 miles per gallon (mpg) not later than MY 2020. Second, the Energy Policy and Conservation Act requires that the agency establish separate average fuel economy standards for all new passenger cars and light trucks at the maximum feasible average fuel economy level that the Secretary of Transportation decides the manufacturers can achieve in that model year. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing standards that are projected to require, on an average industry fleet wide basis, 163 grams/mile of carbon dioxide in model year 2025, which is equivalent to 54.5 mpg if this level were achieved solely through improvements in fuel efficiency. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative 1), are analyzed in this draft EIS. The No Action Alternative assumes that NHTSAs MY 2016 CAFE standards and EPAs MY 2016 GHG standards would continue indefinitely. Alternative 2 would require a two percent average annual fleetwide increase in mpg for both passenger cars and light trucks for MYs 20172025. Alternative 2 represents the lower bound of the range of annual stringency increases NHTSA believes includes the maximum feasible stringency. Under Alternative 3, which is the preferred alternative, manufacturers would be required to meet an estimated average fleetwide fuel economy level of 40.9 mpg in MY 2021 and 49.6 mpg in MY 2025. For passenger cars, the annual increase in the stringency between model years 2017 and 2021 averages 4.1 percent. In recognition of manufacturers challenges in improving the fuel economy and GHG emissions of full-size pickup trucks while preserving the utility of those vehicles, NHTSA is proposing a slower annual rate of improvement for light trucks in the first phase of the program. For light trucks, the proposed annual increase in stringency in MYs 2017 through 2021 averages 2.9 percent per year. In the second phase of the program (MYs 2022-2025), the annual increase in stringency for passenger cars is expected to average 4.3 percent, and for light trucks, 4.7 percent. Alternative 4 would require a seven percent average annual fleetwide increase in mpg for both passenger cars and light trucks for MYs 20172025. Alternative 4 represents the upper bound of the range of annual stringency increases NHTSA believes includes the maximum feasible stringency. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The preferred alternative represents the required fuel economy level NHTSA has tentatively determined to be the maximum feasible level based on balancing technological feasibility, economic practicability, the effect of other motor vehicle standards on fuel economy, and the need of the United States to conserve energy. The proposed standards are currently projected to reduce GHGs by approximately two billion metric tons and save four billion barrels of oil over the lifetime of MYs 2017-2025 vehicles relative to the MY 2016 standards already in place. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The growth in the number of passenger cars and light trucks, combined with assumed increases in their average use, is projected to outpace improvements in fuel economy under Alternative 2 and the preferred alternative, resulting in projected increases in total fuel consumption over the long term. The proposed alternatives would not prevent climate change, but would only result in reductions in the anticipated increases in carbon dioxide concentrations, temperature, precipitation, and sea level. The average cost for a MY 2025 vehicle to meet the proposed standards is estimated to be about $2,000 compared to a vehicle that would meet the level of the MY 2016 standards in MY 2025. However, fuel savings for consumers are expected to more than offset the higher vehicle costs. 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: 110399, Draft EIS--482 pages, Appendices--1,422 pages CD-ROM, November 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Manufacturing 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 - 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/920067557?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CORPORATE+AVERAGE+FUEL+ECONOMY+STANDARDS%2C+PASSENGER+CARS+AND+LIGHT+TRUCKS%2C+MODEL+YEARS+2017-2025.&rft.title=CORPORATE+AVERAGE+FUEL+ECONOMY+STANDARDS%2C+PASSENGER+CARS+AND+LIGHT+TRUCKS%2C+MODEL+YEARS+2017-2025.&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 - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-02-07 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116). [Part 6 of 17] T2 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116). AN - 920065904; 15157-1_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 include those related to the proposed landfill, quarry, and industrial park development, and the planned transport of municipal solid waste and ethanol, a regulated hazardous material, over the rail line. Concerns include the potential for odors and vermin, containment during transport, environmental damage associated with a potential derailment, and quality of life issues for adjacent property owners. In addition to the proposed action, this final EIS evaluates 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. The modified proposed action is the environmentally preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide rail transportation service to RRLLC and several other shippers while keeping up to 1,164 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: 110401, 280 pages, November 25, 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/920065904?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-25&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.&rft.title=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%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 - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-02-07 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116). [Part 5 of 17] T2 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116). AN - 920065883; 15157-1_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 include those related to the proposed landfill, quarry, and industrial park development, and the planned transport of municipal solid waste and ethanol, a regulated hazardous material, over the rail line. Concerns include the potential for odors and vermin, containment during transport, environmental damage associated with a potential derailment, and quality of life issues for adjacent property owners. In addition to the proposed action, this final EIS evaluates 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. The modified proposed action is the environmentally preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide rail transportation service to RRLLC and several other shippers while keeping up to 1,164 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: 110401, 280 pages, November 25, 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/920065883?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-25&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.&rft.title=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%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 - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-02-07 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116). [Part 4 of 17] T2 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116). AN - 920065863; 15157-1_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 include those related to the proposed landfill, quarry, and industrial park development, and the planned transport of municipal solid waste and ethanol, a regulated hazardous material, over the rail line. Concerns include the potential for odors and vermin, containment during transport, environmental damage associated with a potential derailment, and quality of life issues for adjacent property owners. In addition to the proposed action, this final EIS evaluates 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. The modified proposed action is the environmentally preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide rail transportation service to RRLLC and several other shippers while keeping up to 1,164 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: 110401, 280 pages, November 25, 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/920065863?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-25&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.&rft.title=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%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 - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-02-07 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116). [Part 3 of 17] T2 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116). AN - 920065846; 15157-1_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 include those related to the proposed landfill, quarry, and industrial park development, and the planned transport of municipal solid waste and ethanol, a regulated hazardous material, over the rail line. Concerns include the potential for odors and vermin, containment during transport, environmental damage associated with a potential derailment, and quality of life issues for adjacent property owners. In addition to the proposed action, this final EIS evaluates 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. The modified proposed action is the environmentally preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide rail transportation service to RRLLC and several other shippers while keeping up to 1,164 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: 110401, 280 pages, November 25, 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/920065846?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-25&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.&rft.title=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%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 - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-02-07 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116). [Part 2 of 17] T2 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116). AN - 920065825; 15157-1_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 include those related to the proposed landfill, quarry, and industrial park development, and the planned transport of municipal solid waste and ethanol, a regulated hazardous material, over the rail line. Concerns include the potential for odors and vermin, containment during transport, environmental damage associated with a potential derailment, and quality of life issues for adjacent property owners. In addition to the proposed action, this final EIS evaluates 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. The modified proposed action is the environmentally preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide rail transportation service to RRLLC and several other shippers while keeping up to 1,164 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: 110401, 280 pages, November 25, 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/920065825?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-25&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.&rft.title=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%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 - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-02-07 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116). [Part 1 of 17] T2 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116). AN - 920065807; 15157-1_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 include those related to the proposed landfill, quarry, and industrial park development, and the planned transport of municipal solid waste and ethanol, a regulated hazardous material, over the rail line. Concerns include the potential for odors and vermin, containment during transport, environmental damage associated with a potential derailment, and quality of life issues for adjacent property owners. In addition to the proposed action, this final EIS evaluates 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. The modified proposed action is the environmentally preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide rail transportation service to RRLLC and several other shippers while keeping up to 1,164 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: 110401, 280 pages, November 25, 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/920065807?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-25&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.&rft.title=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%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 - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-02-07 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CORPORATE AVERAGE FUEL ECONOMY STANDARDS, PASSENGER CARS AND LIGHT TRUCKS, MODEL YEARS 2017-2025. [Part 2 of 2] T2 - CORPORATE AVERAGE FUEL ECONOMY STANDARDS, PASSENGER CARS AND LIGHT TRUCKS, MODEL YEARS 2017-2025. AN - 920065649; 15155-9_0002 AB - PURPOSE: Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards and vehicle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions standards for the total U.S. fleet of passenger cars and light trucks built in model years (MY) 2017-2025 are proposed. Under the Energy Independence and Security Act, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) must establish separate standards for passenger cars and light trucks for each model year, subject to two principal requirements. First, in certain years, the standards must be set at levels high enough to ensure that the combined U.S. passenger car and light-truck fleet achieves an average fuel economy level of not less than 35 miles per gallon (mpg) not later than MY 2020. Second, the Energy Policy and Conservation Act requires that the agency establish separate average fuel economy standards for all new passenger cars and light trucks at the maximum feasible average fuel economy level that the Secretary of Transportation decides the manufacturers can achieve in that model year. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing standards that are projected to require, on an average industry fleet wide basis, 163 grams/mile of carbon dioxide in model year 2025, which is equivalent to 54.5 mpg if this level were achieved solely through improvements in fuel efficiency. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative 1), are analyzed in this draft EIS. The No Action Alternative assumes that NHTSAs MY 2016 CAFE standards and EPAs MY 2016 GHG standards would continue indefinitely. Alternative 2 would require a two percent average annual fleetwide increase in mpg for both passenger cars and light trucks for MYs 20172025. Alternative 2 represents the lower bound of the range of annual stringency increases NHTSA believes includes the maximum feasible stringency. Under Alternative 3, which is the preferred alternative, manufacturers would be required to meet an estimated average fleetwide fuel economy level of 40.9 mpg in MY 2021 and 49.6 mpg in MY 2025. For passenger cars, the annual increase in the stringency between model years 2017 and 2021 averages 4.1 percent. In recognition of manufacturers challenges in improving the fuel economy and GHG emissions of full-size pickup trucks while preserving the utility of those vehicles, NHTSA is proposing a slower annual rate of improvement for light trucks in the first phase of the program. For light trucks, the proposed annual increase in stringency in MYs 2017 through 2021 averages 2.9 percent per year. In the second phase of the program (MYs 2022-2025), the annual increase in stringency for passenger cars is expected to average 4.3 percent, and for light trucks, 4.7 percent. Alternative 4 would require a seven percent average annual fleetwide increase in mpg for both passenger cars and light trucks for MYs 20172025. Alternative 4 represents the upper bound of the range of annual stringency increases NHTSA believes includes the maximum feasible stringency. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The preferred alternative represents the required fuel economy level NHTSA has tentatively determined to be the maximum feasible level based on balancing technological feasibility, economic practicability, the effect of other motor vehicle standards on fuel economy, and the need of the United States to conserve energy. The proposed standards are currently projected to reduce GHGs by approximately two billion metric tons and save four billion barrels of oil over the lifetime of MYs 2017-2025 vehicles relative to the MY 2016 standards already in place. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The growth in the number of passenger cars and light trucks, combined with assumed increases in their average use, is projected to outpace improvements in fuel economy under Alternative 2 and the preferred alternative, resulting in projected increases in total fuel consumption over the long term. The proposed alternatives would not prevent climate change, but would only result in reductions in the anticipated increases in carbon dioxide concentrations, temperature, precipitation, and sea level. The average cost for a MY 2025 vehicle to meet the proposed standards is estimated to be about $2,000 compared to a vehicle that would meet the level of the MY 2016 standards in MY 2025. However, fuel savings for consumers are expected to more than offset the higher vehicle costs. 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: 110399, Draft EIS--482 pages, Appendices--1,422 pages CD-ROM, November 25, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 2 KW - Manufacturing 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 - 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/920065649?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CORPORATE+AVERAGE+FUEL+ECONOMY+STANDARDS%2C+PASSENGER+CARS+AND+LIGHT+TRUCKS%2C+MODEL+YEARS+2017-2025.&rft.title=CORPORATE+AVERAGE+FUEL+ECONOMY+STANDARDS%2C+PASSENGER+CARS+AND+LIGHT+TRUCKS%2C+MODEL+YEARS+2017-2025.&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 - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-02-07 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116). [Part 10 of 17] T2 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116). AN - 920064681; 15157-1_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 include those related to the proposed landfill, quarry, and industrial park development, and the planned transport of municipal solid waste and ethanol, a regulated hazardous material, over the rail line. Concerns include the potential for odors and vermin, containment during transport, environmental damage associated with a potential derailment, and quality of life issues for adjacent property owners. In addition to the proposed action, this final EIS evaluates 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. The modified proposed action is the environmentally preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide rail transportation service to RRLLC and several other shippers while keeping up to 1,164 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: 110401, 280 pages, November 25, 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/920064681?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-25&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.&rft.title=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%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 - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-02-07 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116). [Part 9 of 17] T2 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116). AN - 920064638; 15157-1_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 include those related to the proposed landfill, quarry, and industrial park development, and the planned transport of municipal solid waste and ethanol, a regulated hazardous material, over the rail line. Concerns include the potential for odors and vermin, containment during transport, environmental damage associated with a potential derailment, and quality of life issues for adjacent property owners. In addition to the proposed action, this final EIS evaluates 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. The modified proposed action is the environmentally preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide rail transportation service to RRLLC and several other shippers while keeping up to 1,164 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: 110401, 280 pages, November 25, 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/920064638?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-25&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.&rft.title=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%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 - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-02-07 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116). [Part 8 of 17] T2 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116). AN - 920064612; 15157-1_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 include those related to the proposed landfill, quarry, and industrial park development, and the planned transport of municipal solid waste and ethanol, a regulated hazardous material, over the rail line. Concerns include the potential for odors and vermin, containment during transport, environmental damage associated with a potential derailment, and quality of life issues for adjacent property owners. In addition to the proposed action, this final EIS evaluates 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. The modified proposed action is the environmentally preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide rail transportation service to RRLLC and several other shippers while keeping up to 1,164 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: 110401, 280 pages, November 25, 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/920064612?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-25&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.&rft.title=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%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 - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-02-07 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116). [Part 7 of 17] T2 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116). AN - 920064587; 15157-1_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 include those related to the proposed landfill, quarry, and industrial park development, and the planned transport of municipal solid waste and ethanol, a regulated hazardous material, over the rail line. Concerns include the potential for odors and vermin, containment during transport, environmental damage associated with a potential derailment, and quality of life issues for adjacent property owners. In addition to the proposed action, this final EIS evaluates 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. The modified proposed action is the environmentally preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide rail transportation service to RRLLC and several other shippers while keeping up to 1,164 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: 110401, 280 pages, November 25, 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/920064587?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-25&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.&rft.title=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%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 - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-02-07 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - R.J. CORMAN RAILROAD COMPANY/PENNSYLVANIA LINES INC. PROJECT, CLEARFIELD AND CENTRE COUNTIES, PENNSYLVANIA (DOCKET NO. FD 35116). AN - 919217247; 15157 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 include those related to the proposed landfill, quarry, and industrial park development, and the planned transport of municipal solid waste and ethanol, a regulated hazardous material, over the rail line. Concerns include the potential for odors and vermin, containment during transport, environmental damage associated with a potential derailment, and quality of life issues for adjacent property owners. In addition to the proposed action, this final EIS evaluates 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. The modified proposed action is the environmentally preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide rail transportation service to RRLLC and several other shippers while keeping up to 1,164 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: 110401, 280 pages, November 25, 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/919217247?accountid=14244 L2 - http://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=2011-11-25&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.&rft.title=R.J.+CORMAN+RAILROAD+COMPANY%2FPENNSYLVANIA+LINES+INC.+PROJECT%2C+CLEARFIELD+AND+CENTRE+COUNTIES%2C+PENNSYLVANIA+%28DOCKET+NO.+FD+35116%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 - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-02-02 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - LOUISVILLE-SOUTHERN INDIANA OHIO RIVER BRIDGES PROJECT, JEFFERSON COUNTY, KENTUCKY AND CLARK COUNTY, INDIANA. AN - 16377447; 15151 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of one or two bridges to improve mobility across the Ohio River between Jefferson County, Kentucky and Clark County Indiana is proposed. Population and employment in Louisville, Kentucky and Jeffersonville, Indiana are growing at steady rates and traffic congestion on the existing Kennedy Bridge has resulted in long travel times and safety problems. Four alternatives were considered in the final EIS of 2003. The selected two-bridges/highway alternative, comprised of Alternatives A-15 and C-1, would involve construction of both a new Downtown Bridge for Interstate 65 (I-65), and an East End Bridge for I-265 approximately eight miles upstream. The selected alternative would also relocate the Kennedy interchange and reconstruct I-65 and the Court Street interchange. This draft supplemental EIS examines the impacts of proposed modifications to the selected alternative including tolling to assist in funding the project and cost-saving measures to minimize the amount of toll-based revenue needed. The proposed cost saving modifications to the selected alternative include: reconstructing the Kennedy interchange within its existing location instead of relocating it to the south; reducing the East End Bridge roadway and tunnel from six to four lanes, with the option to add two lanes later if traffic demand warrants; eliminating the pedestrian/bike path from the Downtown Bridge; and eliminating flyover ramps and making other design changes on the Indiana interstate approach to the newly expanded I-65 bridges. Year-of-expenditure cost of implementing the final EIS selected alternative is currently estimated at $4.1 billion, an increase of $1.6 billion over the estimate made in 2003. The proposed design modifications are projected to result in a $1.2 billion savings. Therefore, the estimated cost of the modified selected alternative is $2.9 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Bridge construction would increase the Ohio River crossing capacity significantly and improve safety and travel times. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way requirements for the modified selected alternative would displace 57 acres of prime farmland, 194 acres of wildlife habitat, 9.6 acres of wetlands, 70 residences, and 24 businesses. Sixteen historic sites, 11 historic districts, and 11 archaeologic sites would be affected. Traffic-generated noise would impact 240 receptor sites and 13 historic properties. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 draft and final EISs, see 02-0070D, Volume 26, Number 1 and 03-0347F, Volume 27, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110395, 595 pages and maps, November 25, 2011 PY - 2011 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-KY-EIS-01-02-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Bridges KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parks KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Streams KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana KW - Kentucky KW - Ohio River KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Parks KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/16377447?accountid=14244 L2 - http://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=2011-11-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=LOUISVILLE-SOUTHERN+INDIANA+OHIO+RIVER+BRIDGES+PROJECT%2C+JEFFERSON+COUNTY%2C+KENTUCKY+AND+CLARK+COUNTY%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=LOUISVILLE-SOUTHERN+INDIANA+OHIO+RIVER+BRIDGES+PROJECT%2C+JEFFERSON+COUNTY%2C+KENTUCKY+AND+CLARK+COUNTY%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Frankfort, Kentucky; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 25, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-02-02 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRUNK HIGHWAY 60, ST. JAMES TO WINDOM, COTTONWOOD AND WATONWAN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF 1983). [Part 1 of 1] T2 - TRUNK HIGHWAY 60, ST. JAMES TO WINDOM, COTTONWOOD AND WATONWAN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF 1983). AN - 918922923; 15141-4_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The completion of four-lane divided sections in the gap segments of Trunk Highway 60 in Cottonwood and Wantonwan counties, Minnesota is proposed. Since the Highway 60 Record of Decision was released in 1984, several segments of the original preferred alternative between the cities of Worthington and St. James, Minnesota have been constructed as a four-lane divided highway. The past projects have involved capacity, safety, and mobility improvements. However, to date three highway segments between the cities of St. James and Windom were reconstructed only as two-lane roads. These three segments, totaling approximately 17 miles, are: the east gap, which extends 5.3 miles from just west of St. James to the eastern edge of Butterfield; the middle gap, which extends 4.2 miles from the western edge of Butterfield to just east of Mountain Lake; and the west gap, which extends 7.5 miles from just west of Mountain Lake to the northeast edge of Windom. This draft supplemental EIS considers a No Build Alternative (Alternative 1) and construction of a four-lane expressway in the east, middle, and west gaps (Alternative 2). The facility would be completed by constructing two lanes adjacent to the existing highway with 90 feet between centerlines. A design speed of 70 miles per hour (mph) would be used for the improvements and a 65 mph posted speed is anticipated to match the posted speeds on existing four-lane sections. Intersections are proposed to be at-grade with two-way stops on the intersecting local roads. Left and right turn lanes would be provided at all public roads. At nonpublic road median crossovers, left turn lanes would be constructed. Other improvements include minor reconstruction of cross street intersections and access/driveway modifications. Total construction and right of-way acquisition costs, estimated in year of construction dollars (2013 to 2018), are $23 million for the east gap, $16.8 million for the middle gap, and $18 to $20.6 million for the west gap. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Continued implementation of transportation system improvements in the corridor would provide a logical, safe, and predictable system for highway users and maintain mobility to address growing freight traffic. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New right-of-way would require 385 to 421 acres and one to three commercial relocations. Approximately 320 to 350 acres of farmland would be converted and 6.2 to 7.9 acres of wetlands would be impacted. The build alternative could require water body modification at Clear Lake (0.2 to 1.2 acres) and Warren Pond (0.3 acres).Three receptors are anticipated to experience noise levels above local daytime standards, while the number of potential exceedances for nighttime standards is 23 to 33 receptors. Twenty-two contaminated sites have been identified in the project area. 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: 110384, 162 pages and maps, Original EIS and ROD--CD-ROM, November 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Farmlands KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Minnesota 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/918922923?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRUNK+HIGHWAY+60%2C+ST.+JAMES+TO+WINDOM%2C+COTTONWOOD+AND+WATONWAN+COUNTIES%2C+MINNESOTA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+1983%29.&rft.title=TRUNK+HIGHWAY+60%2C+ST.+JAMES+TO+WINDOM%2C+COTTONWOOD+AND+WATONWAN+COUNTIES%2C+MINNESOTA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+1983%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, St. Paul, Minnesota; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-02-01 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BANGERTER 600 WEST PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. [Part 16 of 16] T2 - BANGERTER 600 WEST PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. AN - 918915992; 15142-5_0016 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements on Bangerter Highway between Interstate 15 (I-15) and the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) line at about 900 West in the City of Draper in Salt Lake County, Utah are proposed. Bangerter Highway is the main east-west road that serves the southern end of the Salt Lake Valley west of I-15 and provides an important link between I-15 and I-80. Designed to be a limited-access facility, Bangerter Highway currently has three travel lanes in each direction west of I-15 with a concrete median barrier separating the east and west travel lanes west of the signalized intersection at 200 West. The road is classified as a principal arterial and carries 39,000 cars per day. Traffic congestion levels are increasing due to the commercial growth in the 200 West area and residential growth in the suburban communities. Projected traffic backups at the exit ramp for I-15 southbound to Bangerter Highway westbound and at the I-15/Bangerter Highway interchange indicate an increased risk of accidents in 2030. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. The action alternatives include a new right-turn lane from the I-15 southbound off ramps to Bangerter Highway, an additional westbound travel lane on Bangerter Highway from 200 West to a new 600 West interchange, a new grade-separated interchange on Bangerter Highway at 600 West, and two new five-lane arterial roads connecting the new 600 West interchange to 200 West. Alternative 4E would involve construction of the interchange at 600 West and Bangerter Highway and elimination of the signalized intersection at 200 West. No access between 200 West and Bangerter Highway would be provided. Under Alternative 4F, the interchange at 600 West and Bangerter Highway would be constructed, the traffic signals at the 200 West and Bangerter Highway intersection would be eliminated, and right turns only from 200 West would be allowed. Alternative 4G would maintain the traffic signal at the 200 West and Bangerter Highway intersection and allow only right turns to and from 200 West, as well as north-south and east-west through movements. The 600 West Interchange with Right Turns Only at 200 West Alternative (Alternative 4F) is the preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would help meet the projected travel demand in 2030. Converting existing signalized intersections to grade-separated interchanges would reduce congestion and the risk of accidents. Maintaining right turns at the 200 West intersection would reduce negative impacts to local businesses. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the interchange and connecting roads could result in the loss of 0.04 acre of wetlands, disturbance of some migratory bird nesting habitat, and temporary disruption of utility services to local residents and businesses. Depending on the final design, partial or complete acquisition of a state surplus building could be required. In addition, there would be a partial acquisition of a parking area and of undeveloped private land. Loss of the signal at 200 West and the elimination of the left-turn lane could impact retail businesses located at the intersection. 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: 110385, 670 pages and maps, November 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 16 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-11-01-F KW - Highways KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Utah 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/918915992?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BANGERTER+600+WEST+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=BANGERTER+600+WEST+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-02-01 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BANGERTER 600 WEST PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. [Part 15 of 16] T2 - BANGERTER 600 WEST PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. AN - 918915985; 15142-5_0015 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements on Bangerter Highway between Interstate 15 (I-15) and the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) line at about 900 West in the City of Draper in Salt Lake County, Utah are proposed. Bangerter Highway is the main east-west road that serves the southern end of the Salt Lake Valley west of I-15 and provides an important link between I-15 and I-80. Designed to be a limited-access facility, Bangerter Highway currently has three travel lanes in each direction west of I-15 with a concrete median barrier separating the east and west travel lanes west of the signalized intersection at 200 West. The road is classified as a principal arterial and carries 39,000 cars per day. Traffic congestion levels are increasing due to the commercial growth in the 200 West area and residential growth in the suburban communities. Projected traffic backups at the exit ramp for I-15 southbound to Bangerter Highway westbound and at the I-15/Bangerter Highway interchange indicate an increased risk of accidents in 2030. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. The action alternatives include a new right-turn lane from the I-15 southbound off ramps to Bangerter Highway, an additional westbound travel lane on Bangerter Highway from 200 West to a new 600 West interchange, a new grade-separated interchange on Bangerter Highway at 600 West, and two new five-lane arterial roads connecting the new 600 West interchange to 200 West. Alternative 4E would involve construction of the interchange at 600 West and Bangerter Highway and elimination of the signalized intersection at 200 West. No access between 200 West and Bangerter Highway would be provided. Under Alternative 4F, the interchange at 600 West and Bangerter Highway would be constructed, the traffic signals at the 200 West and Bangerter Highway intersection would be eliminated, and right turns only from 200 West would be allowed. Alternative 4G would maintain the traffic signal at the 200 West and Bangerter Highway intersection and allow only right turns to and from 200 West, as well as north-south and east-west through movements. The 600 West Interchange with Right Turns Only at 200 West Alternative (Alternative 4F) is the preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would help meet the projected travel demand in 2030. Converting existing signalized intersections to grade-separated interchanges would reduce congestion and the risk of accidents. Maintaining right turns at the 200 West intersection would reduce negative impacts to local businesses. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the interchange and connecting roads could result in the loss of 0.04 acre of wetlands, disturbance of some migratory bird nesting habitat, and temporary disruption of utility services to local residents and businesses. Depending on the final design, partial or complete acquisition of a state surplus building could be required. In addition, there would be a partial acquisition of a parking area and of undeveloped private land. Loss of the signal at 200 West and the elimination of the left-turn lane could impact retail businesses located at the intersection. 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: 110385, 670 pages and maps, November 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 15 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-11-01-F KW - Highways KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Utah 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/918915985?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BANGERTER+600+WEST+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=BANGERTER+600+WEST+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-02-01 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BANGERTER 600 WEST PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. [Part 14 of 16] T2 - BANGERTER 600 WEST PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. AN - 918915974; 15142-5_0014 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements on Bangerter Highway between Interstate 15 (I-15) and the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) line at about 900 West in the City of Draper in Salt Lake County, Utah are proposed. Bangerter Highway is the main east-west road that serves the southern end of the Salt Lake Valley west of I-15 and provides an important link between I-15 and I-80. Designed to be a limited-access facility, Bangerter Highway currently has three travel lanes in each direction west of I-15 with a concrete median barrier separating the east and west travel lanes west of the signalized intersection at 200 West. The road is classified as a principal arterial and carries 39,000 cars per day. Traffic congestion levels are increasing due to the commercial growth in the 200 West area and residential growth in the suburban communities. Projected traffic backups at the exit ramp for I-15 southbound to Bangerter Highway westbound and at the I-15/Bangerter Highway interchange indicate an increased risk of accidents in 2030. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. The action alternatives include a new right-turn lane from the I-15 southbound off ramps to Bangerter Highway, an additional westbound travel lane on Bangerter Highway from 200 West to a new 600 West interchange, a new grade-separated interchange on Bangerter Highway at 600 West, and two new five-lane arterial roads connecting the new 600 West interchange to 200 West. Alternative 4E would involve construction of the interchange at 600 West and Bangerter Highway and elimination of the signalized intersection at 200 West. No access between 200 West and Bangerter Highway would be provided. Under Alternative 4F, the interchange at 600 West and Bangerter Highway would be constructed, the traffic signals at the 200 West and Bangerter Highway intersection would be eliminated, and right turns only from 200 West would be allowed. Alternative 4G would maintain the traffic signal at the 200 West and Bangerter Highway intersection and allow only right turns to and from 200 West, as well as north-south and east-west through movements. The 600 West Interchange with Right Turns Only at 200 West Alternative (Alternative 4F) is the preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would help meet the projected travel demand in 2030. Converting existing signalized intersections to grade-separated interchanges would reduce congestion and the risk of accidents. Maintaining right turns at the 200 West intersection would reduce negative impacts to local businesses. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the interchange and connecting roads could result in the loss of 0.04 acre of wetlands, disturbance of some migratory bird nesting habitat, and temporary disruption of utility services to local residents and businesses. Depending on the final design, partial or complete acquisition of a state surplus building could be required. In addition, there would be a partial acquisition of a parking area and of undeveloped private land. Loss of the signal at 200 West and the elimination of the left-turn lane could impact retail businesses located at the intersection. 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: 110385, 670 pages and maps, November 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 14 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-11-01-F KW - Highways KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Utah 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/918915974?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BANGERTER+600+WEST+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=BANGERTER+600+WEST+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-02-01 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BANGERTER 600 WEST PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. [Part 13 of 16] T2 - BANGERTER 600 WEST PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. AN - 918915965; 15142-5_0013 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements on Bangerter Highway between Interstate 15 (I-15) and the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) line at about 900 West in the City of Draper in Salt Lake County, Utah are proposed. Bangerter Highway is the main east-west road that serves the southern end of the Salt Lake Valley west of I-15 and provides an important link between I-15 and I-80. Designed to be a limited-access facility, Bangerter Highway currently has three travel lanes in each direction west of I-15 with a concrete median barrier separating the east and west travel lanes west of the signalized intersection at 200 West. The road is classified as a principal arterial and carries 39,000 cars per day. Traffic congestion levels are increasing due to the commercial growth in the 200 West area and residential growth in the suburban communities. Projected traffic backups at the exit ramp for I-15 southbound to Bangerter Highway westbound and at the I-15/Bangerter Highway interchange indicate an increased risk of accidents in 2030. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. The action alternatives include a new right-turn lane from the I-15 southbound off ramps to Bangerter Highway, an additional westbound travel lane on Bangerter Highway from 200 West to a new 600 West interchange, a new grade-separated interchange on Bangerter Highway at 600 West, and two new five-lane arterial roads connecting the new 600 West interchange to 200 West. Alternative 4E would involve construction of the interchange at 600 West and Bangerter Highway and elimination of the signalized intersection at 200 West. No access between 200 West and Bangerter Highway would be provided. Under Alternative 4F, the interchange at 600 West and Bangerter Highway would be constructed, the traffic signals at the 200 West and Bangerter Highway intersection would be eliminated, and right turns only from 200 West would be allowed. Alternative 4G would maintain the traffic signal at the 200 West and Bangerter Highway intersection and allow only right turns to and from 200 West, as well as north-south and east-west through movements. The 600 West Interchange with Right Turns Only at 200 West Alternative (Alternative 4F) is the preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would help meet the projected travel demand in 2030. Converting existing signalized intersections to grade-separated interchanges would reduce congestion and the risk of accidents. Maintaining right turns at the 200 West intersection would reduce negative impacts to local businesses. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the interchange and connecting roads could result in the loss of 0.04 acre of wetlands, disturbance of some migratory bird nesting habitat, and temporary disruption of utility services to local residents and businesses. Depending on the final design, partial or complete acquisition of a state surplus building could be required. In addition, there would be a partial acquisition of a parking area and of undeveloped private land. Loss of the signal at 200 West and the elimination of the left-turn lane could impact retail businesses located at the intersection. 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: 110385, 670 pages and maps, November 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 13 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-11-01-F KW - Highways KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Utah 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/918915965?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BANGERTER+600+WEST+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=BANGERTER+600+WEST+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-02-01 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BANGERTER 600 WEST PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. [Part 12 of 16] T2 - BANGERTER 600 WEST PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. AN - 918915953; 15142-5_0012 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements on Bangerter Highway between Interstate 15 (I-15) and the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) line at about 900 West in the City of Draper in Salt Lake County, Utah are proposed. Bangerter Highway is the main east-west road that serves the southern end of the Salt Lake Valley west of I-15 and provides an important link between I-15 and I-80. Designed to be a limited-access facility, Bangerter Highway currently has three travel lanes in each direction west of I-15 with a concrete median barrier separating the east and west travel lanes west of the signalized intersection at 200 West. The road is classified as a principal arterial and carries 39,000 cars per day. Traffic congestion levels are increasing due to the commercial growth in the 200 West area and residential growth in the suburban communities. Projected traffic backups at the exit ramp for I-15 southbound to Bangerter Highway westbound and at the I-15/Bangerter Highway interchange indicate an increased risk of accidents in 2030. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. The action alternatives include a new right-turn lane from the I-15 southbound off ramps to Bangerter Highway, an additional westbound travel lane on Bangerter Highway from 200 West to a new 600 West interchange, a new grade-separated interchange on Bangerter Highway at 600 West, and two new five-lane arterial roads connecting the new 600 West interchange to 200 West. Alternative 4E would involve construction of the interchange at 600 West and Bangerter Highway and elimination of the signalized intersection at 200 West. No access between 200 West and Bangerter Highway would be provided. Under Alternative 4F, the interchange at 600 West and Bangerter Highway would be constructed, the traffic signals at the 200 West and Bangerter Highway intersection would be eliminated, and right turns only from 200 West would be allowed. Alternative 4G would maintain the traffic signal at the 200 West and Bangerter Highway intersection and allow only right turns to and from 200 West, as well as north-south and east-west through movements. The 600 West Interchange with Right Turns Only at 200 West Alternative (Alternative 4F) is the preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would help meet the projected travel demand in 2030. Converting existing signalized intersections to grade-separated interchanges would reduce congestion and the risk of accidents. Maintaining right turns at the 200 West intersection would reduce negative impacts to local businesses. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the interchange and connecting roads could result in the loss of 0.04 acre of wetlands, disturbance of some migratory bird nesting habitat, and temporary disruption of utility services to local residents and businesses. Depending on the final design, partial or complete acquisition of a state surplus building could be required. In addition, there would be a partial acquisition of a parking area and of undeveloped private land. Loss of the signal at 200 West and the elimination of the left-turn lane could impact retail businesses located at the intersection. 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: 110385, 670 pages and maps, November 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 12 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-11-01-F KW - Highways KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Utah 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/918915953?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BANGERTER+600+WEST+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=BANGERTER+600+WEST+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-02-01 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BANGERTER 600 WEST PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. [Part 11 of 16] T2 - BANGERTER 600 WEST PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. AN - 918915947; 15142-5_0011 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements on Bangerter Highway between Interstate 15 (I-15) and the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) line at about 900 West in the City of Draper in Salt Lake County, Utah are proposed. Bangerter Highway is the main east-west road that serves the southern end of the Salt Lake Valley west of I-15 and provides an important link between I-15 and I-80. Designed to be a limited-access facility, Bangerter Highway currently has three travel lanes in each direction west of I-15 with a concrete median barrier separating the east and west travel lanes west of the signalized intersection at 200 West. The road is classified as a principal arterial and carries 39,000 cars per day. Traffic congestion levels are increasing due to the commercial growth in the 200 West area and residential growth in the suburban communities. Projected traffic backups at the exit ramp for I-15 southbound to Bangerter Highway westbound and at the I-15/Bangerter Highway interchange indicate an increased risk of accidents in 2030. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. The action alternatives include a new right-turn lane from the I-15 southbound off ramps to Bangerter Highway, an additional westbound travel lane on Bangerter Highway from 200 West to a new 600 West interchange, a new grade-separated interchange on Bangerter Highway at 600 West, and two new five-lane arterial roads connecting the new 600 West interchange to 200 West. Alternative 4E would involve construction of the interchange at 600 West and Bangerter Highway and elimination of the signalized intersection at 200 West. No access between 200 West and Bangerter Highway would be provided. Under Alternative 4F, the interchange at 600 West and Bangerter Highway would be constructed, the traffic signals at the 200 West and Bangerter Highway intersection would be eliminated, and right turns only from 200 West would be allowed. Alternative 4G would maintain the traffic signal at the 200 West and Bangerter Highway intersection and allow only right turns to and from 200 West, as well as north-south and east-west through movements. The 600 West Interchange with Right Turns Only at 200 West Alternative (Alternative 4F) is the preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would help meet the projected travel demand in 2030. Converting existing signalized intersections to grade-separated interchanges would reduce congestion and the risk of accidents. Maintaining right turns at the 200 West intersection would reduce negative impacts to local businesses. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the interchange and connecting roads could result in the loss of 0.04 acre of wetlands, disturbance of some migratory bird nesting habitat, and temporary disruption of utility services to local residents and businesses. Depending on the final design, partial or complete acquisition of a state surplus building could be required. In addition, there would be a partial acquisition of a parking area and of undeveloped private land. Loss of the signal at 200 West and the elimination of the left-turn lane could impact retail businesses located at the intersection. 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: 110385, 670 pages and maps, November 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 11 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-11-01-F KW - Highways KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Utah 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/918915947?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BANGERTER+600+WEST+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=BANGERTER+600+WEST+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-02-01 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BANGERTER 600 WEST PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. [Part 10 of 16] T2 - BANGERTER 600 WEST PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. AN - 918915940; 15142-5_0010 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements on Bangerter Highway between Interstate 15 (I-15) and the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) line at about 900 West in the City of Draper in Salt Lake County, Utah are proposed. Bangerter Highway is the main east-west road that serves the southern end of the Salt Lake Valley west of I-15 and provides an important link between I-15 and I-80. Designed to be a limited-access facility, Bangerter Highway currently has three travel lanes in each direction west of I-15 with a concrete median barrier separating the east and west travel lanes west of the signalized intersection at 200 West. The road is classified as a principal arterial and carries 39,000 cars per day. Traffic congestion levels are increasing due to the commercial growth in the 200 West area and residential growth in the suburban communities. Projected traffic backups at the exit ramp for I-15 southbound to Bangerter Highway westbound and at the I-15/Bangerter Highway interchange indicate an increased risk of accidents in 2030. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. The action alternatives include a new right-turn lane from the I-15 southbound off ramps to Bangerter Highway, an additional westbound travel lane on Bangerter Highway from 200 West to a new 600 West interchange, a new grade-separated interchange on Bangerter Highway at 600 West, and two new five-lane arterial roads connecting the new 600 West interchange to 200 West. Alternative 4E would involve construction of the interchange at 600 West and Bangerter Highway and elimination of the signalized intersection at 200 West. No access between 200 West and Bangerter Highway would be provided. Under Alternative 4F, the interchange at 600 West and Bangerter Highway would be constructed, the traffic signals at the 200 West and Bangerter Highway intersection would be eliminated, and right turns only from 200 West would be allowed. Alternative 4G would maintain the traffic signal at the 200 West and Bangerter Highway intersection and allow only right turns to and from 200 West, as well as north-south and east-west through movements. The 600 West Interchange with Right Turns Only at 200 West Alternative (Alternative 4F) is the preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would help meet the projected travel demand in 2030. Converting existing signalized intersections to grade-separated interchanges would reduce congestion and the risk of accidents. Maintaining right turns at the 200 West intersection would reduce negative impacts to local businesses. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the interchange and connecting roads could result in the loss of 0.04 acre of wetlands, disturbance of some migratory bird nesting habitat, and temporary disruption of utility services to local residents and businesses. Depending on the final design, partial or complete acquisition of a state surplus building could be required. In addition, there would be a partial acquisition of a parking area and of undeveloped private land. Loss of the signal at 200 West and the elimination of the left-turn lane could impact retail businesses located at the intersection. 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: 110385, 670 pages and maps, November 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-11-01-F KW - Highways KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Utah 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/918915940?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BANGERTER+600+WEST+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=BANGERTER+600+WEST+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-02-01 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BANGERTER 600 WEST PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. [Part 9 of 16] T2 - BANGERTER 600 WEST PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. AN - 918915937; 15142-5_0009 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements on Bangerter Highway between Interstate 15 (I-15) and the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) line at about 900 West in the City of Draper in Salt Lake County, Utah are proposed. Bangerter Highway is the main east-west road that serves the southern end of the Salt Lake Valley west of I-15 and provides an important link between I-15 and I-80. Designed to be a limited-access facility, Bangerter Highway currently has three travel lanes in each direction west of I-15 with a concrete median barrier separating the east and west travel lanes west of the signalized intersection at 200 West. The road is classified as a principal arterial and carries 39,000 cars per day. Traffic congestion levels are increasing due to the commercial growth in the 200 West area and residential growth in the suburban communities. Projected traffic backups at the exit ramp for I-15 southbound to Bangerter Highway westbound and at the I-15/Bangerter Highway interchange indicate an increased risk of accidents in 2030. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. The action alternatives include a new right-turn lane from the I-15 southbound off ramps to Bangerter Highway, an additional westbound travel lane on Bangerter Highway from 200 West to a new 600 West interchange, a new grade-separated interchange on Bangerter Highway at 600 West, and two new five-lane arterial roads connecting the new 600 West interchange to 200 West. Alternative 4E would involve construction of the interchange at 600 West and Bangerter Highway and elimination of the signalized intersection at 200 West. No access between 200 West and Bangerter Highway would be provided. Under Alternative 4F, the interchange at 600 West and Bangerter Highway would be constructed, the traffic signals at the 200 West and Bangerter Highway intersection would be eliminated, and right turns only from 200 West would be allowed. Alternative 4G would maintain the traffic signal at the 200 West and Bangerter Highway intersection and allow only right turns to and from 200 West, as well as north-south and east-west through movements. The 600 West Interchange with Right Turns Only at 200 West Alternative (Alternative 4F) is the preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would help meet the projected travel demand in 2030. Converting existing signalized intersections to grade-separated interchanges would reduce congestion and the risk of accidents. Maintaining right turns at the 200 West intersection would reduce negative impacts to local businesses. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the interchange and connecting roads could result in the loss of 0.04 acre of wetlands, disturbance of some migratory bird nesting habitat, and temporary disruption of utility services to local residents and businesses. Depending on the final design, partial or complete acquisition of a state surplus building could be required. In addition, there would be a partial acquisition of a parking area and of undeveloped private land. Loss of the signal at 200 West and the elimination of the left-turn lane could impact retail businesses located at the intersection. 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: 110385, 670 pages and maps, November 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 9 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-11-01-F KW - Highways KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Utah 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/918915937?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BANGERTER+600+WEST+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=BANGERTER+600+WEST+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-02-01 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BANGERTER 600 WEST PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. [Part 8 of 16] T2 - BANGERTER 600 WEST PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. AN - 918915932; 15142-5_0008 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements on Bangerter Highway between Interstate 15 (I-15) and the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) line at about 900 West in the City of Draper in Salt Lake County, Utah are proposed. Bangerter Highway is the main east-west road that serves the southern end of the Salt Lake Valley west of I-15 and provides an important link between I-15 and I-80. Designed to be a limited-access facility, Bangerter Highway currently has three travel lanes in each direction west of I-15 with a concrete median barrier separating the east and west travel lanes west of the signalized intersection at 200 West. The road is classified as a principal arterial and carries 39,000 cars per day. Traffic congestion levels are increasing due to the commercial growth in the 200 West area and residential growth in the suburban communities. Projected traffic backups at the exit ramp for I-15 southbound to Bangerter Highway westbound and at the I-15/Bangerter Highway interchange indicate an increased risk of accidents in 2030. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. The action alternatives include a new right-turn lane from the I-15 southbound off ramps to Bangerter Highway, an additional westbound travel lane on Bangerter Highway from 200 West to a new 600 West interchange, a new grade-separated interchange on Bangerter Highway at 600 West, and two new five-lane arterial roads connecting the new 600 West interchange to 200 West. Alternative 4E would involve construction of the interchange at 600 West and Bangerter Highway and elimination of the signalized intersection at 200 West. No access between 200 West and Bangerter Highway would be provided. Under Alternative 4F, the interchange at 600 West and Bangerter Highway would be constructed, the traffic signals at the 200 West and Bangerter Highway intersection would be eliminated, and right turns only from 200 West would be allowed. Alternative 4G would maintain the traffic signal at the 200 West and Bangerter Highway intersection and allow only right turns to and from 200 West, as well as north-south and east-west through movements. The 600 West Interchange with Right Turns Only at 200 West Alternative (Alternative 4F) is the preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would help meet the projected travel demand in 2030. Converting existing signalized intersections to grade-separated interchanges would reduce congestion and the risk of accidents. Maintaining right turns at the 200 West intersection would reduce negative impacts to local businesses. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the interchange and connecting roads could result in the loss of 0.04 acre of wetlands, disturbance of some migratory bird nesting habitat, and temporary disruption of utility services to local residents and businesses. Depending on the final design, partial or complete acquisition of a state surplus building could be required. In addition, there would be a partial acquisition of a parking area and of undeveloped private land. Loss of the signal at 200 West and the elimination of the left-turn lane could impact retail businesses located at the intersection. 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: 110385, 670 pages and maps, November 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-11-01-F KW - Highways KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Utah 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/918915932?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BANGERTER+600+WEST+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=BANGERTER+600+WEST+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-02-01 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BANGERTER 600 WEST PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. [Part 7 of 16] T2 - BANGERTER 600 WEST PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. AN - 918915930; 15142-5_0007 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements on Bangerter Highway between Interstate 15 (I-15) and the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) line at about 900 West in the City of Draper in Salt Lake County, Utah are proposed. Bangerter Highway is the main east-west road that serves the southern end of the Salt Lake Valley west of I-15 and provides an important link between I-15 and I-80. Designed to be a limited-access facility, Bangerter Highway currently has three travel lanes in each direction west of I-15 with a concrete median barrier separating the east and west travel lanes west of the signalized intersection at 200 West. The road is classified as a principal arterial and carries 39,000 cars per day. Traffic congestion levels are increasing due to the commercial growth in the 200 West area and residential growth in the suburban communities. Projected traffic backups at the exit ramp for I-15 southbound to Bangerter Highway westbound and at the I-15/Bangerter Highway interchange indicate an increased risk of accidents in 2030. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. The action alternatives include a new right-turn lane from the I-15 southbound off ramps to Bangerter Highway, an additional westbound travel lane on Bangerter Highway from 200 West to a new 600 West interchange, a new grade-separated interchange on Bangerter Highway at 600 West, and two new five-lane arterial roads connecting the new 600 West interchange to 200 West. Alternative 4E would involve construction of the interchange at 600 West and Bangerter Highway and elimination of the signalized intersection at 200 West. No access between 200 West and Bangerter Highway would be provided. Under Alternative 4F, the interchange at 600 West and Bangerter Highway would be constructed, the traffic signals at the 200 West and Bangerter Highway intersection would be eliminated, and right turns only from 200 West would be allowed. Alternative 4G would maintain the traffic signal at the 200 West and Bangerter Highway intersection and allow only right turns to and from 200 West, as well as north-south and east-west through movements. The 600 West Interchange with Right Turns Only at 200 West Alternative (Alternative 4F) is the preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would help meet the projected travel demand in 2030. Converting existing signalized intersections to grade-separated interchanges would reduce congestion and the risk of accidents. Maintaining right turns at the 200 West intersection would reduce negative impacts to local businesses. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the interchange and connecting roads could result in the loss of 0.04 acre of wetlands, disturbance of some migratory bird nesting habitat, and temporary disruption of utility services to local residents and businesses. Depending on the final design, partial or complete acquisition of a state surplus building could be required. In addition, there would be a partial acquisition of a parking area and of undeveloped private land. Loss of the signal at 200 West and the elimination of the left-turn lane could impact retail businesses located at the intersection. 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: 110385, 670 pages and maps, November 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-11-01-F KW - Highways KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Utah 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/918915930?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BANGERTER+600+WEST+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=BANGERTER+600+WEST+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-02-01 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BANGERTER 600 WEST PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. [Part 6 of 16] T2 - BANGERTER 600 WEST PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. AN - 918915925; 15142-5_0006 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements on Bangerter Highway between Interstate 15 (I-15) and the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) line at about 900 West in the City of Draper in Salt Lake County, Utah are proposed. Bangerter Highway is the main east-west road that serves the southern end of the Salt Lake Valley west of I-15 and provides an important link between I-15 and I-80. Designed to be a limited-access facility, Bangerter Highway currently has three travel lanes in each direction west of I-15 with a concrete median barrier separating the east and west travel lanes west of the signalized intersection at 200 West. The road is classified as a principal arterial and carries 39,000 cars per day. Traffic congestion levels are increasing due to the commercial growth in the 200 West area and residential growth in the suburban communities. Projected traffic backups at the exit ramp for I-15 southbound to Bangerter Highway westbound and at the I-15/Bangerter Highway interchange indicate an increased risk of accidents in 2030. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. The action alternatives include a new right-turn lane from the I-15 southbound off ramps to Bangerter Highway, an additional westbound travel lane on Bangerter Highway from 200 West to a new 600 West interchange, a new grade-separated interchange on Bangerter Highway at 600 West, and two new five-lane arterial roads connecting the new 600 West interchange to 200 West. Alternative 4E would involve construction of the interchange at 600 West and Bangerter Highway and elimination of the signalized intersection at 200 West. No access between 200 West and Bangerter Highway would be provided. Under Alternative 4F, the interchange at 600 West and Bangerter Highway would be constructed, the traffic signals at the 200 West and Bangerter Highway intersection would be eliminated, and right turns only from 200 West would be allowed. Alternative 4G would maintain the traffic signal at the 200 West and Bangerter Highway intersection and allow only right turns to and from 200 West, as well as north-south and east-west through movements. The 600 West Interchange with Right Turns Only at 200 West Alternative (Alternative 4F) is the preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would help meet the projected travel demand in 2030. Converting existing signalized intersections to grade-separated interchanges would reduce congestion and the risk of accidents. Maintaining right turns at the 200 West intersection would reduce negative impacts to local businesses. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the interchange and connecting roads could result in the loss of 0.04 acre of wetlands, disturbance of some migratory bird nesting habitat, and temporary disruption of utility services to local residents and businesses. Depending on the final design, partial or complete acquisition of a state surplus building could be required. In addition, there would be a partial acquisition of a parking area and of undeveloped private land. Loss of the signal at 200 West and the elimination of the left-turn lane could impact retail businesses located at the intersection. 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: 110385, 670 pages and maps, November 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-11-01-F KW - Highways KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Utah 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/918915925?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BANGERTER+600+WEST+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=BANGERTER+600+WEST+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-02-01 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BANGERTER 600 WEST PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. [Part 5 of 16] T2 - BANGERTER 600 WEST PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. AN - 918915905; 15142-5_0005 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements on Bangerter Highway between Interstate 15 (I-15) and the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) line at about 900 West in the City of Draper in Salt Lake County, Utah are proposed. Bangerter Highway is the main east-west road that serves the southern end of the Salt Lake Valley west of I-15 and provides an important link between I-15 and I-80. Designed to be a limited-access facility, Bangerter Highway currently has three travel lanes in each direction west of I-15 with a concrete median barrier separating the east and west travel lanes west of the signalized intersection at 200 West. The road is classified as a principal arterial and carries 39,000 cars per day. Traffic congestion levels are increasing due to the commercial growth in the 200 West area and residential growth in the suburban communities. Projected traffic backups at the exit ramp for I-15 southbound to Bangerter Highway westbound and at the I-15/Bangerter Highway interchange indicate an increased risk of accidents in 2030. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. The action alternatives include a new right-turn lane from the I-15 southbound off ramps to Bangerter Highway, an additional westbound travel lane on Bangerter Highway from 200 West to a new 600 West interchange, a new grade-separated interchange on Bangerter Highway at 600 West, and two new five-lane arterial roads connecting the new 600 West interchange to 200 West. Alternative 4E would involve construction of the interchange at 600 West and Bangerter Highway and elimination of the signalized intersection at 200 West. No access between 200 West and Bangerter Highway would be provided. Under Alternative 4F, the interchange at 600 West and Bangerter Highway would be constructed, the traffic signals at the 200 West and Bangerter Highway intersection would be eliminated, and right turns only from 200 West would be allowed. Alternative 4G would maintain the traffic signal at the 200 West and Bangerter Highway intersection and allow only right turns to and from 200 West, as well as north-south and east-west through movements. The 600 West Interchange with Right Turns Only at 200 West Alternative (Alternative 4F) is the preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would help meet the projected travel demand in 2030. Converting existing signalized intersections to grade-separated interchanges would reduce congestion and the risk of accidents. Maintaining right turns at the 200 West intersection would reduce negative impacts to local businesses. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the interchange and connecting roads could result in the loss of 0.04 acre of wetlands, disturbance of some migratory bird nesting habitat, and temporary disruption of utility services to local residents and businesses. Depending on the final design, partial or complete acquisition of a state surplus building could be required. In addition, there would be a partial acquisition of a parking area and of undeveloped private land. Loss of the signal at 200 West and the elimination of the left-turn lane could impact retail businesses located at the intersection. 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: 110385, 670 pages and maps, November 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-11-01-F KW - Highways KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Utah 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/918915905?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BANGERTER+600+WEST+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=BANGERTER+600+WEST+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-02-01 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BANGERTER 600 WEST PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. [Part 4 of 16] T2 - BANGERTER 600 WEST PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. AN - 918915420; 15142-5_0004 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements on Bangerter Highway between Interstate 15 (I-15) and the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) line at about 900 West in the City of Draper in Salt Lake County, Utah are proposed. Bangerter Highway is the main east-west road that serves the southern end of the Salt Lake Valley west of I-15 and provides an important link between I-15 and I-80. Designed to be a limited-access facility, Bangerter Highway currently has three travel lanes in each direction west of I-15 with a concrete median barrier separating the east and west travel lanes west of the signalized intersection at 200 West. The road is classified as a principal arterial and carries 39,000 cars per day. Traffic congestion levels are increasing due to the commercial growth in the 200 West area and residential growth in the suburban communities. Projected traffic backups at the exit ramp for I-15 southbound to Bangerter Highway westbound and at the I-15/Bangerter Highway interchange indicate an increased risk of accidents in 2030. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. The action alternatives include a new right-turn lane from the I-15 southbound off ramps to Bangerter Highway, an additional westbound travel lane on Bangerter Highway from 200 West to a new 600 West interchange, a new grade-separated interchange on Bangerter Highway at 600 West, and two new five-lane arterial roads connecting the new 600 West interchange to 200 West. Alternative 4E would involve construction of the interchange at 600 West and Bangerter Highway and elimination of the signalized intersection at 200 West. No access between 200 West and Bangerter Highway would be provided. Under Alternative 4F, the interchange at 600 West and Bangerter Highway would be constructed, the traffic signals at the 200 West and Bangerter Highway intersection would be eliminated, and right turns only from 200 West would be allowed. Alternative 4G would maintain the traffic signal at the 200 West and Bangerter Highway intersection and allow only right turns to and from 200 West, as well as north-south and east-west through movements. The 600 West Interchange with Right Turns Only at 200 West Alternative (Alternative 4F) is the preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would help meet the projected travel demand in 2030. Converting existing signalized intersections to grade-separated interchanges would reduce congestion and the risk of accidents. Maintaining right turns at the 200 West intersection would reduce negative impacts to local businesses. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the interchange and connecting roads could result in the loss of 0.04 acre of wetlands, disturbance of some migratory bird nesting habitat, and temporary disruption of utility services to local residents and businesses. Depending on the final design, partial or complete acquisition of a state surplus building could be required. In addition, there would be a partial acquisition of a parking area and of undeveloped private land. Loss of the signal at 200 West and the elimination of the left-turn lane could impact retail businesses located at the intersection. 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: 110385, 670 pages and maps, November 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-11-01-F KW - Highways KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Utah 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/918915420?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BANGERTER+600+WEST+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=BANGERTER+600+WEST+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-02-01 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BANGERTER 600 WEST PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. [Part 3 of 16] T2 - BANGERTER 600 WEST PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. AN - 918915419; 15142-5_0003 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements on Bangerter Highway between Interstate 15 (I-15) and the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) line at about 900 West in the City of Draper in Salt Lake County, Utah are proposed. Bangerter Highway is the main east-west road that serves the southern end of the Salt Lake Valley west of I-15 and provides an important link between I-15 and I-80. Designed to be a limited-access facility, Bangerter Highway currently has three travel lanes in each direction west of I-15 with a concrete median barrier separating the east and west travel lanes west of the signalized intersection at 200 West. The road is classified as a principal arterial and carries 39,000 cars per day. Traffic congestion levels are increasing due to the commercial growth in the 200 West area and residential growth in the suburban communities. Projected traffic backups at the exit ramp for I-15 southbound to Bangerter Highway westbound and at the I-15/Bangerter Highway interchange indicate an increased risk of accidents in 2030. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. The action alternatives include a new right-turn lane from the I-15 southbound off ramps to Bangerter Highway, an additional westbound travel lane on Bangerter Highway from 200 West to a new 600 West interchange, a new grade-separated interchange on Bangerter Highway at 600 West, and two new five-lane arterial roads connecting the new 600 West interchange to 200 West. Alternative 4E would involve construction of the interchange at 600 West and Bangerter Highway and elimination of the signalized intersection at 200 West. No access between 200 West and Bangerter Highway would be provided. Under Alternative 4F, the interchange at 600 West and Bangerter Highway would be constructed, the traffic signals at the 200 West and Bangerter Highway intersection would be eliminated, and right turns only from 200 West would be allowed. Alternative 4G would maintain the traffic signal at the 200 West and Bangerter Highway intersection and allow only right turns to and from 200 West, as well as north-south and east-west through movements. The 600 West Interchange with Right Turns Only at 200 West Alternative (Alternative 4F) is the preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would help meet the projected travel demand in 2030. Converting existing signalized intersections to grade-separated interchanges would reduce congestion and the risk of accidents. Maintaining right turns at the 200 West intersection would reduce negative impacts to local businesses. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the interchange and connecting roads could result in the loss of 0.04 acre of wetlands, disturbance of some migratory bird nesting habitat, and temporary disruption of utility services to local residents and businesses. Depending on the final design, partial or complete acquisition of a state surplus building could be required. In addition, there would be a partial acquisition of a parking area and of undeveloped private land. Loss of the signal at 200 West and the elimination of the left-turn lane could impact retail businesses located at the intersection. 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: 110385, 670 pages and maps, November 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-11-01-F KW - Highways KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Utah 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/918915419?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-02-01 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BANGERTER 600 WEST PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. [Part 2 of 16] T2 - BANGERTER 600 WEST PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. AN - 918915418; 15142-5_0002 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements on Bangerter Highway between Interstate 15 (I-15) and the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) line at about 900 West in the City of Draper in Salt Lake County, Utah are proposed. Bangerter Highway is the main east-west road that serves the southern end of the Salt Lake Valley west of I-15 and provides an important link between I-15 and I-80. Designed to be a limited-access facility, Bangerter Highway currently has three travel lanes in each direction west of I-15 with a concrete median barrier separating the east and west travel lanes west of the signalized intersection at 200 West. The road is classified as a principal arterial and carries 39,000 cars per day. Traffic congestion levels are increasing due to the commercial growth in the 200 West area and residential growth in the suburban communities. Projected traffic backups at the exit ramp for I-15 southbound to Bangerter Highway westbound and at the I-15/Bangerter Highway interchange indicate an increased risk of accidents in 2030. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. The action alternatives include a new right-turn lane from the I-15 southbound off ramps to Bangerter Highway, an additional westbound travel lane on Bangerter Highway from 200 West to a new 600 West interchange, a new grade-separated interchange on Bangerter Highway at 600 West, and two new five-lane arterial roads connecting the new 600 West interchange to 200 West. Alternative 4E would involve construction of the interchange at 600 West and Bangerter Highway and elimination of the signalized intersection at 200 West. No access between 200 West and Bangerter Highway would be provided. Under Alternative 4F, the interchange at 600 West and Bangerter Highway would be constructed, the traffic signals at the 200 West and Bangerter Highway intersection would be eliminated, and right turns only from 200 West would be allowed. Alternative 4G would maintain the traffic signal at the 200 West and Bangerter Highway intersection and allow only right turns to and from 200 West, as well as north-south and east-west through movements. The 600 West Interchange with Right Turns Only at 200 West Alternative (Alternative 4F) is the preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would help meet the projected travel demand in 2030. Converting existing signalized intersections to grade-separated interchanges would reduce congestion and the risk of accidents. Maintaining right turns at the 200 West intersection would reduce negative impacts to local businesses. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the interchange and connecting roads could result in the loss of 0.04 acre of wetlands, disturbance of some migratory bird nesting habitat, and temporary disruption of utility services to local residents and businesses. Depending on the final design, partial or complete acquisition of a state surplus building could be required. In addition, there would be a partial acquisition of a parking area and of undeveloped private land. Loss of the signal at 200 West and the elimination of the left-turn lane could impact retail businesses located at the intersection. 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: 110385, 670 pages and maps, November 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-11-01-F KW - Highways KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Utah 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/918915418?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BANGERTER+600+WEST+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=BANGERTER+600+WEST+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-02-01 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BANGERTER 600 WEST PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. [Part 1 of 16] T2 - BANGERTER 600 WEST PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. AN - 918915417; 15142-5_0001 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements on Bangerter Highway between Interstate 15 (I-15) and the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) line at about 900 West in the City of Draper in Salt Lake County, Utah are proposed. Bangerter Highway is the main east-west road that serves the southern end of the Salt Lake Valley west of I-15 and provides an important link between I-15 and I-80. Designed to be a limited-access facility, Bangerter Highway currently has three travel lanes in each direction west of I-15 with a concrete median barrier separating the east and west travel lanes west of the signalized intersection at 200 West. The road is classified as a principal arterial and carries 39,000 cars per day. Traffic congestion levels are increasing due to the commercial growth in the 200 West area and residential growth in the suburban communities. Projected traffic backups at the exit ramp for I-15 southbound to Bangerter Highway westbound and at the I-15/Bangerter Highway interchange indicate an increased risk of accidents in 2030. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. The action alternatives include a new right-turn lane from the I-15 southbound off ramps to Bangerter Highway, an additional westbound travel lane on Bangerter Highway from 200 West to a new 600 West interchange, a new grade-separated interchange on Bangerter Highway at 600 West, and two new five-lane arterial roads connecting the new 600 West interchange to 200 West. Alternative 4E would involve construction of the interchange at 600 West and Bangerter Highway and elimination of the signalized intersection at 200 West. No access between 200 West and Bangerter Highway would be provided. Under Alternative 4F, the interchange at 600 West and Bangerter Highway would be constructed, the traffic signals at the 200 West and Bangerter Highway intersection would be eliminated, and right turns only from 200 West would be allowed. Alternative 4G would maintain the traffic signal at the 200 West and Bangerter Highway intersection and allow only right turns to and from 200 West, as well as north-south and east-west through movements. The 600 West Interchange with Right Turns Only at 200 West Alternative (Alternative 4F) is the preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would help meet the projected travel demand in 2030. Converting existing signalized intersections to grade-separated interchanges would reduce congestion and the risk of accidents. Maintaining right turns at the 200 West intersection would reduce negative impacts to local businesses. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the interchange and connecting roads could result in the loss of 0.04 acre of wetlands, disturbance of some migratory bird nesting habitat, and temporary disruption of utility services to local residents and businesses. Depending on the final design, partial or complete acquisition of a state surplus building could be required. In addition, there would be a partial acquisition of a parking area and of undeveloped private land. Loss of the signal at 200 West and the elimination of the left-turn lane could impact retail businesses located at the intersection. 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: 110385, 670 pages and maps, November 18, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-11-01-F KW - Highways KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Utah 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/918915417?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BANGERTER+600+WEST+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=BANGERTER+600+WEST+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-02-01 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BANGERTER 600 WEST PROJECT, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH. AN - 916835769; 15142 AB - PURPOSE: Transportation improvements on Bangerter Highway between Interstate 15 (I-15) and the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) line at about 900 West in the City of Draper in Salt Lake County, Utah are proposed. Bangerter Highway is the main east-west road that serves the southern end of the Salt Lake Valley west of I-15 and provides an important link between I-15 and I-80. Designed to be a limited-access facility, Bangerter Highway currently has three travel lanes in each direction west of I-15 with a concrete median barrier separating the east and west travel lanes west of the signalized intersection at 200 West. The road is classified as a principal arterial and carries 39,000 cars per day. Traffic congestion levels are increasing due to the commercial growth in the 200 West area and residential growth in the suburban communities. Projected traffic backups at the exit ramp for I-15 southbound to Bangerter Highway westbound and at the I-15/Bangerter Highway interchange indicate an increased risk of accidents in 2030. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. The action alternatives include a new right-turn lane from the I-15 southbound off ramps to Bangerter Highway, an additional westbound travel lane on Bangerter Highway from 200 West to a new 600 West interchange, a new grade-separated interchange on Bangerter Highway at 600 West, and two new five-lane arterial roads connecting the new 600 West interchange to 200 West. Alternative 4E would involve construction of the interchange at 600 West and Bangerter Highway and elimination of the signalized intersection at 200 West. No access between 200 West and Bangerter Highway would be provided. Under Alternative 4F, the interchange at 600 West and Bangerter Highway would be constructed, the traffic signals at the 200 West and Bangerter Highway intersection would be eliminated, and right turns only from 200 West would be allowed. Alternative 4G would maintain the traffic signal at the 200 West and Bangerter Highway intersection and allow only right turns to and from 200 West, as well as north-south and east-west through movements. The 600 West Interchange with Right Turns Only at 200 West Alternative (Alternative 4F) is the preferred alternative. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Improvements would help meet the projected travel demand in 2030. Converting existing signalized intersections to grade-separated interchanges would reduce congestion and the risk of accidents. Maintaining right turns at the 200 West intersection would reduce negative impacts to local businesses. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the interchange and connecting roads could result in the loss of 0.04 acre of wetlands, disturbance of some migratory bird nesting habitat, and temporary disruption of utility services to local residents and businesses. Depending on the final design, partial or complete acquisition of a state surplus building could be required. In addition, there would be a partial acquisition of a parking area and of undeveloped private land. Loss of the signal at 200 West and the elimination of the left-turn lane could impact retail businesses located at the intersection. 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: 110385, 670 pages and maps, November 18, 2011 PY - 2011 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-11-01-F KW - Highways KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Control KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Utah 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/916835769?accountid=14244 L2 - http://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=2011-11-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BANGERTER+600+WEST+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=BANGERTER+600+WEST+PROJECT%2C+SALT+LAKE+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - TRUNK HIGHWAY 60, ST. JAMES TO WINDOM, COTTONWOOD AND WATONWAN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF 1983). AN - 916835768; 15141 AB - PURPOSE: The completion of four-lane divided sections in the gap segments of Trunk Highway 60 in Cottonwood and Wantonwan counties, Minnesota is proposed. Since the Highway 60 Record of Decision was released in 1984, several segments of the original preferred alternative between the cities of Worthington and St. James, Minnesota have been constructed as a four-lane divided highway. The past projects have involved capacity, safety, and mobility improvements. However, to date three highway segments between the cities of St. James and Windom were reconstructed only as two-lane roads. These three segments, totaling approximately 17 miles, are: the east gap, which extends 5.3 miles from just west of St. James to the eastern edge of Butterfield; the middle gap, which extends 4.2 miles from the western edge of Butterfield to just east of Mountain Lake; and the west gap, which extends 7.5 miles from just west of Mountain Lake to the northeast edge of Windom. This draft supplemental EIS considers a No Build Alternative (Alternative 1) and construction of a four-lane expressway in the east, middle, and west gaps (Alternative 2). The facility would be completed by constructing two lanes adjacent to the existing highway with 90 feet between centerlines. A design speed of 70 miles per hour (mph) would be used for the improvements and a 65 mph posted speed is anticipated to match the posted speeds on existing four-lane sections. Intersections are proposed to be at-grade with two-way stops on the intersecting local roads. Left and right turn lanes would be provided at all public roads. At nonpublic road median crossovers, left turn lanes would be constructed. Other improvements include minor reconstruction of cross street intersections and access/driveway modifications. Total construction and right of-way acquisition costs, estimated in year of construction dollars (2013 to 2018), are $23 million for the east gap, $16.8 million for the middle gap, and $18 to $20.6 million for the west gap. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Continued implementation of transportation system improvements in the corridor would provide a logical, safe, and predictable system for highway users and maintain mobility to address growing freight traffic. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New right-of-way would require 385 to 421 acres and one to three commercial relocations. Approximately 320 to 350 acres of farmland would be converted and 6.2 to 7.9 acres of wetlands would be impacted. The build alternative could require water body modification at Clear Lake (0.2 to 1.2 acres) and Warren Pond (0.3 acres).Three receptors are anticipated to experience noise levels above local daytime standards, while the number of potential exceedances for nighttime standards is 23 to 33 receptors. Twenty-two contaminated sites have been identified in the project area. 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: 110384, 162 pages and maps, Original EIS and ROD--CD-ROM, November 18, 2011 PY - 2011 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Farmlands KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Minnesota 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/916835768?accountid=14244 L2 - http://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=2011-11-18&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=TRUNK+HIGHWAY+60%2C+ST.+JAMES+TO+WINDOM%2C+COTTONWOOD+AND+WATONWAN+COUNTIES%2C+MINNESOTA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+1983%29.&rft.title=TRUNK+HIGHWAY+60%2C+ST.+JAMES+TO+WINDOM%2C+COTTONWOOD+AND+WATONWAN+COUNTIES%2C+MINNESOTA+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+1983%29.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, St. Paul, Minnesota; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 18, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-20 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BATON ROUGE LOOP, PARISHES OF ASCENSION, EAST BATON ROUGE, IBERVILLE, LIVINGSTON, AND WEST BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA (TIER 1 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 17 of 17] T2 - BATON ROUGE LOOP, PARISHES OF ASCENSION, EAST BATON ROUGE, IBERVILLE, LIVINGSTON, AND WEST BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA (TIER 1 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 917565125; 15135-8_0017 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a controlled-access toll roadway around Baton Rouge, Louisiana is proposed. The Baton Rouge Loop would extend 90 to 105 miles through the parishes of Ascension, East Baton Rouge, Iberville, Livingston, and West Baton Rouge and would supplement Interstate 12 (I-12) and I-10. Traffic congestion and delays in the five-parish region have steadily worsened over the past 15 years. Traffic flow is restricted at the I-10 and US 190 Mississippi River Bridge crossings, and the lack of convenient alternative routes and system connectivity forces local traffic onto I-10 and I-12, increasing congestion. The Baton Rouge Loop would initially be constructed as a four-lane facility, two 12-foot lanes each direction, with the ability to add at least two additional lanes in the median when traffic demands warrant. The proposed typical roadway section would also provide space within the average 400-foot right-of-way to add continuous frontage roads, if needed, with bike paths and transit potentially sharing the footprint. Sections of the route would be elevated above existing terrain in environmentally sensitive areas. This Tier 1 draft EIS examines a No Build Alternative and a Build Alternative that is composed of thirty-one corridor alternatives in three geographic units. For the North Unit, three of five corridor alternatives are recommended for further input and consideration. In the South Unit, nine of the eighteen corridor alternatives are recommended for exclusion due to issues associated with wetland mitigation banks. For the East Unit, four of eight corridor alternatives are recommended for additional deliberation. Locally preferred corridors include two potential Mississippi River bridge locations. One is north of the present I-10 bridge either in the existing US 190 bridge corridor or five miles north of the US 190 bridge; and the second is south of the existing I-10 bridge either at the Missouri Bend north of Addis or in Iberville Parish between Plaquemine and St. Gabriel. Various corridor alternative options exist through northern Livingston and East Baton Rouge Parishes, and Iberville and Ascension Parishes between the Mississippi and Amite Rivers. System-to-system four-level interchanges would connect the Baton Rouge Loop to I-10 and I-12, and perhaps other major highways such as US 190, US 51, and State Route 1. Other interchanges would vary but would most commonly be diamond-type interchanges. The preliminary capital cost estimate for the Baton Rouge Loop in 2009 dollars is between $4 billion and $4.9 billion. A sensitivity analysis shows that an initial toll rate of $0.15 per mile would maximize revenue generated by the Loop. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new facility would reduce congestion and delay on I-10, I-12 and other major arterial corridors. Expanded roadway capacity would address future travel demand, enhance the regional transportation network, and improve the safe movement of people and goods within and through the five-parish project area. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction could impact fish and wildlife, including eight threatened and endangered species. Potential secondary development spurred by construction would have a high likelihood of impacting wetland, floodplain, and/or agricultural resources. Approximately one-third of each North Unit corridor alternative is comprised of wetlands, 40 percent is comprised of floodplains, and 34 percent consist of agricultural lands. On average, 56 percent of the area contained within the South Unit corridor alternatives consists of wetlands, 55 percent is located within a 100-year floodplain, and 42 percent consists of agricultural lands. For the East Unit alternatives, 51 percent of the area consists of wetlands, 81 percent is located within a 100-year floodplain, and 9.6 percent consists of agricultural lands. The project area contains numerous community facilities, cultural resources, hazardous waste sites, and oil and gas wells. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110378, Volume 1--496 pages and maps, Volume 2 (Exhibits)--139 pages, November 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 17 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Louisiana KW - Mississippi River KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/917565125?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BATON+ROUGE+LOOP%2C+PARISHES+OF+ASCENSION%2C+EAST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+IBERVILLE%2C+LIVINGSTON%2C+AND+WEST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+LOUISIANA+%28TIER+1+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=BATON+ROUGE+LOOP%2C+PARISHES+OF+ASCENSION%2C+EAST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+IBERVILLE%2C+LIVINGSTON%2C+AND+WEST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+LOUISIANA+%28TIER+1+DRAFT+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, Baton Rouge, Louisiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BATON ROUGE LOOP, PARISHES OF ASCENSION, EAST BATON ROUGE, IBERVILLE, LIVINGSTON, AND WEST BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA (TIER 1 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 16 of 17] T2 - BATON ROUGE LOOP, PARISHES OF ASCENSION, EAST BATON ROUGE, IBERVILLE, LIVINGSTON, AND WEST BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA (TIER 1 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 917565122; 15135-8_0016 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a controlled-access toll roadway around Baton Rouge, Louisiana is proposed. The Baton Rouge Loop would extend 90 to 105 miles through the parishes of Ascension, East Baton Rouge, Iberville, Livingston, and West Baton Rouge and would supplement Interstate 12 (I-12) and I-10. Traffic congestion and delays in the five-parish region have steadily worsened over the past 15 years. Traffic flow is restricted at the I-10 and US 190 Mississippi River Bridge crossings, and the lack of convenient alternative routes and system connectivity forces local traffic onto I-10 and I-12, increasing congestion. The Baton Rouge Loop would initially be constructed as a four-lane facility, two 12-foot lanes each direction, with the ability to add at least two additional lanes in the median when traffic demands warrant. The proposed typical roadway section would also provide space within the average 400-foot right-of-way to add continuous frontage roads, if needed, with bike paths and transit potentially sharing the footprint. Sections of the route would be elevated above existing terrain in environmentally sensitive areas. This Tier 1 draft EIS examines a No Build Alternative and a Build Alternative that is composed of thirty-one corridor alternatives in three geographic units. For the North Unit, three of five corridor alternatives are recommended for further input and consideration. In the South Unit, nine of the eighteen corridor alternatives are recommended for exclusion due to issues associated with wetland mitigation banks. For the East Unit, four of eight corridor alternatives are recommended for additional deliberation. Locally preferred corridors include two potential Mississippi River bridge locations. One is north of the present I-10 bridge either in the existing US 190 bridge corridor or five miles north of the US 190 bridge; and the second is south of the existing I-10 bridge either at the Missouri Bend north of Addis or in Iberville Parish between Plaquemine and St. Gabriel. Various corridor alternative options exist through northern Livingston and East Baton Rouge Parishes, and Iberville and Ascension Parishes between the Mississippi and Amite Rivers. System-to-system four-level interchanges would connect the Baton Rouge Loop to I-10 and I-12, and perhaps other major highways such as US 190, US 51, and State Route 1. Other interchanges would vary but would most commonly be diamond-type interchanges. The preliminary capital cost estimate for the Baton Rouge Loop in 2009 dollars is between $4 billion and $4.9 billion. A sensitivity analysis shows that an initial toll rate of $0.15 per mile would maximize revenue generated by the Loop. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new facility would reduce congestion and delay on I-10, I-12 and other major arterial corridors. Expanded roadway capacity would address future travel demand, enhance the regional transportation network, and improve the safe movement of people and goods within and through the five-parish project area. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction could impact fish and wildlife, including eight threatened and endangered species. Potential secondary development spurred by construction would have a high likelihood of impacting wetland, floodplain, and/or agricultural resources. Approximately one-third of each North Unit corridor alternative is comprised of wetlands, 40 percent is comprised of floodplains, and 34 percent consist of agricultural lands. On average, 56 percent of the area contained within the South Unit corridor alternatives consists of wetlands, 55 percent is located within a 100-year floodplain, and 42 percent consists of agricultural lands. For the East Unit alternatives, 51 percent of the area consists of wetlands, 81 percent is located within a 100-year floodplain, and 9.6 percent consists of agricultural lands. The project area contains numerous community facilities, cultural resources, hazardous waste sites, and oil and gas wells. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110378, Volume 1--496 pages and maps, Volume 2 (Exhibits)--139 pages, November 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 16 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Louisiana KW - Mississippi River KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/917565122?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BATON+ROUGE+LOOP%2C+PARISHES+OF+ASCENSION%2C+EAST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+IBERVILLE%2C+LIVINGSTON%2C+AND+WEST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+LOUISIANA+%28TIER+1+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=BATON+ROUGE+LOOP%2C+PARISHES+OF+ASCENSION%2C+EAST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+IBERVILLE%2C+LIVINGSTON%2C+AND+WEST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+LOUISIANA+%28TIER+1+DRAFT+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, Baton Rouge, Louisiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BATON ROUGE LOOP, PARISHES OF ASCENSION, EAST BATON ROUGE, IBERVILLE, LIVINGSTON, AND WEST BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA (TIER 1 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 15 of 17] T2 - BATON ROUGE LOOP, PARISHES OF ASCENSION, EAST BATON ROUGE, IBERVILLE, LIVINGSTON, AND WEST BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA (TIER 1 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 917565117; 15135-8_0015 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a controlled-access toll roadway around Baton Rouge, Louisiana is proposed. The Baton Rouge Loop would extend 90 to 105 miles through the parishes of Ascension, East Baton Rouge, Iberville, Livingston, and West Baton Rouge and would supplement Interstate 12 (I-12) and I-10. Traffic congestion and delays in the five-parish region have steadily worsened over the past 15 years. Traffic flow is restricted at the I-10 and US 190 Mississippi River Bridge crossings, and the lack of convenient alternative routes and system connectivity forces local traffic onto I-10 and I-12, increasing congestion. The Baton Rouge Loop would initially be constructed as a four-lane facility, two 12-foot lanes each direction, with the ability to add at least two additional lanes in the median when traffic demands warrant. The proposed typical roadway section would also provide space within the average 400-foot right-of-way to add continuous frontage roads, if needed, with bike paths and transit potentially sharing the footprint. Sections of the route would be elevated above existing terrain in environmentally sensitive areas. This Tier 1 draft EIS examines a No Build Alternative and a Build Alternative that is composed of thirty-one corridor alternatives in three geographic units. For the North Unit, three of five corridor alternatives are recommended for further input and consideration. In the South Unit, nine of the eighteen corridor alternatives are recommended for exclusion due to issues associated with wetland mitigation banks. For the East Unit, four of eight corridor alternatives are recommended for additional deliberation. Locally preferred corridors include two potential Mississippi River bridge locations. One is north of the present I-10 bridge either in the existing US 190 bridge corridor or five miles north of the US 190 bridge; and the second is south of the existing I-10 bridge either at the Missouri Bend north of Addis or in Iberville Parish between Plaquemine and St. Gabriel. Various corridor alternative options exist through northern Livingston and East Baton Rouge Parishes, and Iberville and Ascension Parishes between the Mississippi and Amite Rivers. System-to-system four-level interchanges would connect the Baton Rouge Loop to I-10 and I-12, and perhaps other major highways such as US 190, US 51, and State Route 1. Other interchanges would vary but would most commonly be diamond-type interchanges. The preliminary capital cost estimate for the Baton Rouge Loop in 2009 dollars is between $4 billion and $4.9 billion. A sensitivity analysis shows that an initial toll rate of $0.15 per mile would maximize revenue generated by the Loop. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new facility would reduce congestion and delay on I-10, I-12 and other major arterial corridors. Expanded roadway capacity would address future travel demand, enhance the regional transportation network, and improve the safe movement of people and goods within and through the five-parish project area. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction could impact fish and wildlife, including eight threatened and endangered species. Potential secondary development spurred by construction would have a high likelihood of impacting wetland, floodplain, and/or agricultural resources. Approximately one-third of each North Unit corridor alternative is comprised of wetlands, 40 percent is comprised of floodplains, and 34 percent consist of agricultural lands. On average, 56 percent of the area contained within the South Unit corridor alternatives consists of wetlands, 55 percent is located within a 100-year floodplain, and 42 percent consists of agricultural lands. For the East Unit alternatives, 51 percent of the area consists of wetlands, 81 percent is located within a 100-year floodplain, and 9.6 percent consists of agricultural lands. The project area contains numerous community facilities, cultural resources, hazardous waste sites, and oil and gas wells. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110378, Volume 1--496 pages and maps, Volume 2 (Exhibits)--139 pages, November 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 15 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Louisiana KW - Mississippi River KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/917565117?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BATON+ROUGE+LOOP%2C+PARISHES+OF+ASCENSION%2C+EAST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+IBERVILLE%2C+LIVINGSTON%2C+AND+WEST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+LOUISIANA+%28TIER+1+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=BATON+ROUGE+LOOP%2C+PARISHES+OF+ASCENSION%2C+EAST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+IBERVILLE%2C+LIVINGSTON%2C+AND+WEST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+LOUISIANA+%28TIER+1+DRAFT+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, Baton Rouge, Louisiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BATON ROUGE LOOP, PARISHES OF ASCENSION, EAST BATON ROUGE, IBERVILLE, LIVINGSTON, AND WEST BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA (TIER 1 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 14 of 17] T2 - BATON ROUGE LOOP, PARISHES OF ASCENSION, EAST BATON ROUGE, IBERVILLE, LIVINGSTON, AND WEST BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA (TIER 1 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 917565111; 15135-8_0014 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a controlled-access toll roadway around Baton Rouge, Louisiana is proposed. The Baton Rouge Loop would extend 90 to 105 miles through the parishes of Ascension, East Baton Rouge, Iberville, Livingston, and West Baton Rouge and would supplement Interstate 12 (I-12) and I-10. Traffic congestion and delays in the five-parish region have steadily worsened over the past 15 years. Traffic flow is restricted at the I-10 and US 190 Mississippi River Bridge crossings, and the lack of convenient alternative routes and system connectivity forces local traffic onto I-10 and I-12, increasing congestion. The Baton Rouge Loop would initially be constructed as a four-lane facility, two 12-foot lanes each direction, with the ability to add at least two additional lanes in the median when traffic demands warrant. The proposed typical roadway section would also provide space within the average 400-foot right-of-way to add continuous frontage roads, if needed, with bike paths and transit potentially sharing the footprint. Sections of the route would be elevated above existing terrain in environmentally sensitive areas. This Tier 1 draft EIS examines a No Build Alternative and a Build Alternative that is composed of thirty-one corridor alternatives in three geographic units. For the North Unit, three of five corridor alternatives are recommended for further input and consideration. In the South Unit, nine of the eighteen corridor alternatives are recommended for exclusion due to issues associated with wetland mitigation banks. For the East Unit, four of eight corridor alternatives are recommended for additional deliberation. Locally preferred corridors include two potential Mississippi River bridge locations. One is north of the present I-10 bridge either in the existing US 190 bridge corridor or five miles north of the US 190 bridge; and the second is south of the existing I-10 bridge either at the Missouri Bend north of Addis or in Iberville Parish between Plaquemine and St. Gabriel. Various corridor alternative options exist through northern Livingston and East Baton Rouge Parishes, and Iberville and Ascension Parishes between the Mississippi and Amite Rivers. System-to-system four-level interchanges would connect the Baton Rouge Loop to I-10 and I-12, and perhaps other major highways such as US 190, US 51, and State Route 1. Other interchanges would vary but would most commonly be diamond-type interchanges. The preliminary capital cost estimate for the Baton Rouge Loop in 2009 dollars is between $4 billion and $4.9 billion. A sensitivity analysis shows that an initial toll rate of $0.15 per mile would maximize revenue generated by the Loop. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new facility would reduce congestion and delay on I-10, I-12 and other major arterial corridors. Expanded roadway capacity would address future travel demand, enhance the regional transportation network, and improve the safe movement of people and goods within and through the five-parish project area. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction could impact fish and wildlife, including eight threatened and endangered species. Potential secondary development spurred by construction would have a high likelihood of impacting wetland, floodplain, and/or agricultural resources. Approximately one-third of each North Unit corridor alternative is comprised of wetlands, 40 percent is comprised of floodplains, and 34 percent consist of agricultural lands. On average, 56 percent of the area contained within the South Unit corridor alternatives consists of wetlands, 55 percent is located within a 100-year floodplain, and 42 percent consists of agricultural lands. For the East Unit alternatives, 51 percent of the area consists of wetlands, 81 percent is located within a 100-year floodplain, and 9.6 percent consists of agricultural lands. The project area contains numerous community facilities, cultural resources, hazardous waste sites, and oil and gas wells. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110378, Volume 1--496 pages and maps, Volume 2 (Exhibits)--139 pages, November 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 14 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Louisiana KW - Mississippi River KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/917565111?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BATON+ROUGE+LOOP%2C+PARISHES+OF+ASCENSION%2C+EAST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+IBERVILLE%2C+LIVINGSTON%2C+AND+WEST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+LOUISIANA+%28TIER+1+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=BATON+ROUGE+LOOP%2C+PARISHES+OF+ASCENSION%2C+EAST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+IBERVILLE%2C+LIVINGSTON%2C+AND+WEST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+LOUISIANA+%28TIER+1+DRAFT+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, Baton Rouge, Louisiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BATON ROUGE LOOP, PARISHES OF ASCENSION, EAST BATON ROUGE, IBERVILLE, LIVINGSTON, AND WEST BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA (TIER 1 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 13 of 17] T2 - BATON ROUGE LOOP, PARISHES OF ASCENSION, EAST BATON ROUGE, IBERVILLE, LIVINGSTON, AND WEST BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA (TIER 1 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 917565107; 15135-8_0013 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a controlled-access toll roadway around Baton Rouge, Louisiana is proposed. The Baton Rouge Loop would extend 90 to 105 miles through the parishes of Ascension, East Baton Rouge, Iberville, Livingston, and West Baton Rouge and would supplement Interstate 12 (I-12) and I-10. Traffic congestion and delays in the five-parish region have steadily worsened over the past 15 years. Traffic flow is restricted at the I-10 and US 190 Mississippi River Bridge crossings, and the lack of convenient alternative routes and system connectivity forces local traffic onto I-10 and I-12, increasing congestion. The Baton Rouge Loop would initially be constructed as a four-lane facility, two 12-foot lanes each direction, with the ability to add at least two additional lanes in the median when traffic demands warrant. The proposed typical roadway section would also provide space within the average 400-foot right-of-way to add continuous frontage roads, if needed, with bike paths and transit potentially sharing the footprint. Sections of the route would be elevated above existing terrain in environmentally sensitive areas. This Tier 1 draft EIS examines a No Build Alternative and a Build Alternative that is composed of thirty-one corridor alternatives in three geographic units. For the North Unit, three of five corridor alternatives are recommended for further input and consideration. In the South Unit, nine of the eighteen corridor alternatives are recommended for exclusion due to issues associated with wetland mitigation banks. For the East Unit, four of eight corridor alternatives are recommended for additional deliberation. Locally preferred corridors include two potential Mississippi River bridge locations. One is north of the present I-10 bridge either in the existing US 190 bridge corridor or five miles north of the US 190 bridge; and the second is south of the existing I-10 bridge either at the Missouri Bend north of Addis or in Iberville Parish between Plaquemine and St. Gabriel. Various corridor alternative options exist through northern Livingston and East Baton Rouge Parishes, and Iberville and Ascension Parishes between the Mississippi and Amite Rivers. System-to-system four-level interchanges would connect the Baton Rouge Loop to I-10 and I-12, and perhaps other major highways such as US 190, US 51, and State Route 1. Other interchanges would vary but would most commonly be diamond-type interchanges. The preliminary capital cost estimate for the Baton Rouge Loop in 2009 dollars is between $4 billion and $4.9 billion. A sensitivity analysis shows that an initial toll rate of $0.15 per mile would maximize revenue generated by the Loop. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new facility would reduce congestion and delay on I-10, I-12 and other major arterial corridors. Expanded roadway capacity would address future travel demand, enhance the regional transportation network, and improve the safe movement of people and goods within and through the five-parish project area. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction could impact fish and wildlife, including eight threatened and endangered species. Potential secondary development spurred by construction would have a high likelihood of impacting wetland, floodplain, and/or agricultural resources. Approximately one-third of each North Unit corridor alternative is comprised of wetlands, 40 percent is comprised of floodplains, and 34 percent consist of agricultural lands. On average, 56 percent of the area contained within the South Unit corridor alternatives consists of wetlands, 55 percent is located within a 100-year floodplain, and 42 percent consists of agricultural lands. For the East Unit alternatives, 51 percent of the area consists of wetlands, 81 percent is located within a 100-year floodplain, and 9.6 percent consists of agricultural lands. The project area contains numerous community facilities, cultural resources, hazardous waste sites, and oil and gas wells. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110378, Volume 1--496 pages and maps, Volume 2 (Exhibits)--139 pages, November 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 13 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Louisiana KW - Mississippi River KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/917565107?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BATON+ROUGE+LOOP%2C+PARISHES+OF+ASCENSION%2C+EAST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+IBERVILLE%2C+LIVINGSTON%2C+AND+WEST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+LOUISIANA+%28TIER+1+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=BATON+ROUGE+LOOP%2C+PARISHES+OF+ASCENSION%2C+EAST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+IBERVILLE%2C+LIVINGSTON%2C+AND+WEST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+LOUISIANA+%28TIER+1+DRAFT+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, Baton Rouge, Louisiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BATON ROUGE LOOP, PARISHES OF ASCENSION, EAST BATON ROUGE, IBERVILLE, LIVINGSTON, AND WEST BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA (TIER 1 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 12 of 17] T2 - BATON ROUGE LOOP, PARISHES OF ASCENSION, EAST BATON ROUGE, IBERVILLE, LIVINGSTON, AND WEST BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA (TIER 1 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 917565095; 15135-8_0012 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a controlled-access toll roadway around Baton Rouge, Louisiana is proposed. The Baton Rouge Loop would extend 90 to 105 miles through the parishes of Ascension, East Baton Rouge, Iberville, Livingston, and West Baton Rouge and would supplement Interstate 12 (I-12) and I-10. Traffic congestion and delays in the five-parish region have steadily worsened over the past 15 years. Traffic flow is restricted at the I-10 and US 190 Mississippi River Bridge crossings, and the lack of convenient alternative routes and system connectivity forces local traffic onto I-10 and I-12, increasing congestion. The Baton Rouge Loop would initially be constructed as a four-lane facility, two 12-foot lanes each direction, with the ability to add at least two additional lanes in the median when traffic demands warrant. The proposed typical roadway section would also provide space within the average 400-foot right-of-way to add continuous frontage roads, if needed, with bike paths and transit potentially sharing the footprint. Sections of the route would be elevated above existing terrain in environmentally sensitive areas. This Tier 1 draft EIS examines a No Build Alternative and a Build Alternative that is composed of thirty-one corridor alternatives in three geographic units. For the North Unit, three of five corridor alternatives are recommended for further input and consideration. In the South Unit, nine of the eighteen corridor alternatives are recommended for exclusion due to issues associated with wetland mitigation banks. For the East Unit, four of eight corridor alternatives are recommended for additional deliberation. Locally preferred corridors include two potential Mississippi River bridge locations. One is north of the present I-10 bridge either in the existing US 190 bridge corridor or five miles north of the US 190 bridge; and the second is south of the existing I-10 bridge either at the Missouri Bend north of Addis or in Iberville Parish between Plaquemine and St. Gabriel. Various corridor alternative options exist through northern Livingston and East Baton Rouge Parishes, and Iberville and Ascension Parishes between the Mississippi and Amite Rivers. System-to-system four-level interchanges would connect the Baton Rouge Loop to I-10 and I-12, and perhaps other major highways such as US 190, US 51, and State Route 1. Other interchanges would vary but would most commonly be diamond-type interchanges. The preliminary capital cost estimate for the Baton Rouge Loop in 2009 dollars is between $4 billion and $4.9 billion. A sensitivity analysis shows that an initial toll rate of $0.15 per mile would maximize revenue generated by the Loop. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new facility would reduce congestion and delay on I-10, I-12 and other major arterial corridors. Expanded roadway capacity would address future travel demand, enhance the regional transportation network, and improve the safe movement of people and goods within and through the five-parish project area. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction could impact fish and wildlife, including eight threatened and endangered species. Potential secondary development spurred by construction would have a high likelihood of impacting wetland, floodplain, and/or agricultural resources. Approximately one-third of each North Unit corridor alternative is comprised of wetlands, 40 percent is comprised of floodplains, and 34 percent consist of agricultural lands. On average, 56 percent of the area contained within the South Unit corridor alternatives consists of wetlands, 55 percent is located within a 100-year floodplain, and 42 percent consists of agricultural lands. For the East Unit alternatives, 51 percent of the area consists of wetlands, 81 percent is located within a 100-year floodplain, and 9.6 percent consists of agricultural lands. The project area contains numerous community facilities, cultural resources, hazardous waste sites, and oil and gas wells. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110378, Volume 1--496 pages and maps, Volume 2 (Exhibits)--139 pages, November 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 12 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Louisiana KW - Mississippi River KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/917565095?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BATON+ROUGE+LOOP%2C+PARISHES+OF+ASCENSION%2C+EAST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+IBERVILLE%2C+LIVINGSTON%2C+AND+WEST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+LOUISIANA+%28TIER+1+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=BATON+ROUGE+LOOP%2C+PARISHES+OF+ASCENSION%2C+EAST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+IBERVILLE%2C+LIVINGSTON%2C+AND+WEST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+LOUISIANA+%28TIER+1+DRAFT+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, Baton Rouge, Louisiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BATON ROUGE LOOP, PARISHES OF ASCENSION, EAST BATON ROUGE, IBERVILLE, LIVINGSTON, AND WEST BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA (TIER 1 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 11 of 17] T2 - BATON ROUGE LOOP, PARISHES OF ASCENSION, EAST BATON ROUGE, IBERVILLE, LIVINGSTON, AND WEST BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA (TIER 1 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 917565090; 15135-8_0011 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a controlled-access toll roadway around Baton Rouge, Louisiana is proposed. The Baton Rouge Loop would extend 90 to 105 miles through the parishes of Ascension, East Baton Rouge, Iberville, Livingston, and West Baton Rouge and would supplement Interstate 12 (I-12) and I-10. Traffic congestion and delays in the five-parish region have steadily worsened over the past 15 years. Traffic flow is restricted at the I-10 and US 190 Mississippi River Bridge crossings, and the lack of convenient alternative routes and system connectivity forces local traffic onto I-10 and I-12, increasing congestion. The Baton Rouge Loop would initially be constructed as a four-lane facility, two 12-foot lanes each direction, with the ability to add at least two additional lanes in the median when traffic demands warrant. The proposed typical roadway section would also provide space within the average 400-foot right-of-way to add continuous frontage roads, if needed, with bike paths and transit potentially sharing the footprint. Sections of the route would be elevated above existing terrain in environmentally sensitive areas. This Tier 1 draft EIS examines a No Build Alternative and a Build Alternative that is composed of thirty-one corridor alternatives in three geographic units. For the North Unit, three of five corridor alternatives are recommended for further input and consideration. In the South Unit, nine of the eighteen corridor alternatives are recommended for exclusion due to issues associated with wetland mitigation banks. For the East Unit, four of eight corridor alternatives are recommended for additional deliberation. Locally preferred corridors include two potential Mississippi River bridge locations. One is north of the present I-10 bridge either in the existing US 190 bridge corridor or five miles north of the US 190 bridge; and the second is south of the existing I-10 bridge either at the Missouri Bend north of Addis or in Iberville Parish between Plaquemine and St. Gabriel. Various corridor alternative options exist through northern Livingston and East Baton Rouge Parishes, and Iberville and Ascension Parishes between the Mississippi and Amite Rivers. System-to-system four-level interchanges would connect the Baton Rouge Loop to I-10 and I-12, and perhaps other major highways such as US 190, US 51, and State Route 1. Other interchanges would vary but would most commonly be diamond-type interchanges. The preliminary capital cost estimate for the Baton Rouge Loop in 2009 dollars is between $4 billion and $4.9 billion. A sensitivity analysis shows that an initial toll rate of $0.15 per mile would maximize revenue generated by the Loop. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new facility would reduce congestion and delay on I-10, I-12 and other major arterial corridors. Expanded roadway capacity would address future travel demand, enhance the regional transportation network, and improve the safe movement of people and goods within and through the five-parish project area. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction could impact fish and wildlife, including eight threatened and endangered species. Potential secondary development spurred by construction would have a high likelihood of impacting wetland, floodplain, and/or agricultural resources. Approximately one-third of each North Unit corridor alternative is comprised of wetlands, 40 percent is comprised of floodplains, and 34 percent consist of agricultural lands. On average, 56 percent of the area contained within the South Unit corridor alternatives consists of wetlands, 55 percent is located within a 100-year floodplain, and 42 percent consists of agricultural lands. For the East Unit alternatives, 51 percent of the area consists of wetlands, 81 percent is located within a 100-year floodplain, and 9.6 percent consists of agricultural lands. The project area contains numerous community facilities, cultural resources, hazardous waste sites, and oil and gas wells. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110378, Volume 1--496 pages and maps, Volume 2 (Exhibits)--139 pages, November 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 11 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Louisiana KW - Mississippi River KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/917565090?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BATON+ROUGE+LOOP%2C+PARISHES+OF+ASCENSION%2C+EAST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+IBERVILLE%2C+LIVINGSTON%2C+AND+WEST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+LOUISIANA+%28TIER+1+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=BATON+ROUGE+LOOP%2C+PARISHES+OF+ASCENSION%2C+EAST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+IBERVILLE%2C+LIVINGSTON%2C+AND+WEST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+LOUISIANA+%28TIER+1+DRAFT+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, Baton Rouge, Louisiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BATON ROUGE LOOP, PARISHES OF ASCENSION, EAST BATON ROUGE, IBERVILLE, LIVINGSTON, AND WEST BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA (TIER 1 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 10 of 17] T2 - BATON ROUGE LOOP, PARISHES OF ASCENSION, EAST BATON ROUGE, IBERVILLE, LIVINGSTON, AND WEST BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA (TIER 1 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 917565085; 15135-8_0010 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a controlled-access toll roadway around Baton Rouge, Louisiana is proposed. The Baton Rouge Loop would extend 90 to 105 miles through the parishes of Ascension, East Baton Rouge, Iberville, Livingston, and West Baton Rouge and would supplement Interstate 12 (I-12) and I-10. Traffic congestion and delays in the five-parish region have steadily worsened over the past 15 years. Traffic flow is restricted at the I-10 and US 190 Mississippi River Bridge crossings, and the lack of convenient alternative routes and system connectivity forces local traffic onto I-10 and I-12, increasing congestion. The Baton Rouge Loop would initially be constructed as a four-lane facility, two 12-foot lanes each direction, with the ability to add at least two additional lanes in the median when traffic demands warrant. The proposed typical roadway section would also provide space within the average 400-foot right-of-way to add continuous frontage roads, if needed, with bike paths and transit potentially sharing the footprint. Sections of the route would be elevated above existing terrain in environmentally sensitive areas. This Tier 1 draft EIS examines a No Build Alternative and a Build Alternative that is composed of thirty-one corridor alternatives in three geographic units. For the North Unit, three of five corridor alternatives are recommended for further input and consideration. In the South Unit, nine of the eighteen corridor alternatives are recommended for exclusion due to issues associated with wetland mitigation banks. For the East Unit, four of eight corridor alternatives are recommended for additional deliberation. Locally preferred corridors include two potential Mississippi River bridge locations. One is north of the present I-10 bridge either in the existing US 190 bridge corridor or five miles north of the US 190 bridge; and the second is south of the existing I-10 bridge either at the Missouri Bend north of Addis or in Iberville Parish between Plaquemine and St. Gabriel. Various corridor alternative options exist through northern Livingston and East Baton Rouge Parishes, and Iberville and Ascension Parishes between the Mississippi and Amite Rivers. System-to-system four-level interchanges would connect the Baton Rouge Loop to I-10 and I-12, and perhaps other major highways such as US 190, US 51, and State Route 1. Other interchanges would vary but would most commonly be diamond-type interchanges. The preliminary capital cost estimate for the Baton Rouge Loop in 2009 dollars is between $4 billion and $4.9 billion. A sensitivity analysis shows that an initial toll rate of $0.15 per mile would maximize revenue generated by the Loop. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new facility would reduce congestion and delay on I-10, I-12 and other major arterial corridors. Expanded roadway capacity would address future travel demand, enhance the regional transportation network, and improve the safe movement of people and goods within and through the five-parish project area. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction could impact fish and wildlife, including eight threatened and endangered species. Potential secondary development spurred by construction would have a high likelihood of impacting wetland, floodplain, and/or agricultural resources. Approximately one-third of each North Unit corridor alternative is comprised of wetlands, 40 percent is comprised of floodplains, and 34 percent consist of agricultural lands. On average, 56 percent of the area contained within the South Unit corridor alternatives consists of wetlands, 55 percent is located within a 100-year floodplain, and 42 percent consists of agricultural lands. For the East Unit alternatives, 51 percent of the area consists of wetlands, 81 percent is located within a 100-year floodplain, and 9.6 percent consists of agricultural lands. The project area contains numerous community facilities, cultural resources, hazardous waste sites, and oil and gas wells. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110378, Volume 1--496 pages and maps, Volume 2 (Exhibits)--139 pages, November 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Louisiana KW - Mississippi River KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/917565085?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BATON+ROUGE+LOOP%2C+PARISHES+OF+ASCENSION%2C+EAST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+IBERVILLE%2C+LIVINGSTON%2C+AND+WEST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+LOUISIANA+%28TIER+1+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=BATON+ROUGE+LOOP%2C+PARISHES+OF+ASCENSION%2C+EAST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+IBERVILLE%2C+LIVINGSTON%2C+AND+WEST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+LOUISIANA+%28TIER+1+DRAFT+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, Baton Rouge, Louisiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BATON ROUGE LOOP, PARISHES OF ASCENSION, EAST BATON ROUGE, IBERVILLE, LIVINGSTON, AND WEST BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA (TIER 1 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 9 of 17] T2 - BATON ROUGE LOOP, PARISHES OF ASCENSION, EAST BATON ROUGE, IBERVILLE, LIVINGSTON, AND WEST BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA (TIER 1 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 917565078; 15135-8_0009 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a controlled-access toll roadway around Baton Rouge, Louisiana is proposed. The Baton Rouge Loop would extend 90 to 105 miles through the parishes of Ascension, East Baton Rouge, Iberville, Livingston, and West Baton Rouge and would supplement Interstate 12 (I-12) and I-10. Traffic congestion and delays in the five-parish region have steadily worsened over the past 15 years. Traffic flow is restricted at the I-10 and US 190 Mississippi River Bridge crossings, and the lack of convenient alternative routes and system connectivity forces local traffic onto I-10 and I-12, increasing congestion. The Baton Rouge Loop would initially be constructed as a four-lane facility, two 12-foot lanes each direction, with the ability to add at least two additional lanes in the median when traffic demands warrant. The proposed typical roadway section would also provide space within the average 400-foot right-of-way to add continuous frontage roads, if needed, with bike paths and transit potentially sharing the footprint. Sections of the route would be elevated above existing terrain in environmentally sensitive areas. This Tier 1 draft EIS examines a No Build Alternative and a Build Alternative that is composed of thirty-one corridor alternatives in three geographic units. For the North Unit, three of five corridor alternatives are recommended for further input and consideration. In the South Unit, nine of the eighteen corridor alternatives are recommended for exclusion due to issues associated with wetland mitigation banks. For the East Unit, four of eight corridor alternatives are recommended for additional deliberation. Locally preferred corridors include two potential Mississippi River bridge locations. One is north of the present I-10 bridge either in the existing US 190 bridge corridor or five miles north of the US 190 bridge; and the second is south of the existing I-10 bridge either at the Missouri Bend north of Addis or in Iberville Parish between Plaquemine and St. Gabriel. Various corridor alternative options exist through northern Livingston and East Baton Rouge Parishes, and Iberville and Ascension Parishes between the Mississippi and Amite Rivers. System-to-system four-level interchanges would connect the Baton Rouge Loop to I-10 and I-12, and perhaps other major highways such as US 190, US 51, and State Route 1. Other interchanges would vary but would most commonly be diamond-type interchanges. The preliminary capital cost estimate for the Baton Rouge Loop in 2009 dollars is between $4 billion and $4.9 billion. A sensitivity analysis shows that an initial toll rate of $0.15 per mile would maximize revenue generated by the Loop. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new facility would reduce congestion and delay on I-10, I-12 and other major arterial corridors. Expanded roadway capacity would address future travel demand, enhance the regional transportation network, and improve the safe movement of people and goods within and through the five-parish project area. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction could impact fish and wildlife, including eight threatened and endangered species. Potential secondary development spurred by construction would have a high likelihood of impacting wetland, floodplain, and/or agricultural resources. Approximately one-third of each North Unit corridor alternative is comprised of wetlands, 40 percent is comprised of floodplains, and 34 percent consist of agricultural lands. On average, 56 percent of the area contained within the South Unit corridor alternatives consists of wetlands, 55 percent is located within a 100-year floodplain, and 42 percent consists of agricultural lands. For the East Unit alternatives, 51 percent of the area consists of wetlands, 81 percent is located within a 100-year floodplain, and 9.6 percent consists of agricultural lands. The project area contains numerous community facilities, cultural resources, hazardous waste sites, and oil and gas wells. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110378, Volume 1--496 pages and maps, Volume 2 (Exhibits)--139 pages, November 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 9 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Louisiana KW - Mississippi River KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/917565078?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BATON+ROUGE+LOOP%2C+PARISHES+OF+ASCENSION%2C+EAST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+IBERVILLE%2C+LIVINGSTON%2C+AND+WEST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+LOUISIANA+%28TIER+1+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=BATON+ROUGE+LOOP%2C+PARISHES+OF+ASCENSION%2C+EAST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+IBERVILLE%2C+LIVINGSTON%2C+AND+WEST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+LOUISIANA+%28TIER+1+DRAFT+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, Baton Rouge, Louisiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BATON ROUGE LOOP, PARISHES OF ASCENSION, EAST BATON ROUGE, IBERVILLE, LIVINGSTON, AND WEST BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA (TIER 1 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 8 of 17] T2 - BATON ROUGE LOOP, PARISHES OF ASCENSION, EAST BATON ROUGE, IBERVILLE, LIVINGSTON, AND WEST BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA (TIER 1 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 917565071; 15135-8_0008 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a controlled-access toll roadway around Baton Rouge, Louisiana is proposed. The Baton Rouge Loop would extend 90 to 105 miles through the parishes of Ascension, East Baton Rouge, Iberville, Livingston, and West Baton Rouge and would supplement Interstate 12 (I-12) and I-10. Traffic congestion and delays in the five-parish region have steadily worsened over the past 15 years. Traffic flow is restricted at the I-10 and US 190 Mississippi River Bridge crossings, and the lack of convenient alternative routes and system connectivity forces local traffic onto I-10 and I-12, increasing congestion. The Baton Rouge Loop would initially be constructed as a four-lane facility, two 12-foot lanes each direction, with the ability to add at least two additional lanes in the median when traffic demands warrant. The proposed typical roadway section would also provide space within the average 400-foot right-of-way to add continuous frontage roads, if needed, with bike paths and transit potentially sharing the footprint. Sections of the route would be elevated above existing terrain in environmentally sensitive areas. This Tier 1 draft EIS examines a No Build Alternative and a Build Alternative that is composed of thirty-one corridor alternatives in three geographic units. For the North Unit, three of five corridor alternatives are recommended for further input and consideration. In the South Unit, nine of the eighteen corridor alternatives are recommended for exclusion due to issues associated with wetland mitigation banks. For the East Unit, four of eight corridor alternatives are recommended for additional deliberation. Locally preferred corridors include two potential Mississippi River bridge locations. One is north of the present I-10 bridge either in the existing US 190 bridge corridor or five miles north of the US 190 bridge; and the second is south of the existing I-10 bridge either at the Missouri Bend north of Addis or in Iberville Parish between Plaquemine and St. Gabriel. Various corridor alternative options exist through northern Livingston and East Baton Rouge Parishes, and Iberville and Ascension Parishes between the Mississippi and Amite Rivers. System-to-system four-level interchanges would connect the Baton Rouge Loop to I-10 and I-12, and perhaps other major highways such as US 190, US 51, and State Route 1. Other interchanges would vary but would most commonly be diamond-type interchanges. The preliminary capital cost estimate for the Baton Rouge Loop in 2009 dollars is between $4 billion and $4.9 billion. A sensitivity analysis shows that an initial toll rate of $0.15 per mile would maximize revenue generated by the Loop. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new facility would reduce congestion and delay on I-10, I-12 and other major arterial corridors. Expanded roadway capacity would address future travel demand, enhance the regional transportation network, and improve the safe movement of people and goods within and through the five-parish project area. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction could impact fish and wildlife, including eight threatened and endangered species. Potential secondary development spurred by construction would have a high likelihood of impacting wetland, floodplain, and/or agricultural resources. Approximately one-third of each North Unit corridor alternative is comprised of wetlands, 40 percent is comprised of floodplains, and 34 percent consist of agricultural lands. On average, 56 percent of the area contained within the South Unit corridor alternatives consists of wetlands, 55 percent is located within a 100-year floodplain, and 42 percent consists of agricultural lands. For the East Unit alternatives, 51 percent of the area consists of wetlands, 81 percent is located within a 100-year floodplain, and 9.6 percent consists of agricultural lands. The project area contains numerous community facilities, cultural resources, hazardous waste sites, and oil and gas wells. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110378, Volume 1--496 pages and maps, Volume 2 (Exhibits)--139 pages, November 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Louisiana KW - Mississippi River KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/917565071?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BATON+ROUGE+LOOP%2C+PARISHES+OF+ASCENSION%2C+EAST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+IBERVILLE%2C+LIVINGSTON%2C+AND+WEST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+LOUISIANA+%28TIER+1+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=BATON+ROUGE+LOOP%2C+PARISHES+OF+ASCENSION%2C+EAST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+IBERVILLE%2C+LIVINGSTON%2C+AND+WEST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+LOUISIANA+%28TIER+1+DRAFT+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, Baton Rouge, Louisiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BATON ROUGE LOOP, PARISHES OF ASCENSION, EAST BATON ROUGE, IBERVILLE, LIVINGSTON, AND WEST BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA (TIER 1 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 7 of 17] T2 - BATON ROUGE LOOP, PARISHES OF ASCENSION, EAST BATON ROUGE, IBERVILLE, LIVINGSTON, AND WEST BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA (TIER 1 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 917565065; 15135-8_0007 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a controlled-access toll roadway around Baton Rouge, Louisiana is proposed. The Baton Rouge Loop would extend 90 to 105 miles through the parishes of Ascension, East Baton Rouge, Iberville, Livingston, and West Baton Rouge and would supplement Interstate 12 (I-12) and I-10. Traffic congestion and delays in the five-parish region have steadily worsened over the past 15 years. Traffic flow is restricted at the I-10 and US 190 Mississippi River Bridge crossings, and the lack of convenient alternative routes and system connectivity forces local traffic onto I-10 and I-12, increasing congestion. The Baton Rouge Loop would initially be constructed as a four-lane facility, two 12-foot lanes each direction, with the ability to add at least two additional lanes in the median when traffic demands warrant. The proposed typical roadway section would also provide space within the average 400-foot right-of-way to add continuous frontage roads, if needed, with bike paths and transit potentially sharing the footprint. Sections of the route would be elevated above existing terrain in environmentally sensitive areas. This Tier 1 draft EIS examines a No Build Alternative and a Build Alternative that is composed of thirty-one corridor alternatives in three geographic units. For the North Unit, three of five corridor alternatives are recommended for further input and consideration. In the South Unit, nine of the eighteen corridor alternatives are recommended for exclusion due to issues associated with wetland mitigation banks. For the East Unit, four of eight corridor alternatives are recommended for additional deliberation. Locally preferred corridors include two potential Mississippi River bridge locations. One is north of the present I-10 bridge either in the existing US 190 bridge corridor or five miles north of the US 190 bridge; and the second is south of the existing I-10 bridge either at the Missouri Bend north of Addis or in Iberville Parish between Plaquemine and St. Gabriel. Various corridor alternative options exist through northern Livingston and East Baton Rouge Parishes, and Iberville and Ascension Parishes between the Mississippi and Amite Rivers. System-to-system four-level interchanges would connect the Baton Rouge Loop to I-10 and I-12, and perhaps other major highways such as US 190, US 51, and State Route 1. Other interchanges would vary but would most commonly be diamond-type interchanges. The preliminary capital cost estimate for the Baton Rouge Loop in 2009 dollars is between $4 billion and $4.9 billion. A sensitivity analysis shows that an initial toll rate of $0.15 per mile would maximize revenue generated by the Loop. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new facility would reduce congestion and delay on I-10, I-12 and other major arterial corridors. Expanded roadway capacity would address future travel demand, enhance the regional transportation network, and improve the safe movement of people and goods within and through the five-parish project area. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction could impact fish and wildlife, including eight threatened and endangered species. Potential secondary development spurred by construction would have a high likelihood of impacting wetland, floodplain, and/or agricultural resources. Approximately one-third of each North Unit corridor alternative is comprised of wetlands, 40 percent is comprised of floodplains, and 34 percent consist of agricultural lands. On average, 56 percent of the area contained within the South Unit corridor alternatives consists of wetlands, 55 percent is located within a 100-year floodplain, and 42 percent consists of agricultural lands. For the East Unit alternatives, 51 percent of the area consists of wetlands, 81 percent is located within a 100-year floodplain, and 9.6 percent consists of agricultural lands. The project area contains numerous community facilities, cultural resources, hazardous waste sites, and oil and gas wells. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110378, Volume 1--496 pages and maps, Volume 2 (Exhibits)--139 pages, November 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Louisiana KW - Mississippi River KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/917565065?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BATON+ROUGE+LOOP%2C+PARISHES+OF+ASCENSION%2C+EAST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+IBERVILLE%2C+LIVINGSTON%2C+AND+WEST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+LOUISIANA+%28TIER+1+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=BATON+ROUGE+LOOP%2C+PARISHES+OF+ASCENSION%2C+EAST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+IBERVILLE%2C+LIVINGSTON%2C+AND+WEST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+LOUISIANA+%28TIER+1+DRAFT+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, Baton Rouge, Louisiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BATON ROUGE LOOP, PARISHES OF ASCENSION, EAST BATON ROUGE, IBERVILLE, LIVINGSTON, AND WEST BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA (TIER 1 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 6 of 17] T2 - BATON ROUGE LOOP, PARISHES OF ASCENSION, EAST BATON ROUGE, IBERVILLE, LIVINGSTON, AND WEST BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA (TIER 1 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 917565061; 15135-8_0006 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a controlled-access toll roadway around Baton Rouge, Louisiana is proposed. The Baton Rouge Loop would extend 90 to 105 miles through the parishes of Ascension, East Baton Rouge, Iberville, Livingston, and West Baton Rouge and would supplement Interstate 12 (I-12) and I-10. Traffic congestion and delays in the five-parish region have steadily worsened over the past 15 years. Traffic flow is restricted at the I-10 and US 190 Mississippi River Bridge crossings, and the lack of convenient alternative routes and system connectivity forces local traffic onto I-10 and I-12, increasing congestion. The Baton Rouge Loop would initially be constructed as a four-lane facility, two 12-foot lanes each direction, with the ability to add at least two additional lanes in the median when traffic demands warrant. The proposed typical roadway section would also provide space within the average 400-foot right-of-way to add continuous frontage roads, if needed, with bike paths and transit potentially sharing the footprint. Sections of the route would be elevated above existing terrain in environmentally sensitive areas. This Tier 1 draft EIS examines a No Build Alternative and a Build Alternative that is composed of thirty-one corridor alternatives in three geographic units. For the North Unit, three of five corridor alternatives are recommended for further input and consideration. In the South Unit, nine of the eighteen corridor alternatives are recommended for exclusion due to issues associated with wetland mitigation banks. For the East Unit, four of eight corridor alternatives are recommended for additional deliberation. Locally preferred corridors include two potential Mississippi River bridge locations. One is north of the present I-10 bridge either in the existing US 190 bridge corridor or five miles north of the US 190 bridge; and the second is south of the existing I-10 bridge either at the Missouri Bend north of Addis or in Iberville Parish between Plaquemine and St. Gabriel. Various corridor alternative options exist through northern Livingston and East Baton Rouge Parishes, and Iberville and Ascension Parishes between the Mississippi and Amite Rivers. System-to-system four-level interchanges would connect the Baton Rouge Loop to I-10 and I-12, and perhaps other major highways such as US 190, US 51, and State Route 1. Other interchanges would vary but would most commonly be diamond-type interchanges. The preliminary capital cost estimate for the Baton Rouge Loop in 2009 dollars is between $4 billion and $4.9 billion. A sensitivity analysis shows that an initial toll rate of $0.15 per mile would maximize revenue generated by the Loop. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new facility would reduce congestion and delay on I-10, I-12 and other major arterial corridors. Expanded roadway capacity would address future travel demand, enhance the regional transportation network, and improve the safe movement of people and goods within and through the five-parish project area. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction could impact fish and wildlife, including eight threatened and endangered species. Potential secondary development spurred by construction would have a high likelihood of impacting wetland, floodplain, and/or agricultural resources. Approximately one-third of each North Unit corridor alternative is comprised of wetlands, 40 percent is comprised of floodplains, and 34 percent consist of agricultural lands. On average, 56 percent of the area contained within the South Unit corridor alternatives consists of wetlands, 55 percent is located within a 100-year floodplain, and 42 percent consists of agricultural lands. For the East Unit alternatives, 51 percent of the area consists of wetlands, 81 percent is located within a 100-year floodplain, and 9.6 percent consists of agricultural lands. The project area contains numerous community facilities, cultural resources, hazardous waste sites, and oil and gas wells. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110378, Volume 1--496 pages and maps, Volume 2 (Exhibits)--139 pages, November 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Louisiana KW - Mississippi River KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/917565061?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BATON+ROUGE+LOOP%2C+PARISHES+OF+ASCENSION%2C+EAST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+IBERVILLE%2C+LIVINGSTON%2C+AND+WEST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+LOUISIANA+%28TIER+1+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=BATON+ROUGE+LOOP%2C+PARISHES+OF+ASCENSION%2C+EAST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+IBERVILLE%2C+LIVINGSTON%2C+AND+WEST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+LOUISIANA+%28TIER+1+DRAFT+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, Baton Rouge, Louisiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BATON ROUGE LOOP, PARISHES OF ASCENSION, EAST BATON ROUGE, IBERVILLE, LIVINGSTON, AND WEST BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA (TIER 1 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 5 of 17] T2 - BATON ROUGE LOOP, PARISHES OF ASCENSION, EAST BATON ROUGE, IBERVILLE, LIVINGSTON, AND WEST BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA (TIER 1 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 917565057; 15135-8_0005 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a controlled-access toll roadway around Baton Rouge, Louisiana is proposed. The Baton Rouge Loop would extend 90 to 105 miles through the parishes of Ascension, East Baton Rouge, Iberville, Livingston, and West Baton Rouge and would supplement Interstate 12 (I-12) and I-10. Traffic congestion and delays in the five-parish region have steadily worsened over the past 15 years. Traffic flow is restricted at the I-10 and US 190 Mississippi River Bridge crossings, and the lack of convenient alternative routes and system connectivity forces local traffic onto I-10 and I-12, increasing congestion. The Baton Rouge Loop would initially be constructed as a four-lane facility, two 12-foot lanes each direction, with the ability to add at least two additional lanes in the median when traffic demands warrant. The proposed typical roadway section would also provide space within the average 400-foot right-of-way to add continuous frontage roads, if needed, with bike paths and transit potentially sharing the footprint. Sections of the route would be elevated above existing terrain in environmentally sensitive areas. This Tier 1 draft EIS examines a No Build Alternative and a Build Alternative that is composed of thirty-one corridor alternatives in three geographic units. For the North Unit, three of five corridor alternatives are recommended for further input and consideration. In the South Unit, nine of the eighteen corridor alternatives are recommended for exclusion due to issues associated with wetland mitigation banks. For the East Unit, four of eight corridor alternatives are recommended for additional deliberation. Locally preferred corridors include two potential Mississippi River bridge locations. One is north of the present I-10 bridge either in the existing US 190 bridge corridor or five miles north of the US 190 bridge; and the second is south of the existing I-10 bridge either at the Missouri Bend north of Addis or in Iberville Parish between Plaquemine and St. Gabriel. Various corridor alternative options exist through northern Livingston and East Baton Rouge Parishes, and Iberville and Ascension Parishes between the Mississippi and Amite Rivers. System-to-system four-level interchanges would connect the Baton Rouge Loop to I-10 and I-12, and perhaps other major highways such as US 190, US 51, and State Route 1. Other interchanges would vary but would most commonly be diamond-type interchanges. The preliminary capital cost estimate for the Baton Rouge Loop in 2009 dollars is between $4 billion and $4.9 billion. A sensitivity analysis shows that an initial toll rate of $0.15 per mile would maximize revenue generated by the Loop. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new facility would reduce congestion and delay on I-10, I-12 and other major arterial corridors. Expanded roadway capacity would address future travel demand, enhance the regional transportation network, and improve the safe movement of people and goods within and through the five-parish project area. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction could impact fish and wildlife, including eight threatened and endangered species. Potential secondary development spurred by construction would have a high likelihood of impacting wetland, floodplain, and/or agricultural resources. Approximately one-third of each North Unit corridor alternative is comprised of wetlands, 40 percent is comprised of floodplains, and 34 percent consist of agricultural lands. On average, 56 percent of the area contained within the South Unit corridor alternatives consists of wetlands, 55 percent is located within a 100-year floodplain, and 42 percent consists of agricultural lands. For the East Unit alternatives, 51 percent of the area consists of wetlands, 81 percent is located within a 100-year floodplain, and 9.6 percent consists of agricultural lands. The project area contains numerous community facilities, cultural resources, hazardous waste sites, and oil and gas wells. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110378, Volume 1--496 pages and maps, Volume 2 (Exhibits)--139 pages, November 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Louisiana KW - Mississippi River KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/917565057?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BATON+ROUGE+LOOP%2C+PARISHES+OF+ASCENSION%2C+EAST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+IBERVILLE%2C+LIVINGSTON%2C+AND+WEST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+LOUISIANA+%28TIER+1+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=BATON+ROUGE+LOOP%2C+PARISHES+OF+ASCENSION%2C+EAST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+IBERVILLE%2C+LIVINGSTON%2C+AND+WEST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+LOUISIANA+%28TIER+1+DRAFT+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, Baton Rouge, Louisiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BATON ROUGE LOOP, PARISHES OF ASCENSION, EAST BATON ROUGE, IBERVILLE, LIVINGSTON, AND WEST BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA (TIER 1 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 4 of 17] T2 - BATON ROUGE LOOP, PARISHES OF ASCENSION, EAST BATON ROUGE, IBERVILLE, LIVINGSTON, AND WEST BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA (TIER 1 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 917565052; 15135-8_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a controlled-access toll roadway around Baton Rouge, Louisiana is proposed. The Baton Rouge Loop would extend 90 to 105 miles through the parishes of Ascension, East Baton Rouge, Iberville, Livingston, and West Baton Rouge and would supplement Interstate 12 (I-12) and I-10. Traffic congestion and delays in the five-parish region have steadily worsened over the past 15 years. Traffic flow is restricted at the I-10 and US 190 Mississippi River Bridge crossings, and the lack of convenient alternative routes and system connectivity forces local traffic onto I-10 and I-12, increasing congestion. The Baton Rouge Loop would initially be constructed as a four-lane facility, two 12-foot lanes each direction, with the ability to add at least two additional lanes in the median when traffic demands warrant. The proposed typical roadway section would also provide space within the average 400-foot right-of-way to add continuous frontage roads, if needed, with bike paths and transit potentially sharing the footprint. Sections of the route would be elevated above existing terrain in environmentally sensitive areas. This Tier 1 draft EIS examines a No Build Alternative and a Build Alternative that is composed of thirty-one corridor alternatives in three geographic units. For the North Unit, three of five corridor alternatives are recommended for further input and consideration. In the South Unit, nine of the eighteen corridor alternatives are recommended for exclusion due to issues associated with wetland mitigation banks. For the East Unit, four of eight corridor alternatives are recommended for additional deliberation. Locally preferred corridors include two potential Mississippi River bridge locations. One is north of the present I-10 bridge either in the existing US 190 bridge corridor or five miles north of the US 190 bridge; and the second is south of the existing I-10 bridge either at the Missouri Bend north of Addis or in Iberville Parish between Plaquemine and St. Gabriel. Various corridor alternative options exist through northern Livingston and East Baton Rouge Parishes, and Iberville and Ascension Parishes between the Mississippi and Amite Rivers. System-to-system four-level interchanges would connect the Baton Rouge Loop to I-10 and I-12, and perhaps other major highways such as US 190, US 51, and State Route 1. Other interchanges would vary but would most commonly be diamond-type interchanges. The preliminary capital cost estimate for the Baton Rouge Loop in 2009 dollars is between $4 billion and $4.9 billion. A sensitivity analysis shows that an initial toll rate of $0.15 per mile would maximize revenue generated by the Loop. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new facility would reduce congestion and delay on I-10, I-12 and other major arterial corridors. Expanded roadway capacity would address future travel demand, enhance the regional transportation network, and improve the safe movement of people and goods within and through the five-parish project area. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction could impact fish and wildlife, including eight threatened and endangered species. Potential secondary development spurred by construction would have a high likelihood of impacting wetland, floodplain, and/or agricultural resources. Approximately one-third of each North Unit corridor alternative is comprised of wetlands, 40 percent is comprised of floodplains, and 34 percent consist of agricultural lands. On average, 56 percent of the area contained within the South Unit corridor alternatives consists of wetlands, 55 percent is located within a 100-year floodplain, and 42 percent consists of agricultural lands. For the East Unit alternatives, 51 percent of the area consists of wetlands, 81 percent is located within a 100-year floodplain, and 9.6 percent consists of agricultural lands. The project area contains numerous community facilities, cultural resources, hazardous waste sites, and oil and gas wells. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110378, Volume 1--496 pages and maps, Volume 2 (Exhibits)--139 pages, November 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Louisiana KW - Mississippi River KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/917565052?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BATON+ROUGE+LOOP%2C+PARISHES+OF+ASCENSION%2C+EAST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+IBERVILLE%2C+LIVINGSTON%2C+AND+WEST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+LOUISIANA+%28TIER+1+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=BATON+ROUGE+LOOP%2C+PARISHES+OF+ASCENSION%2C+EAST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+IBERVILLE%2C+LIVINGSTON%2C+AND+WEST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+LOUISIANA+%28TIER+1+DRAFT+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, Baton Rouge, Louisiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BATON ROUGE LOOP, PARISHES OF ASCENSION, EAST BATON ROUGE, IBERVILLE, LIVINGSTON, AND WEST BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA (TIER 1 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 2 of 17] T2 - BATON ROUGE LOOP, PARISHES OF ASCENSION, EAST BATON ROUGE, IBERVILLE, LIVINGSTON, AND WEST BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA (TIER 1 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 917564223; 15135-8_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a controlled-access toll roadway around Baton Rouge, Louisiana is proposed. The Baton Rouge Loop would extend 90 to 105 miles through the parishes of Ascension, East Baton Rouge, Iberville, Livingston, and West Baton Rouge and would supplement Interstate 12 (I-12) and I-10. Traffic congestion and delays in the five-parish region have steadily worsened over the past 15 years. Traffic flow is restricted at the I-10 and US 190 Mississippi River Bridge crossings, and the lack of convenient alternative routes and system connectivity forces local traffic onto I-10 and I-12, increasing congestion. The Baton Rouge Loop would initially be constructed as a four-lane facility, two 12-foot lanes each direction, with the ability to add at least two additional lanes in the median when traffic demands warrant. The proposed typical roadway section would also provide space within the average 400-foot right-of-way to add continuous frontage roads, if needed, with bike paths and transit potentially sharing the footprint. Sections of the route would be elevated above existing terrain in environmentally sensitive areas. This Tier 1 draft EIS examines a No Build Alternative and a Build Alternative that is composed of thirty-one corridor alternatives in three geographic units. For the North Unit, three of five corridor alternatives are recommended for further input and consideration. In the South Unit, nine of the eighteen corridor alternatives are recommended for exclusion due to issues associated with wetland mitigation banks. For the East Unit, four of eight corridor alternatives are recommended for additional deliberation. Locally preferred corridors include two potential Mississippi River bridge locations. One is north of the present I-10 bridge either in the existing US 190 bridge corridor or five miles north of the US 190 bridge; and the second is south of the existing I-10 bridge either at the Missouri Bend north of Addis or in Iberville Parish between Plaquemine and St. Gabriel. Various corridor alternative options exist through northern Livingston and East Baton Rouge Parishes, and Iberville and Ascension Parishes between the Mississippi and Amite Rivers. System-to-system four-level interchanges would connect the Baton Rouge Loop to I-10 and I-12, and perhaps other major highways such as US 190, US 51, and State Route 1. Other interchanges would vary but would most commonly be diamond-type interchanges. The preliminary capital cost estimate for the Baton Rouge Loop in 2009 dollars is between $4 billion and $4.9 billion. A sensitivity analysis shows that an initial toll rate of $0.15 per mile would maximize revenue generated by the Loop. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new facility would reduce congestion and delay on I-10, I-12 and other major arterial corridors. Expanded roadway capacity would address future travel demand, enhance the regional transportation network, and improve the safe movement of people and goods within and through the five-parish project area. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction could impact fish and wildlife, including eight threatened and endangered species. Potential secondary development spurred by construction would have a high likelihood of impacting wetland, floodplain, and/or agricultural resources. Approximately one-third of each North Unit corridor alternative is comprised of wetlands, 40 percent is comprised of floodplains, and 34 percent consist of agricultural lands. On average, 56 percent of the area contained within the South Unit corridor alternatives consists of wetlands, 55 percent is located within a 100-year floodplain, and 42 percent consists of agricultural lands. For the East Unit alternatives, 51 percent of the area consists of wetlands, 81 percent is located within a 100-year floodplain, and 9.6 percent consists of agricultural lands. The project area contains numerous community facilities, cultural resources, hazardous waste sites, and oil and gas wells. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110378, Volume 1--496 pages and maps, Volume 2 (Exhibits)--139 pages, November 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Louisiana KW - Mississippi River KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/917564223?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BATON+ROUGE+LOOP%2C+PARISHES+OF+ASCENSION%2C+EAST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+IBERVILLE%2C+LIVINGSTON%2C+AND+WEST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+LOUISIANA+%28TIER+1+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=BATON+ROUGE+LOOP%2C+PARISHES+OF+ASCENSION%2C+EAST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+IBERVILLE%2C+LIVINGSTON%2C+AND+WEST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+LOUISIANA+%28TIER+1+DRAFT+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, Baton Rouge, Louisiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BATON ROUGE LOOP, PARISHES OF ASCENSION, EAST BATON ROUGE, IBERVILLE, LIVINGSTON, AND WEST BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA (TIER 1 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). [Part 1 of 17] T2 - BATON ROUGE LOOP, PARISHES OF ASCENSION, EAST BATON ROUGE, IBERVILLE, LIVINGSTON, AND WEST BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA (TIER 1 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 917564220; 15135-8_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a controlled-access toll roadway around Baton Rouge, Louisiana is proposed. The Baton Rouge Loop would extend 90 to 105 miles through the parishes of Ascension, East Baton Rouge, Iberville, Livingston, and West Baton Rouge and would supplement Interstate 12 (I-12) and I-10. Traffic congestion and delays in the five-parish region have steadily worsened over the past 15 years. Traffic flow is restricted at the I-10 and US 190 Mississippi River Bridge crossings, and the lack of convenient alternative routes and system connectivity forces local traffic onto I-10 and I-12, increasing congestion. The Baton Rouge Loop would initially be constructed as a four-lane facility, two 12-foot lanes each direction, with the ability to add at least two additional lanes in the median when traffic demands warrant. The proposed typical roadway section would also provide space within the average 400-foot right-of-way to add continuous frontage roads, if needed, with bike paths and transit potentially sharing the footprint. Sections of the route would be elevated above existing terrain in environmentally sensitive areas. This Tier 1 draft EIS examines a No Build Alternative and a Build Alternative that is composed of thirty-one corridor alternatives in three geographic units. For the North Unit, three of five corridor alternatives are recommended for further input and consideration. In the South Unit, nine of the eighteen corridor alternatives are recommended for exclusion due to issues associated with wetland mitigation banks. For the East Unit, four of eight corridor alternatives are recommended for additional deliberation. Locally preferred corridors include two potential Mississippi River bridge locations. One is north of the present I-10 bridge either in the existing US 190 bridge corridor or five miles north of the US 190 bridge; and the second is south of the existing I-10 bridge either at the Missouri Bend north of Addis or in Iberville Parish between Plaquemine and St. Gabriel. Various corridor alternative options exist through northern Livingston and East Baton Rouge Parishes, and Iberville and Ascension Parishes between the Mississippi and Amite Rivers. System-to-system four-level interchanges would connect the Baton Rouge Loop to I-10 and I-12, and perhaps other major highways such as US 190, US 51, and State Route 1. Other interchanges would vary but would most commonly be diamond-type interchanges. The preliminary capital cost estimate for the Baton Rouge Loop in 2009 dollars is between $4 billion and $4.9 billion. A sensitivity analysis shows that an initial toll rate of $0.15 per mile would maximize revenue generated by the Loop. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new facility would reduce congestion and delay on I-10, I-12 and other major arterial corridors. Expanded roadway capacity would address future travel demand, enhance the regional transportation network, and improve the safe movement of people and goods within and through the five-parish project area. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction could impact fish and wildlife, including eight threatened and endangered species. Potential secondary development spurred by construction would have a high likelihood of impacting wetland, floodplain, and/or agricultural resources. Approximately one-third of each North Unit corridor alternative is comprised of wetlands, 40 percent is comprised of floodplains, and 34 percent consist of agricultural lands. On average, 56 percent of the area contained within the South Unit corridor alternatives consists of wetlands, 55 percent is located within a 100-year floodplain, and 42 percent consists of agricultural lands. For the East Unit alternatives, 51 percent of the area consists of wetlands, 81 percent is located within a 100-year floodplain, and 9.6 percent consists of agricultural lands. The project area contains numerous community facilities, cultural resources, hazardous waste sites, and oil and gas wells. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110378, Volume 1--496 pages and maps, Volume 2 (Exhibits)--139 pages, November 11, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Louisiana KW - Mississippi River KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/917564220?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BATON+ROUGE+LOOP%2C+PARISHES+OF+ASCENSION%2C+EAST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+IBERVILLE%2C+LIVINGSTON%2C+AND+WEST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+LOUISIANA+%28TIER+1+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=BATON+ROUGE+LOOP%2C+PARISHES+OF+ASCENSION%2C+EAST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+IBERVILLE%2C+LIVINGSTON%2C+AND+WEST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+LOUISIANA+%28TIER+1+DRAFT+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, Baton Rouge, Louisiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - BATON ROUGE LOOP, PARISHES OF ASCENSION, EAST BATON ROUGE, IBERVILLE, LIVINGSTON, AND WEST BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA (TIER 1 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT). AN - 916143376; 15135 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a controlled-access toll roadway around Baton Rouge, Louisiana is proposed. The Baton Rouge Loop would extend 90 to 105 miles through the parishes of Ascension, East Baton Rouge, Iberville, Livingston, and West Baton Rouge and would supplement Interstate 12 (I-12) and I-10. Traffic congestion and delays in the five-parish region have steadily worsened over the past 15 years. Traffic flow is restricted at the I-10 and US 190 Mississippi River Bridge crossings, and the lack of convenient alternative routes and system connectivity forces local traffic onto I-10 and I-12, increasing congestion. The Baton Rouge Loop would initially be constructed as a four-lane facility, two 12-foot lanes each direction, with the ability to add at least two additional lanes in the median when traffic demands warrant. The proposed typical roadway section would also provide space within the average 400-foot right-of-way to add continuous frontage roads, if needed, with bike paths and transit potentially sharing the footprint. Sections of the route would be elevated above existing terrain in environmentally sensitive areas. This Tier 1 draft EIS examines a No Build Alternative and a Build Alternative that is composed of thirty-one corridor alternatives in three geographic units. For the North Unit, three of five corridor alternatives are recommended for further input and consideration. In the South Unit, nine of the eighteen corridor alternatives are recommended for exclusion due to issues associated with wetland mitigation banks. For the East Unit, four of eight corridor alternatives are recommended for additional deliberation. Locally preferred corridors include two potential Mississippi River bridge locations. One is north of the present I-10 bridge either in the existing US 190 bridge corridor or five miles north of the US 190 bridge; and the second is south of the existing I-10 bridge either at the Missouri Bend north of Addis or in Iberville Parish between Plaquemine and St. Gabriel. Various corridor alternative options exist through northern Livingston and East Baton Rouge Parishes, and Iberville and Ascension Parishes between the Mississippi and Amite Rivers. System-to-system four-level interchanges would connect the Baton Rouge Loop to I-10 and I-12, and perhaps other major highways such as US 190, US 51, and State Route 1. Other interchanges would vary but would most commonly be diamond-type interchanges. The preliminary capital cost estimate for the Baton Rouge Loop in 2009 dollars is between $4 billion and $4.9 billion. A sensitivity analysis shows that an initial toll rate of $0.15 per mile would maximize revenue generated by the Loop. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new facility would reduce congestion and delay on I-10, I-12 and other major arterial corridors. Expanded roadway capacity would address future travel demand, enhance the regional transportation network, and improve the safe movement of people and goods within and through the five-parish project area. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction could impact fish and wildlife, including eight threatened and endangered species. Potential secondary development spurred by construction would have a high likelihood of impacting wetland, floodplain, and/or agricultural resources. Approximately one-third of each North Unit corridor alternative is comprised of wetlands, 40 percent is comprised of floodplains, and 34 percent consist of agricultural lands. On average, 56 percent of the area contained within the South Unit corridor alternatives consists of wetlands, 55 percent is located within a 100-year floodplain, and 42 percent consists of agricultural lands. For the East Unit alternatives, 51 percent of the area consists of wetlands, 81 percent is located within a 100-year floodplain, and 9.6 percent consists of agricultural lands. The project area contains numerous community facilities, cultural resources, hazardous waste sites, and oil and gas wells. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110378, Volume 1--496 pages and maps, Volume 2 (Exhibits)--139 pages, November 11, 2011 PY - 2011 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Wells KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Louisiana KW - Mississippi River KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/916143376?accountid=14244 L2 - http://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=2011-11-11&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=BATON+ROUGE+LOOP%2C+PARISHES+OF+ASCENSION%2C+EAST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+IBERVILLE%2C+LIVINGSTON%2C+AND+WEST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+LOUISIANA+%28TIER+1+DRAFT+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT%29.&rft.title=BATON+ROUGE+LOOP%2C+PARISHES+OF+ASCENSION%2C+EAST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+IBERVILLE%2C+LIVINGSTON%2C+AND+WEST+BATON+ROUGE%2C+LOUISIANA+%28TIER+1+DRAFT+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, Baton Rouge, Louisiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 11, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 12 of 43] T2 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 917564126; 15125-8_0012 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to the seven-mile segment of Interstate 25 (I-25) that passes through Pueblo, Colorado, from just south of US Highway 50 (US 50)/State Highway (SH) 47 to just south of Pueblo Boulevard, are proposed. The corridor, known as the Pueblo Freeway, was originally completed in 1959 and changes are required to address current and future transportation needs. I-25 serves as a critical north-south link in the nations Interstate Highway System and as a strategic international corridor under the North American Free Trade Act. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. The Existing I-25 Alternative would widen I-25 to six lanes (three in each direction) from just north of 29th Street to Pueblo Boulevard on its current alignment. The interchanges at US 50B, Indiana Avenue, and Pueblo Boulevard would be reconstructed. Access to 29th Street would be provided via a frontage road and split-diamond interchanges would be created between 13th Street and 1st Street and Abriendo Avenue and Northern Avenue. Connectivity off of I-25 would be improved by extending Dillon Drive south from 26th Street to US 50B and by extending Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. The Modified I-25 Alternative, which is preferred, shares the design characteristics of the Existing I-25 Alternative, with the exception of the southern part of the corridor between the Arkansas River and Canal Street where the Existing I-25 Alternative can be implemented only by moving the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks 150 feet to the east to make room for widening I-25. As an alternative to moving the rail line, the Modified I-25 Alternative would relocate I-25 on a new alignment to the east at Ilex Street, which would allow the UPRR rail line south of the Arkansas River to remain in place. With the Modified I-25 Alternative, I-25 would bridge over the railroad tracks at Minnequa Avenue and then run on the west side of the tracks and rejoin the existing I-25 alignment. By straightening I-25 at Ilex Street, I-25 would leave the current alignment and continue south. The roadway portion no longer used as I-25 would be available to become an extension of Santa Fe Avenue, a critical element to improving local mobility. The Modified I-25 Alternative would extend Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. Under both build alternatives, the completion of proposed trails and sidewalks would provide continuous bicycle and pedestrian access between 29th Street in the north to Pueblo Boulevard in the south. The project would be constructed in phases, with phase one being the replacements of the Ilex Street bridges. The estimated costs for all the project improvements are $760.5 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would address deteriorating roadways and bridges and unsafe road characteristics. Local and regional mobility within and through Pueblo would be improved to meet existing and future travel demands. Trails would provide safe, non-motorized access to Mineral Palace Park, Benedict Park, JJ Raigoza Park, the Historic Arkansas Riverwalk of Pueblo, the Runyon Field Sports Complex, the Runyon Lake State Wildlife Area, and the Fountain Creek Trail system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause direct loss of 1.1 acres of wetlands and 18.1 acres of wildlife habitat and temporary impacts to road traffic, trails and UPRR operations. For the preferred alternative, acquisitions would include: 117 residences; 56 total and 26 partial commercial properties; and 15 total and 15 partial public properties. Construction of four new bridges over the Arkansas River would require relocation of trails and an existing pedestrian bridge. Implementation of the preferred alternative would cause adverse effects to 40 historic resources, including the North Side, Second Ward, Steelworks Suburbs, and Grove historic districts. Noise impacts would be mitigated through construction of 21,525 feet of noise walls. 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: 110368, Draft EIS--516 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 12 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CO-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado 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/917564126?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 11 of 43] T2 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 917564122; 15125-8_0011 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to the seven-mile segment of Interstate 25 (I-25) that passes through Pueblo, Colorado, from just south of US Highway 50 (US 50)/State Highway (SH) 47 to just south of Pueblo Boulevard, are proposed. The corridor, known as the Pueblo Freeway, was originally completed in 1959 and changes are required to address current and future transportation needs. I-25 serves as a critical north-south link in the nations Interstate Highway System and as a strategic international corridor under the North American Free Trade Act. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. The Existing I-25 Alternative would widen I-25 to six lanes (three in each direction) from just north of 29th Street to Pueblo Boulevard on its current alignment. The interchanges at US 50B, Indiana Avenue, and Pueblo Boulevard would be reconstructed. Access to 29th Street would be provided via a frontage road and split-diamond interchanges would be created between 13th Street and 1st Street and Abriendo Avenue and Northern Avenue. Connectivity off of I-25 would be improved by extending Dillon Drive south from 26th Street to US 50B and by extending Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. The Modified I-25 Alternative, which is preferred, shares the design characteristics of the Existing I-25 Alternative, with the exception of the southern part of the corridor between the Arkansas River and Canal Street where the Existing I-25 Alternative can be implemented only by moving the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks 150 feet to the east to make room for widening I-25. As an alternative to moving the rail line, the Modified I-25 Alternative would relocate I-25 on a new alignment to the east at Ilex Street, which would allow the UPRR rail line south of the Arkansas River to remain in place. With the Modified I-25 Alternative, I-25 would bridge over the railroad tracks at Minnequa Avenue and then run on the west side of the tracks and rejoin the existing I-25 alignment. By straightening I-25 at Ilex Street, I-25 would leave the current alignment and continue south. The roadway portion no longer used as I-25 would be available to become an extension of Santa Fe Avenue, a critical element to improving local mobility. The Modified I-25 Alternative would extend Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. Under both build alternatives, the completion of proposed trails and sidewalks would provide continuous bicycle and pedestrian access between 29th Street in the north to Pueblo Boulevard in the south. The project would be constructed in phases, with phase one being the replacements of the Ilex Street bridges. The estimated costs for all the project improvements are $760.5 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would address deteriorating roadways and bridges and unsafe road characteristics. Local and regional mobility within and through Pueblo would be improved to meet existing and future travel demands. Trails would provide safe, non-motorized access to Mineral Palace Park, Benedict Park, JJ Raigoza Park, the Historic Arkansas Riverwalk of Pueblo, the Runyon Field Sports Complex, the Runyon Lake State Wildlife Area, and the Fountain Creek Trail system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause direct loss of 1.1 acres of wetlands and 18.1 acres of wildlife habitat and temporary impacts to road traffic, trails and UPRR operations. For the preferred alternative, acquisitions would include: 117 residences; 56 total and 26 partial commercial properties; and 15 total and 15 partial public properties. Construction of four new bridges over the Arkansas River would require relocation of trails and an existing pedestrian bridge. Implementation of the preferred alternative would cause adverse effects to 40 historic resources, including the North Side, Second Ward, Steelworks Suburbs, and Grove historic districts. Noise impacts would be mitigated through construction of 21,525 feet of noise walls. 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: 110368, Draft EIS--516 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 11 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CO-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado 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/917564122?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 10 of 43] T2 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 917564118; 15125-8_0010 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to the seven-mile segment of Interstate 25 (I-25) that passes through Pueblo, Colorado, from just south of US Highway 50 (US 50)/State Highway (SH) 47 to just south of Pueblo Boulevard, are proposed. The corridor, known as the Pueblo Freeway, was originally completed in 1959 and changes are required to address current and future transportation needs. I-25 serves as a critical north-south link in the nations Interstate Highway System and as a strategic international corridor under the North American Free Trade Act. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. The Existing I-25 Alternative would widen I-25 to six lanes (three in each direction) from just north of 29th Street to Pueblo Boulevard on its current alignment. The interchanges at US 50B, Indiana Avenue, and Pueblo Boulevard would be reconstructed. Access to 29th Street would be provided via a frontage road and split-diamond interchanges would be created between 13th Street and 1st Street and Abriendo Avenue and Northern Avenue. Connectivity off of I-25 would be improved by extending Dillon Drive south from 26th Street to US 50B and by extending Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. The Modified I-25 Alternative, which is preferred, shares the design characteristics of the Existing I-25 Alternative, with the exception of the southern part of the corridor between the Arkansas River and Canal Street where the Existing I-25 Alternative can be implemented only by moving the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks 150 feet to the east to make room for widening I-25. As an alternative to moving the rail line, the Modified I-25 Alternative would relocate I-25 on a new alignment to the east at Ilex Street, which would allow the UPRR rail line south of the Arkansas River to remain in place. With the Modified I-25 Alternative, I-25 would bridge over the railroad tracks at Minnequa Avenue and then run on the west side of the tracks and rejoin the existing I-25 alignment. By straightening I-25 at Ilex Street, I-25 would leave the current alignment and continue south. The roadway portion no longer used as I-25 would be available to become an extension of Santa Fe Avenue, a critical element to improving local mobility. The Modified I-25 Alternative would extend Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. Under both build alternatives, the completion of proposed trails and sidewalks would provide continuous bicycle and pedestrian access between 29th Street in the north to Pueblo Boulevard in the south. The project would be constructed in phases, with phase one being the replacements of the Ilex Street bridges. The estimated costs for all the project improvements are $760.5 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would address deteriorating roadways and bridges and unsafe road characteristics. Local and regional mobility within and through Pueblo would be improved to meet existing and future travel demands. Trails would provide safe, non-motorized access to Mineral Palace Park, Benedict Park, JJ Raigoza Park, the Historic Arkansas Riverwalk of Pueblo, the Runyon Field Sports Complex, the Runyon Lake State Wildlife Area, and the Fountain Creek Trail system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause direct loss of 1.1 acres of wetlands and 18.1 acres of wildlife habitat and temporary impacts to road traffic, trails and UPRR operations. For the preferred alternative, acquisitions would include: 117 residences; 56 total and 26 partial commercial properties; and 15 total and 15 partial public properties. Construction of four new bridges over the Arkansas River would require relocation of trails and an existing pedestrian bridge. Implementation of the preferred alternative would cause adverse effects to 40 historic resources, including the North Side, Second Ward, Steelworks Suburbs, and Grove historic districts. Noise impacts would be mitigated through construction of 21,525 feet of noise walls. 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: 110368, Draft EIS--516 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CO-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado 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/917564118?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 9 of 43] T2 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 917564114; 15125-8_0009 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to the seven-mile segment of Interstate 25 (I-25) that passes through Pueblo, Colorado, from just south of US Highway 50 (US 50)/State Highway (SH) 47 to just south of Pueblo Boulevard, are proposed. The corridor, known as the Pueblo Freeway, was originally completed in 1959 and changes are required to address current and future transportation needs. I-25 serves as a critical north-south link in the nations Interstate Highway System and as a strategic international corridor under the North American Free Trade Act. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. The Existing I-25 Alternative would widen I-25 to six lanes (three in each direction) from just north of 29th Street to Pueblo Boulevard on its current alignment. The interchanges at US 50B, Indiana Avenue, and Pueblo Boulevard would be reconstructed. Access to 29th Street would be provided via a frontage road and split-diamond interchanges would be created between 13th Street and 1st Street and Abriendo Avenue and Northern Avenue. Connectivity off of I-25 would be improved by extending Dillon Drive south from 26th Street to US 50B and by extending Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. The Modified I-25 Alternative, which is preferred, shares the design characteristics of the Existing I-25 Alternative, with the exception of the southern part of the corridor between the Arkansas River and Canal Street where the Existing I-25 Alternative can be implemented only by moving the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks 150 feet to the east to make room for widening I-25. As an alternative to moving the rail line, the Modified I-25 Alternative would relocate I-25 on a new alignment to the east at Ilex Street, which would allow the UPRR rail line south of the Arkansas River to remain in place. With the Modified I-25 Alternative, I-25 would bridge over the railroad tracks at Minnequa Avenue and then run on the west side of the tracks and rejoin the existing I-25 alignment. By straightening I-25 at Ilex Street, I-25 would leave the current alignment and continue south. The roadway portion no longer used as I-25 would be available to become an extension of Santa Fe Avenue, a critical element to improving local mobility. The Modified I-25 Alternative would extend Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. Under both build alternatives, the completion of proposed trails and sidewalks would provide continuous bicycle and pedestrian access between 29th Street in the north to Pueblo Boulevard in the south. The project would be constructed in phases, with phase one being the replacements of the Ilex Street bridges. The estimated costs for all the project improvements are $760.5 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would address deteriorating roadways and bridges and unsafe road characteristics. Local and regional mobility within and through Pueblo would be improved to meet existing and future travel demands. Trails would provide safe, non-motorized access to Mineral Palace Park, Benedict Park, JJ Raigoza Park, the Historic Arkansas Riverwalk of Pueblo, the Runyon Field Sports Complex, the Runyon Lake State Wildlife Area, and the Fountain Creek Trail system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause direct loss of 1.1 acres of wetlands and 18.1 acres of wildlife habitat and temporary impacts to road traffic, trails and UPRR operations. For the preferred alternative, acquisitions would include: 117 residences; 56 total and 26 partial commercial properties; and 15 total and 15 partial public properties. Construction of four new bridges over the Arkansas River would require relocation of trails and an existing pedestrian bridge. Implementation of the preferred alternative would cause adverse effects to 40 historic resources, including the North Side, Second Ward, Steelworks Suburbs, and Grove historic districts. Noise impacts would be mitigated through construction of 21,525 feet of noise walls. 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: 110368, Draft EIS--516 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 9 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CO-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado 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/917564114?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 8 of 43] T2 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 917564111; 15125-8_0008 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to the seven-mile segment of Interstate 25 (I-25) that passes through Pueblo, Colorado, from just south of US Highway 50 (US 50)/State Highway (SH) 47 to just south of Pueblo Boulevard, are proposed. The corridor, known as the Pueblo Freeway, was originally completed in 1959 and changes are required to address current and future transportation needs. I-25 serves as a critical north-south link in the nations Interstate Highway System and as a strategic international corridor under the North American Free Trade Act. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. The Existing I-25 Alternative would widen I-25 to six lanes (three in each direction) from just north of 29th Street to Pueblo Boulevard on its current alignment. The interchanges at US 50B, Indiana Avenue, and Pueblo Boulevard would be reconstructed. Access to 29th Street would be provided via a frontage road and split-diamond interchanges would be created between 13th Street and 1st Street and Abriendo Avenue and Northern Avenue. Connectivity off of I-25 would be improved by extending Dillon Drive south from 26th Street to US 50B and by extending Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. The Modified I-25 Alternative, which is preferred, shares the design characteristics of the Existing I-25 Alternative, with the exception of the southern part of the corridor between the Arkansas River and Canal Street where the Existing I-25 Alternative can be implemented only by moving the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks 150 feet to the east to make room for widening I-25. As an alternative to moving the rail line, the Modified I-25 Alternative would relocate I-25 on a new alignment to the east at Ilex Street, which would allow the UPRR rail line south of the Arkansas River to remain in place. With the Modified I-25 Alternative, I-25 would bridge over the railroad tracks at Minnequa Avenue and then run on the west side of the tracks and rejoin the existing I-25 alignment. By straightening I-25 at Ilex Street, I-25 would leave the current alignment and continue south. The roadway portion no longer used as I-25 would be available to become an extension of Santa Fe Avenue, a critical element to improving local mobility. The Modified I-25 Alternative would extend Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. Under both build alternatives, the completion of proposed trails and sidewalks would provide continuous bicycle and pedestrian access between 29th Street in the north to Pueblo Boulevard in the south. The project would be constructed in phases, with phase one being the replacements of the Ilex Street bridges. The estimated costs for all the project improvements are $760.5 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would address deteriorating roadways and bridges and unsafe road characteristics. Local and regional mobility within and through Pueblo would be improved to meet existing and future travel demands. Trails would provide safe, non-motorized access to Mineral Palace Park, Benedict Park, JJ Raigoza Park, the Historic Arkansas Riverwalk of Pueblo, the Runyon Field Sports Complex, the Runyon Lake State Wildlife Area, and the Fountain Creek Trail system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause direct loss of 1.1 acres of wetlands and 18.1 acres of wildlife habitat and temporary impacts to road traffic, trails and UPRR operations. For the preferred alternative, acquisitions would include: 117 residences; 56 total and 26 partial commercial properties; and 15 total and 15 partial public properties. Construction of four new bridges over the Arkansas River would require relocation of trails and an existing pedestrian bridge. Implementation of the preferred alternative would cause adverse effects to 40 historic resources, including the North Side, Second Ward, Steelworks Suburbs, and Grove historic districts. Noise impacts would be mitigated through construction of 21,525 feet of noise walls. 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: 110368, Draft EIS--516 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CO-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado 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/917564111?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 7 of 43] T2 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 917564107; 15125-8_0007 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to the seven-mile segment of Interstate 25 (I-25) that passes through Pueblo, Colorado, from just south of US Highway 50 (US 50)/State Highway (SH) 47 to just south of Pueblo Boulevard, are proposed. The corridor, known as the Pueblo Freeway, was originally completed in 1959 and changes are required to address current and future transportation needs. I-25 serves as a critical north-south link in the nations Interstate Highway System and as a strategic international corridor under the North American Free Trade Act. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. The Existing I-25 Alternative would widen I-25 to six lanes (three in each direction) from just north of 29th Street to Pueblo Boulevard on its current alignment. The interchanges at US 50B, Indiana Avenue, and Pueblo Boulevard would be reconstructed. Access to 29th Street would be provided via a frontage road and split-diamond interchanges would be created between 13th Street and 1st Street and Abriendo Avenue and Northern Avenue. Connectivity off of I-25 would be improved by extending Dillon Drive south from 26th Street to US 50B and by extending Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. The Modified I-25 Alternative, which is preferred, shares the design characteristics of the Existing I-25 Alternative, with the exception of the southern part of the corridor between the Arkansas River and Canal Street where the Existing I-25 Alternative can be implemented only by moving the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks 150 feet to the east to make room for widening I-25. As an alternative to moving the rail line, the Modified I-25 Alternative would relocate I-25 on a new alignment to the east at Ilex Street, which would allow the UPRR rail line south of the Arkansas River to remain in place. With the Modified I-25 Alternative, I-25 would bridge over the railroad tracks at Minnequa Avenue and then run on the west side of the tracks and rejoin the existing I-25 alignment. By straightening I-25 at Ilex Street, I-25 would leave the current alignment and continue south. The roadway portion no longer used as I-25 would be available to become an extension of Santa Fe Avenue, a critical element to improving local mobility. The Modified I-25 Alternative would extend Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. Under both build alternatives, the completion of proposed trails and sidewalks would provide continuous bicycle and pedestrian access between 29th Street in the north to Pueblo Boulevard in the south. The project would be constructed in phases, with phase one being the replacements of the Ilex Street bridges. The estimated costs for all the project improvements are $760.5 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would address deteriorating roadways and bridges and unsafe road characteristics. Local and regional mobility within and through Pueblo would be improved to meet existing and future travel demands. Trails would provide safe, non-motorized access to Mineral Palace Park, Benedict Park, JJ Raigoza Park, the Historic Arkansas Riverwalk of Pueblo, the Runyon Field Sports Complex, the Runyon Lake State Wildlife Area, and the Fountain Creek Trail system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause direct loss of 1.1 acres of wetlands and 18.1 acres of wildlife habitat and temporary impacts to road traffic, trails and UPRR operations. For the preferred alternative, acquisitions would include: 117 residences; 56 total and 26 partial commercial properties; and 15 total and 15 partial public properties. Construction of four new bridges over the Arkansas River would require relocation of trails and an existing pedestrian bridge. Implementation of the preferred alternative would cause adverse effects to 40 historic resources, including the North Side, Second Ward, Steelworks Suburbs, and Grove historic districts. Noise impacts would be mitigated through construction of 21,525 feet of noise walls. 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: 110368, Draft EIS--516 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CO-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado 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/917564107?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 6 of 43] T2 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 917564104; 15125-8_0006 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to the seven-mile segment of Interstate 25 (I-25) that passes through Pueblo, Colorado, from just south of US Highway 50 (US 50)/State Highway (SH) 47 to just south of Pueblo Boulevard, are proposed. The corridor, known as the Pueblo Freeway, was originally completed in 1959 and changes are required to address current and future transportation needs. I-25 serves as a critical north-south link in the nations Interstate Highway System and as a strategic international corridor under the North American Free Trade Act. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. The Existing I-25 Alternative would widen I-25 to six lanes (three in each direction) from just north of 29th Street to Pueblo Boulevard on its current alignment. The interchanges at US 50B, Indiana Avenue, and Pueblo Boulevard would be reconstructed. Access to 29th Street would be provided via a frontage road and split-diamond interchanges would be created between 13th Street and 1st Street and Abriendo Avenue and Northern Avenue. Connectivity off of I-25 would be improved by extending Dillon Drive south from 26th Street to US 50B and by extending Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. The Modified I-25 Alternative, which is preferred, shares the design characteristics of the Existing I-25 Alternative, with the exception of the southern part of the corridor between the Arkansas River and Canal Street where the Existing I-25 Alternative can be implemented only by moving the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks 150 feet to the east to make room for widening I-25. As an alternative to moving the rail line, the Modified I-25 Alternative would relocate I-25 on a new alignment to the east at Ilex Street, which would allow the UPRR rail line south of the Arkansas River to remain in place. With the Modified I-25 Alternative, I-25 would bridge over the railroad tracks at Minnequa Avenue and then run on the west side of the tracks and rejoin the existing I-25 alignment. By straightening I-25 at Ilex Street, I-25 would leave the current alignment and continue south. The roadway portion no longer used as I-25 would be available to become an extension of Santa Fe Avenue, a critical element to improving local mobility. The Modified I-25 Alternative would extend Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. Under both build alternatives, the completion of proposed trails and sidewalks would provide continuous bicycle and pedestrian access between 29th Street in the north to Pueblo Boulevard in the south. The project would be constructed in phases, with phase one being the replacements of the Ilex Street bridges. The estimated costs for all the project improvements are $760.5 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would address deteriorating roadways and bridges and unsafe road characteristics. Local and regional mobility within and through Pueblo would be improved to meet existing and future travel demands. Trails would provide safe, non-motorized access to Mineral Palace Park, Benedict Park, JJ Raigoza Park, the Historic Arkansas Riverwalk of Pueblo, the Runyon Field Sports Complex, the Runyon Lake State Wildlife Area, and the Fountain Creek Trail system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause direct loss of 1.1 acres of wetlands and 18.1 acres of wildlife habitat and temporary impacts to road traffic, trails and UPRR operations. For the preferred alternative, acquisitions would include: 117 residences; 56 total and 26 partial commercial properties; and 15 total and 15 partial public properties. Construction of four new bridges over the Arkansas River would require relocation of trails and an existing pedestrian bridge. Implementation of the preferred alternative would cause adverse effects to 40 historic resources, including the North Side, Second Ward, Steelworks Suburbs, and Grove historic districts. Noise impacts would be mitigated through construction of 21,525 feet of noise walls. 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: 110368, Draft EIS--516 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CO-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado 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/917564104?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 30 of 43] T2 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 917563852; 15125-8_0030 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to the seven-mile segment of Interstate 25 (I-25) that passes through Pueblo, Colorado, from just south of US Highway 50 (US 50)/State Highway (SH) 47 to just south of Pueblo Boulevard, are proposed. The corridor, known as the Pueblo Freeway, was originally completed in 1959 and changes are required to address current and future transportation needs. I-25 serves as a critical north-south link in the nations Interstate Highway System and as a strategic international corridor under the North American Free Trade Act. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. The Existing I-25 Alternative would widen I-25 to six lanes (three in each direction) from just north of 29th Street to Pueblo Boulevard on its current alignment. The interchanges at US 50B, Indiana Avenue, and Pueblo Boulevard would be reconstructed. Access to 29th Street would be provided via a frontage road and split-diamond interchanges would be created between 13th Street and 1st Street and Abriendo Avenue and Northern Avenue. Connectivity off of I-25 would be improved by extending Dillon Drive south from 26th Street to US 50B and by extending Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. The Modified I-25 Alternative, which is preferred, shares the design characteristics of the Existing I-25 Alternative, with the exception of the southern part of the corridor between the Arkansas River and Canal Street where the Existing I-25 Alternative can be implemented only by moving the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks 150 feet to the east to make room for widening I-25. As an alternative to moving the rail line, the Modified I-25 Alternative would relocate I-25 on a new alignment to the east at Ilex Street, which would allow the UPRR rail line south of the Arkansas River to remain in place. With the Modified I-25 Alternative, I-25 would bridge over the railroad tracks at Minnequa Avenue and then run on the west side of the tracks and rejoin the existing I-25 alignment. By straightening I-25 at Ilex Street, I-25 would leave the current alignment and continue south. The roadway portion no longer used as I-25 would be available to become an extension of Santa Fe Avenue, a critical element to improving local mobility. The Modified I-25 Alternative would extend Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. Under both build alternatives, the completion of proposed trails and sidewalks would provide continuous bicycle and pedestrian access between 29th Street in the north to Pueblo Boulevard in the south. The project would be constructed in phases, with phase one being the replacements of the Ilex Street bridges. The estimated costs for all the project improvements are $760.5 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would address deteriorating roadways and bridges and unsafe road characteristics. Local and regional mobility within and through Pueblo would be improved to meet existing and future travel demands. Trails would provide safe, non-motorized access to Mineral Palace Park, Benedict Park, JJ Raigoza Park, the Historic Arkansas Riverwalk of Pueblo, the Runyon Field Sports Complex, the Runyon Lake State Wildlife Area, and the Fountain Creek Trail system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause direct loss of 1.1 acres of wetlands and 18.1 acres of wildlife habitat and temporary impacts to road traffic, trails and UPRR operations. For the preferred alternative, acquisitions would include: 117 residences; 56 total and 26 partial commercial properties; and 15 total and 15 partial public properties. Construction of four new bridges over the Arkansas River would require relocation of trails and an existing pedestrian bridge. Implementation of the preferred alternative would cause adverse effects to 40 historic resources, including the North Side, Second Ward, Steelworks Suburbs, and Grove historic districts. Noise impacts would be mitigated through construction of 21,525 feet of noise walls. 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: 110368, Draft EIS--516 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 30 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CO-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado 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/917563852?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 29 of 43] T2 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 917563848; 15125-8_0029 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to the seven-mile segment of Interstate 25 (I-25) that passes through Pueblo, Colorado, from just south of US Highway 50 (US 50)/State Highway (SH) 47 to just south of Pueblo Boulevard, are proposed. The corridor, known as the Pueblo Freeway, was originally completed in 1959 and changes are required to address current and future transportation needs. I-25 serves as a critical north-south link in the nations Interstate Highway System and as a strategic international corridor under the North American Free Trade Act. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. The Existing I-25 Alternative would widen I-25 to six lanes (three in each direction) from just north of 29th Street to Pueblo Boulevard on its current alignment. The interchanges at US 50B, Indiana Avenue, and Pueblo Boulevard would be reconstructed. Access to 29th Street would be provided via a frontage road and split-diamond interchanges would be created between 13th Street and 1st Street and Abriendo Avenue and Northern Avenue. Connectivity off of I-25 would be improved by extending Dillon Drive south from 26th Street to US 50B and by extending Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. The Modified I-25 Alternative, which is preferred, shares the design characteristics of the Existing I-25 Alternative, with the exception of the southern part of the corridor between the Arkansas River and Canal Street where the Existing I-25 Alternative can be implemented only by moving the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks 150 feet to the east to make room for widening I-25. As an alternative to moving the rail line, the Modified I-25 Alternative would relocate I-25 on a new alignment to the east at Ilex Street, which would allow the UPRR rail line south of the Arkansas River to remain in place. With the Modified I-25 Alternative, I-25 would bridge over the railroad tracks at Minnequa Avenue and then run on the west side of the tracks and rejoin the existing I-25 alignment. By straightening I-25 at Ilex Street, I-25 would leave the current alignment and continue south. The roadway portion no longer used as I-25 would be available to become an extension of Santa Fe Avenue, a critical element to improving local mobility. The Modified I-25 Alternative would extend Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. Under both build alternatives, the completion of proposed trails and sidewalks would provide continuous bicycle and pedestrian access between 29th Street in the north to Pueblo Boulevard in the south. The project would be constructed in phases, with phase one being the replacements of the Ilex Street bridges. The estimated costs for all the project improvements are $760.5 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would address deteriorating roadways and bridges and unsafe road characteristics. Local and regional mobility within and through Pueblo would be improved to meet existing and future travel demands. Trails would provide safe, non-motorized access to Mineral Palace Park, Benedict Park, JJ Raigoza Park, the Historic Arkansas Riverwalk of Pueblo, the Runyon Field Sports Complex, the Runyon Lake State Wildlife Area, and the Fountain Creek Trail system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause direct loss of 1.1 acres of wetlands and 18.1 acres of wildlife habitat and temporary impacts to road traffic, trails and UPRR operations. For the preferred alternative, acquisitions would include: 117 residences; 56 total and 26 partial commercial properties; and 15 total and 15 partial public properties. Construction of four new bridges over the Arkansas River would require relocation of trails and an existing pedestrian bridge. Implementation of the preferred alternative would cause adverse effects to 40 historic resources, including the North Side, Second Ward, Steelworks Suburbs, and Grove historic districts. Noise impacts would be mitigated through construction of 21,525 feet of noise walls. 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: 110368, Draft EIS--516 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 29 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CO-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado 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/917563848?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 28 of 43] T2 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 917563844; 15125-8_0028 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to the seven-mile segment of Interstate 25 (I-25) that passes through Pueblo, Colorado, from just south of US Highway 50 (US 50)/State Highway (SH) 47 to just south of Pueblo Boulevard, are proposed. The corridor, known as the Pueblo Freeway, was originally completed in 1959 and changes are required to address current and future transportation needs. I-25 serves as a critical north-south link in the nations Interstate Highway System and as a strategic international corridor under the North American Free Trade Act. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. The Existing I-25 Alternative would widen I-25 to six lanes (three in each direction) from just north of 29th Street to Pueblo Boulevard on its current alignment. The interchanges at US 50B, Indiana Avenue, and Pueblo Boulevard would be reconstructed. Access to 29th Street would be provided via a frontage road and split-diamond interchanges would be created between 13th Street and 1st Street and Abriendo Avenue and Northern Avenue. Connectivity off of I-25 would be improved by extending Dillon Drive south from 26th Street to US 50B and by extending Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. The Modified I-25 Alternative, which is preferred, shares the design characteristics of the Existing I-25 Alternative, with the exception of the southern part of the corridor between the Arkansas River and Canal Street where the Existing I-25 Alternative can be implemented only by moving the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks 150 feet to the east to make room for widening I-25. As an alternative to moving the rail line, the Modified I-25 Alternative would relocate I-25 on a new alignment to the east at Ilex Street, which would allow the UPRR rail line south of the Arkansas River to remain in place. With the Modified I-25 Alternative, I-25 would bridge over the railroad tracks at Minnequa Avenue and then run on the west side of the tracks and rejoin the existing I-25 alignment. By straightening I-25 at Ilex Street, I-25 would leave the current alignment and continue south. The roadway portion no longer used as I-25 would be available to become an extension of Santa Fe Avenue, a critical element to improving local mobility. The Modified I-25 Alternative would extend Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. Under both build alternatives, the completion of proposed trails and sidewalks would provide continuous bicycle and pedestrian access between 29th Street in the north to Pueblo Boulevard in the south. The project would be constructed in phases, with phase one being the replacements of the Ilex Street bridges. The estimated costs for all the project improvements are $760.5 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would address deteriorating roadways and bridges and unsafe road characteristics. Local and regional mobility within and through Pueblo would be improved to meet existing and future travel demands. Trails would provide safe, non-motorized access to Mineral Palace Park, Benedict Park, JJ Raigoza Park, the Historic Arkansas Riverwalk of Pueblo, the Runyon Field Sports Complex, the Runyon Lake State Wildlife Area, and the Fountain Creek Trail system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause direct loss of 1.1 acres of wetlands and 18.1 acres of wildlife habitat and temporary impacts to road traffic, trails and UPRR operations. For the preferred alternative, acquisitions would include: 117 residences; 56 total and 26 partial commercial properties; and 15 total and 15 partial public properties. Construction of four new bridges over the Arkansas River would require relocation of trails and an existing pedestrian bridge. Implementation of the preferred alternative would cause adverse effects to 40 historic resources, including the North Side, Second Ward, Steelworks Suburbs, and Grove historic districts. Noise impacts would be mitigated through construction of 21,525 feet of noise walls. 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: 110368, Draft EIS--516 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 28 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CO-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado 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/917563844?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 27 of 43] T2 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 917563840; 15125-8_0027 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to the seven-mile segment of Interstate 25 (I-25) that passes through Pueblo, Colorado, from just south of US Highway 50 (US 50)/State Highway (SH) 47 to just south of Pueblo Boulevard, are proposed. The corridor, known as the Pueblo Freeway, was originally completed in 1959 and changes are required to address current and future transportation needs. I-25 serves as a critical north-south link in the nations Interstate Highway System and as a strategic international corridor under the North American Free Trade Act. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. The Existing I-25 Alternative would widen I-25 to six lanes (three in each direction) from just north of 29th Street to Pueblo Boulevard on its current alignment. The interchanges at US 50B, Indiana Avenue, and Pueblo Boulevard would be reconstructed. Access to 29th Street would be provided via a frontage road and split-diamond interchanges would be created between 13th Street and 1st Street and Abriendo Avenue and Northern Avenue. Connectivity off of I-25 would be improved by extending Dillon Drive south from 26th Street to US 50B and by extending Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. The Modified I-25 Alternative, which is preferred, shares the design characteristics of the Existing I-25 Alternative, with the exception of the southern part of the corridor between the Arkansas River and Canal Street where the Existing I-25 Alternative can be implemented only by moving the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks 150 feet to the east to make room for widening I-25. As an alternative to moving the rail line, the Modified I-25 Alternative would relocate I-25 on a new alignment to the east at Ilex Street, which would allow the UPRR rail line south of the Arkansas River to remain in place. With the Modified I-25 Alternative, I-25 would bridge over the railroad tracks at Minnequa Avenue and then run on the west side of the tracks and rejoin the existing I-25 alignment. By straightening I-25 at Ilex Street, I-25 would leave the current alignment and continue south. The roadway portion no longer used as I-25 would be available to become an extension of Santa Fe Avenue, a critical element to improving local mobility. The Modified I-25 Alternative would extend Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. Under both build alternatives, the completion of proposed trails and sidewalks would provide continuous bicycle and pedestrian access between 29th Street in the north to Pueblo Boulevard in the south. The project would be constructed in phases, with phase one being the replacements of the Ilex Street bridges. The estimated costs for all the project improvements are $760.5 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would address deteriorating roadways and bridges and unsafe road characteristics. Local and regional mobility within and through Pueblo would be improved to meet existing and future travel demands. Trails would provide safe, non-motorized access to Mineral Palace Park, Benedict Park, JJ Raigoza Park, the Historic Arkansas Riverwalk of Pueblo, the Runyon Field Sports Complex, the Runyon Lake State Wildlife Area, and the Fountain Creek Trail system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause direct loss of 1.1 acres of wetlands and 18.1 acres of wildlife habitat and temporary impacts to road traffic, trails and UPRR operations. For the preferred alternative, acquisitions would include: 117 residences; 56 total and 26 partial commercial properties; and 15 total and 15 partial public properties. Construction of four new bridges over the Arkansas River would require relocation of trails and an existing pedestrian bridge. Implementation of the preferred alternative would cause adverse effects to 40 historic resources, including the North Side, Second Ward, Steelworks Suburbs, and Grove historic districts. Noise impacts would be mitigated through construction of 21,525 feet of noise walls. 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: 110368, Draft EIS--516 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 27 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CO-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado 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/917563840?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 26 of 43] T2 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 917563837; 15125-8_0026 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to the seven-mile segment of Interstate 25 (I-25) that passes through Pueblo, Colorado, from just south of US Highway 50 (US 50)/State Highway (SH) 47 to just south of Pueblo Boulevard, are proposed. The corridor, known as the Pueblo Freeway, was originally completed in 1959 and changes are required to address current and future transportation needs. I-25 serves as a critical north-south link in the nations Interstate Highway System and as a strategic international corridor under the North American Free Trade Act. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. The Existing I-25 Alternative would widen I-25 to six lanes (three in each direction) from just north of 29th Street to Pueblo Boulevard on its current alignment. The interchanges at US 50B, Indiana Avenue, and Pueblo Boulevard would be reconstructed. Access to 29th Street would be provided via a frontage road and split-diamond interchanges would be created between 13th Street and 1st Street and Abriendo Avenue and Northern Avenue. Connectivity off of I-25 would be improved by extending Dillon Drive south from 26th Street to US 50B and by extending Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. The Modified I-25 Alternative, which is preferred, shares the design characteristics of the Existing I-25 Alternative, with the exception of the southern part of the corridor between the Arkansas River and Canal Street where the Existing I-25 Alternative can be implemented only by moving the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks 150 feet to the east to make room for widening I-25. As an alternative to moving the rail line, the Modified I-25 Alternative would relocate I-25 on a new alignment to the east at Ilex Street, which would allow the UPRR rail line south of the Arkansas River to remain in place. With the Modified I-25 Alternative, I-25 would bridge over the railroad tracks at Minnequa Avenue and then run on the west side of the tracks and rejoin the existing I-25 alignment. By straightening I-25 at Ilex Street, I-25 would leave the current alignment and continue south. The roadway portion no longer used as I-25 would be available to become an extension of Santa Fe Avenue, a critical element to improving local mobility. The Modified I-25 Alternative would extend Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. Under both build alternatives, the completion of proposed trails and sidewalks would provide continuous bicycle and pedestrian access between 29th Street in the north to Pueblo Boulevard in the south. The project would be constructed in phases, with phase one being the replacements of the Ilex Street bridges. The estimated costs for all the project improvements are $760.5 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would address deteriorating roadways and bridges and unsafe road characteristics. Local and regional mobility within and through Pueblo would be improved to meet existing and future travel demands. Trails would provide safe, non-motorized access to Mineral Palace Park, Benedict Park, JJ Raigoza Park, the Historic Arkansas Riverwalk of Pueblo, the Runyon Field Sports Complex, the Runyon Lake State Wildlife Area, and the Fountain Creek Trail system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause direct loss of 1.1 acres of wetlands and 18.1 acres of wildlife habitat and temporary impacts to road traffic, trails and UPRR operations. For the preferred alternative, acquisitions would include: 117 residences; 56 total and 26 partial commercial properties; and 15 total and 15 partial public properties. Construction of four new bridges over the Arkansas River would require relocation of trails and an existing pedestrian bridge. Implementation of the preferred alternative would cause adverse effects to 40 historic resources, including the North Side, Second Ward, Steelworks Suburbs, and Grove historic districts. Noise impacts would be mitigated through construction of 21,525 feet of noise walls. 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: 110368, Draft EIS--516 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 26 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CO-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado 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/917563837?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. [Part 11 of 23] T2 - VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. AN - 917563833; 15129-2_0011 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of bus rapid transit (BRT) improvements along a two-mile stretch of Van Ness Avenue, from Lombard Street in the north to Mission Street in the south, San Francisco, California is proposed. Van Ness Avenue is a major north to south corridor for the eastern part of San Francisco. The Muni bus routes that travel along Van Ness Avenue provide regional transit connections to Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), AC Transit, Caltrain, and SamTrans. Golden Gate Transit (GGT) also provides service along Van Ness Avenue. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are analyzed in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 would provide a dedicated bus lane, or transitway, in the right-most lane of Van Ness Avenue located adjacent to the existing curbside parking area. The transitway would be traversable for mixed-flow traffic that would enter the transitway to complete a right turn or to parallel park. BRT stations would be located within the curbside parking area as curb extensions. Under Alternative 3, the transitway would be comprised of two side-by-side, dedicated bus lanes located in the center of the roadway in between two medians. The transitway would be separated from mixed-flow traffic by a four-foot-wide median, widening to a nine-foot-wide median at BRT stations, allowing right-side boarding. Alternative 4 would provide a transitway in the center of the roadway comprised of a single, 14-foot-wide median flanked by dedicated northbound and southbound bus lanes. Station platforms would be located on the single center median, requiring left-side passenger boarding and alighting, as well as left-side doors on vehicles. All stations would have this single-median design, with the exception of the BRT stations proposed at Geary/OFarrell, which would utilize a dual-median configuration similar to that proposed under Alternative 3 to accommodate GGT buses that are strictly rightside boarding. All GGT stops, except Geary/OFarrell, along the BRT corridor would be eliminated in Alternative 4. At the northern end of the corridor, GGT vehicles would be routed along a portion of Chestnut Street to accommodate an additional stop at the corner of Chestnut Street and Van Ness Avenue. At the southern end, GGT buses would continue to stop at the intersections of McAllister and Polk streets and Golden Gate Avenue and Polk Street. A second GGT stop within the BRT runningway at Union Street is also possible. Alternatives 3 and 4 contain a center-lane alternative design option (Design Option B) which would eliminate all but one northbound left turn (at Lombard Street) and all but one southbound left turn (at Broadway) in the project corridor. Project cost is estimated to be between $87 million and $130 million, depending on the build alternative selected. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Annual operations and maintenance costs associated with the build alternatives are significantly lower than those of the No Build Alternative, with cost savings ranging from 14 to 29 percent, depending on the build alternative. The savings are attributed to the travel time benefits of the BRT, requiring fewer vehicles to provide a similar amount of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activity would result in a potentially significant impact due to exceedances of nitrogen oxide emissions, but control measures would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. Implementation of the Van Ness BRT system would result in traffic circulation impacts at six to 11 intersections in the corridor, primarily along Franklin and Gough streets. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110372, Draft EIS--502 pages, Appendices--152 pages, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 11 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/917563833?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=VAN+NESS+AVENUE+BUS+RAPID+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=VAN+NESS+AVENUE+BUS+RAPID+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. [Part 10 of 23] T2 - VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. AN - 917563830; 15129-2_0010 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of bus rapid transit (BRT) improvements along a two-mile stretch of Van Ness Avenue, from Lombard Street in the north to Mission Street in the south, San Francisco, California is proposed. Van Ness Avenue is a major north to south corridor for the eastern part of San Francisco. The Muni bus routes that travel along Van Ness Avenue provide regional transit connections to Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), AC Transit, Caltrain, and SamTrans. Golden Gate Transit (GGT) also provides service along Van Ness Avenue. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are analyzed in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 would provide a dedicated bus lane, or transitway, in the right-most lane of Van Ness Avenue located adjacent to the existing curbside parking area. The transitway would be traversable for mixed-flow traffic that would enter the transitway to complete a right turn or to parallel park. BRT stations would be located within the curbside parking area as curb extensions. Under Alternative 3, the transitway would be comprised of two side-by-side, dedicated bus lanes located in the center of the roadway in between two medians. The transitway would be separated from mixed-flow traffic by a four-foot-wide median, widening to a nine-foot-wide median at BRT stations, allowing right-side boarding. Alternative 4 would provide a transitway in the center of the roadway comprised of a single, 14-foot-wide median flanked by dedicated northbound and southbound bus lanes. Station platforms would be located on the single center median, requiring left-side passenger boarding and alighting, as well as left-side doors on vehicles. All stations would have this single-median design, with the exception of the BRT stations proposed at Geary/OFarrell, which would utilize a dual-median configuration similar to that proposed under Alternative 3 to accommodate GGT buses that are strictly rightside boarding. All GGT stops, except Geary/OFarrell, along the BRT corridor would be eliminated in Alternative 4. At the northern end of the corridor, GGT vehicles would be routed along a portion of Chestnut Street to accommodate an additional stop at the corner of Chestnut Street and Van Ness Avenue. At the southern end, GGT buses would continue to stop at the intersections of McAllister and Polk streets and Golden Gate Avenue and Polk Street. A second GGT stop within the BRT runningway at Union Street is also possible. Alternatives 3 and 4 contain a center-lane alternative design option (Design Option B) which would eliminate all but one northbound left turn (at Lombard Street) and all but one southbound left turn (at Broadway) in the project corridor. Project cost is estimated to be between $87 million and $130 million, depending on the build alternative selected. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Annual operations and maintenance costs associated with the build alternatives are significantly lower than those of the No Build Alternative, with cost savings ranging from 14 to 29 percent, depending on the build alternative. The savings are attributed to the travel time benefits of the BRT, requiring fewer vehicles to provide a similar amount of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activity would result in a potentially significant impact due to exceedances of nitrogen oxide emissions, but control measures would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. Implementation of the Van Ness BRT system would result in traffic circulation impacts at six to 11 intersections in the corridor, primarily along Franklin and Gough streets. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110372, Draft EIS--502 pages, Appendices--152 pages, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/917563830?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=VAN+NESS+AVENUE+BUS+RAPID+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=VAN+NESS+AVENUE+BUS+RAPID+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. [Part 9 of 23] T2 - VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. AN - 917563827; 15129-2_0009 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of bus rapid transit (BRT) improvements along a two-mile stretch of Van Ness Avenue, from Lombard Street in the north to Mission Street in the south, San Francisco, California is proposed. Van Ness Avenue is a major north to south corridor for the eastern part of San Francisco. The Muni bus routes that travel along Van Ness Avenue provide regional transit connections to Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), AC Transit, Caltrain, and SamTrans. Golden Gate Transit (GGT) also provides service along Van Ness Avenue. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are analyzed in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 would provide a dedicated bus lane, or transitway, in the right-most lane of Van Ness Avenue located adjacent to the existing curbside parking area. The transitway would be traversable for mixed-flow traffic that would enter the transitway to complete a right turn or to parallel park. BRT stations would be located within the curbside parking area as curb extensions. Under Alternative 3, the transitway would be comprised of two side-by-side, dedicated bus lanes located in the center of the roadway in between two medians. The transitway would be separated from mixed-flow traffic by a four-foot-wide median, widening to a nine-foot-wide median at BRT stations, allowing right-side boarding. Alternative 4 would provide a transitway in the center of the roadway comprised of a single, 14-foot-wide median flanked by dedicated northbound and southbound bus lanes. Station platforms would be located on the single center median, requiring left-side passenger boarding and alighting, as well as left-side doors on vehicles. All stations would have this single-median design, with the exception of the BRT stations proposed at Geary/OFarrell, which would utilize a dual-median configuration similar to that proposed under Alternative 3 to accommodate GGT buses that are strictly rightside boarding. All GGT stops, except Geary/OFarrell, along the BRT corridor would be eliminated in Alternative 4. At the northern end of the corridor, GGT vehicles would be routed along a portion of Chestnut Street to accommodate an additional stop at the corner of Chestnut Street and Van Ness Avenue. At the southern end, GGT buses would continue to stop at the intersections of McAllister and Polk streets and Golden Gate Avenue and Polk Street. A second GGT stop within the BRT runningway at Union Street is also possible. Alternatives 3 and 4 contain a center-lane alternative design option (Design Option B) which would eliminate all but one northbound left turn (at Lombard Street) and all but one southbound left turn (at Broadway) in the project corridor. Project cost is estimated to be between $87 million and $130 million, depending on the build alternative selected. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Annual operations and maintenance costs associated with the build alternatives are significantly lower than those of the No Build Alternative, with cost savings ranging from 14 to 29 percent, depending on the build alternative. The savings are attributed to the travel time benefits of the BRT, requiring fewer vehicles to provide a similar amount of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activity would result in a potentially significant impact due to exceedances of nitrogen oxide emissions, but control measures would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. Implementation of the Van Ness BRT system would result in traffic circulation impacts at six to 11 intersections in the corridor, primarily along Franklin and Gough streets. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110372, Draft EIS--502 pages, Appendices--152 pages, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 9 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/917563827?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=VAN+NESS+AVENUE+BUS+RAPID+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=VAN+NESS+AVENUE+BUS+RAPID+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. [Part 8 of 23] T2 - VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. AN - 917563821; 15129-2_0008 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of bus rapid transit (BRT) improvements along a two-mile stretch of Van Ness Avenue, from Lombard Street in the north to Mission Street in the south, San Francisco, California is proposed. Van Ness Avenue is a major north to south corridor for the eastern part of San Francisco. The Muni bus routes that travel along Van Ness Avenue provide regional transit connections to Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), AC Transit, Caltrain, and SamTrans. Golden Gate Transit (GGT) also provides service along Van Ness Avenue. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are analyzed in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 would provide a dedicated bus lane, or transitway, in the right-most lane of Van Ness Avenue located adjacent to the existing curbside parking area. The transitway would be traversable for mixed-flow traffic that would enter the transitway to complete a right turn or to parallel park. BRT stations would be located within the curbside parking area as curb extensions. Under Alternative 3, the transitway would be comprised of two side-by-side, dedicated bus lanes located in the center of the roadway in between two medians. The transitway would be separated from mixed-flow traffic by a four-foot-wide median, widening to a nine-foot-wide median at BRT stations, allowing right-side boarding. Alternative 4 would provide a transitway in the center of the roadway comprised of a single, 14-foot-wide median flanked by dedicated northbound and southbound bus lanes. Station platforms would be located on the single center median, requiring left-side passenger boarding and alighting, as well as left-side doors on vehicles. All stations would have this single-median design, with the exception of the BRT stations proposed at Geary/OFarrell, which would utilize a dual-median configuration similar to that proposed under Alternative 3 to accommodate GGT buses that are strictly rightside boarding. All GGT stops, except Geary/OFarrell, along the BRT corridor would be eliminated in Alternative 4. At the northern end of the corridor, GGT vehicles would be routed along a portion of Chestnut Street to accommodate an additional stop at the corner of Chestnut Street and Van Ness Avenue. At the southern end, GGT buses would continue to stop at the intersections of McAllister and Polk streets and Golden Gate Avenue and Polk Street. A second GGT stop within the BRT runningway at Union Street is also possible. Alternatives 3 and 4 contain a center-lane alternative design option (Design Option B) which would eliminate all but one northbound left turn (at Lombard Street) and all but one southbound left turn (at Broadway) in the project corridor. Project cost is estimated to be between $87 million and $130 million, depending on the build alternative selected. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Annual operations and maintenance costs associated with the build alternatives are significantly lower than those of the No Build Alternative, with cost savings ranging from 14 to 29 percent, depending on the build alternative. The savings are attributed to the travel time benefits of the BRT, requiring fewer vehicles to provide a similar amount of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activity would result in a potentially significant impact due to exceedances of nitrogen oxide emissions, but control measures would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. Implementation of the Van Ness BRT system would result in traffic circulation impacts at six to 11 intersections in the corridor, primarily along Franklin and Gough streets. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110372, Draft EIS--502 pages, Appendices--152 pages, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/917563821?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=VAN+NESS+AVENUE+BUS+RAPID+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=VAN+NESS+AVENUE+BUS+RAPID+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. [Part 7 of 23] T2 - VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. AN - 917563817; 15129-2_0007 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of bus rapid transit (BRT) improvements along a two-mile stretch of Van Ness Avenue, from Lombard Street in the north to Mission Street in the south, San Francisco, California is proposed. Van Ness Avenue is a major north to south corridor for the eastern part of San Francisco. The Muni bus routes that travel along Van Ness Avenue provide regional transit connections to Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), AC Transit, Caltrain, and SamTrans. Golden Gate Transit (GGT) also provides service along Van Ness Avenue. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are analyzed in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 would provide a dedicated bus lane, or transitway, in the right-most lane of Van Ness Avenue located adjacent to the existing curbside parking area. The transitway would be traversable for mixed-flow traffic that would enter the transitway to complete a right turn or to parallel park. BRT stations would be located within the curbside parking area as curb extensions. Under Alternative 3, the transitway would be comprised of two side-by-side, dedicated bus lanes located in the center of the roadway in between two medians. The transitway would be separated from mixed-flow traffic by a four-foot-wide median, widening to a nine-foot-wide median at BRT stations, allowing right-side boarding. Alternative 4 would provide a transitway in the center of the roadway comprised of a single, 14-foot-wide median flanked by dedicated northbound and southbound bus lanes. Station platforms would be located on the single center median, requiring left-side passenger boarding and alighting, as well as left-side doors on vehicles. All stations would have this single-median design, with the exception of the BRT stations proposed at Geary/OFarrell, which would utilize a dual-median configuration similar to that proposed under Alternative 3 to accommodate GGT buses that are strictly rightside boarding. All GGT stops, except Geary/OFarrell, along the BRT corridor would be eliminated in Alternative 4. At the northern end of the corridor, GGT vehicles would be routed along a portion of Chestnut Street to accommodate an additional stop at the corner of Chestnut Street and Van Ness Avenue. At the southern end, GGT buses would continue to stop at the intersections of McAllister and Polk streets and Golden Gate Avenue and Polk Street. A second GGT stop within the BRT runningway at Union Street is also possible. Alternatives 3 and 4 contain a center-lane alternative design option (Design Option B) which would eliminate all but one northbound left turn (at Lombard Street) and all but one southbound left turn (at Broadway) in the project corridor. Project cost is estimated to be between $87 million and $130 million, depending on the build alternative selected. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Annual operations and maintenance costs associated with the build alternatives are significantly lower than those of the No Build Alternative, with cost savings ranging from 14 to 29 percent, depending on the build alternative. The savings are attributed to the travel time benefits of the BRT, requiring fewer vehicles to provide a similar amount of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activity would result in a potentially significant impact due to exceedances of nitrogen oxide emissions, but control measures would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. Implementation of the Van Ness BRT system would result in traffic circulation impacts at six to 11 intersections in the corridor, primarily along Franklin and Gough streets. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110372, Draft EIS--502 pages, Appendices--152 pages, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/917563817?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=VAN+NESS+AVENUE+BUS+RAPID+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=VAN+NESS+AVENUE+BUS+RAPID+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 5 of 43] T2 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 917563727; 15125-8_0005 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to the seven-mile segment of Interstate 25 (I-25) that passes through Pueblo, Colorado, from just south of US Highway 50 (US 50)/State Highway (SH) 47 to just south of Pueblo Boulevard, are proposed. The corridor, known as the Pueblo Freeway, was originally completed in 1959 and changes are required to address current and future transportation needs. I-25 serves as a critical north-south link in the nations Interstate Highway System and as a strategic international corridor under the North American Free Trade Act. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. The Existing I-25 Alternative would widen I-25 to six lanes (three in each direction) from just north of 29th Street to Pueblo Boulevard on its current alignment. The interchanges at US 50B, Indiana Avenue, and Pueblo Boulevard would be reconstructed. Access to 29th Street would be provided via a frontage road and split-diamond interchanges would be created between 13th Street and 1st Street and Abriendo Avenue and Northern Avenue. Connectivity off of I-25 would be improved by extending Dillon Drive south from 26th Street to US 50B and by extending Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. The Modified I-25 Alternative, which is preferred, shares the design characteristics of the Existing I-25 Alternative, with the exception of the southern part of the corridor between the Arkansas River and Canal Street where the Existing I-25 Alternative can be implemented only by moving the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks 150 feet to the east to make room for widening I-25. As an alternative to moving the rail line, the Modified I-25 Alternative would relocate I-25 on a new alignment to the east at Ilex Street, which would allow the UPRR rail line south of the Arkansas River to remain in place. With the Modified I-25 Alternative, I-25 would bridge over the railroad tracks at Minnequa Avenue and then run on the west side of the tracks and rejoin the existing I-25 alignment. By straightening I-25 at Ilex Street, I-25 would leave the current alignment and continue south. The roadway portion no longer used as I-25 would be available to become an extension of Santa Fe Avenue, a critical element to improving local mobility. The Modified I-25 Alternative would extend Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. Under both build alternatives, the completion of proposed trails and sidewalks would provide continuous bicycle and pedestrian access between 29th Street in the north to Pueblo Boulevard in the south. The project would be constructed in phases, with phase one being the replacements of the Ilex Street bridges. The estimated costs for all the project improvements are $760.5 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would address deteriorating roadways and bridges and unsafe road characteristics. Local and regional mobility within and through Pueblo would be improved to meet existing and future travel demands. Trails would provide safe, non-motorized access to Mineral Palace Park, Benedict Park, JJ Raigoza Park, the Historic Arkansas Riverwalk of Pueblo, the Runyon Field Sports Complex, the Runyon Lake State Wildlife Area, and the Fountain Creek Trail system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause direct loss of 1.1 acres of wetlands and 18.1 acres of wildlife habitat and temporary impacts to road traffic, trails and UPRR operations. For the preferred alternative, acquisitions would include: 117 residences; 56 total and 26 partial commercial properties; and 15 total and 15 partial public properties. Construction of four new bridges over the Arkansas River would require relocation of trails and an existing pedestrian bridge. Implementation of the preferred alternative would cause adverse effects to 40 historic resources, including the North Side, Second Ward, Steelworks Suburbs, and Grove historic districts. Noise impacts would be mitigated through construction of 21,525 feet of noise walls. 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: 110368, Draft EIS--516 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CO-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado 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/917563727?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 4 of 43] T2 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 917563724; 15125-8_0004 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to the seven-mile segment of Interstate 25 (I-25) that passes through Pueblo, Colorado, from just south of US Highway 50 (US 50)/State Highway (SH) 47 to just south of Pueblo Boulevard, are proposed. The corridor, known as the Pueblo Freeway, was originally completed in 1959 and changes are required to address current and future transportation needs. I-25 serves as a critical north-south link in the nations Interstate Highway System and as a strategic international corridor under the North American Free Trade Act. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. The Existing I-25 Alternative would widen I-25 to six lanes (three in each direction) from just north of 29th Street to Pueblo Boulevard on its current alignment. The interchanges at US 50B, Indiana Avenue, and Pueblo Boulevard would be reconstructed. Access to 29th Street would be provided via a frontage road and split-diamond interchanges would be created between 13th Street and 1st Street and Abriendo Avenue and Northern Avenue. Connectivity off of I-25 would be improved by extending Dillon Drive south from 26th Street to US 50B and by extending Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. The Modified I-25 Alternative, which is preferred, shares the design characteristics of the Existing I-25 Alternative, with the exception of the southern part of the corridor between the Arkansas River and Canal Street where the Existing I-25 Alternative can be implemented only by moving the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks 150 feet to the east to make room for widening I-25. As an alternative to moving the rail line, the Modified I-25 Alternative would relocate I-25 on a new alignment to the east at Ilex Street, which would allow the UPRR rail line south of the Arkansas River to remain in place. With the Modified I-25 Alternative, I-25 would bridge over the railroad tracks at Minnequa Avenue and then run on the west side of the tracks and rejoin the existing I-25 alignment. By straightening I-25 at Ilex Street, I-25 would leave the current alignment and continue south. The roadway portion no longer used as I-25 would be available to become an extension of Santa Fe Avenue, a critical element to improving local mobility. The Modified I-25 Alternative would extend Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. Under both build alternatives, the completion of proposed trails and sidewalks would provide continuous bicycle and pedestrian access between 29th Street in the north to Pueblo Boulevard in the south. The project would be constructed in phases, with phase one being the replacements of the Ilex Street bridges. The estimated costs for all the project improvements are $760.5 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would address deteriorating roadways and bridges and unsafe road characteristics. Local and regional mobility within and through Pueblo would be improved to meet existing and future travel demands. Trails would provide safe, non-motorized access to Mineral Palace Park, Benedict Park, JJ Raigoza Park, the Historic Arkansas Riverwalk of Pueblo, the Runyon Field Sports Complex, the Runyon Lake State Wildlife Area, and the Fountain Creek Trail system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause direct loss of 1.1 acres of wetlands and 18.1 acres of wildlife habitat and temporary impacts to road traffic, trails and UPRR operations. For the preferred alternative, acquisitions would include: 117 residences; 56 total and 26 partial commercial properties; and 15 total and 15 partial public properties. Construction of four new bridges over the Arkansas River would require relocation of trails and an existing pedestrian bridge. Implementation of the preferred alternative would cause adverse effects to 40 historic resources, including the North Side, Second Ward, Steelworks Suburbs, and Grove historic districts. Noise impacts would be mitigated through construction of 21,525 feet of noise walls. 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: 110368, Draft EIS--516 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CO-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado 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/917563724?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 3 of 43] T2 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 917563722; 15125-8_0003 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to the seven-mile segment of Interstate 25 (I-25) that passes through Pueblo, Colorado, from just south of US Highway 50 (US 50)/State Highway (SH) 47 to just south of Pueblo Boulevard, are proposed. The corridor, known as the Pueblo Freeway, was originally completed in 1959 and changes are required to address current and future transportation needs. I-25 serves as a critical north-south link in the nations Interstate Highway System and as a strategic international corridor under the North American Free Trade Act. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. The Existing I-25 Alternative would widen I-25 to six lanes (three in each direction) from just north of 29th Street to Pueblo Boulevard on its current alignment. The interchanges at US 50B, Indiana Avenue, and Pueblo Boulevard would be reconstructed. Access to 29th Street would be provided via a frontage road and split-diamond interchanges would be created between 13th Street and 1st Street and Abriendo Avenue and Northern Avenue. Connectivity off of I-25 would be improved by extending Dillon Drive south from 26th Street to US 50B and by extending Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. The Modified I-25 Alternative, which is preferred, shares the design characteristics of the Existing I-25 Alternative, with the exception of the southern part of the corridor between the Arkansas River and Canal Street where the Existing I-25 Alternative can be implemented only by moving the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks 150 feet to the east to make room for widening I-25. As an alternative to moving the rail line, the Modified I-25 Alternative would relocate I-25 on a new alignment to the east at Ilex Street, which would allow the UPRR rail line south of the Arkansas River to remain in place. With the Modified I-25 Alternative, I-25 would bridge over the railroad tracks at Minnequa Avenue and then run on the west side of the tracks and rejoin the existing I-25 alignment. By straightening I-25 at Ilex Street, I-25 would leave the current alignment and continue south. The roadway portion no longer used as I-25 would be available to become an extension of Santa Fe Avenue, a critical element to improving local mobility. The Modified I-25 Alternative would extend Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. Under both build alternatives, the completion of proposed trails and sidewalks would provide continuous bicycle and pedestrian access between 29th Street in the north to Pueblo Boulevard in the south. The project would be constructed in phases, with phase one being the replacements of the Ilex Street bridges. The estimated costs for all the project improvements are $760.5 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would address deteriorating roadways and bridges and unsafe road characteristics. Local and regional mobility within and through Pueblo would be improved to meet existing and future travel demands. Trails would provide safe, non-motorized access to Mineral Palace Park, Benedict Park, JJ Raigoza Park, the Historic Arkansas Riverwalk of Pueblo, the Runyon Field Sports Complex, the Runyon Lake State Wildlife Area, and the Fountain Creek Trail system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause direct loss of 1.1 acres of wetlands and 18.1 acres of wildlife habitat and temporary impacts to road traffic, trails and UPRR operations. For the preferred alternative, acquisitions would include: 117 residences; 56 total and 26 partial commercial properties; and 15 total and 15 partial public properties. Construction of four new bridges over the Arkansas River would require relocation of trails and an existing pedestrian bridge. Implementation of the preferred alternative would cause adverse effects to 40 historic resources, including the North Side, Second Ward, Steelworks Suburbs, and Grove historic districts. Noise impacts would be mitigated through construction of 21,525 feet of noise walls. 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: 110368, Draft EIS--516 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CO-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado 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/917563722?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 2 of 43] T2 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 917563721; 15125-8_0002 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to the seven-mile segment of Interstate 25 (I-25) that passes through Pueblo, Colorado, from just south of US Highway 50 (US 50)/State Highway (SH) 47 to just south of Pueblo Boulevard, are proposed. The corridor, known as the Pueblo Freeway, was originally completed in 1959 and changes are required to address current and future transportation needs. I-25 serves as a critical north-south link in the nations Interstate Highway System and as a strategic international corridor under the North American Free Trade Act. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. The Existing I-25 Alternative would widen I-25 to six lanes (three in each direction) from just north of 29th Street to Pueblo Boulevard on its current alignment. The interchanges at US 50B, Indiana Avenue, and Pueblo Boulevard would be reconstructed. Access to 29th Street would be provided via a frontage road and split-diamond interchanges would be created between 13th Street and 1st Street and Abriendo Avenue and Northern Avenue. Connectivity off of I-25 would be improved by extending Dillon Drive south from 26th Street to US 50B and by extending Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. The Modified I-25 Alternative, which is preferred, shares the design characteristics of the Existing I-25 Alternative, with the exception of the southern part of the corridor between the Arkansas River and Canal Street where the Existing I-25 Alternative can be implemented only by moving the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks 150 feet to the east to make room for widening I-25. As an alternative to moving the rail line, the Modified I-25 Alternative would relocate I-25 on a new alignment to the east at Ilex Street, which would allow the UPRR rail line south of the Arkansas River to remain in place. With the Modified I-25 Alternative, I-25 would bridge over the railroad tracks at Minnequa Avenue and then run on the west side of the tracks and rejoin the existing I-25 alignment. By straightening I-25 at Ilex Street, I-25 would leave the current alignment and continue south. The roadway portion no longer used as I-25 would be available to become an extension of Santa Fe Avenue, a critical element to improving local mobility. The Modified I-25 Alternative would extend Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. Under both build alternatives, the completion of proposed trails and sidewalks would provide continuous bicycle and pedestrian access between 29th Street in the north to Pueblo Boulevard in the south. The project would be constructed in phases, with phase one being the replacements of the Ilex Street bridges. The estimated costs for all the project improvements are $760.5 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would address deteriorating roadways and bridges and unsafe road characteristics. Local and regional mobility within and through Pueblo would be improved to meet existing and future travel demands. Trails would provide safe, non-motorized access to Mineral Palace Park, Benedict Park, JJ Raigoza Park, the Historic Arkansas Riverwalk of Pueblo, the Runyon Field Sports Complex, the Runyon Lake State Wildlife Area, and the Fountain Creek Trail system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause direct loss of 1.1 acres of wetlands and 18.1 acres of wildlife habitat and temporary impacts to road traffic, trails and UPRR operations. For the preferred alternative, acquisitions would include: 117 residences; 56 total and 26 partial commercial properties; and 15 total and 15 partial public properties. Construction of four new bridges over the Arkansas River would require relocation of trails and an existing pedestrian bridge. Implementation of the preferred alternative would cause adverse effects to 40 historic resources, including the North Side, Second Ward, Steelworks Suburbs, and Grove historic districts. Noise impacts would be mitigated through construction of 21,525 feet of noise walls. 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: 110368, Draft EIS--516 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CO-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado 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/917563721?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 1 of 43] T2 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 917563718; 15125-8_0001 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to the seven-mile segment of Interstate 25 (I-25) that passes through Pueblo, Colorado, from just south of US Highway 50 (US 50)/State Highway (SH) 47 to just south of Pueblo Boulevard, are proposed. The corridor, known as the Pueblo Freeway, was originally completed in 1959 and changes are required to address current and future transportation needs. I-25 serves as a critical north-south link in the nations Interstate Highway System and as a strategic international corridor under the North American Free Trade Act. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. The Existing I-25 Alternative would widen I-25 to six lanes (three in each direction) from just north of 29th Street to Pueblo Boulevard on its current alignment. The interchanges at US 50B, Indiana Avenue, and Pueblo Boulevard would be reconstructed. Access to 29th Street would be provided via a frontage road and split-diamond interchanges would be created between 13th Street and 1st Street and Abriendo Avenue and Northern Avenue. Connectivity off of I-25 would be improved by extending Dillon Drive south from 26th Street to US 50B and by extending Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. The Modified I-25 Alternative, which is preferred, shares the design characteristics of the Existing I-25 Alternative, with the exception of the southern part of the corridor between the Arkansas River and Canal Street where the Existing I-25 Alternative can be implemented only by moving the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks 150 feet to the east to make room for widening I-25. As an alternative to moving the rail line, the Modified I-25 Alternative would relocate I-25 on a new alignment to the east at Ilex Street, which would allow the UPRR rail line south of the Arkansas River to remain in place. With the Modified I-25 Alternative, I-25 would bridge over the railroad tracks at Minnequa Avenue and then run on the west side of the tracks and rejoin the existing I-25 alignment. By straightening I-25 at Ilex Street, I-25 would leave the current alignment and continue south. The roadway portion no longer used as I-25 would be available to become an extension of Santa Fe Avenue, a critical element to improving local mobility. The Modified I-25 Alternative would extend Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. Under both build alternatives, the completion of proposed trails and sidewalks would provide continuous bicycle and pedestrian access between 29th Street in the north to Pueblo Boulevard in the south. The project would be constructed in phases, with phase one being the replacements of the Ilex Street bridges. The estimated costs for all the project improvements are $760.5 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would address deteriorating roadways and bridges and unsafe road characteristics. Local and regional mobility within and through Pueblo would be improved to meet existing and future travel demands. Trails would provide safe, non-motorized access to Mineral Palace Park, Benedict Park, JJ Raigoza Park, the Historic Arkansas Riverwalk of Pueblo, the Runyon Field Sports Complex, the Runyon Lake State Wildlife Area, and the Fountain Creek Trail system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause direct loss of 1.1 acres of wetlands and 18.1 acres of wildlife habitat and temporary impacts to road traffic, trails and UPRR operations. For the preferred alternative, acquisitions would include: 117 residences; 56 total and 26 partial commercial properties; and 15 total and 15 partial public properties. Construction of four new bridges over the Arkansas River would require relocation of trails and an existing pedestrian bridge. Implementation of the preferred alternative would cause adverse effects to 40 historic resources, including the North Side, Second Ward, Steelworks Suburbs, and Grove historic districts. Noise impacts would be mitigated through construction of 21,525 feet of noise walls. 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: 110368, Draft EIS--516 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CO-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado 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/917563718?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SIXTH STREET VIADUCT SEISMIC IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 2 of 2] T2 - SIXTH STREET VIADUCT SEISMIC IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 917563710; 15131-4_0002 AB - PURPOSE: Seismic improvement of the 6th Street Viaduct over the Los Angeles River and the 6th Street Overcrossing, which spans the US 101 Hollywood Freeway, Los Angeles County, California is proposed. These two bridges comprise a single structure which connects downtown Los Angeles with the Boyle Heights community. The 66-foot-wide viaduct is 3,500 feet long, with a four-lane roadway, no shoulders, and variable-width sidewalks. It was constructed in 1932 and concrete elements of the viaduct have cracked and deteriorated. Seismic vulnerability studies, completed in 2004, concluded that the viaduct, in its current state of material deterioration and lack of structural strength, has a high vulnerability to failure as a result of a major earthquake. Key issues include those related to the historic nature of the 6th Street Viaduct, opportunities for redevelopment of the surrounding area, and selection of a replacement bridge type for the main span over the Los Angeles River. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative 1) are analyzed in this final EIS. Under Alternative 2, the viaduct's columns would be seismically retrofitted and infill walls would be constructed between selected columns. New foundations, grade beams, retrofitting of bent caps, and closure of some expansion joints in the superstructure would be constructed. Alternative 3 is the preferred alternative and would replace the existing structure with a new viaduct along one of three alignments under consideration. Alignment 3B is preferred and would maintain the present location on the south side of the existing bridge from Mateo Street to Santa Fe Avenue, but would swing to the north approximately 85 feet farther than the existing alignment on the east side of the river, which would upgrade the existing non-standard curve radius at the east end. The preferred main-span bridge type is an extradosed (cable-supported) concrete box girder with dual pylons. The new 70-foot-wide roadway would consist of two 11-foot-wide lanes with an eight-foot-wide shoulder in each direction, a 10-foot-wide median, and 10-foot-wide sidewalks. The construction cost for the preferred alternative, alignment, and bridge type is estimated at $306 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would preserve 6th Street as a viable east-west link between Boyle Heights and downtown Los Angeles and would reduce the vulnerability of the viaduct in major earthquake events. The new bridge proposed under Alternative 3 would have a 75-year design life. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Demolition of the 6th Street Viaduct would eliminate a structure that has been determined eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. Right-of-way for the preferred alternative would require acquisition of several industrial buildings affecting up to 33 businesses, 11 of which would be subject to relocation. Construction of a replacement bridge would require full closure of the 6th Street Viaduct for up to four years and 13 out of 31 intersections under study would be impacted by detouring traffic. Railroad operations would be disrupted and relocation of some utility services would be required. Buildings proposed for demolition could contain asbestos which could cause health effects to workers. Construction would cause disproportionately high adverse effects on minority and low-income populations. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0308D, Volume 33, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 110374, Final EIS--522 pages, Appendices--354 pages, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Demolition KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Safety Analyses KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Seismic Surveys KW - Seismology KW - Structural Rehabilitation KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California 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/917563710?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SIXTH+STREET+VIADUCT+SEISMIC+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=SIXTH+STREET+VIADUCT+SEISMIC+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - California Department of Transportation, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 32 of 43] T2 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 917563651; 15125-8_0032 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to the seven-mile segment of Interstate 25 (I-25) that passes through Pueblo, Colorado, from just south of US Highway 50 (US 50)/State Highway (SH) 47 to just south of Pueblo Boulevard, are proposed. The corridor, known as the Pueblo Freeway, was originally completed in 1959 and changes are required to address current and future transportation needs. I-25 serves as a critical north-south link in the nations Interstate Highway System and as a strategic international corridor under the North American Free Trade Act. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. The Existing I-25 Alternative would widen I-25 to six lanes (three in each direction) from just north of 29th Street to Pueblo Boulevard on its current alignment. The interchanges at US 50B, Indiana Avenue, and Pueblo Boulevard would be reconstructed. Access to 29th Street would be provided via a frontage road and split-diamond interchanges would be created between 13th Street and 1st Street and Abriendo Avenue and Northern Avenue. Connectivity off of I-25 would be improved by extending Dillon Drive south from 26th Street to US 50B and by extending Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. The Modified I-25 Alternative, which is preferred, shares the design characteristics of the Existing I-25 Alternative, with the exception of the southern part of the corridor between the Arkansas River and Canal Street where the Existing I-25 Alternative can be implemented only by moving the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks 150 feet to the east to make room for widening I-25. As an alternative to moving the rail line, the Modified I-25 Alternative would relocate I-25 on a new alignment to the east at Ilex Street, which would allow the UPRR rail line south of the Arkansas River to remain in place. With the Modified I-25 Alternative, I-25 would bridge over the railroad tracks at Minnequa Avenue and then run on the west side of the tracks and rejoin the existing I-25 alignment. By straightening I-25 at Ilex Street, I-25 would leave the current alignment and continue south. The roadway portion no longer used as I-25 would be available to become an extension of Santa Fe Avenue, a critical element to improving local mobility. The Modified I-25 Alternative would extend Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. Under both build alternatives, the completion of proposed trails and sidewalks would provide continuous bicycle and pedestrian access between 29th Street in the north to Pueblo Boulevard in the south. The project would be constructed in phases, with phase one being the replacements of the Ilex Street bridges. The estimated costs for all the project improvements are $760.5 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would address deteriorating roadways and bridges and unsafe road characteristics. Local and regional mobility within and through Pueblo would be improved to meet existing and future travel demands. Trails would provide safe, non-motorized access to Mineral Palace Park, Benedict Park, JJ Raigoza Park, the Historic Arkansas Riverwalk of Pueblo, the Runyon Field Sports Complex, the Runyon Lake State Wildlife Area, and the Fountain Creek Trail system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause direct loss of 1.1 acres of wetlands and 18.1 acres of wildlife habitat and temporary impacts to road traffic, trails and UPRR operations. For the preferred alternative, acquisitions would include: 117 residences; 56 total and 26 partial commercial properties; and 15 total and 15 partial public properties. Construction of four new bridges over the Arkansas River would require relocation of trails and an existing pedestrian bridge. Implementation of the preferred alternative would cause adverse effects to 40 historic resources, including the North Side, Second Ward, Steelworks Suburbs, and Grove historic districts. Noise impacts would be mitigated through construction of 21,525 feet of noise walls. 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: 110368, Draft EIS--516 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 32 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CO-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado 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/917563651?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 31 of 43] T2 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 917563641; 15125-8_0031 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to the seven-mile segment of Interstate 25 (I-25) that passes through Pueblo, Colorado, from just south of US Highway 50 (US 50)/State Highway (SH) 47 to just south of Pueblo Boulevard, are proposed. The corridor, known as the Pueblo Freeway, was originally completed in 1959 and changes are required to address current and future transportation needs. I-25 serves as a critical north-south link in the nations Interstate Highway System and as a strategic international corridor under the North American Free Trade Act. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. The Existing I-25 Alternative would widen I-25 to six lanes (three in each direction) from just north of 29th Street to Pueblo Boulevard on its current alignment. The interchanges at US 50B, Indiana Avenue, and Pueblo Boulevard would be reconstructed. Access to 29th Street would be provided via a frontage road and split-diamond interchanges would be created between 13th Street and 1st Street and Abriendo Avenue and Northern Avenue. Connectivity off of I-25 would be improved by extending Dillon Drive south from 26th Street to US 50B and by extending Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. The Modified I-25 Alternative, which is preferred, shares the design characteristics of the Existing I-25 Alternative, with the exception of the southern part of the corridor between the Arkansas River and Canal Street where the Existing I-25 Alternative can be implemented only by moving the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks 150 feet to the east to make room for widening I-25. As an alternative to moving the rail line, the Modified I-25 Alternative would relocate I-25 on a new alignment to the east at Ilex Street, which would allow the UPRR rail line south of the Arkansas River to remain in place. With the Modified I-25 Alternative, I-25 would bridge over the railroad tracks at Minnequa Avenue and then run on the west side of the tracks and rejoin the existing I-25 alignment. By straightening I-25 at Ilex Street, I-25 would leave the current alignment and continue south. The roadway portion no longer used as I-25 would be available to become an extension of Santa Fe Avenue, a critical element to improving local mobility. The Modified I-25 Alternative would extend Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. Under both build alternatives, the completion of proposed trails and sidewalks would provide continuous bicycle and pedestrian access between 29th Street in the north to Pueblo Boulevard in the south. The project would be constructed in phases, with phase one being the replacements of the Ilex Street bridges. The estimated costs for all the project improvements are $760.5 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would address deteriorating roadways and bridges and unsafe road characteristics. Local and regional mobility within and through Pueblo would be improved to meet existing and future travel demands. Trails would provide safe, non-motorized access to Mineral Palace Park, Benedict Park, JJ Raigoza Park, the Historic Arkansas Riverwalk of Pueblo, the Runyon Field Sports Complex, the Runyon Lake State Wildlife Area, and the Fountain Creek Trail system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause direct loss of 1.1 acres of wetlands and 18.1 acres of wildlife habitat and temporary impacts to road traffic, trails and UPRR operations. For the preferred alternative, acquisitions would include: 117 residences; 56 total and 26 partial commercial properties; and 15 total and 15 partial public properties. Construction of four new bridges over the Arkansas River would require relocation of trails and an existing pedestrian bridge. Implementation of the preferred alternative would cause adverse effects to 40 historic resources, including the North Side, Second Ward, Steelworks Suburbs, and Grove historic districts. Noise impacts would be mitigated through construction of 21,525 feet of noise walls. 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: 110368, Draft EIS--516 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 31 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CO-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado 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/917563641?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 25 of 43] T2 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 917563632; 15125-8_0025 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to the seven-mile segment of Interstate 25 (I-25) that passes through Pueblo, Colorado, from just south of US Highway 50 (US 50)/State Highway (SH) 47 to just south of Pueblo Boulevard, are proposed. The corridor, known as the Pueblo Freeway, was originally completed in 1959 and changes are required to address current and future transportation needs. I-25 serves as a critical north-south link in the nations Interstate Highway System and as a strategic international corridor under the North American Free Trade Act. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. The Existing I-25 Alternative would widen I-25 to six lanes (three in each direction) from just north of 29th Street to Pueblo Boulevard on its current alignment. The interchanges at US 50B, Indiana Avenue, and Pueblo Boulevard would be reconstructed. Access to 29th Street would be provided via a frontage road and split-diamond interchanges would be created between 13th Street and 1st Street and Abriendo Avenue and Northern Avenue. Connectivity off of I-25 would be improved by extending Dillon Drive south from 26th Street to US 50B and by extending Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. The Modified I-25 Alternative, which is preferred, shares the design characteristics of the Existing I-25 Alternative, with the exception of the southern part of the corridor between the Arkansas River and Canal Street where the Existing I-25 Alternative can be implemented only by moving the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks 150 feet to the east to make room for widening I-25. As an alternative to moving the rail line, the Modified I-25 Alternative would relocate I-25 on a new alignment to the east at Ilex Street, which would allow the UPRR rail line south of the Arkansas River to remain in place. With the Modified I-25 Alternative, I-25 would bridge over the railroad tracks at Minnequa Avenue and then run on the west side of the tracks and rejoin the existing I-25 alignment. By straightening I-25 at Ilex Street, I-25 would leave the current alignment and continue south. The roadway portion no longer used as I-25 would be available to become an extension of Santa Fe Avenue, a critical element to improving local mobility. The Modified I-25 Alternative would extend Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. Under both build alternatives, the completion of proposed trails and sidewalks would provide continuous bicycle and pedestrian access between 29th Street in the north to Pueblo Boulevard in the south. The project would be constructed in phases, with phase one being the replacements of the Ilex Street bridges. The estimated costs for all the project improvements are $760.5 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would address deteriorating roadways and bridges and unsafe road characteristics. Local and regional mobility within and through Pueblo would be improved to meet existing and future travel demands. Trails would provide safe, non-motorized access to Mineral Palace Park, Benedict Park, JJ Raigoza Park, the Historic Arkansas Riverwalk of Pueblo, the Runyon Field Sports Complex, the Runyon Lake State Wildlife Area, and the Fountain Creek Trail system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause direct loss of 1.1 acres of wetlands and 18.1 acres of wildlife habitat and temporary impacts to road traffic, trails and UPRR operations. For the preferred alternative, acquisitions would include: 117 residences; 56 total and 26 partial commercial properties; and 15 total and 15 partial public properties. Construction of four new bridges over the Arkansas River would require relocation of trails and an existing pedestrian bridge. Implementation of the preferred alternative would cause adverse effects to 40 historic resources, including the North Side, Second Ward, Steelworks Suburbs, and Grove historic districts. Noise impacts would be mitigated through construction of 21,525 feet of noise walls. 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: 110368, Draft EIS--516 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 25 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CO-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado 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/917563632?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 24 of 43] T2 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 917563624; 15125-8_0024 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to the seven-mile segment of Interstate 25 (I-25) that passes through Pueblo, Colorado, from just south of US Highway 50 (US 50)/State Highway (SH) 47 to just south of Pueblo Boulevard, are proposed. The corridor, known as the Pueblo Freeway, was originally completed in 1959 and changes are required to address current and future transportation needs. I-25 serves as a critical north-south link in the nations Interstate Highway System and as a strategic international corridor under the North American Free Trade Act. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. The Existing I-25 Alternative would widen I-25 to six lanes (three in each direction) from just north of 29th Street to Pueblo Boulevard on its current alignment. The interchanges at US 50B, Indiana Avenue, and Pueblo Boulevard would be reconstructed. Access to 29th Street would be provided via a frontage road and split-diamond interchanges would be created between 13th Street and 1st Street and Abriendo Avenue and Northern Avenue. Connectivity off of I-25 would be improved by extending Dillon Drive south from 26th Street to US 50B and by extending Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. The Modified I-25 Alternative, which is preferred, shares the design characteristics of the Existing I-25 Alternative, with the exception of the southern part of the corridor between the Arkansas River and Canal Street where the Existing I-25 Alternative can be implemented only by moving the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks 150 feet to the east to make room for widening I-25. As an alternative to moving the rail line, the Modified I-25 Alternative would relocate I-25 on a new alignment to the east at Ilex Street, which would allow the UPRR rail line south of the Arkansas River to remain in place. With the Modified I-25 Alternative, I-25 would bridge over the railroad tracks at Minnequa Avenue and then run on the west side of the tracks and rejoin the existing I-25 alignment. By straightening I-25 at Ilex Street, I-25 would leave the current alignment and continue south. The roadway portion no longer used as I-25 would be available to become an extension of Santa Fe Avenue, a critical element to improving local mobility. The Modified I-25 Alternative would extend Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. Under both build alternatives, the completion of proposed trails and sidewalks would provide continuous bicycle and pedestrian access between 29th Street in the north to Pueblo Boulevard in the south. The project would be constructed in phases, with phase one being the replacements of the Ilex Street bridges. The estimated costs for all the project improvements are $760.5 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would address deteriorating roadways and bridges and unsafe road characteristics. Local and regional mobility within and through Pueblo would be improved to meet existing and future travel demands. Trails would provide safe, non-motorized access to Mineral Palace Park, Benedict Park, JJ Raigoza Park, the Historic Arkansas Riverwalk of Pueblo, the Runyon Field Sports Complex, the Runyon Lake State Wildlife Area, and the Fountain Creek Trail system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause direct loss of 1.1 acres of wetlands and 18.1 acres of wildlife habitat and temporary impacts to road traffic, trails and UPRR operations. For the preferred alternative, acquisitions would include: 117 residences; 56 total and 26 partial commercial properties; and 15 total and 15 partial public properties. Construction of four new bridges over the Arkansas River would require relocation of trails and an existing pedestrian bridge. Implementation of the preferred alternative would cause adverse effects to 40 historic resources, including the North Side, Second Ward, Steelworks Suburbs, and Grove historic districts. Noise impacts would be mitigated through construction of 21,525 feet of noise walls. 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: 110368, Draft EIS--516 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 24 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CO-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado 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/917563624?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 23 of 43] T2 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 917563616; 15125-8_0023 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to the seven-mile segment of Interstate 25 (I-25) that passes through Pueblo, Colorado, from just south of US Highway 50 (US 50)/State Highway (SH) 47 to just south of Pueblo Boulevard, are proposed. The corridor, known as the Pueblo Freeway, was originally completed in 1959 and changes are required to address current and future transportation needs. I-25 serves as a critical north-south link in the nations Interstate Highway System and as a strategic international corridor under the North American Free Trade Act. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. The Existing I-25 Alternative would widen I-25 to six lanes (three in each direction) from just north of 29th Street to Pueblo Boulevard on its current alignment. The interchanges at US 50B, Indiana Avenue, and Pueblo Boulevard would be reconstructed. Access to 29th Street would be provided via a frontage road and split-diamond interchanges would be created between 13th Street and 1st Street and Abriendo Avenue and Northern Avenue. Connectivity off of I-25 would be improved by extending Dillon Drive south from 26th Street to US 50B and by extending Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. The Modified I-25 Alternative, which is preferred, shares the design characteristics of the Existing I-25 Alternative, with the exception of the southern part of the corridor between the Arkansas River and Canal Street where the Existing I-25 Alternative can be implemented only by moving the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks 150 feet to the east to make room for widening I-25. As an alternative to moving the rail line, the Modified I-25 Alternative would relocate I-25 on a new alignment to the east at Ilex Street, which would allow the UPRR rail line south of the Arkansas River to remain in place. With the Modified I-25 Alternative, I-25 would bridge over the railroad tracks at Minnequa Avenue and then run on the west side of the tracks and rejoin the existing I-25 alignment. By straightening I-25 at Ilex Street, I-25 would leave the current alignment and continue south. The roadway portion no longer used as I-25 would be available to become an extension of Santa Fe Avenue, a critical element to improving local mobility. The Modified I-25 Alternative would extend Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. Under both build alternatives, the completion of proposed trails and sidewalks would provide continuous bicycle and pedestrian access between 29th Street in the north to Pueblo Boulevard in the south. The project would be constructed in phases, with phase one being the replacements of the Ilex Street bridges. The estimated costs for all the project improvements are $760.5 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would address deteriorating roadways and bridges and unsafe road characteristics. Local and regional mobility within and through Pueblo would be improved to meet existing and future travel demands. Trails would provide safe, non-motorized access to Mineral Palace Park, Benedict Park, JJ Raigoza Park, the Historic Arkansas Riverwalk of Pueblo, the Runyon Field Sports Complex, the Runyon Lake State Wildlife Area, and the Fountain Creek Trail system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause direct loss of 1.1 acres of wetlands and 18.1 acres of wildlife habitat and temporary impacts to road traffic, trails and UPRR operations. For the preferred alternative, acquisitions would include: 117 residences; 56 total and 26 partial commercial properties; and 15 total and 15 partial public properties. Construction of four new bridges over the Arkansas River would require relocation of trails and an existing pedestrian bridge. Implementation of the preferred alternative would cause adverse effects to 40 historic resources, including the North Side, Second Ward, Steelworks Suburbs, and Grove historic districts. Noise impacts would be mitigated through construction of 21,525 feet of noise walls. 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: 110368, Draft EIS--516 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 23 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CO-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado 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/917563616?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 22 of 43] T2 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 917563607; 15125-8_0022 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to the seven-mile segment of Interstate 25 (I-25) that passes through Pueblo, Colorado, from just south of US Highway 50 (US 50)/State Highway (SH) 47 to just south of Pueblo Boulevard, are proposed. The corridor, known as the Pueblo Freeway, was originally completed in 1959 and changes are required to address current and future transportation needs. I-25 serves as a critical north-south link in the nations Interstate Highway System and as a strategic international corridor under the North American Free Trade Act. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. The Existing I-25 Alternative would widen I-25 to six lanes (three in each direction) from just north of 29th Street to Pueblo Boulevard on its current alignment. The interchanges at US 50B, Indiana Avenue, and Pueblo Boulevard would be reconstructed. Access to 29th Street would be provided via a frontage road and split-diamond interchanges would be created between 13th Street and 1st Street and Abriendo Avenue and Northern Avenue. Connectivity off of I-25 would be improved by extending Dillon Drive south from 26th Street to US 50B and by extending Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. The Modified I-25 Alternative, which is preferred, shares the design characteristics of the Existing I-25 Alternative, with the exception of the southern part of the corridor between the Arkansas River and Canal Street where the Existing I-25 Alternative can be implemented only by moving the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks 150 feet to the east to make room for widening I-25. As an alternative to moving the rail line, the Modified I-25 Alternative would relocate I-25 on a new alignment to the east at Ilex Street, which would allow the UPRR rail line south of the Arkansas River to remain in place. With the Modified I-25 Alternative, I-25 would bridge over the railroad tracks at Minnequa Avenue and then run on the west side of the tracks and rejoin the existing I-25 alignment. By straightening I-25 at Ilex Street, I-25 would leave the current alignment and continue south. The roadway portion no longer used as I-25 would be available to become an extension of Santa Fe Avenue, a critical element to improving local mobility. The Modified I-25 Alternative would extend Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. Under both build alternatives, the completion of proposed trails and sidewalks would provide continuous bicycle and pedestrian access between 29th Street in the north to Pueblo Boulevard in the south. The project would be constructed in phases, with phase one being the replacements of the Ilex Street bridges. The estimated costs for all the project improvements are $760.5 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would address deteriorating roadways and bridges and unsafe road characteristics. Local and regional mobility within and through Pueblo would be improved to meet existing and future travel demands. Trails would provide safe, non-motorized access to Mineral Palace Park, Benedict Park, JJ Raigoza Park, the Historic Arkansas Riverwalk of Pueblo, the Runyon Field Sports Complex, the Runyon Lake State Wildlife Area, and the Fountain Creek Trail system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause direct loss of 1.1 acres of wetlands and 18.1 acres of wildlife habitat and temporary impacts to road traffic, trails and UPRR operations. For the preferred alternative, acquisitions would include: 117 residences; 56 total and 26 partial commercial properties; and 15 total and 15 partial public properties. Construction of four new bridges over the Arkansas River would require relocation of trails and an existing pedestrian bridge. Implementation of the preferred alternative would cause adverse effects to 40 historic resources, including the North Side, Second Ward, Steelworks Suburbs, and Grove historic districts. Noise impacts would be mitigated through construction of 21,525 feet of noise walls. 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: 110368, Draft EIS--516 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 22 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CO-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado 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/917563607?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 18 of 43] T2 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 917563598; 15125-8_0018 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to the seven-mile segment of Interstate 25 (I-25) that passes through Pueblo, Colorado, from just south of US Highway 50 (US 50)/State Highway (SH) 47 to just south of Pueblo Boulevard, are proposed. The corridor, known as the Pueblo Freeway, was originally completed in 1959 and changes are required to address current and future transportation needs. I-25 serves as a critical north-south link in the nations Interstate Highway System and as a strategic international corridor under the North American Free Trade Act. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. The Existing I-25 Alternative would widen I-25 to six lanes (three in each direction) from just north of 29th Street to Pueblo Boulevard on its current alignment. The interchanges at US 50B, Indiana Avenue, and Pueblo Boulevard would be reconstructed. Access to 29th Street would be provided via a frontage road and split-diamond interchanges would be created between 13th Street and 1st Street and Abriendo Avenue and Northern Avenue. Connectivity off of I-25 would be improved by extending Dillon Drive south from 26th Street to US 50B and by extending Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. The Modified I-25 Alternative, which is preferred, shares the design characteristics of the Existing I-25 Alternative, with the exception of the southern part of the corridor between the Arkansas River and Canal Street where the Existing I-25 Alternative can be implemented only by moving the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks 150 feet to the east to make room for widening I-25. As an alternative to moving the rail line, the Modified I-25 Alternative would relocate I-25 on a new alignment to the east at Ilex Street, which would allow the UPRR rail line south of the Arkansas River to remain in place. With the Modified I-25 Alternative, I-25 would bridge over the railroad tracks at Minnequa Avenue and then run on the west side of the tracks and rejoin the existing I-25 alignment. By straightening I-25 at Ilex Street, I-25 would leave the current alignment and continue south. The roadway portion no longer used as I-25 would be available to become an extension of Santa Fe Avenue, a critical element to improving local mobility. The Modified I-25 Alternative would extend Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. Under both build alternatives, the completion of proposed trails and sidewalks would provide continuous bicycle and pedestrian access between 29th Street in the north to Pueblo Boulevard in the south. The project would be constructed in phases, with phase one being the replacements of the Ilex Street bridges. The estimated costs for all the project improvements are $760.5 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would address deteriorating roadways and bridges and unsafe road characteristics. Local and regional mobility within and through Pueblo would be improved to meet existing and future travel demands. Trails would provide safe, non-motorized access to Mineral Palace Park, Benedict Park, JJ Raigoza Park, the Historic Arkansas Riverwalk of Pueblo, the Runyon Field Sports Complex, the Runyon Lake State Wildlife Area, and the Fountain Creek Trail system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause direct loss of 1.1 acres of wetlands and 18.1 acres of wildlife habitat and temporary impacts to road traffic, trails and UPRR operations. For the preferred alternative, acquisitions would include: 117 residences; 56 total and 26 partial commercial properties; and 15 total and 15 partial public properties. Construction of four new bridges over the Arkansas River would require relocation of trails and an existing pedestrian bridge. Implementation of the preferred alternative would cause adverse effects to 40 historic resources, including the North Side, Second Ward, Steelworks Suburbs, and Grove historic districts. Noise impacts would be mitigated through construction of 21,525 feet of noise walls. 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: 110368, Draft EIS--516 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 18 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CO-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado 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/917563598?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 21 of 43] T2 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 917563597; 15125-8_0021 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to the seven-mile segment of Interstate 25 (I-25) that passes through Pueblo, Colorado, from just south of US Highway 50 (US 50)/State Highway (SH) 47 to just south of Pueblo Boulevard, are proposed. The corridor, known as the Pueblo Freeway, was originally completed in 1959 and changes are required to address current and future transportation needs. I-25 serves as a critical north-south link in the nations Interstate Highway System and as a strategic international corridor under the North American Free Trade Act. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. The Existing I-25 Alternative would widen I-25 to six lanes (three in each direction) from just north of 29th Street to Pueblo Boulevard on its current alignment. The interchanges at US 50B, Indiana Avenue, and Pueblo Boulevard would be reconstructed. Access to 29th Street would be provided via a frontage road and split-diamond interchanges would be created between 13th Street and 1st Street and Abriendo Avenue and Northern Avenue. Connectivity off of I-25 would be improved by extending Dillon Drive south from 26th Street to US 50B and by extending Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. The Modified I-25 Alternative, which is preferred, shares the design characteristics of the Existing I-25 Alternative, with the exception of the southern part of the corridor between the Arkansas River and Canal Street where the Existing I-25 Alternative can be implemented only by moving the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks 150 feet to the east to make room for widening I-25. As an alternative to moving the rail line, the Modified I-25 Alternative would relocate I-25 on a new alignment to the east at Ilex Street, which would allow the UPRR rail line south of the Arkansas River to remain in place. With the Modified I-25 Alternative, I-25 would bridge over the railroad tracks at Minnequa Avenue and then run on the west side of the tracks and rejoin the existing I-25 alignment. By straightening I-25 at Ilex Street, I-25 would leave the current alignment and continue south. The roadway portion no longer used as I-25 would be available to become an extension of Santa Fe Avenue, a critical element to improving local mobility. The Modified I-25 Alternative would extend Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. Under both build alternatives, the completion of proposed trails and sidewalks would provide continuous bicycle and pedestrian access between 29th Street in the north to Pueblo Boulevard in the south. The project would be constructed in phases, with phase one being the replacements of the Ilex Street bridges. The estimated costs for all the project improvements are $760.5 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would address deteriorating roadways and bridges and unsafe road characteristics. Local and regional mobility within and through Pueblo would be improved to meet existing and future travel demands. Trails would provide safe, non-motorized access to Mineral Palace Park, Benedict Park, JJ Raigoza Park, the Historic Arkansas Riverwalk of Pueblo, the Runyon Field Sports Complex, the Runyon Lake State Wildlife Area, and the Fountain Creek Trail system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause direct loss of 1.1 acres of wetlands and 18.1 acres of wildlife habitat and temporary impacts to road traffic, trails and UPRR operations. For the preferred alternative, acquisitions would include: 117 residences; 56 total and 26 partial commercial properties; and 15 total and 15 partial public properties. Construction of four new bridges over the Arkansas River would require relocation of trails and an existing pedestrian bridge. Implementation of the preferred alternative would cause adverse effects to 40 historic resources, including the North Side, Second Ward, Steelworks Suburbs, and Grove historic districts. Noise impacts would be mitigated through construction of 21,525 feet of noise walls. 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: 110368, Draft EIS--516 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 21 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CO-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado 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/917563597?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 20 of 43] T2 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 917563586; 15125-8_0020 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to the seven-mile segment of Interstate 25 (I-25) that passes through Pueblo, Colorado, from just south of US Highway 50 (US 50)/State Highway (SH) 47 to just south of Pueblo Boulevard, are proposed. The corridor, known as the Pueblo Freeway, was originally completed in 1959 and changes are required to address current and future transportation needs. I-25 serves as a critical north-south link in the nations Interstate Highway System and as a strategic international corridor under the North American Free Trade Act. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. The Existing I-25 Alternative would widen I-25 to six lanes (three in each direction) from just north of 29th Street to Pueblo Boulevard on its current alignment. The interchanges at US 50B, Indiana Avenue, and Pueblo Boulevard would be reconstructed. Access to 29th Street would be provided via a frontage road and split-diamond interchanges would be created between 13th Street and 1st Street and Abriendo Avenue and Northern Avenue. Connectivity off of I-25 would be improved by extending Dillon Drive south from 26th Street to US 50B and by extending Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. The Modified I-25 Alternative, which is preferred, shares the design characteristics of the Existing I-25 Alternative, with the exception of the southern part of the corridor between the Arkansas River and Canal Street where the Existing I-25 Alternative can be implemented only by moving the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks 150 feet to the east to make room for widening I-25. As an alternative to moving the rail line, the Modified I-25 Alternative would relocate I-25 on a new alignment to the east at Ilex Street, which would allow the UPRR rail line south of the Arkansas River to remain in place. With the Modified I-25 Alternative, I-25 would bridge over the railroad tracks at Minnequa Avenue and then run on the west side of the tracks and rejoin the existing I-25 alignment. By straightening I-25 at Ilex Street, I-25 would leave the current alignment and continue south. The roadway portion no longer used as I-25 would be available to become an extension of Santa Fe Avenue, a critical element to improving local mobility. The Modified I-25 Alternative would extend Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. Under both build alternatives, the completion of proposed trails and sidewalks would provide continuous bicycle and pedestrian access between 29th Street in the north to Pueblo Boulevard in the south. The project would be constructed in phases, with phase one being the replacements of the Ilex Street bridges. The estimated costs for all the project improvements are $760.5 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would address deteriorating roadways and bridges and unsafe road characteristics. Local and regional mobility within and through Pueblo would be improved to meet existing and future travel demands. Trails would provide safe, non-motorized access to Mineral Palace Park, Benedict Park, JJ Raigoza Park, the Historic Arkansas Riverwalk of Pueblo, the Runyon Field Sports Complex, the Runyon Lake State Wildlife Area, and the Fountain Creek Trail system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause direct loss of 1.1 acres of wetlands and 18.1 acres of wildlife habitat and temporary impacts to road traffic, trails and UPRR operations. For the preferred alternative, acquisitions would include: 117 residences; 56 total and 26 partial commercial properties; and 15 total and 15 partial public properties. Construction of four new bridges over the Arkansas River would require relocation of trails and an existing pedestrian bridge. Implementation of the preferred alternative would cause adverse effects to 40 historic resources, including the North Side, Second Ward, Steelworks Suburbs, and Grove historic districts. Noise impacts would be mitigated through construction of 21,525 feet of noise walls. 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: 110368, Draft EIS--516 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 20 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CO-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado 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/917563586?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 17 of 43] T2 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 917563585; 15125-8_0017 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to the seven-mile segment of Interstate 25 (I-25) that passes through Pueblo, Colorado, from just south of US Highway 50 (US 50)/State Highway (SH) 47 to just south of Pueblo Boulevard, are proposed. The corridor, known as the Pueblo Freeway, was originally completed in 1959 and changes are required to address current and future transportation needs. I-25 serves as a critical north-south link in the nations Interstate Highway System and as a strategic international corridor under the North American Free Trade Act. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. The Existing I-25 Alternative would widen I-25 to six lanes (three in each direction) from just north of 29th Street to Pueblo Boulevard on its current alignment. The interchanges at US 50B, Indiana Avenue, and Pueblo Boulevard would be reconstructed. Access to 29th Street would be provided via a frontage road and split-diamond interchanges would be created between 13th Street and 1st Street and Abriendo Avenue and Northern Avenue. Connectivity off of I-25 would be improved by extending Dillon Drive south from 26th Street to US 50B and by extending Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. The Modified I-25 Alternative, which is preferred, shares the design characteristics of the Existing I-25 Alternative, with the exception of the southern part of the corridor between the Arkansas River and Canal Street where the Existing I-25 Alternative can be implemented only by moving the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks 150 feet to the east to make room for widening I-25. As an alternative to moving the rail line, the Modified I-25 Alternative would relocate I-25 on a new alignment to the east at Ilex Street, which would allow the UPRR rail line south of the Arkansas River to remain in place. With the Modified I-25 Alternative, I-25 would bridge over the railroad tracks at Minnequa Avenue and then run on the west side of the tracks and rejoin the existing I-25 alignment. By straightening I-25 at Ilex Street, I-25 would leave the current alignment and continue south. The roadway portion no longer used as I-25 would be available to become an extension of Santa Fe Avenue, a critical element to improving local mobility. The Modified I-25 Alternative would extend Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. Under both build alternatives, the completion of proposed trails and sidewalks would provide continuous bicycle and pedestrian access between 29th Street in the north to Pueblo Boulevard in the south. The project would be constructed in phases, with phase one being the replacements of the Ilex Street bridges. The estimated costs for all the project improvements are $760.5 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would address deteriorating roadways and bridges and unsafe road characteristics. Local and regional mobility within and through Pueblo would be improved to meet existing and future travel demands. Trails would provide safe, non-motorized access to Mineral Palace Park, Benedict Park, JJ Raigoza Park, the Historic Arkansas Riverwalk of Pueblo, the Runyon Field Sports Complex, the Runyon Lake State Wildlife Area, and the Fountain Creek Trail system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause direct loss of 1.1 acres of wetlands and 18.1 acres of wildlife habitat and temporary impacts to road traffic, trails and UPRR operations. For the preferred alternative, acquisitions would include: 117 residences; 56 total and 26 partial commercial properties; and 15 total and 15 partial public properties. Construction of four new bridges over the Arkansas River would require relocation of trails and an existing pedestrian bridge. Implementation of the preferred alternative would cause adverse effects to 40 historic resources, including the North Side, Second Ward, Steelworks Suburbs, and Grove historic districts. Noise impacts would be mitigated through construction of 21,525 feet of noise walls. 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: 110368, Draft EIS--516 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 17 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CO-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado 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/917563585?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 19 of 43] T2 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 917563577; 15125-8_0019 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to the seven-mile segment of Interstate 25 (I-25) that passes through Pueblo, Colorado, from just south of US Highway 50 (US 50)/State Highway (SH) 47 to just south of Pueblo Boulevard, are proposed. The corridor, known as the Pueblo Freeway, was originally completed in 1959 and changes are required to address current and future transportation needs. I-25 serves as a critical north-south link in the nations Interstate Highway System and as a strategic international corridor under the North American Free Trade Act. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. The Existing I-25 Alternative would widen I-25 to six lanes (three in each direction) from just north of 29th Street to Pueblo Boulevard on its current alignment. The interchanges at US 50B, Indiana Avenue, and Pueblo Boulevard would be reconstructed. Access to 29th Street would be provided via a frontage road and split-diamond interchanges would be created between 13th Street and 1st Street and Abriendo Avenue and Northern Avenue. Connectivity off of I-25 would be improved by extending Dillon Drive south from 26th Street to US 50B and by extending Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. The Modified I-25 Alternative, which is preferred, shares the design characteristics of the Existing I-25 Alternative, with the exception of the southern part of the corridor between the Arkansas River and Canal Street where the Existing I-25 Alternative can be implemented only by moving the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks 150 feet to the east to make room for widening I-25. As an alternative to moving the rail line, the Modified I-25 Alternative would relocate I-25 on a new alignment to the east at Ilex Street, which would allow the UPRR rail line south of the Arkansas River to remain in place. With the Modified I-25 Alternative, I-25 would bridge over the railroad tracks at Minnequa Avenue and then run on the west side of the tracks and rejoin the existing I-25 alignment. By straightening I-25 at Ilex Street, I-25 would leave the current alignment and continue south. The roadway portion no longer used as I-25 would be available to become an extension of Santa Fe Avenue, a critical element to improving local mobility. The Modified I-25 Alternative would extend Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. Under both build alternatives, the completion of proposed trails and sidewalks would provide continuous bicycle and pedestrian access between 29th Street in the north to Pueblo Boulevard in the south. The project would be constructed in phases, with phase one being the replacements of the Ilex Street bridges. The estimated costs for all the project improvements are $760.5 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would address deteriorating roadways and bridges and unsafe road characteristics. Local and regional mobility within and through Pueblo would be improved to meet existing and future travel demands. Trails would provide safe, non-motorized access to Mineral Palace Park, Benedict Park, JJ Raigoza Park, the Historic Arkansas Riverwalk of Pueblo, the Runyon Field Sports Complex, the Runyon Lake State Wildlife Area, and the Fountain Creek Trail system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause direct loss of 1.1 acres of wetlands and 18.1 acres of wildlife habitat and temporary impacts to road traffic, trails and UPRR operations. For the preferred alternative, acquisitions would include: 117 residences; 56 total and 26 partial commercial properties; and 15 total and 15 partial public properties. Construction of four new bridges over the Arkansas River would require relocation of trails and an existing pedestrian bridge. Implementation of the preferred alternative would cause adverse effects to 40 historic resources, including the North Side, Second Ward, Steelworks Suburbs, and Grove historic districts. Noise impacts would be mitigated through construction of 21,525 feet of noise walls. 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: 110368, Draft EIS--516 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 19 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CO-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado 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/917563577?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 16 of 43] T2 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 917563572; 15125-8_0016 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to the seven-mile segment of Interstate 25 (I-25) that passes through Pueblo, Colorado, from just south of US Highway 50 (US 50)/State Highway (SH) 47 to just south of Pueblo Boulevard, are proposed. The corridor, known as the Pueblo Freeway, was originally completed in 1959 and changes are required to address current and future transportation needs. I-25 serves as a critical north-south link in the nations Interstate Highway System and as a strategic international corridor under the North American Free Trade Act. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. The Existing I-25 Alternative would widen I-25 to six lanes (three in each direction) from just north of 29th Street to Pueblo Boulevard on its current alignment. The interchanges at US 50B, Indiana Avenue, and Pueblo Boulevard would be reconstructed. Access to 29th Street would be provided via a frontage road and split-diamond interchanges would be created between 13th Street and 1st Street and Abriendo Avenue and Northern Avenue. Connectivity off of I-25 would be improved by extending Dillon Drive south from 26th Street to US 50B and by extending Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. The Modified I-25 Alternative, which is preferred, shares the design characteristics of the Existing I-25 Alternative, with the exception of the southern part of the corridor between the Arkansas River and Canal Street where the Existing I-25 Alternative can be implemented only by moving the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks 150 feet to the east to make room for widening I-25. As an alternative to moving the rail line, the Modified I-25 Alternative would relocate I-25 on a new alignment to the east at Ilex Street, which would allow the UPRR rail line south of the Arkansas River to remain in place. With the Modified I-25 Alternative, I-25 would bridge over the railroad tracks at Minnequa Avenue and then run on the west side of the tracks and rejoin the existing I-25 alignment. By straightening I-25 at Ilex Street, I-25 would leave the current alignment and continue south. The roadway portion no longer used as I-25 would be available to become an extension of Santa Fe Avenue, a critical element to improving local mobility. The Modified I-25 Alternative would extend Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. Under both build alternatives, the completion of proposed trails and sidewalks would provide continuous bicycle and pedestrian access between 29th Street in the north to Pueblo Boulevard in the south. The project would be constructed in phases, with phase one being the replacements of the Ilex Street bridges. The estimated costs for all the project improvements are $760.5 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would address deteriorating roadways and bridges and unsafe road characteristics. Local and regional mobility within and through Pueblo would be improved to meet existing and future travel demands. Trails would provide safe, non-motorized access to Mineral Palace Park, Benedict Park, JJ Raigoza Park, the Historic Arkansas Riverwalk of Pueblo, the Runyon Field Sports Complex, the Runyon Lake State Wildlife Area, and the Fountain Creek Trail system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause direct loss of 1.1 acres of wetlands and 18.1 acres of wildlife habitat and temporary impacts to road traffic, trails and UPRR operations. For the preferred alternative, acquisitions would include: 117 residences; 56 total and 26 partial commercial properties; and 15 total and 15 partial public properties. Construction of four new bridges over the Arkansas River would require relocation of trails and an existing pedestrian bridge. Implementation of the preferred alternative would cause adverse effects to 40 historic resources, including the North Side, Second Ward, Steelworks Suburbs, and Grove historic districts. Noise impacts would be mitigated through construction of 21,525 feet of noise walls. 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: 110368, Draft EIS--516 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 16 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CO-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado 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/917563572?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. [Part 20 of 23] T2 - VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. AN - 917563570; 15129-2_0020 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of bus rapid transit (BRT) improvements along a two-mile stretch of Van Ness Avenue, from Lombard Street in the north to Mission Street in the south, San Francisco, California is proposed. Van Ness Avenue is a major north to south corridor for the eastern part of San Francisco. The Muni bus routes that travel along Van Ness Avenue provide regional transit connections to Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), AC Transit, Caltrain, and SamTrans. Golden Gate Transit (GGT) also provides service along Van Ness Avenue. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are analyzed in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 would provide a dedicated bus lane, or transitway, in the right-most lane of Van Ness Avenue located adjacent to the existing curbside parking area. The transitway would be traversable for mixed-flow traffic that would enter the transitway to complete a right turn or to parallel park. BRT stations would be located within the curbside parking area as curb extensions. Under Alternative 3, the transitway would be comprised of two side-by-side, dedicated bus lanes located in the center of the roadway in between two medians. The transitway would be separated from mixed-flow traffic by a four-foot-wide median, widening to a nine-foot-wide median at BRT stations, allowing right-side boarding. Alternative 4 would provide a transitway in the center of the roadway comprised of a single, 14-foot-wide median flanked by dedicated northbound and southbound bus lanes. Station platforms would be located on the single center median, requiring left-side passenger boarding and alighting, as well as left-side doors on vehicles. All stations would have this single-median design, with the exception of the BRT stations proposed at Geary/OFarrell, which would utilize a dual-median configuration similar to that proposed under Alternative 3 to accommodate GGT buses that are strictly rightside boarding. All GGT stops, except Geary/OFarrell, along the BRT corridor would be eliminated in Alternative 4. At the northern end of the corridor, GGT vehicles would be routed along a portion of Chestnut Street to accommodate an additional stop at the corner of Chestnut Street and Van Ness Avenue. At the southern end, GGT buses would continue to stop at the intersections of McAllister and Polk streets and Golden Gate Avenue and Polk Street. A second GGT stop within the BRT runningway at Union Street is also possible. Alternatives 3 and 4 contain a center-lane alternative design option (Design Option B) which would eliminate all but one northbound left turn (at Lombard Street) and all but one southbound left turn (at Broadway) in the project corridor. Project cost is estimated to be between $87 million and $130 million, depending on the build alternative selected. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Annual operations and maintenance costs associated with the build alternatives are significantly lower than those of the No Build Alternative, with cost savings ranging from 14 to 29 percent, depending on the build alternative. The savings are attributed to the travel time benefits of the BRT, requiring fewer vehicles to provide a similar amount of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activity would result in a potentially significant impact due to exceedances of nitrogen oxide emissions, but control measures would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. Implementation of the Van Ness BRT system would result in traffic circulation impacts at six to 11 intersections in the corridor, primarily along Franklin and Gough streets. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110372, Draft EIS--502 pages, Appendices--152 pages, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 20 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/917563570?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=VAN+NESS+AVENUE+BUS+RAPID+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=VAN+NESS+AVENUE+BUS+RAPID+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. [Part 19 of 23] T2 - VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. AN - 917563563; 15129-2_0019 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of bus rapid transit (BRT) improvements along a two-mile stretch of Van Ness Avenue, from Lombard Street in the north to Mission Street in the south, San Francisco, California is proposed. Van Ness Avenue is a major north to south corridor for the eastern part of San Francisco. The Muni bus routes that travel along Van Ness Avenue provide regional transit connections to Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), AC Transit, Caltrain, and SamTrans. Golden Gate Transit (GGT) also provides service along Van Ness Avenue. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are analyzed in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 would provide a dedicated bus lane, or transitway, in the right-most lane of Van Ness Avenue located adjacent to the existing curbside parking area. The transitway would be traversable for mixed-flow traffic that would enter the transitway to complete a right turn or to parallel park. BRT stations would be located within the curbside parking area as curb extensions. Under Alternative 3, the transitway would be comprised of two side-by-side, dedicated bus lanes located in the center of the roadway in between two medians. The transitway would be separated from mixed-flow traffic by a four-foot-wide median, widening to a nine-foot-wide median at BRT stations, allowing right-side boarding. Alternative 4 would provide a transitway in the center of the roadway comprised of a single, 14-foot-wide median flanked by dedicated northbound and southbound bus lanes. Station platforms would be located on the single center median, requiring left-side passenger boarding and alighting, as well as left-side doors on vehicles. All stations would have this single-median design, with the exception of the BRT stations proposed at Geary/OFarrell, which would utilize a dual-median configuration similar to that proposed under Alternative 3 to accommodate GGT buses that are strictly rightside boarding. All GGT stops, except Geary/OFarrell, along the BRT corridor would be eliminated in Alternative 4. At the northern end of the corridor, GGT vehicles would be routed along a portion of Chestnut Street to accommodate an additional stop at the corner of Chestnut Street and Van Ness Avenue. At the southern end, GGT buses would continue to stop at the intersections of McAllister and Polk streets and Golden Gate Avenue and Polk Street. A second GGT stop within the BRT runningway at Union Street is also possible. Alternatives 3 and 4 contain a center-lane alternative design option (Design Option B) which would eliminate all but one northbound left turn (at Lombard Street) and all but one southbound left turn (at Broadway) in the project corridor. Project cost is estimated to be between $87 million and $130 million, depending on the build alternative selected. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Annual operations and maintenance costs associated with the build alternatives are significantly lower than those of the No Build Alternative, with cost savings ranging from 14 to 29 percent, depending on the build alternative. The savings are attributed to the travel time benefits of the BRT, requiring fewer vehicles to provide a similar amount of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activity would result in a potentially significant impact due to exceedances of nitrogen oxide emissions, but control measures would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. Implementation of the Van Ness BRT system would result in traffic circulation impacts at six to 11 intersections in the corridor, primarily along Franklin and Gough streets. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110372, Draft EIS--502 pages, Appendices--152 pages, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 19 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/917563563?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=VAN+NESS+AVENUE+BUS+RAPID+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=VAN+NESS+AVENUE+BUS+RAPID+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 15 of 43] T2 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 917563560; 15125-8_0015 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to the seven-mile segment of Interstate 25 (I-25) that passes through Pueblo, Colorado, from just south of US Highway 50 (US 50)/State Highway (SH) 47 to just south of Pueblo Boulevard, are proposed. The corridor, known as the Pueblo Freeway, was originally completed in 1959 and changes are required to address current and future transportation needs. I-25 serves as a critical north-south link in the nations Interstate Highway System and as a strategic international corridor under the North American Free Trade Act. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. The Existing I-25 Alternative would widen I-25 to six lanes (three in each direction) from just north of 29th Street to Pueblo Boulevard on its current alignment. The interchanges at US 50B, Indiana Avenue, and Pueblo Boulevard would be reconstructed. Access to 29th Street would be provided via a frontage road and split-diamond interchanges would be created between 13th Street and 1st Street and Abriendo Avenue and Northern Avenue. Connectivity off of I-25 would be improved by extending Dillon Drive south from 26th Street to US 50B and by extending Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. The Modified I-25 Alternative, which is preferred, shares the design characteristics of the Existing I-25 Alternative, with the exception of the southern part of the corridor between the Arkansas River and Canal Street where the Existing I-25 Alternative can be implemented only by moving the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks 150 feet to the east to make room for widening I-25. As an alternative to moving the rail line, the Modified I-25 Alternative would relocate I-25 on a new alignment to the east at Ilex Street, which would allow the UPRR rail line south of the Arkansas River to remain in place. With the Modified I-25 Alternative, I-25 would bridge over the railroad tracks at Minnequa Avenue and then run on the west side of the tracks and rejoin the existing I-25 alignment. By straightening I-25 at Ilex Street, I-25 would leave the current alignment and continue south. The roadway portion no longer used as I-25 would be available to become an extension of Santa Fe Avenue, a critical element to improving local mobility. The Modified I-25 Alternative would extend Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. Under both build alternatives, the completion of proposed trails and sidewalks would provide continuous bicycle and pedestrian access between 29th Street in the north to Pueblo Boulevard in the south. The project would be constructed in phases, with phase one being the replacements of the Ilex Street bridges. The estimated costs for all the project improvements are $760.5 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would address deteriorating roadways and bridges and unsafe road characteristics. Local and regional mobility within and through Pueblo would be improved to meet existing and future travel demands. Trails would provide safe, non-motorized access to Mineral Palace Park, Benedict Park, JJ Raigoza Park, the Historic Arkansas Riverwalk of Pueblo, the Runyon Field Sports Complex, the Runyon Lake State Wildlife Area, and the Fountain Creek Trail system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause direct loss of 1.1 acres of wetlands and 18.1 acres of wildlife habitat and temporary impacts to road traffic, trails and UPRR operations. For the preferred alternative, acquisitions would include: 117 residences; 56 total and 26 partial commercial properties; and 15 total and 15 partial public properties. Construction of four new bridges over the Arkansas River would require relocation of trails and an existing pedestrian bridge. Implementation of the preferred alternative would cause adverse effects to 40 historic resources, including the North Side, Second Ward, Steelworks Suburbs, and Grove historic districts. Noise impacts would be mitigated through construction of 21,525 feet of noise walls. 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: 110368, Draft EIS--516 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 15 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CO-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado 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/917563560?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. [Part 18 of 23] T2 - VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. AN - 917563554; 15129-2_0018 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of bus rapid transit (BRT) improvements along a two-mile stretch of Van Ness Avenue, from Lombard Street in the north to Mission Street in the south, San Francisco, California is proposed. Van Ness Avenue is a major north to south corridor for the eastern part of San Francisco. The Muni bus routes that travel along Van Ness Avenue provide regional transit connections to Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), AC Transit, Caltrain, and SamTrans. Golden Gate Transit (GGT) also provides service along Van Ness Avenue. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are analyzed in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 would provide a dedicated bus lane, or transitway, in the right-most lane of Van Ness Avenue located adjacent to the existing curbside parking area. The transitway would be traversable for mixed-flow traffic that would enter the transitway to complete a right turn or to parallel park. BRT stations would be located within the curbside parking area as curb extensions. Under Alternative 3, the transitway would be comprised of two side-by-side, dedicated bus lanes located in the center of the roadway in between two medians. The transitway would be separated from mixed-flow traffic by a four-foot-wide median, widening to a nine-foot-wide median at BRT stations, allowing right-side boarding. Alternative 4 would provide a transitway in the center of the roadway comprised of a single, 14-foot-wide median flanked by dedicated northbound and southbound bus lanes. Station platforms would be located on the single center median, requiring left-side passenger boarding and alighting, as well as left-side doors on vehicles. All stations would have this single-median design, with the exception of the BRT stations proposed at Geary/OFarrell, which would utilize a dual-median configuration similar to that proposed under Alternative 3 to accommodate GGT buses that are strictly rightside boarding. All GGT stops, except Geary/OFarrell, along the BRT corridor would be eliminated in Alternative 4. At the northern end of the corridor, GGT vehicles would be routed along a portion of Chestnut Street to accommodate an additional stop at the corner of Chestnut Street and Van Ness Avenue. At the southern end, GGT buses would continue to stop at the intersections of McAllister and Polk streets and Golden Gate Avenue and Polk Street. A second GGT stop within the BRT runningway at Union Street is also possible. Alternatives 3 and 4 contain a center-lane alternative design option (Design Option B) which would eliminate all but one northbound left turn (at Lombard Street) and all but one southbound left turn (at Broadway) in the project corridor. Project cost is estimated to be between $87 million and $130 million, depending on the build alternative selected. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Annual operations and maintenance costs associated with the build alternatives are significantly lower than those of the No Build Alternative, with cost savings ranging from 14 to 29 percent, depending on the build alternative. The savings are attributed to the travel time benefits of the BRT, requiring fewer vehicles to provide a similar amount of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activity would result in a potentially significant impact due to exceedances of nitrogen oxide emissions, but control measures would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. Implementation of the Van Ness BRT system would result in traffic circulation impacts at six to 11 intersections in the corridor, primarily along Franklin and Gough streets. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110372, Draft EIS--502 pages, Appendices--152 pages, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 18 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/917563554?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=VAN+NESS+AVENUE+BUS+RAPID+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=VAN+NESS+AVENUE+BUS+RAPID+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 14 of 43] T2 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 917563550; 15125-8_0014 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to the seven-mile segment of Interstate 25 (I-25) that passes through Pueblo, Colorado, from just south of US Highway 50 (US 50)/State Highway (SH) 47 to just south of Pueblo Boulevard, are proposed. The corridor, known as the Pueblo Freeway, was originally completed in 1959 and changes are required to address current and future transportation needs. I-25 serves as a critical north-south link in the nations Interstate Highway System and as a strategic international corridor under the North American Free Trade Act. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. The Existing I-25 Alternative would widen I-25 to six lanes (three in each direction) from just north of 29th Street to Pueblo Boulevard on its current alignment. The interchanges at US 50B, Indiana Avenue, and Pueblo Boulevard would be reconstructed. Access to 29th Street would be provided via a frontage road and split-diamond interchanges would be created between 13th Street and 1st Street and Abriendo Avenue and Northern Avenue. Connectivity off of I-25 would be improved by extending Dillon Drive south from 26th Street to US 50B and by extending Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. The Modified I-25 Alternative, which is preferred, shares the design characteristics of the Existing I-25 Alternative, with the exception of the southern part of the corridor between the Arkansas River and Canal Street where the Existing I-25 Alternative can be implemented only by moving the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks 150 feet to the east to make room for widening I-25. As an alternative to moving the rail line, the Modified I-25 Alternative would relocate I-25 on a new alignment to the east at Ilex Street, which would allow the UPRR rail line south of the Arkansas River to remain in place. With the Modified I-25 Alternative, I-25 would bridge over the railroad tracks at Minnequa Avenue and then run on the west side of the tracks and rejoin the existing I-25 alignment. By straightening I-25 at Ilex Street, I-25 would leave the current alignment and continue south. The roadway portion no longer used as I-25 would be available to become an extension of Santa Fe Avenue, a critical element to improving local mobility. The Modified I-25 Alternative would extend Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. Under both build alternatives, the completion of proposed trails and sidewalks would provide continuous bicycle and pedestrian access between 29th Street in the north to Pueblo Boulevard in the south. The project would be constructed in phases, with phase one being the replacements of the Ilex Street bridges. The estimated costs for all the project improvements are $760.5 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would address deteriorating roadways and bridges and unsafe road characteristics. Local and regional mobility within and through Pueblo would be improved to meet existing and future travel demands. Trails would provide safe, non-motorized access to Mineral Palace Park, Benedict Park, JJ Raigoza Park, the Historic Arkansas Riverwalk of Pueblo, the Runyon Field Sports Complex, the Runyon Lake State Wildlife Area, and the Fountain Creek Trail system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause direct loss of 1.1 acres of wetlands and 18.1 acres of wildlife habitat and temporary impacts to road traffic, trails and UPRR operations. For the preferred alternative, acquisitions would include: 117 residences; 56 total and 26 partial commercial properties; and 15 total and 15 partial public properties. Construction of four new bridges over the Arkansas River would require relocation of trails and an existing pedestrian bridge. Implementation of the preferred alternative would cause adverse effects to 40 historic resources, including the North Side, Second Ward, Steelworks Suburbs, and Grove historic districts. Noise impacts would be mitigated through construction of 21,525 feet of noise walls. 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: 110368, Draft EIS--516 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 14 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CO-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado 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/917563550?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. [Part 17 of 23] T2 - VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. AN - 917563548; 15129-2_0017 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of bus rapid transit (BRT) improvements along a two-mile stretch of Van Ness Avenue, from Lombard Street in the north to Mission Street in the south, San Francisco, California is proposed. Van Ness Avenue is a major north to south corridor for the eastern part of San Francisco. The Muni bus routes that travel along Van Ness Avenue provide regional transit connections to Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), AC Transit, Caltrain, and SamTrans. Golden Gate Transit (GGT) also provides service along Van Ness Avenue. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are analyzed in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 would provide a dedicated bus lane, or transitway, in the right-most lane of Van Ness Avenue located adjacent to the existing curbside parking area. The transitway would be traversable for mixed-flow traffic that would enter the transitway to complete a right turn or to parallel park. BRT stations would be located within the curbside parking area as curb extensions. Under Alternative 3, the transitway would be comprised of two side-by-side, dedicated bus lanes located in the center of the roadway in between two medians. The transitway would be separated from mixed-flow traffic by a four-foot-wide median, widening to a nine-foot-wide median at BRT stations, allowing right-side boarding. Alternative 4 would provide a transitway in the center of the roadway comprised of a single, 14-foot-wide median flanked by dedicated northbound and southbound bus lanes. Station platforms would be located on the single center median, requiring left-side passenger boarding and alighting, as well as left-side doors on vehicles. All stations would have this single-median design, with the exception of the BRT stations proposed at Geary/OFarrell, which would utilize a dual-median configuration similar to that proposed under Alternative 3 to accommodate GGT buses that are strictly rightside boarding. All GGT stops, except Geary/OFarrell, along the BRT corridor would be eliminated in Alternative 4. At the northern end of the corridor, GGT vehicles would be routed along a portion of Chestnut Street to accommodate an additional stop at the corner of Chestnut Street and Van Ness Avenue. At the southern end, GGT buses would continue to stop at the intersections of McAllister and Polk streets and Golden Gate Avenue and Polk Street. A second GGT stop within the BRT runningway at Union Street is also possible. Alternatives 3 and 4 contain a center-lane alternative design option (Design Option B) which would eliminate all but one northbound left turn (at Lombard Street) and all but one southbound left turn (at Broadway) in the project corridor. Project cost is estimated to be between $87 million and $130 million, depending on the build alternative selected. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Annual operations and maintenance costs associated with the build alternatives are significantly lower than those of the No Build Alternative, with cost savings ranging from 14 to 29 percent, depending on the build alternative. The savings are attributed to the travel time benefits of the BRT, requiring fewer vehicles to provide a similar amount of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activity would result in a potentially significant impact due to exceedances of nitrogen oxide emissions, but control measures would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. Implementation of the Van Ness BRT system would result in traffic circulation impacts at six to 11 intersections in the corridor, primarily along Franklin and Gough streets. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110372, Draft EIS--502 pages, Appendices--152 pages, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 17 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/917563548?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=VAN+NESS+AVENUE+BUS+RAPID+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=VAN+NESS+AVENUE+BUS+RAPID+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. [Part 16 of 23] T2 - VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. AN - 917563540; 15129-2_0016 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of bus rapid transit (BRT) improvements along a two-mile stretch of Van Ness Avenue, from Lombard Street in the north to Mission Street in the south, San Francisco, California is proposed. Van Ness Avenue is a major north to south corridor for the eastern part of San Francisco. The Muni bus routes that travel along Van Ness Avenue provide regional transit connections to Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), AC Transit, Caltrain, and SamTrans. Golden Gate Transit (GGT) also provides service along Van Ness Avenue. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are analyzed in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 would provide a dedicated bus lane, or transitway, in the right-most lane of Van Ness Avenue located adjacent to the existing curbside parking area. The transitway would be traversable for mixed-flow traffic that would enter the transitway to complete a right turn or to parallel park. BRT stations would be located within the curbside parking area as curb extensions. Under Alternative 3, the transitway would be comprised of two side-by-side, dedicated bus lanes located in the center of the roadway in between two medians. The transitway would be separated from mixed-flow traffic by a four-foot-wide median, widening to a nine-foot-wide median at BRT stations, allowing right-side boarding. Alternative 4 would provide a transitway in the center of the roadway comprised of a single, 14-foot-wide median flanked by dedicated northbound and southbound bus lanes. Station platforms would be located on the single center median, requiring left-side passenger boarding and alighting, as well as left-side doors on vehicles. All stations would have this single-median design, with the exception of the BRT stations proposed at Geary/OFarrell, which would utilize a dual-median configuration similar to that proposed under Alternative 3 to accommodate GGT buses that are strictly rightside boarding. All GGT stops, except Geary/OFarrell, along the BRT corridor would be eliminated in Alternative 4. At the northern end of the corridor, GGT vehicles would be routed along a portion of Chestnut Street to accommodate an additional stop at the corner of Chestnut Street and Van Ness Avenue. At the southern end, GGT buses would continue to stop at the intersections of McAllister and Polk streets and Golden Gate Avenue and Polk Street. A second GGT stop within the BRT runningway at Union Street is also possible. Alternatives 3 and 4 contain a center-lane alternative design option (Design Option B) which would eliminate all but one northbound left turn (at Lombard Street) and all but one southbound left turn (at Broadway) in the project corridor. Project cost is estimated to be between $87 million and $130 million, depending on the build alternative selected. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Annual operations and maintenance costs associated with the build alternatives are significantly lower than those of the No Build Alternative, with cost savings ranging from 14 to 29 percent, depending on the build alternative. The savings are attributed to the travel time benefits of the BRT, requiring fewer vehicles to provide a similar amount of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activity would result in a potentially significant impact due to exceedances of nitrogen oxide emissions, but control measures would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. Implementation of the Van Ness BRT system would result in traffic circulation impacts at six to 11 intersections in the corridor, primarily along Franklin and Gough streets. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110372, Draft EIS--502 pages, Appendices--152 pages, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 16 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/917563540?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=VAN+NESS+AVENUE+BUS+RAPID+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=VAN+NESS+AVENUE+BUS+RAPID+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 13 of 43] T2 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 917563537; 15125-8_0013 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to the seven-mile segment of Interstate 25 (I-25) that passes through Pueblo, Colorado, from just south of US Highway 50 (US 50)/State Highway (SH) 47 to just south of Pueblo Boulevard, are proposed. The corridor, known as the Pueblo Freeway, was originally completed in 1959 and changes are required to address current and future transportation needs. I-25 serves as a critical north-south link in the nations Interstate Highway System and as a strategic international corridor under the North American Free Trade Act. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. The Existing I-25 Alternative would widen I-25 to six lanes (three in each direction) from just north of 29th Street to Pueblo Boulevard on its current alignment. The interchanges at US 50B, Indiana Avenue, and Pueblo Boulevard would be reconstructed. Access to 29th Street would be provided via a frontage road and split-diamond interchanges would be created between 13th Street and 1st Street and Abriendo Avenue and Northern Avenue. Connectivity off of I-25 would be improved by extending Dillon Drive south from 26th Street to US 50B and by extending Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. The Modified I-25 Alternative, which is preferred, shares the design characteristics of the Existing I-25 Alternative, with the exception of the southern part of the corridor between the Arkansas River and Canal Street where the Existing I-25 Alternative can be implemented only by moving the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks 150 feet to the east to make room for widening I-25. As an alternative to moving the rail line, the Modified I-25 Alternative would relocate I-25 on a new alignment to the east at Ilex Street, which would allow the UPRR rail line south of the Arkansas River to remain in place. With the Modified I-25 Alternative, I-25 would bridge over the railroad tracks at Minnequa Avenue and then run on the west side of the tracks and rejoin the existing I-25 alignment. By straightening I-25 at Ilex Street, I-25 would leave the current alignment and continue south. The roadway portion no longer used as I-25 would be available to become an extension of Santa Fe Avenue, a critical element to improving local mobility. The Modified I-25 Alternative would extend Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. Under both build alternatives, the completion of proposed trails and sidewalks would provide continuous bicycle and pedestrian access between 29th Street in the north to Pueblo Boulevard in the south. The project would be constructed in phases, with phase one being the replacements of the Ilex Street bridges. The estimated costs for all the project improvements are $760.5 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would address deteriorating roadways and bridges and unsafe road characteristics. Local and regional mobility within and through Pueblo would be improved to meet existing and future travel demands. Trails would provide safe, non-motorized access to Mineral Palace Park, Benedict Park, JJ Raigoza Park, the Historic Arkansas Riverwalk of Pueblo, the Runyon Field Sports Complex, the Runyon Lake State Wildlife Area, and the Fountain Creek Trail system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause direct loss of 1.1 acres of wetlands and 18.1 acres of wildlife habitat and temporary impacts to road traffic, trails and UPRR operations. For the preferred alternative, acquisitions would include: 117 residences; 56 total and 26 partial commercial properties; and 15 total and 15 partial public properties. Construction of four new bridges over the Arkansas River would require relocation of trails and an existing pedestrian bridge. Implementation of the preferred alternative would cause adverse effects to 40 historic resources, including the North Side, Second Ward, Steelworks Suburbs, and Grove historic districts. Noise impacts would be mitigated through construction of 21,525 feet of noise walls. 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: 110368, Draft EIS--516 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 13 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CO-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado 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/917563537?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. [Part 15 of 23] T2 - VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. AN - 917563533; 15129-2_0015 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of bus rapid transit (BRT) improvements along a two-mile stretch of Van Ness Avenue, from Lombard Street in the north to Mission Street in the south, San Francisco, California is proposed. Van Ness Avenue is a major north to south corridor for the eastern part of San Francisco. The Muni bus routes that travel along Van Ness Avenue provide regional transit connections to Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), AC Transit, Caltrain, and SamTrans. Golden Gate Transit (GGT) also provides service along Van Ness Avenue. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are analyzed in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 would provide a dedicated bus lane, or transitway, in the right-most lane of Van Ness Avenue located adjacent to the existing curbside parking area. The transitway would be traversable for mixed-flow traffic that would enter the transitway to complete a right turn or to parallel park. BRT stations would be located within the curbside parking area as curb extensions. Under Alternative 3, the transitway would be comprised of two side-by-side, dedicated bus lanes located in the center of the roadway in between two medians. The transitway would be separated from mixed-flow traffic by a four-foot-wide median, widening to a nine-foot-wide median at BRT stations, allowing right-side boarding. Alternative 4 would provide a transitway in the center of the roadway comprised of a single, 14-foot-wide median flanked by dedicated northbound and southbound bus lanes. Station platforms would be located on the single center median, requiring left-side passenger boarding and alighting, as well as left-side doors on vehicles. All stations would have this single-median design, with the exception of the BRT stations proposed at Geary/OFarrell, which would utilize a dual-median configuration similar to that proposed under Alternative 3 to accommodate GGT buses that are strictly rightside boarding. All GGT stops, except Geary/OFarrell, along the BRT corridor would be eliminated in Alternative 4. At the northern end of the corridor, GGT vehicles would be routed along a portion of Chestnut Street to accommodate an additional stop at the corner of Chestnut Street and Van Ness Avenue. At the southern end, GGT buses would continue to stop at the intersections of McAllister and Polk streets and Golden Gate Avenue and Polk Street. A second GGT stop within the BRT runningway at Union Street is also possible. Alternatives 3 and 4 contain a center-lane alternative design option (Design Option B) which would eliminate all but one northbound left turn (at Lombard Street) and all but one southbound left turn (at Broadway) in the project corridor. Project cost is estimated to be between $87 million and $130 million, depending on the build alternative selected. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Annual operations and maintenance costs associated with the build alternatives are significantly lower than those of the No Build Alternative, with cost savings ranging from 14 to 29 percent, depending on the build alternative. The savings are attributed to the travel time benefits of the BRT, requiring fewer vehicles to provide a similar amount of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activity would result in a potentially significant impact due to exceedances of nitrogen oxide emissions, but control measures would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. Implementation of the Van Ness BRT system would result in traffic circulation impacts at six to 11 intersections in the corridor, primarily along Franklin and Gough streets. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110372, Draft EIS--502 pages, Appendices--152 pages, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 15 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/917563533?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=VAN+NESS+AVENUE+BUS+RAPID+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=VAN+NESS+AVENUE+BUS+RAPID+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. [Part 3 of 23] T2 - VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. AN - 917563529; 15129-2_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of bus rapid transit (BRT) improvements along a two-mile stretch of Van Ness Avenue, from Lombard Street in the north to Mission Street in the south, San Francisco, California is proposed. Van Ness Avenue is a major north to south corridor for the eastern part of San Francisco. The Muni bus routes that travel along Van Ness Avenue provide regional transit connections to Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), AC Transit, Caltrain, and SamTrans. Golden Gate Transit (GGT) also provides service along Van Ness Avenue. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are analyzed in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 would provide a dedicated bus lane, or transitway, in the right-most lane of Van Ness Avenue located adjacent to the existing curbside parking area. The transitway would be traversable for mixed-flow traffic that would enter the transitway to complete a right turn or to parallel park. BRT stations would be located within the curbside parking area as curb extensions. Under Alternative 3, the transitway would be comprised of two side-by-side, dedicated bus lanes located in the center of the roadway in between two medians. The transitway would be separated from mixed-flow traffic by a four-foot-wide median, widening to a nine-foot-wide median at BRT stations, allowing right-side boarding. Alternative 4 would provide a transitway in the center of the roadway comprised of a single, 14-foot-wide median flanked by dedicated northbound and southbound bus lanes. Station platforms would be located on the single center median, requiring left-side passenger boarding and alighting, as well as left-side doors on vehicles. All stations would have this single-median design, with the exception of the BRT stations proposed at Geary/OFarrell, which would utilize a dual-median configuration similar to that proposed under Alternative 3 to accommodate GGT buses that are strictly rightside boarding. All GGT stops, except Geary/OFarrell, along the BRT corridor would be eliminated in Alternative 4. At the northern end of the corridor, GGT vehicles would be routed along a portion of Chestnut Street to accommodate an additional stop at the corner of Chestnut Street and Van Ness Avenue. At the southern end, GGT buses would continue to stop at the intersections of McAllister and Polk streets and Golden Gate Avenue and Polk Street. A second GGT stop within the BRT runningway at Union Street is also possible. Alternatives 3 and 4 contain a center-lane alternative design option (Design Option B) which would eliminate all but one northbound left turn (at Lombard Street) and all but one southbound left turn (at Broadway) in the project corridor. Project cost is estimated to be between $87 million and $130 million, depending on the build alternative selected. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Annual operations and maintenance costs associated with the build alternatives are significantly lower than those of the No Build Alternative, with cost savings ranging from 14 to 29 percent, depending on the build alternative. The savings are attributed to the travel time benefits of the BRT, requiring fewer vehicles to provide a similar amount of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activity would result in a potentially significant impact due to exceedances of nitrogen oxide emissions, but control measures would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. Implementation of the Van Ness BRT system would result in traffic circulation impacts at six to 11 intersections in the corridor, primarily along Franklin and Gough streets. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110372, Draft EIS--502 pages, Appendices--152 pages, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/917563529?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=VAN+NESS+AVENUE+BUS+RAPID+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=VAN+NESS+AVENUE+BUS+RAPID+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. [Part 14 of 23] T2 - VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. AN - 917563523; 15129-2_0014 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of bus rapid transit (BRT) improvements along a two-mile stretch of Van Ness Avenue, from Lombard Street in the north to Mission Street in the south, San Francisco, California is proposed. Van Ness Avenue is a major north to south corridor for the eastern part of San Francisco. The Muni bus routes that travel along Van Ness Avenue provide regional transit connections to Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), AC Transit, Caltrain, and SamTrans. Golden Gate Transit (GGT) also provides service along Van Ness Avenue. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are analyzed in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 would provide a dedicated bus lane, or transitway, in the right-most lane of Van Ness Avenue located adjacent to the existing curbside parking area. The transitway would be traversable for mixed-flow traffic that would enter the transitway to complete a right turn or to parallel park. BRT stations would be located within the curbside parking area as curb extensions. Under Alternative 3, the transitway would be comprised of two side-by-side, dedicated bus lanes located in the center of the roadway in between two medians. The transitway would be separated from mixed-flow traffic by a four-foot-wide median, widening to a nine-foot-wide median at BRT stations, allowing right-side boarding. Alternative 4 would provide a transitway in the center of the roadway comprised of a single, 14-foot-wide median flanked by dedicated northbound and southbound bus lanes. Station platforms would be located on the single center median, requiring left-side passenger boarding and alighting, as well as left-side doors on vehicles. All stations would have this single-median design, with the exception of the BRT stations proposed at Geary/OFarrell, which would utilize a dual-median configuration similar to that proposed under Alternative 3 to accommodate GGT buses that are strictly rightside boarding. All GGT stops, except Geary/OFarrell, along the BRT corridor would be eliminated in Alternative 4. At the northern end of the corridor, GGT vehicles would be routed along a portion of Chestnut Street to accommodate an additional stop at the corner of Chestnut Street and Van Ness Avenue. At the southern end, GGT buses would continue to stop at the intersections of McAllister and Polk streets and Golden Gate Avenue and Polk Street. A second GGT stop within the BRT runningway at Union Street is also possible. Alternatives 3 and 4 contain a center-lane alternative design option (Design Option B) which would eliminate all but one northbound left turn (at Lombard Street) and all but one southbound left turn (at Broadway) in the project corridor. Project cost is estimated to be between $87 million and $130 million, depending on the build alternative selected. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Annual operations and maintenance costs associated with the build alternatives are significantly lower than those of the No Build Alternative, with cost savings ranging from 14 to 29 percent, depending on the build alternative. The savings are attributed to the travel time benefits of the BRT, requiring fewer vehicles to provide a similar amount of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activity would result in a potentially significant impact due to exceedances of nitrogen oxide emissions, but control measures would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. Implementation of the Van Ness BRT system would result in traffic circulation impacts at six to 11 intersections in the corridor, primarily along Franklin and Gough streets. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110372, Draft EIS--502 pages, Appendices--152 pages, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 14 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/917563523?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=VAN+NESS+AVENUE+BUS+RAPID+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=VAN+NESS+AVENUE+BUS+RAPID+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. [Part 2 of 23] T2 - VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. AN - 917563518; 15129-2_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of bus rapid transit (BRT) improvements along a two-mile stretch of Van Ness Avenue, from Lombard Street in the north to Mission Street in the south, San Francisco, California is proposed. Van Ness Avenue is a major north to south corridor for the eastern part of San Francisco. The Muni bus routes that travel along Van Ness Avenue provide regional transit connections to Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), AC Transit, Caltrain, and SamTrans. Golden Gate Transit (GGT) also provides service along Van Ness Avenue. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are analyzed in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 would provide a dedicated bus lane, or transitway, in the right-most lane of Van Ness Avenue located adjacent to the existing curbside parking area. The transitway would be traversable for mixed-flow traffic that would enter the transitway to complete a right turn or to parallel park. BRT stations would be located within the curbside parking area as curb extensions. Under Alternative 3, the transitway would be comprised of two side-by-side, dedicated bus lanes located in the center of the roadway in between two medians. The transitway would be separated from mixed-flow traffic by a four-foot-wide median, widening to a nine-foot-wide median at BRT stations, allowing right-side boarding. Alternative 4 would provide a transitway in the center of the roadway comprised of a single, 14-foot-wide median flanked by dedicated northbound and southbound bus lanes. Station platforms would be located on the single center median, requiring left-side passenger boarding and alighting, as well as left-side doors on vehicles. All stations would have this single-median design, with the exception of the BRT stations proposed at Geary/OFarrell, which would utilize a dual-median configuration similar to that proposed under Alternative 3 to accommodate GGT buses that are strictly rightside boarding. All GGT stops, except Geary/OFarrell, along the BRT corridor would be eliminated in Alternative 4. At the northern end of the corridor, GGT vehicles would be routed along a portion of Chestnut Street to accommodate an additional stop at the corner of Chestnut Street and Van Ness Avenue. At the southern end, GGT buses would continue to stop at the intersections of McAllister and Polk streets and Golden Gate Avenue and Polk Street. A second GGT stop within the BRT runningway at Union Street is also possible. Alternatives 3 and 4 contain a center-lane alternative design option (Design Option B) which would eliminate all but one northbound left turn (at Lombard Street) and all but one southbound left turn (at Broadway) in the project corridor. Project cost is estimated to be between $87 million and $130 million, depending on the build alternative selected. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Annual operations and maintenance costs associated with the build alternatives are significantly lower than those of the No Build Alternative, with cost savings ranging from 14 to 29 percent, depending on the build alternative. The savings are attributed to the travel time benefits of the BRT, requiring fewer vehicles to provide a similar amount of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activity would result in a potentially significant impact due to exceedances of nitrogen oxide emissions, but control measures would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. Implementation of the Van Ness BRT system would result in traffic circulation impacts at six to 11 intersections in the corridor, primarily along Franklin and Gough streets. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110372, Draft EIS--502 pages, Appendices--152 pages, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/917563518?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=VAN+NESS+AVENUE+BUS+RAPID+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=VAN+NESS+AVENUE+BUS+RAPID+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. [Part 13 of 23] T2 - VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. AN - 917563517; 15129-2_0013 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of bus rapid transit (BRT) improvements along a two-mile stretch of Van Ness Avenue, from Lombard Street in the north to Mission Street in the south, San Francisco, California is proposed. Van Ness Avenue is a major north to south corridor for the eastern part of San Francisco. The Muni bus routes that travel along Van Ness Avenue provide regional transit connections to Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), AC Transit, Caltrain, and SamTrans. Golden Gate Transit (GGT) also provides service along Van Ness Avenue. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are analyzed in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 would provide a dedicated bus lane, or transitway, in the right-most lane of Van Ness Avenue located adjacent to the existing curbside parking area. The transitway would be traversable for mixed-flow traffic that would enter the transitway to complete a right turn or to parallel park. BRT stations would be located within the curbside parking area as curb extensions. Under Alternative 3, the transitway would be comprised of two side-by-side, dedicated bus lanes located in the center of the roadway in between two medians. The transitway would be separated from mixed-flow traffic by a four-foot-wide median, widening to a nine-foot-wide median at BRT stations, allowing right-side boarding. Alternative 4 would provide a transitway in the center of the roadway comprised of a single, 14-foot-wide median flanked by dedicated northbound and southbound bus lanes. Station platforms would be located on the single center median, requiring left-side passenger boarding and alighting, as well as left-side doors on vehicles. All stations would have this single-median design, with the exception of the BRT stations proposed at Geary/OFarrell, which would utilize a dual-median configuration similar to that proposed under Alternative 3 to accommodate GGT buses that are strictly rightside boarding. All GGT stops, except Geary/OFarrell, along the BRT corridor would be eliminated in Alternative 4. At the northern end of the corridor, GGT vehicles would be routed along a portion of Chestnut Street to accommodate an additional stop at the corner of Chestnut Street and Van Ness Avenue. At the southern end, GGT buses would continue to stop at the intersections of McAllister and Polk streets and Golden Gate Avenue and Polk Street. A second GGT stop within the BRT runningway at Union Street is also possible. Alternatives 3 and 4 contain a center-lane alternative design option (Design Option B) which would eliminate all but one northbound left turn (at Lombard Street) and all but one southbound left turn (at Broadway) in the project corridor. Project cost is estimated to be between $87 million and $130 million, depending on the build alternative selected. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Annual operations and maintenance costs associated with the build alternatives are significantly lower than those of the No Build Alternative, with cost savings ranging from 14 to 29 percent, depending on the build alternative. The savings are attributed to the travel time benefits of the BRT, requiring fewer vehicles to provide a similar amount of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activity would result in a potentially significant impact due to exceedances of nitrogen oxide emissions, but control measures would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. Implementation of the Van Ness BRT system would result in traffic circulation impacts at six to 11 intersections in the corridor, primarily along Franklin and Gough streets. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110372, Draft EIS--502 pages, Appendices--152 pages, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 13 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/917563517?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=VAN+NESS+AVENUE+BUS+RAPID+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=VAN+NESS+AVENUE+BUS+RAPID+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. [Part 12 of 23] T2 - VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. AN - 917563511; 15129-2_0012 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of bus rapid transit (BRT) improvements along a two-mile stretch of Van Ness Avenue, from Lombard Street in the north to Mission Street in the south, San Francisco, California is proposed. Van Ness Avenue is a major north to south corridor for the eastern part of San Francisco. The Muni bus routes that travel along Van Ness Avenue provide regional transit connections to Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), AC Transit, Caltrain, and SamTrans. Golden Gate Transit (GGT) also provides service along Van Ness Avenue. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are analyzed in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 would provide a dedicated bus lane, or transitway, in the right-most lane of Van Ness Avenue located adjacent to the existing curbside parking area. The transitway would be traversable for mixed-flow traffic that would enter the transitway to complete a right turn or to parallel park. BRT stations would be located within the curbside parking area as curb extensions. Under Alternative 3, the transitway would be comprised of two side-by-side, dedicated bus lanes located in the center of the roadway in between two medians. The transitway would be separated from mixed-flow traffic by a four-foot-wide median, widening to a nine-foot-wide median at BRT stations, allowing right-side boarding. Alternative 4 would provide a transitway in the center of the roadway comprised of a single, 14-foot-wide median flanked by dedicated northbound and southbound bus lanes. Station platforms would be located on the single center median, requiring left-side passenger boarding and alighting, as well as left-side doors on vehicles. All stations would have this single-median design, with the exception of the BRT stations proposed at Geary/OFarrell, which would utilize a dual-median configuration similar to that proposed under Alternative 3 to accommodate GGT buses that are strictly rightside boarding. All GGT stops, except Geary/OFarrell, along the BRT corridor would be eliminated in Alternative 4. At the northern end of the corridor, GGT vehicles would be routed along a portion of Chestnut Street to accommodate an additional stop at the corner of Chestnut Street and Van Ness Avenue. At the southern end, GGT buses would continue to stop at the intersections of McAllister and Polk streets and Golden Gate Avenue and Polk Street. A second GGT stop within the BRT runningway at Union Street is also possible. Alternatives 3 and 4 contain a center-lane alternative design option (Design Option B) which would eliminate all but one northbound left turn (at Lombard Street) and all but one southbound left turn (at Broadway) in the project corridor. Project cost is estimated to be between $87 million and $130 million, depending on the build alternative selected. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Annual operations and maintenance costs associated with the build alternatives are significantly lower than those of the No Build Alternative, with cost savings ranging from 14 to 29 percent, depending on the build alternative. The savings are attributed to the travel time benefits of the BRT, requiring fewer vehicles to provide a similar amount of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activity would result in a potentially significant impact due to exceedances of nitrogen oxide emissions, but control measures would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. Implementation of the Van Ness BRT system would result in traffic circulation impacts at six to 11 intersections in the corridor, primarily along Franklin and Gough streets. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110372, Draft EIS--502 pages, Appendices--152 pages, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 12 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/917563511?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=VAN+NESS+AVENUE+BUS+RAPID+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=VAN+NESS+AVENUE+BUS+RAPID+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. [Part 1 of 23] T2 - VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. AN - 917563509; 15129-2_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of bus rapid transit (BRT) improvements along a two-mile stretch of Van Ness Avenue, from Lombard Street in the north to Mission Street in the south, San Francisco, California is proposed. Van Ness Avenue is a major north to south corridor for the eastern part of San Francisco. The Muni bus routes that travel along Van Ness Avenue provide regional transit connections to Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), AC Transit, Caltrain, and SamTrans. Golden Gate Transit (GGT) also provides service along Van Ness Avenue. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are analyzed in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 would provide a dedicated bus lane, or transitway, in the right-most lane of Van Ness Avenue located adjacent to the existing curbside parking area. The transitway would be traversable for mixed-flow traffic that would enter the transitway to complete a right turn or to parallel park. BRT stations would be located within the curbside parking area as curb extensions. Under Alternative 3, the transitway would be comprised of two side-by-side, dedicated bus lanes located in the center of the roadway in between two medians. The transitway would be separated from mixed-flow traffic by a four-foot-wide median, widening to a nine-foot-wide median at BRT stations, allowing right-side boarding. Alternative 4 would provide a transitway in the center of the roadway comprised of a single, 14-foot-wide median flanked by dedicated northbound and southbound bus lanes. Station platforms would be located on the single center median, requiring left-side passenger boarding and alighting, as well as left-side doors on vehicles. All stations would have this single-median design, with the exception of the BRT stations proposed at Geary/OFarrell, which would utilize a dual-median configuration similar to that proposed under Alternative 3 to accommodate GGT buses that are strictly rightside boarding. All GGT stops, except Geary/OFarrell, along the BRT corridor would be eliminated in Alternative 4. At the northern end of the corridor, GGT vehicles would be routed along a portion of Chestnut Street to accommodate an additional stop at the corner of Chestnut Street and Van Ness Avenue. At the southern end, GGT buses would continue to stop at the intersections of McAllister and Polk streets and Golden Gate Avenue and Polk Street. A second GGT stop within the BRT runningway at Union Street is also possible. Alternatives 3 and 4 contain a center-lane alternative design option (Design Option B) which would eliminate all but one northbound left turn (at Lombard Street) and all but one southbound left turn (at Broadway) in the project corridor. Project cost is estimated to be between $87 million and $130 million, depending on the build alternative selected. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Annual operations and maintenance costs associated with the build alternatives are significantly lower than those of the No Build Alternative, with cost savings ranging from 14 to 29 percent, depending on the build alternative. The savings are attributed to the travel time benefits of the BRT, requiring fewer vehicles to provide a similar amount of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activity would result in a potentially significant impact due to exceedances of nitrogen oxide emissions, but control measures would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. Implementation of the Van Ness BRT system would result in traffic circulation impacts at six to 11 intersections in the corridor, primarily along Franklin and Gough streets. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110372, Draft EIS--502 pages, Appendices--152 pages, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/917563509?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=VAN+NESS+AVENUE+BUS+RAPID+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=VAN+NESS+AVENUE+BUS+RAPID+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. [Part 6 of 23] T2 - VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. AN - 917563502; 15129-2_0006 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of bus rapid transit (BRT) improvements along a two-mile stretch of Van Ness Avenue, from Lombard Street in the north to Mission Street in the south, San Francisco, California is proposed. Van Ness Avenue is a major north to south corridor for the eastern part of San Francisco. The Muni bus routes that travel along Van Ness Avenue provide regional transit connections to Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), AC Transit, Caltrain, and SamTrans. Golden Gate Transit (GGT) also provides service along Van Ness Avenue. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are analyzed in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 would provide a dedicated bus lane, or transitway, in the right-most lane of Van Ness Avenue located adjacent to the existing curbside parking area. The transitway would be traversable for mixed-flow traffic that would enter the transitway to complete a right turn or to parallel park. BRT stations would be located within the curbside parking area as curb extensions. Under Alternative 3, the transitway would be comprised of two side-by-side, dedicated bus lanes located in the center of the roadway in between two medians. The transitway would be separated from mixed-flow traffic by a four-foot-wide median, widening to a nine-foot-wide median at BRT stations, allowing right-side boarding. Alternative 4 would provide a transitway in the center of the roadway comprised of a single, 14-foot-wide median flanked by dedicated northbound and southbound bus lanes. Station platforms would be located on the single center median, requiring left-side passenger boarding and alighting, as well as left-side doors on vehicles. All stations would have this single-median design, with the exception of the BRT stations proposed at Geary/OFarrell, which would utilize a dual-median configuration similar to that proposed under Alternative 3 to accommodate GGT buses that are strictly rightside boarding. All GGT stops, except Geary/OFarrell, along the BRT corridor would be eliminated in Alternative 4. At the northern end of the corridor, GGT vehicles would be routed along a portion of Chestnut Street to accommodate an additional stop at the corner of Chestnut Street and Van Ness Avenue. At the southern end, GGT buses would continue to stop at the intersections of McAllister and Polk streets and Golden Gate Avenue and Polk Street. A second GGT stop within the BRT runningway at Union Street is also possible. Alternatives 3 and 4 contain a center-lane alternative design option (Design Option B) which would eliminate all but one northbound left turn (at Lombard Street) and all but one southbound left turn (at Broadway) in the project corridor. Project cost is estimated to be between $87 million and $130 million, depending on the build alternative selected. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Annual operations and maintenance costs associated with the build alternatives are significantly lower than those of the No Build Alternative, with cost savings ranging from 14 to 29 percent, depending on the build alternative. The savings are attributed to the travel time benefits of the BRT, requiring fewer vehicles to provide a similar amount of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activity would result in a potentially significant impact due to exceedances of nitrogen oxide emissions, but control measures would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. Implementation of the Van Ness BRT system would result in traffic circulation impacts at six to 11 intersections in the corridor, primarily along Franklin and Gough streets. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110372, Draft EIS--502 pages, Appendices--152 pages, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/917563502?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=VAN+NESS+AVENUE+BUS+RAPID+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=VAN+NESS+AVENUE+BUS+RAPID+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. [Part 5 of 23] T2 - VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. AN - 917563494; 15129-2_0005 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of bus rapid transit (BRT) improvements along a two-mile stretch of Van Ness Avenue, from Lombard Street in the north to Mission Street in the south, San Francisco, California is proposed. Van Ness Avenue is a major north to south corridor for the eastern part of San Francisco. The Muni bus routes that travel along Van Ness Avenue provide regional transit connections to Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), AC Transit, Caltrain, and SamTrans. Golden Gate Transit (GGT) also provides service along Van Ness Avenue. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are analyzed in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 would provide a dedicated bus lane, or transitway, in the right-most lane of Van Ness Avenue located adjacent to the existing curbside parking area. The transitway would be traversable for mixed-flow traffic that would enter the transitway to complete a right turn or to parallel park. BRT stations would be located within the curbside parking area as curb extensions. Under Alternative 3, the transitway would be comprised of two side-by-side, dedicated bus lanes located in the center of the roadway in between two medians. The transitway would be separated from mixed-flow traffic by a four-foot-wide median, widening to a nine-foot-wide median at BRT stations, allowing right-side boarding. Alternative 4 would provide a transitway in the center of the roadway comprised of a single, 14-foot-wide median flanked by dedicated northbound and southbound bus lanes. Station platforms would be located on the single center median, requiring left-side passenger boarding and alighting, as well as left-side doors on vehicles. All stations would have this single-median design, with the exception of the BRT stations proposed at Geary/OFarrell, which would utilize a dual-median configuration similar to that proposed under Alternative 3 to accommodate GGT buses that are strictly rightside boarding. All GGT stops, except Geary/OFarrell, along the BRT corridor would be eliminated in Alternative 4. At the northern end of the corridor, GGT vehicles would be routed along a portion of Chestnut Street to accommodate an additional stop at the corner of Chestnut Street and Van Ness Avenue. At the southern end, GGT buses would continue to stop at the intersections of McAllister and Polk streets and Golden Gate Avenue and Polk Street. A second GGT stop within the BRT runningway at Union Street is also possible. Alternatives 3 and 4 contain a center-lane alternative design option (Design Option B) which would eliminate all but one northbound left turn (at Lombard Street) and all but one southbound left turn (at Broadway) in the project corridor. Project cost is estimated to be between $87 million and $130 million, depending on the build alternative selected. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Annual operations and maintenance costs associated with the build alternatives are significantly lower than those of the No Build Alternative, with cost savings ranging from 14 to 29 percent, depending on the build alternative. The savings are attributed to the travel time benefits of the BRT, requiring fewer vehicles to provide a similar amount of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activity would result in a potentially significant impact due to exceedances of nitrogen oxide emissions, but control measures would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. Implementation of the Van Ness BRT system would result in traffic circulation impacts at six to 11 intersections in the corridor, primarily along Franklin and Gough streets. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110372, Draft EIS--502 pages, Appendices--152 pages, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/917563494?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=VAN+NESS+AVENUE+BUS+RAPID+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=VAN+NESS+AVENUE+BUS+RAPID+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. [Part 4 of 23] T2 - VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. AN - 917563487; 15129-2_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of bus rapid transit (BRT) improvements along a two-mile stretch of Van Ness Avenue, from Lombard Street in the north to Mission Street in the south, San Francisco, California is proposed. Van Ness Avenue is a major north to south corridor for the eastern part of San Francisco. The Muni bus routes that travel along Van Ness Avenue provide regional transit connections to Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), AC Transit, Caltrain, and SamTrans. Golden Gate Transit (GGT) also provides service along Van Ness Avenue. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are analyzed in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 would provide a dedicated bus lane, or transitway, in the right-most lane of Van Ness Avenue located adjacent to the existing curbside parking area. The transitway would be traversable for mixed-flow traffic that would enter the transitway to complete a right turn or to parallel park. BRT stations would be located within the curbside parking area as curb extensions. Under Alternative 3, the transitway would be comprised of two side-by-side, dedicated bus lanes located in the center of the roadway in between two medians. The transitway would be separated from mixed-flow traffic by a four-foot-wide median, widening to a nine-foot-wide median at BRT stations, allowing right-side boarding. Alternative 4 would provide a transitway in the center of the roadway comprised of a single, 14-foot-wide median flanked by dedicated northbound and southbound bus lanes. Station platforms would be located on the single center median, requiring left-side passenger boarding and alighting, as well as left-side doors on vehicles. All stations would have this single-median design, with the exception of the BRT stations proposed at Geary/OFarrell, which would utilize a dual-median configuration similar to that proposed under Alternative 3 to accommodate GGT buses that are strictly rightside boarding. All GGT stops, except Geary/OFarrell, along the BRT corridor would be eliminated in Alternative 4. At the northern end of the corridor, GGT vehicles would be routed along a portion of Chestnut Street to accommodate an additional stop at the corner of Chestnut Street and Van Ness Avenue. At the southern end, GGT buses would continue to stop at the intersections of McAllister and Polk streets and Golden Gate Avenue and Polk Street. A second GGT stop within the BRT runningway at Union Street is also possible. Alternatives 3 and 4 contain a center-lane alternative design option (Design Option B) which would eliminate all but one northbound left turn (at Lombard Street) and all but one southbound left turn (at Broadway) in the project corridor. Project cost is estimated to be between $87 million and $130 million, depending on the build alternative selected. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Annual operations and maintenance costs associated with the build alternatives are significantly lower than those of the No Build Alternative, with cost savings ranging from 14 to 29 percent, depending on the build alternative. The savings are attributed to the travel time benefits of the BRT, requiring fewer vehicles to provide a similar amount of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activity would result in a potentially significant impact due to exceedances of nitrogen oxide emissions, but control measures would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. Implementation of the Van Ness BRT system would result in traffic circulation impacts at six to 11 intersections in the corridor, primarily along Franklin and Gough streets. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110372, Draft EIS--502 pages, Appendices--152 pages, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/917563487?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=VAN+NESS+AVENUE+BUS+RAPID+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=VAN+NESS+AVENUE+BUS+RAPID+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 40 of 43] T2 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 917563317; 15125-8_0040 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to the seven-mile segment of Interstate 25 (I-25) that passes through Pueblo, Colorado, from just south of US Highway 50 (US 50)/State Highway (SH) 47 to just south of Pueblo Boulevard, are proposed. The corridor, known as the Pueblo Freeway, was originally completed in 1959 and changes are required to address current and future transportation needs. I-25 serves as a critical north-south link in the nations Interstate Highway System and as a strategic international corridor under the North American Free Trade Act. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. The Existing I-25 Alternative would widen I-25 to six lanes (three in each direction) from just north of 29th Street to Pueblo Boulevard on its current alignment. The interchanges at US 50B, Indiana Avenue, and Pueblo Boulevard would be reconstructed. Access to 29th Street would be provided via a frontage road and split-diamond interchanges would be created between 13th Street and 1st Street and Abriendo Avenue and Northern Avenue. Connectivity off of I-25 would be improved by extending Dillon Drive south from 26th Street to US 50B and by extending Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. The Modified I-25 Alternative, which is preferred, shares the design characteristics of the Existing I-25 Alternative, with the exception of the southern part of the corridor between the Arkansas River and Canal Street where the Existing I-25 Alternative can be implemented only by moving the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks 150 feet to the east to make room for widening I-25. As an alternative to moving the rail line, the Modified I-25 Alternative would relocate I-25 on a new alignment to the east at Ilex Street, which would allow the UPRR rail line south of the Arkansas River to remain in place. With the Modified I-25 Alternative, I-25 would bridge over the railroad tracks at Minnequa Avenue and then run on the west side of the tracks and rejoin the existing I-25 alignment. By straightening I-25 at Ilex Street, I-25 would leave the current alignment and continue south. The roadway portion no longer used as I-25 would be available to become an extension of Santa Fe Avenue, a critical element to improving local mobility. The Modified I-25 Alternative would extend Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. Under both build alternatives, the completion of proposed trails and sidewalks would provide continuous bicycle and pedestrian access between 29th Street in the north to Pueblo Boulevard in the south. The project would be constructed in phases, with phase one being the replacements of the Ilex Street bridges. The estimated costs for all the project improvements are $760.5 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would address deteriorating roadways and bridges and unsafe road characteristics. Local and regional mobility within and through Pueblo would be improved to meet existing and future travel demands. Trails would provide safe, non-motorized access to Mineral Palace Park, Benedict Park, JJ Raigoza Park, the Historic Arkansas Riverwalk of Pueblo, the Runyon Field Sports Complex, the Runyon Lake State Wildlife Area, and the Fountain Creek Trail system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause direct loss of 1.1 acres of wetlands and 18.1 acres of wildlife habitat and temporary impacts to road traffic, trails and UPRR operations. For the preferred alternative, acquisitions would include: 117 residences; 56 total and 26 partial commercial properties; and 15 total and 15 partial public properties. Construction of four new bridges over the Arkansas River would require relocation of trails and an existing pedestrian bridge. Implementation of the preferred alternative would cause adverse effects to 40 historic resources, including the North Side, Second Ward, Steelworks Suburbs, and Grove historic districts. Noise impacts would be mitigated through construction of 21,525 feet of noise walls. 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: 110368, Draft EIS--516 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 40 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CO-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado 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/917563317?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 39 of 43] T2 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 917563312; 15125-8_0039 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to the seven-mile segment of Interstate 25 (I-25) that passes through Pueblo, Colorado, from just south of US Highway 50 (US 50)/State Highway (SH) 47 to just south of Pueblo Boulevard, are proposed. The corridor, known as the Pueblo Freeway, was originally completed in 1959 and changes are required to address current and future transportation needs. I-25 serves as a critical north-south link in the nations Interstate Highway System and as a strategic international corridor under the North American Free Trade Act. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. The Existing I-25 Alternative would widen I-25 to six lanes (three in each direction) from just north of 29th Street to Pueblo Boulevard on its current alignment. The interchanges at US 50B, Indiana Avenue, and Pueblo Boulevard would be reconstructed. Access to 29th Street would be provided via a frontage road and split-diamond interchanges would be created between 13th Street and 1st Street and Abriendo Avenue and Northern Avenue. Connectivity off of I-25 would be improved by extending Dillon Drive south from 26th Street to US 50B and by extending Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. The Modified I-25 Alternative, which is preferred, shares the design characteristics of the Existing I-25 Alternative, with the exception of the southern part of the corridor between the Arkansas River and Canal Street where the Existing I-25 Alternative can be implemented only by moving the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks 150 feet to the east to make room for widening I-25. As an alternative to moving the rail line, the Modified I-25 Alternative would relocate I-25 on a new alignment to the east at Ilex Street, which would allow the UPRR rail line south of the Arkansas River to remain in place. With the Modified I-25 Alternative, I-25 would bridge over the railroad tracks at Minnequa Avenue and then run on the west side of the tracks and rejoin the existing I-25 alignment. By straightening I-25 at Ilex Street, I-25 would leave the current alignment and continue south. The roadway portion no longer used as I-25 would be available to become an extension of Santa Fe Avenue, a critical element to improving local mobility. The Modified I-25 Alternative would extend Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. Under both build alternatives, the completion of proposed trails and sidewalks would provide continuous bicycle and pedestrian access between 29th Street in the north to Pueblo Boulevard in the south. The project would be constructed in phases, with phase one being the replacements of the Ilex Street bridges. The estimated costs for all the project improvements are $760.5 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would address deteriorating roadways and bridges and unsafe road characteristics. Local and regional mobility within and through Pueblo would be improved to meet existing and future travel demands. Trails would provide safe, non-motorized access to Mineral Palace Park, Benedict Park, JJ Raigoza Park, the Historic Arkansas Riverwalk of Pueblo, the Runyon Field Sports Complex, the Runyon Lake State Wildlife Area, and the Fountain Creek Trail system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause direct loss of 1.1 acres of wetlands and 18.1 acres of wildlife habitat and temporary impacts to road traffic, trails and UPRR operations. For the preferred alternative, acquisitions would include: 117 residences; 56 total and 26 partial commercial properties; and 15 total and 15 partial public properties. Construction of four new bridges over the Arkansas River would require relocation of trails and an existing pedestrian bridge. Implementation of the preferred alternative would cause adverse effects to 40 historic resources, including the North Side, Second Ward, Steelworks Suburbs, and Grove historic districts. Noise impacts would be mitigated through construction of 21,525 feet of noise walls. 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: 110368, Draft EIS--516 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 39 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CO-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado 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/917563312?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 38 of 43] T2 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 917563291; 15125-8_0038 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to the seven-mile segment of Interstate 25 (I-25) that passes through Pueblo, Colorado, from just south of US Highway 50 (US 50)/State Highway (SH) 47 to just south of Pueblo Boulevard, are proposed. The corridor, known as the Pueblo Freeway, was originally completed in 1959 and changes are required to address current and future transportation needs. I-25 serves as a critical north-south link in the nations Interstate Highway System and as a strategic international corridor under the North American Free Trade Act. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. The Existing I-25 Alternative would widen I-25 to six lanes (three in each direction) from just north of 29th Street to Pueblo Boulevard on its current alignment. The interchanges at US 50B, Indiana Avenue, and Pueblo Boulevard would be reconstructed. Access to 29th Street would be provided via a frontage road and split-diamond interchanges would be created between 13th Street and 1st Street and Abriendo Avenue and Northern Avenue. Connectivity off of I-25 would be improved by extending Dillon Drive south from 26th Street to US 50B and by extending Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. The Modified I-25 Alternative, which is preferred, shares the design characteristics of the Existing I-25 Alternative, with the exception of the southern part of the corridor between the Arkansas River and Canal Street where the Existing I-25 Alternative can be implemented only by moving the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks 150 feet to the east to make room for widening I-25. As an alternative to moving the rail line, the Modified I-25 Alternative would relocate I-25 on a new alignment to the east at Ilex Street, which would allow the UPRR rail line south of the Arkansas River to remain in place. With the Modified I-25 Alternative, I-25 would bridge over the railroad tracks at Minnequa Avenue and then run on the west side of the tracks and rejoin the existing I-25 alignment. By straightening I-25 at Ilex Street, I-25 would leave the current alignment and continue south. The roadway portion no longer used as I-25 would be available to become an extension of Santa Fe Avenue, a critical element to improving local mobility. The Modified I-25 Alternative would extend Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. Under both build alternatives, the completion of proposed trails and sidewalks would provide continuous bicycle and pedestrian access between 29th Street in the north to Pueblo Boulevard in the south. The project would be constructed in phases, with phase one being the replacements of the Ilex Street bridges. The estimated costs for all the project improvements are $760.5 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would address deteriorating roadways and bridges and unsafe road characteristics. Local and regional mobility within and through Pueblo would be improved to meet existing and future travel demands. Trails would provide safe, non-motorized access to Mineral Palace Park, Benedict Park, JJ Raigoza Park, the Historic Arkansas Riverwalk of Pueblo, the Runyon Field Sports Complex, the Runyon Lake State Wildlife Area, and the Fountain Creek Trail system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause direct loss of 1.1 acres of wetlands and 18.1 acres of wildlife habitat and temporary impacts to road traffic, trails and UPRR operations. For the preferred alternative, acquisitions would include: 117 residences; 56 total and 26 partial commercial properties; and 15 total and 15 partial public properties. Construction of four new bridges over the Arkansas River would require relocation of trails and an existing pedestrian bridge. Implementation of the preferred alternative would cause adverse effects to 40 historic resources, including the North Side, Second Ward, Steelworks Suburbs, and Grove historic districts. Noise impacts would be mitigated through construction of 21,525 feet of noise walls. 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: 110368, Draft EIS--516 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 38 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CO-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado 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/917563291?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 37 of 43] T2 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 917563288; 15125-8_0037 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to the seven-mile segment of Interstate 25 (I-25) that passes through Pueblo, Colorado, from just south of US Highway 50 (US 50)/State Highway (SH) 47 to just south of Pueblo Boulevard, are proposed. The corridor, known as the Pueblo Freeway, was originally completed in 1959 and changes are required to address current and future transportation needs. I-25 serves as a critical north-south link in the nations Interstate Highway System and as a strategic international corridor under the North American Free Trade Act. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. The Existing I-25 Alternative would widen I-25 to six lanes (three in each direction) from just north of 29th Street to Pueblo Boulevard on its current alignment. The interchanges at US 50B, Indiana Avenue, and Pueblo Boulevard would be reconstructed. Access to 29th Street would be provided via a frontage road and split-diamond interchanges would be created between 13th Street and 1st Street and Abriendo Avenue and Northern Avenue. Connectivity off of I-25 would be improved by extending Dillon Drive south from 26th Street to US 50B and by extending Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. The Modified I-25 Alternative, which is preferred, shares the design characteristics of the Existing I-25 Alternative, with the exception of the southern part of the corridor between the Arkansas River and Canal Street where the Existing I-25 Alternative can be implemented only by moving the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks 150 feet to the east to make room for widening I-25. As an alternative to moving the rail line, the Modified I-25 Alternative would relocate I-25 on a new alignment to the east at Ilex Street, which would allow the UPRR rail line south of the Arkansas River to remain in place. With the Modified I-25 Alternative, I-25 would bridge over the railroad tracks at Minnequa Avenue and then run on the west side of the tracks and rejoin the existing I-25 alignment. By straightening I-25 at Ilex Street, I-25 would leave the current alignment and continue south. The roadway portion no longer used as I-25 would be available to become an extension of Santa Fe Avenue, a critical element to improving local mobility. The Modified I-25 Alternative would extend Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. Under both build alternatives, the completion of proposed trails and sidewalks would provide continuous bicycle and pedestrian access between 29th Street in the north to Pueblo Boulevard in the south. The project would be constructed in phases, with phase one being the replacements of the Ilex Street bridges. The estimated costs for all the project improvements are $760.5 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would address deteriorating roadways and bridges and unsafe road characteristics. Local and regional mobility within and through Pueblo would be improved to meet existing and future travel demands. Trails would provide safe, non-motorized access to Mineral Palace Park, Benedict Park, JJ Raigoza Park, the Historic Arkansas Riverwalk of Pueblo, the Runyon Field Sports Complex, the Runyon Lake State Wildlife Area, and the Fountain Creek Trail system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause direct loss of 1.1 acres of wetlands and 18.1 acres of wildlife habitat and temporary impacts to road traffic, trails and UPRR operations. For the preferred alternative, acquisitions would include: 117 residences; 56 total and 26 partial commercial properties; and 15 total and 15 partial public properties. Construction of four new bridges over the Arkansas River would require relocation of trails and an existing pedestrian bridge. Implementation of the preferred alternative would cause adverse effects to 40 historic resources, including the North Side, Second Ward, Steelworks Suburbs, and Grove historic districts. Noise impacts would be mitigated through construction of 21,525 feet of noise walls. 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: 110368, Draft EIS--516 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 37 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CO-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado 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/917563288?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 36 of 43] T2 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 917563283; 15125-8_0036 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to the seven-mile segment of Interstate 25 (I-25) that passes through Pueblo, Colorado, from just south of US Highway 50 (US 50)/State Highway (SH) 47 to just south of Pueblo Boulevard, are proposed. The corridor, known as the Pueblo Freeway, was originally completed in 1959 and changes are required to address current and future transportation needs. I-25 serves as a critical north-south link in the nations Interstate Highway System and as a strategic international corridor under the North American Free Trade Act. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. The Existing I-25 Alternative would widen I-25 to six lanes (three in each direction) from just north of 29th Street to Pueblo Boulevard on its current alignment. The interchanges at US 50B, Indiana Avenue, and Pueblo Boulevard would be reconstructed. Access to 29th Street would be provided via a frontage road and split-diamond interchanges would be created between 13th Street and 1st Street and Abriendo Avenue and Northern Avenue. Connectivity off of I-25 would be improved by extending Dillon Drive south from 26th Street to US 50B and by extending Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. The Modified I-25 Alternative, which is preferred, shares the design characteristics of the Existing I-25 Alternative, with the exception of the southern part of the corridor between the Arkansas River and Canal Street where the Existing I-25 Alternative can be implemented only by moving the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks 150 feet to the east to make room for widening I-25. As an alternative to moving the rail line, the Modified I-25 Alternative would relocate I-25 on a new alignment to the east at Ilex Street, which would allow the UPRR rail line south of the Arkansas River to remain in place. With the Modified I-25 Alternative, I-25 would bridge over the railroad tracks at Minnequa Avenue and then run on the west side of the tracks and rejoin the existing I-25 alignment. By straightening I-25 at Ilex Street, I-25 would leave the current alignment and continue south. The roadway portion no longer used as I-25 would be available to become an extension of Santa Fe Avenue, a critical element to improving local mobility. The Modified I-25 Alternative would extend Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. Under both build alternatives, the completion of proposed trails and sidewalks would provide continuous bicycle and pedestrian access between 29th Street in the north to Pueblo Boulevard in the south. The project would be constructed in phases, with phase one being the replacements of the Ilex Street bridges. The estimated costs for all the project improvements are $760.5 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would address deteriorating roadways and bridges and unsafe road characteristics. Local and regional mobility within and through Pueblo would be improved to meet existing and future travel demands. Trails would provide safe, non-motorized access to Mineral Palace Park, Benedict Park, JJ Raigoza Park, the Historic Arkansas Riverwalk of Pueblo, the Runyon Field Sports Complex, the Runyon Lake State Wildlife Area, and the Fountain Creek Trail system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause direct loss of 1.1 acres of wetlands and 18.1 acres of wildlife habitat and temporary impacts to road traffic, trails and UPRR operations. For the preferred alternative, acquisitions would include: 117 residences; 56 total and 26 partial commercial properties; and 15 total and 15 partial public properties. Construction of four new bridges over the Arkansas River would require relocation of trails and an existing pedestrian bridge. Implementation of the preferred alternative would cause adverse effects to 40 historic resources, including the North Side, Second Ward, Steelworks Suburbs, and Grove historic districts. Noise impacts would be mitigated through construction of 21,525 feet of noise walls. 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: 110368, Draft EIS--516 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 36 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CO-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado 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/917563283?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 35 of 43] T2 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 917563279; 15125-8_0035 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to the seven-mile segment of Interstate 25 (I-25) that passes through Pueblo, Colorado, from just south of US Highway 50 (US 50)/State Highway (SH) 47 to just south of Pueblo Boulevard, are proposed. The corridor, known as the Pueblo Freeway, was originally completed in 1959 and changes are required to address current and future transportation needs. I-25 serves as a critical north-south link in the nations Interstate Highway System and as a strategic international corridor under the North American Free Trade Act. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. The Existing I-25 Alternative would widen I-25 to six lanes (three in each direction) from just north of 29th Street to Pueblo Boulevard on its current alignment. The interchanges at US 50B, Indiana Avenue, and Pueblo Boulevard would be reconstructed. Access to 29th Street would be provided via a frontage road and split-diamond interchanges would be created between 13th Street and 1st Street and Abriendo Avenue and Northern Avenue. Connectivity off of I-25 would be improved by extending Dillon Drive south from 26th Street to US 50B and by extending Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. The Modified I-25 Alternative, which is preferred, shares the design characteristics of the Existing I-25 Alternative, with the exception of the southern part of the corridor between the Arkansas River and Canal Street where the Existing I-25 Alternative can be implemented only by moving the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks 150 feet to the east to make room for widening I-25. As an alternative to moving the rail line, the Modified I-25 Alternative would relocate I-25 on a new alignment to the east at Ilex Street, which would allow the UPRR rail line south of the Arkansas River to remain in place. With the Modified I-25 Alternative, I-25 would bridge over the railroad tracks at Minnequa Avenue and then run on the west side of the tracks and rejoin the existing I-25 alignment. By straightening I-25 at Ilex Street, I-25 would leave the current alignment and continue south. The roadway portion no longer used as I-25 would be available to become an extension of Santa Fe Avenue, a critical element to improving local mobility. The Modified I-25 Alternative would extend Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. Under both build alternatives, the completion of proposed trails and sidewalks would provide continuous bicycle and pedestrian access between 29th Street in the north to Pueblo Boulevard in the south. The project would be constructed in phases, with phase one being the replacements of the Ilex Street bridges. The estimated costs for all the project improvements are $760.5 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would address deteriorating roadways and bridges and unsafe road characteristics. Local and regional mobility within and through Pueblo would be improved to meet existing and future travel demands. Trails would provide safe, non-motorized access to Mineral Palace Park, Benedict Park, JJ Raigoza Park, the Historic Arkansas Riverwalk of Pueblo, the Runyon Field Sports Complex, the Runyon Lake State Wildlife Area, and the Fountain Creek Trail system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause direct loss of 1.1 acres of wetlands and 18.1 acres of wildlife habitat and temporary impacts to road traffic, trails and UPRR operations. For the preferred alternative, acquisitions would include: 117 residences; 56 total and 26 partial commercial properties; and 15 total and 15 partial public properties. Construction of four new bridges over the Arkansas River would require relocation of trails and an existing pedestrian bridge. Implementation of the preferred alternative would cause adverse effects to 40 historic resources, including the North Side, Second Ward, Steelworks Suburbs, and Grove historic districts. Noise impacts would be mitigated through construction of 21,525 feet of noise walls. 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: 110368, Draft EIS--516 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 35 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CO-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado 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/917563279?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 34 of 43] T2 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 917563275; 15125-8_0034 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to the seven-mile segment of Interstate 25 (I-25) that passes through Pueblo, Colorado, from just south of US Highway 50 (US 50)/State Highway (SH) 47 to just south of Pueblo Boulevard, are proposed. The corridor, known as the Pueblo Freeway, was originally completed in 1959 and changes are required to address current and future transportation needs. I-25 serves as a critical north-south link in the nations Interstate Highway System and as a strategic international corridor under the North American Free Trade Act. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. The Existing I-25 Alternative would widen I-25 to six lanes (three in each direction) from just north of 29th Street to Pueblo Boulevard on its current alignment. The interchanges at US 50B, Indiana Avenue, and Pueblo Boulevard would be reconstructed. Access to 29th Street would be provided via a frontage road and split-diamond interchanges would be created between 13th Street and 1st Street and Abriendo Avenue and Northern Avenue. Connectivity off of I-25 would be improved by extending Dillon Drive south from 26th Street to US 50B and by extending Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. The Modified I-25 Alternative, which is preferred, shares the design characteristics of the Existing I-25 Alternative, with the exception of the southern part of the corridor between the Arkansas River and Canal Street where the Existing I-25 Alternative can be implemented only by moving the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks 150 feet to the east to make room for widening I-25. As an alternative to moving the rail line, the Modified I-25 Alternative would relocate I-25 on a new alignment to the east at Ilex Street, which would allow the UPRR rail line south of the Arkansas River to remain in place. With the Modified I-25 Alternative, I-25 would bridge over the railroad tracks at Minnequa Avenue and then run on the west side of the tracks and rejoin the existing I-25 alignment. By straightening I-25 at Ilex Street, I-25 would leave the current alignment and continue south. The roadway portion no longer used as I-25 would be available to become an extension of Santa Fe Avenue, a critical element to improving local mobility. The Modified I-25 Alternative would extend Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. Under both build alternatives, the completion of proposed trails and sidewalks would provide continuous bicycle and pedestrian access between 29th Street in the north to Pueblo Boulevard in the south. The project would be constructed in phases, with phase one being the replacements of the Ilex Street bridges. The estimated costs for all the project improvements are $760.5 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would address deteriorating roadways and bridges and unsafe road characteristics. Local and regional mobility within and through Pueblo would be improved to meet existing and future travel demands. Trails would provide safe, non-motorized access to Mineral Palace Park, Benedict Park, JJ Raigoza Park, the Historic Arkansas Riverwalk of Pueblo, the Runyon Field Sports Complex, the Runyon Lake State Wildlife Area, and the Fountain Creek Trail system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause direct loss of 1.1 acres of wetlands and 18.1 acres of wildlife habitat and temporary impacts to road traffic, trails and UPRR operations. For the preferred alternative, acquisitions would include: 117 residences; 56 total and 26 partial commercial properties; and 15 total and 15 partial public properties. Construction of four new bridges over the Arkansas River would require relocation of trails and an existing pedestrian bridge. Implementation of the preferred alternative would cause adverse effects to 40 historic resources, including the North Side, Second Ward, Steelworks Suburbs, and Grove historic districts. Noise impacts would be mitigated through construction of 21,525 feet of noise walls. 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: 110368, Draft EIS--516 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 34 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CO-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado 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/917563275?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 33 of 43] T2 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 917563273; 15125-8_0033 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to the seven-mile segment of Interstate 25 (I-25) that passes through Pueblo, Colorado, from just south of US Highway 50 (US 50)/State Highway (SH) 47 to just south of Pueblo Boulevard, are proposed. The corridor, known as the Pueblo Freeway, was originally completed in 1959 and changes are required to address current and future transportation needs. I-25 serves as a critical north-south link in the nations Interstate Highway System and as a strategic international corridor under the North American Free Trade Act. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. The Existing I-25 Alternative would widen I-25 to six lanes (three in each direction) from just north of 29th Street to Pueblo Boulevard on its current alignment. The interchanges at US 50B, Indiana Avenue, and Pueblo Boulevard would be reconstructed. Access to 29th Street would be provided via a frontage road and split-diamond interchanges would be created between 13th Street and 1st Street and Abriendo Avenue and Northern Avenue. Connectivity off of I-25 would be improved by extending Dillon Drive south from 26th Street to US 50B and by extending Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. The Modified I-25 Alternative, which is preferred, shares the design characteristics of the Existing I-25 Alternative, with the exception of the southern part of the corridor between the Arkansas River and Canal Street where the Existing I-25 Alternative can be implemented only by moving the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks 150 feet to the east to make room for widening I-25. As an alternative to moving the rail line, the Modified I-25 Alternative would relocate I-25 on a new alignment to the east at Ilex Street, which would allow the UPRR rail line south of the Arkansas River to remain in place. With the Modified I-25 Alternative, I-25 would bridge over the railroad tracks at Minnequa Avenue and then run on the west side of the tracks and rejoin the existing I-25 alignment. By straightening I-25 at Ilex Street, I-25 would leave the current alignment and continue south. The roadway portion no longer used as I-25 would be available to become an extension of Santa Fe Avenue, a critical element to improving local mobility. The Modified I-25 Alternative would extend Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. Under both build alternatives, the completion of proposed trails and sidewalks would provide continuous bicycle and pedestrian access between 29th Street in the north to Pueblo Boulevard in the south. The project would be constructed in phases, with phase one being the replacements of the Ilex Street bridges. The estimated costs for all the project improvements are $760.5 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would address deteriorating roadways and bridges and unsafe road characteristics. Local and regional mobility within and through Pueblo would be improved to meet existing and future travel demands. Trails would provide safe, non-motorized access to Mineral Palace Park, Benedict Park, JJ Raigoza Park, the Historic Arkansas Riverwalk of Pueblo, the Runyon Field Sports Complex, the Runyon Lake State Wildlife Area, and the Fountain Creek Trail system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause direct loss of 1.1 acres of wetlands and 18.1 acres of wildlife habitat and temporary impacts to road traffic, trails and UPRR operations. For the preferred alternative, acquisitions would include: 117 residences; 56 total and 26 partial commercial properties; and 15 total and 15 partial public properties. Construction of four new bridges over the Arkansas River would require relocation of trails and an existing pedestrian bridge. Implementation of the preferred alternative would cause adverse effects to 40 historic resources, including the North Side, Second Ward, Steelworks Suburbs, and Grove historic districts. Noise impacts would be mitigated through construction of 21,525 feet of noise walls. 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: 110368, Draft EIS--516 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 33 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CO-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado 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/917563273?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 43 of 43] T2 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 917563272; 15125-8_0043 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to the seven-mile segment of Interstate 25 (I-25) that passes through Pueblo, Colorado, from just south of US Highway 50 (US 50)/State Highway (SH) 47 to just south of Pueblo Boulevard, are proposed. The corridor, known as the Pueblo Freeway, was originally completed in 1959 and changes are required to address current and future transportation needs. I-25 serves as a critical north-south link in the nations Interstate Highway System and as a strategic international corridor under the North American Free Trade Act. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. The Existing I-25 Alternative would widen I-25 to six lanes (three in each direction) from just north of 29th Street to Pueblo Boulevard on its current alignment. The interchanges at US 50B, Indiana Avenue, and Pueblo Boulevard would be reconstructed. Access to 29th Street would be provided via a frontage road and split-diamond interchanges would be created between 13th Street and 1st Street and Abriendo Avenue and Northern Avenue. Connectivity off of I-25 would be improved by extending Dillon Drive south from 26th Street to US 50B and by extending Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. The Modified I-25 Alternative, which is preferred, shares the design characteristics of the Existing I-25 Alternative, with the exception of the southern part of the corridor between the Arkansas River and Canal Street where the Existing I-25 Alternative can be implemented only by moving the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks 150 feet to the east to make room for widening I-25. As an alternative to moving the rail line, the Modified I-25 Alternative would relocate I-25 on a new alignment to the east at Ilex Street, which would allow the UPRR rail line south of the Arkansas River to remain in place. With the Modified I-25 Alternative, I-25 would bridge over the railroad tracks at Minnequa Avenue and then run on the west side of the tracks and rejoin the existing I-25 alignment. By straightening I-25 at Ilex Street, I-25 would leave the current alignment and continue south. The roadway portion no longer used as I-25 would be available to become an extension of Santa Fe Avenue, a critical element to improving local mobility. The Modified I-25 Alternative would extend Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. Under both build alternatives, the completion of proposed trails and sidewalks would provide continuous bicycle and pedestrian access between 29th Street in the north to Pueblo Boulevard in the south. The project would be constructed in phases, with phase one being the replacements of the Ilex Street bridges. The estimated costs for all the project improvements are $760.5 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would address deteriorating roadways and bridges and unsafe road characteristics. Local and regional mobility within and through Pueblo would be improved to meet existing and future travel demands. Trails would provide safe, non-motorized access to Mineral Palace Park, Benedict Park, JJ Raigoza Park, the Historic Arkansas Riverwalk of Pueblo, the Runyon Field Sports Complex, the Runyon Lake State Wildlife Area, and the Fountain Creek Trail system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause direct loss of 1.1 acres of wetlands and 18.1 acres of wildlife habitat and temporary impacts to road traffic, trails and UPRR operations. For the preferred alternative, acquisitions would include: 117 residences; 56 total and 26 partial commercial properties; and 15 total and 15 partial public properties. Construction of four new bridges over the Arkansas River would require relocation of trails and an existing pedestrian bridge. Implementation of the preferred alternative would cause adverse effects to 40 historic resources, including the North Side, Second Ward, Steelworks Suburbs, and Grove historic districts. Noise impacts would be mitigated through construction of 21,525 feet of noise walls. 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: 110368, Draft EIS--516 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 43 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CO-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado 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/917563272?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. [Part 23 of 23] T2 - VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. AN - 917563271; 15129-2_0023 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of bus rapid transit (BRT) improvements along a two-mile stretch of Van Ness Avenue, from Lombard Street in the north to Mission Street in the south, San Francisco, California is proposed. Van Ness Avenue is a major north to south corridor for the eastern part of San Francisco. The Muni bus routes that travel along Van Ness Avenue provide regional transit connections to Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), AC Transit, Caltrain, and SamTrans. Golden Gate Transit (GGT) also provides service along Van Ness Avenue. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are analyzed in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 would provide a dedicated bus lane, or transitway, in the right-most lane of Van Ness Avenue located adjacent to the existing curbside parking area. The transitway would be traversable for mixed-flow traffic that would enter the transitway to complete a right turn or to parallel park. BRT stations would be located within the curbside parking area as curb extensions. Under Alternative 3, the transitway would be comprised of two side-by-side, dedicated bus lanes located in the center of the roadway in between two medians. The transitway would be separated from mixed-flow traffic by a four-foot-wide median, widening to a nine-foot-wide median at BRT stations, allowing right-side boarding. Alternative 4 would provide a transitway in the center of the roadway comprised of a single, 14-foot-wide median flanked by dedicated northbound and southbound bus lanes. Station platforms would be located on the single center median, requiring left-side passenger boarding and alighting, as well as left-side doors on vehicles. All stations would have this single-median design, with the exception of the BRT stations proposed at Geary/OFarrell, which would utilize a dual-median configuration similar to that proposed under Alternative 3 to accommodate GGT buses that are strictly rightside boarding. All GGT stops, except Geary/OFarrell, along the BRT corridor would be eliminated in Alternative 4. At the northern end of the corridor, GGT vehicles would be routed along a portion of Chestnut Street to accommodate an additional stop at the corner of Chestnut Street and Van Ness Avenue. At the southern end, GGT buses would continue to stop at the intersections of McAllister and Polk streets and Golden Gate Avenue and Polk Street. A second GGT stop within the BRT runningway at Union Street is also possible. Alternatives 3 and 4 contain a center-lane alternative design option (Design Option B) which would eliminate all but one northbound left turn (at Lombard Street) and all but one southbound left turn (at Broadway) in the project corridor. Project cost is estimated to be between $87 million and $130 million, depending on the build alternative selected. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Annual operations and maintenance costs associated with the build alternatives are significantly lower than those of the No Build Alternative, with cost savings ranging from 14 to 29 percent, depending on the build alternative. The savings are attributed to the travel time benefits of the BRT, requiring fewer vehicles to provide a similar amount of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activity would result in a potentially significant impact due to exceedances of nitrogen oxide emissions, but control measures would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. Implementation of the Van Ness BRT system would result in traffic circulation impacts at six to 11 intersections in the corridor, primarily along Franklin and Gough streets. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110372, Draft EIS--502 pages, Appendices--152 pages, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 23 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/917563271?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=VAN+NESS+AVENUE+BUS+RAPID+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=VAN+NESS+AVENUE+BUS+RAPID+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 42 of 43] T2 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 917563270; 15125-8_0042 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to the seven-mile segment of Interstate 25 (I-25) that passes through Pueblo, Colorado, from just south of US Highway 50 (US 50)/State Highway (SH) 47 to just south of Pueblo Boulevard, are proposed. The corridor, known as the Pueblo Freeway, was originally completed in 1959 and changes are required to address current and future transportation needs. I-25 serves as a critical north-south link in the nations Interstate Highway System and as a strategic international corridor under the North American Free Trade Act. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. The Existing I-25 Alternative would widen I-25 to six lanes (three in each direction) from just north of 29th Street to Pueblo Boulevard on its current alignment. The interchanges at US 50B, Indiana Avenue, and Pueblo Boulevard would be reconstructed. Access to 29th Street would be provided via a frontage road and split-diamond interchanges would be created between 13th Street and 1st Street and Abriendo Avenue and Northern Avenue. Connectivity off of I-25 would be improved by extending Dillon Drive south from 26th Street to US 50B and by extending Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. The Modified I-25 Alternative, which is preferred, shares the design characteristics of the Existing I-25 Alternative, with the exception of the southern part of the corridor between the Arkansas River and Canal Street where the Existing I-25 Alternative can be implemented only by moving the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks 150 feet to the east to make room for widening I-25. As an alternative to moving the rail line, the Modified I-25 Alternative would relocate I-25 on a new alignment to the east at Ilex Street, which would allow the UPRR rail line south of the Arkansas River to remain in place. With the Modified I-25 Alternative, I-25 would bridge over the railroad tracks at Minnequa Avenue and then run on the west side of the tracks and rejoin the existing I-25 alignment. By straightening I-25 at Ilex Street, I-25 would leave the current alignment and continue south. The roadway portion no longer used as I-25 would be available to become an extension of Santa Fe Avenue, a critical element to improving local mobility. The Modified I-25 Alternative would extend Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. Under both build alternatives, the completion of proposed trails and sidewalks would provide continuous bicycle and pedestrian access between 29th Street in the north to Pueblo Boulevard in the south. The project would be constructed in phases, with phase one being the replacements of the Ilex Street bridges. The estimated costs for all the project improvements are $760.5 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would address deteriorating roadways and bridges and unsafe road characteristics. Local and regional mobility within and through Pueblo would be improved to meet existing and future travel demands. Trails would provide safe, non-motorized access to Mineral Palace Park, Benedict Park, JJ Raigoza Park, the Historic Arkansas Riverwalk of Pueblo, the Runyon Field Sports Complex, the Runyon Lake State Wildlife Area, and the Fountain Creek Trail system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause direct loss of 1.1 acres of wetlands and 18.1 acres of wildlife habitat and temporary impacts to road traffic, trails and UPRR operations. For the preferred alternative, acquisitions would include: 117 residences; 56 total and 26 partial commercial properties; and 15 total and 15 partial public properties. Construction of four new bridges over the Arkansas River would require relocation of trails and an existing pedestrian bridge. Implementation of the preferred alternative would cause adverse effects to 40 historic resources, including the North Side, Second Ward, Steelworks Suburbs, and Grove historic districts. Noise impacts would be mitigated through construction of 21,525 feet of noise walls. 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: 110368, Draft EIS--516 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 42 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CO-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado 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/917563270?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. [Part 22 of 23] T2 - VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. AN - 917563269; 15129-2_0022 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of bus rapid transit (BRT) improvements along a two-mile stretch of Van Ness Avenue, from Lombard Street in the north to Mission Street in the south, San Francisco, California is proposed. Van Ness Avenue is a major north to south corridor for the eastern part of San Francisco. The Muni bus routes that travel along Van Ness Avenue provide regional transit connections to Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), AC Transit, Caltrain, and SamTrans. Golden Gate Transit (GGT) also provides service along Van Ness Avenue. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are analyzed in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 would provide a dedicated bus lane, or transitway, in the right-most lane of Van Ness Avenue located adjacent to the existing curbside parking area. The transitway would be traversable for mixed-flow traffic that would enter the transitway to complete a right turn or to parallel park. BRT stations would be located within the curbside parking area as curb extensions. Under Alternative 3, the transitway would be comprised of two side-by-side, dedicated bus lanes located in the center of the roadway in between two medians. The transitway would be separated from mixed-flow traffic by a four-foot-wide median, widening to a nine-foot-wide median at BRT stations, allowing right-side boarding. Alternative 4 would provide a transitway in the center of the roadway comprised of a single, 14-foot-wide median flanked by dedicated northbound and southbound bus lanes. Station platforms would be located on the single center median, requiring left-side passenger boarding and alighting, as well as left-side doors on vehicles. All stations would have this single-median design, with the exception of the BRT stations proposed at Geary/OFarrell, which would utilize a dual-median configuration similar to that proposed under Alternative 3 to accommodate GGT buses that are strictly rightside boarding. All GGT stops, except Geary/OFarrell, along the BRT corridor would be eliminated in Alternative 4. At the northern end of the corridor, GGT vehicles would be routed along a portion of Chestnut Street to accommodate an additional stop at the corner of Chestnut Street and Van Ness Avenue. At the southern end, GGT buses would continue to stop at the intersections of McAllister and Polk streets and Golden Gate Avenue and Polk Street. A second GGT stop within the BRT runningway at Union Street is also possible. Alternatives 3 and 4 contain a center-lane alternative design option (Design Option B) which would eliminate all but one northbound left turn (at Lombard Street) and all but one southbound left turn (at Broadway) in the project corridor. Project cost is estimated to be between $87 million and $130 million, depending on the build alternative selected. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Annual operations and maintenance costs associated with the build alternatives are significantly lower than those of the No Build Alternative, with cost savings ranging from 14 to 29 percent, depending on the build alternative. The savings are attributed to the travel time benefits of the BRT, requiring fewer vehicles to provide a similar amount of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activity would result in a potentially significant impact due to exceedances of nitrogen oxide emissions, but control measures would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. Implementation of the Van Ness BRT system would result in traffic circulation impacts at six to 11 intersections in the corridor, primarily along Franklin and Gough streets. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110372, Draft EIS--502 pages, Appendices--152 pages, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 22 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/917563269?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=VAN+NESS+AVENUE+BUS+RAPID+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=VAN+NESS+AVENUE+BUS+RAPID+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. [Part 41 of 43] T2 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 917563268; 15125-8_0041 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to the seven-mile segment of Interstate 25 (I-25) that passes through Pueblo, Colorado, from just south of US Highway 50 (US 50)/State Highway (SH) 47 to just south of Pueblo Boulevard, are proposed. The corridor, known as the Pueblo Freeway, was originally completed in 1959 and changes are required to address current and future transportation needs. I-25 serves as a critical north-south link in the nations Interstate Highway System and as a strategic international corridor under the North American Free Trade Act. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. The Existing I-25 Alternative would widen I-25 to six lanes (three in each direction) from just north of 29th Street to Pueblo Boulevard on its current alignment. The interchanges at US 50B, Indiana Avenue, and Pueblo Boulevard would be reconstructed. Access to 29th Street would be provided via a frontage road and split-diamond interchanges would be created between 13th Street and 1st Street and Abriendo Avenue and Northern Avenue. Connectivity off of I-25 would be improved by extending Dillon Drive south from 26th Street to US 50B and by extending Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. The Modified I-25 Alternative, which is preferred, shares the design characteristics of the Existing I-25 Alternative, with the exception of the southern part of the corridor between the Arkansas River and Canal Street where the Existing I-25 Alternative can be implemented only by moving the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks 150 feet to the east to make room for widening I-25. As an alternative to moving the rail line, the Modified I-25 Alternative would relocate I-25 on a new alignment to the east at Ilex Street, which would allow the UPRR rail line south of the Arkansas River to remain in place. With the Modified I-25 Alternative, I-25 would bridge over the railroad tracks at Minnequa Avenue and then run on the west side of the tracks and rejoin the existing I-25 alignment. By straightening I-25 at Ilex Street, I-25 would leave the current alignment and continue south. The roadway portion no longer used as I-25 would be available to become an extension of Santa Fe Avenue, a critical element to improving local mobility. The Modified I-25 Alternative would extend Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. Under both build alternatives, the completion of proposed trails and sidewalks would provide continuous bicycle and pedestrian access between 29th Street in the north to Pueblo Boulevard in the south. The project would be constructed in phases, with phase one being the replacements of the Ilex Street bridges. The estimated costs for all the project improvements are $760.5 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would address deteriorating roadways and bridges and unsafe road characteristics. Local and regional mobility within and through Pueblo would be improved to meet existing and future travel demands. Trails would provide safe, non-motorized access to Mineral Palace Park, Benedict Park, JJ Raigoza Park, the Historic Arkansas Riverwalk of Pueblo, the Runyon Field Sports Complex, the Runyon Lake State Wildlife Area, and the Fountain Creek Trail system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause direct loss of 1.1 acres of wetlands and 18.1 acres of wildlife habitat and temporary impacts to road traffic, trails and UPRR operations. For the preferred alternative, acquisitions would include: 117 residences; 56 total and 26 partial commercial properties; and 15 total and 15 partial public properties. Construction of four new bridges over the Arkansas River would require relocation of trails and an existing pedestrian bridge. Implementation of the preferred alternative would cause adverse effects to 40 historic resources, including the North Side, Second Ward, Steelworks Suburbs, and Grove historic districts. Noise impacts would be mitigated through construction of 21,525 feet of noise walls. 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: 110368, Draft EIS--516 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 41 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CO-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado 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/917563268?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. [Part 21 of 23] T2 - VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. AN - 917563267; 15129-2_0021 AB - PURPOSE: The implementation of bus rapid transit (BRT) improvements along a two-mile stretch of Van Ness Avenue, from Lombard Street in the north to Mission Street in the south, San Francisco, California is proposed. Van Ness Avenue is a major north to south corridor for the eastern part of San Francisco. The Muni bus routes that travel along Van Ness Avenue provide regional transit connections to Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), AC Transit, Caltrain, and SamTrans. Golden Gate Transit (GGT) also provides service along Van Ness Avenue. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative (Alternative 1), are analyzed in this draft EIS. Alternative 2 would provide a dedicated bus lane, or transitway, in the right-most lane of Van Ness Avenue located adjacent to the existing curbside parking area. The transitway would be traversable for mixed-flow traffic that would enter the transitway to complete a right turn or to parallel park. BRT stations would be located within the curbside parking area as curb extensions. Under Alternative 3, the transitway would be comprised of two side-by-side, dedicated bus lanes located in the center of the roadway in between two medians. The transitway would be separated from mixed-flow traffic by a four-foot-wide median, widening to a nine-foot-wide median at BRT stations, allowing right-side boarding. Alternative 4 would provide a transitway in the center of the roadway comprised of a single, 14-foot-wide median flanked by dedicated northbound and southbound bus lanes. Station platforms would be located on the single center median, requiring left-side passenger boarding and alighting, as well as left-side doors on vehicles. All stations would have this single-median design, with the exception of the BRT stations proposed at Geary/OFarrell, which would utilize a dual-median configuration similar to that proposed under Alternative 3 to accommodate GGT buses that are strictly rightside boarding. All GGT stops, except Geary/OFarrell, along the BRT corridor would be eliminated in Alternative 4. At the northern end of the corridor, GGT vehicles would be routed along a portion of Chestnut Street to accommodate an additional stop at the corner of Chestnut Street and Van Ness Avenue. At the southern end, GGT buses would continue to stop at the intersections of McAllister and Polk streets and Golden Gate Avenue and Polk Street. A second GGT stop within the BRT runningway at Union Street is also possible. Alternatives 3 and 4 contain a center-lane alternative design option (Design Option B) which would eliminate all but one northbound left turn (at Lombard Street) and all but one southbound left turn (at Broadway) in the project corridor. Project cost is estimated to be between $87 million and $130 million, depending on the build alternative selected. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Annual operations and maintenance costs associated with the build alternatives are significantly lower than those of the No Build Alternative, with cost savings ranging from 14 to 29 percent, depending on the build alternative. The savings are attributed to the travel time benefits of the BRT, requiring fewer vehicles to provide a similar amount of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activity would result in a potentially significant impact due to exceedances of nitrogen oxide emissions, but control measures would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. Implementation of the Van Ness BRT system would result in traffic circulation impacts at six to 11 intersections in the corridor, primarily along Franklin and Gough streets. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Transit Law (49 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110372, Draft EIS--502 pages, Appendices--152 pages, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 21 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - California KW - Federal Transit Law, Funding UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/917563267?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=VAN+NESS+AVENUE+BUS+RAPID+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=VAN+NESS+AVENUE+BUS+RAPID+TRANSIT+PROJECT%2C+CITY+AND+COUNTY+OF+SAN+FRANCISCO%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SIXTH STREET VIADUCT SEISMIC IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 1 of 2] T2 - SIXTH STREET VIADUCT SEISMIC IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 917563258; 15131-4_0001 AB - PURPOSE: Seismic improvement of the 6th Street Viaduct over the Los Angeles River and the 6th Street Overcrossing, which spans the US 101 Hollywood Freeway, Los Angeles County, California is proposed. These two bridges comprise a single structure which connects downtown Los Angeles with the Boyle Heights community. The 66-foot-wide viaduct is 3,500 feet long, with a four-lane roadway, no shoulders, and variable-width sidewalks. It was constructed in 1932 and concrete elements of the viaduct have cracked and deteriorated. Seismic vulnerability studies, completed in 2004, concluded that the viaduct, in its current state of material deterioration and lack of structural strength, has a high vulnerability to failure as a result of a major earthquake. Key issues include those related to the historic nature of the 6th Street Viaduct, opportunities for redevelopment of the surrounding area, and selection of a replacement bridge type for the main span over the Los Angeles River. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative 1) are analyzed in this final EIS. Under Alternative 2, the viaduct's columns would be seismically retrofitted and infill walls would be constructed between selected columns. New foundations, grade beams, retrofitting of bent caps, and closure of some expansion joints in the superstructure would be constructed. Alternative 3 is the preferred alternative and would replace the existing structure with a new viaduct along one of three alignments under consideration. Alignment 3B is preferred and would maintain the present location on the south side of the existing bridge from Mateo Street to Santa Fe Avenue, but would swing to the north approximately 85 feet farther than the existing alignment on the east side of the river, which would upgrade the existing non-standard curve radius at the east end. The preferred main-span bridge type is an extradosed (cable-supported) concrete box girder with dual pylons. The new 70-foot-wide roadway would consist of two 11-foot-wide lanes with an eight-foot-wide shoulder in each direction, a 10-foot-wide median, and 10-foot-wide sidewalks. The construction cost for the preferred alternative, alignment, and bridge type is estimated at $306 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would preserve 6th Street as a viable east-west link between Boyle Heights and downtown Los Angeles and would reduce the vulnerability of the viaduct in major earthquake events. The new bridge proposed under Alternative 3 would have a 75-year design life. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Demolition of the 6th Street Viaduct would eliminate a structure that has been determined eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. Right-of-way for the preferred alternative would require acquisition of several industrial buildings affecting up to 33 businesses, 11 of which would be subject to relocation. Construction of a replacement bridge would require full closure of the 6th Street Viaduct for up to four years and 13 out of 31 intersections under study would be impacted by detouring traffic. Railroad operations would be disrupted and relocation of some utility services would be required. Buildings proposed for demolition could contain asbestos which could cause health effects to workers. Construction would cause disproportionately high adverse effects on minority and low-income populations. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0308D, Volume 33, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 110374, Final EIS--522 pages, Appendices--354 pages, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Demolition KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Safety Analyses KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Seismic Surveys KW - Seismology KW - Structural Rehabilitation KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California 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/917563258?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SIXTH+STREET+VIADUCT+SEISMIC+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=SIXTH+STREET+VIADUCT+SEISMIC+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - California Department of Transportation, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-25 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - SIXTH STREET VIADUCT SEISMIC IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 915373361; 15131 AB - PURPOSE: Seismic improvement of the 6th Street Viaduct over the Los Angeles River and the 6th Street Overcrossing, which spans the US 101 Hollywood Freeway, Los Angeles County, California is proposed. These two bridges comprise a single structure which connects downtown Los Angeles with the Boyle Heights community. The 66-foot-wide viaduct is 3,500 feet long, with a four-lane roadway, no shoulders, and variable-width sidewalks. It was constructed in 1932 and concrete elements of the viaduct have cracked and deteriorated. Seismic vulnerability studies, completed in 2004, concluded that the viaduct, in its current state of material deterioration and lack of structural strength, has a high vulnerability to failure as a result of a major earthquake. Key issues include those related to the historic nature of the 6th Street Viaduct, opportunities for redevelopment of the surrounding area, and selection of a replacement bridge type for the main span over the Los Angeles River. Three alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative 1) are analyzed in this final EIS. Under Alternative 2, the viaduct's columns would be seismically retrofitted and infill walls would be constructed between selected columns. New foundations, grade beams, retrofitting of bent caps, and closure of some expansion joints in the superstructure would be constructed. Alternative 3 is the preferred alternative and would replace the existing structure with a new viaduct along one of three alignments under consideration. Alignment 3B is preferred and would maintain the present location on the south side of the existing bridge from Mateo Street to Santa Fe Avenue, but would swing to the north approximately 85 feet farther than the existing alignment on the east side of the river, which would upgrade the existing non-standard curve radius at the east end. The preferred main-span bridge type is an extradosed (cable-supported) concrete box girder with dual pylons. The new 70-foot-wide roadway would consist of two 11-foot-wide lanes with an eight-foot-wide shoulder in each direction, a 10-foot-wide median, and 10-foot-wide sidewalks. The construction cost for the preferred alternative, alignment, and bridge type is estimated at $306 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed project would preserve 6th Street as a viable east-west link between Boyle Heights and downtown Los Angeles and would reduce the vulnerability of the viaduct in major earthquake events. The new bridge proposed under Alternative 3 would have a 75-year design life. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Demolition of the 6th Street Viaduct would eliminate a structure that has been determined eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. Right-of-way for the preferred alternative would require acquisition of several industrial buildings affecting up to 33 businesses, 11 of which would be subject to relocation. Construction of a replacement bridge would require full closure of the 6th Street Viaduct for up to four years and 13 out of 31 intersections under study would be impacted by detouring traffic. Railroad operations would be disrupted and relocation of some utility services would be required. Buildings proposed for demolition could contain asbestos which could cause health effects to workers. Construction would cause disproportionately high adverse effects on minority and low-income populations. 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 09-0308D, Volume 33, Number 3. JF - EPA number: 110374, Final EIS--522 pages, Appendices--354 pages, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Demolition KW - Environmental Justice KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Municipal Services KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Railroads KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Safety Analyses KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Seismic Surveys KW - Seismology KW - Structural Rehabilitation KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - California 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/915373361?accountid=14244 L2 - http://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=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=SIXTH+STREET+VIADUCT+SEISMIC+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=SIXTH+STREET+VIADUCT+SEISMIC+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - California Department of Transportation, Los Angeles, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-12 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-25 IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH PUEBLO, PUEBLO COUNTY, COLORADO. AN - 915373002; 15125 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to the seven-mile segment of Interstate 25 (I-25) that passes through Pueblo, Colorado, from just south of US Highway 50 (US 50)/State Highway (SH) 47 to just south of Pueblo Boulevard, are proposed. The corridor, known as the Pueblo Freeway, was originally completed in 1959 and changes are required to address current and future transportation needs. I-25 serves as a critical north-south link in the nations Interstate Highway System and as a strategic international corridor under the North American Free Trade Act. Two build alternatives and a No Build Alternative are considered in this draft EIS. The Existing I-25 Alternative would widen I-25 to six lanes (three in each direction) from just north of 29th Street to Pueblo Boulevard on its current alignment. The interchanges at US 50B, Indiana Avenue, and Pueblo Boulevard would be reconstructed. Access to 29th Street would be provided via a frontage road and split-diamond interchanges would be created between 13th Street and 1st Street and Abriendo Avenue and Northern Avenue. Connectivity off of I-25 would be improved by extending Dillon Drive south from 26th Street to US 50B and by extending Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. The Modified I-25 Alternative, which is preferred, shares the design characteristics of the Existing I-25 Alternative, with the exception of the southern part of the corridor between the Arkansas River and Canal Street where the Existing I-25 Alternative can be implemented only by moving the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks 150 feet to the east to make room for widening I-25. As an alternative to moving the rail line, the Modified I-25 Alternative would relocate I-25 on a new alignment to the east at Ilex Street, which would allow the UPRR rail line south of the Arkansas River to remain in place. With the Modified I-25 Alternative, I-25 would bridge over the railroad tracks at Minnequa Avenue and then run on the west side of the tracks and rejoin the existing I-25 alignment. By straightening I-25 at Ilex Street, I-25 would leave the current alignment and continue south. The roadway portion no longer used as I-25 would be available to become an extension of Santa Fe Avenue, a critical element to improving local mobility. The Modified I-25 Alternative would extend Abriendo Avenue across I-25 to Santa Fe Drive. Under both build alternatives, the completion of proposed trails and sidewalks would provide continuous bicycle and pedestrian access between 29th Street in the north to Pueblo Boulevard in the south. The project would be constructed in phases, with phase one being the replacements of the Ilex Street bridges. The estimated costs for all the project improvements are $760.5 million in 2010 dollars. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would address deteriorating roadways and bridges and unsafe road characteristics. Local and regional mobility within and through Pueblo would be improved to meet existing and future travel demands. Trails would provide safe, non-motorized access to Mineral Palace Park, Benedict Park, JJ Raigoza Park, the Historic Arkansas Riverwalk of Pueblo, the Runyon Field Sports Complex, the Runyon Lake State Wildlife Area, and the Fountain Creek Trail system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would cause direct loss of 1.1 acres of wetlands and 18.1 acres of wildlife habitat and temporary impacts to road traffic, trails and UPRR operations. For the preferred alternative, acquisitions would include: 117 residences; 56 total and 26 partial commercial properties; and 15 total and 15 partial public properties. Construction of four new bridges over the Arkansas River would require relocation of trails and an existing pedestrian bridge. Implementation of the preferred alternative would cause adverse effects to 40 historic resources, including the North Side, Second Ward, Steelworks Suburbs, and Grove historic districts. Noise impacts would be mitigated through construction of 21,525 feet of noise walls. 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: 110368, Draft EIS--516 pages and maps, Appendices--CD-ROM, November 4, 2011 PY - 2011 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CO-EIS-11-01-D KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Districts KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Railroads KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado 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/915373002?accountid=14244 L2 - http://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=2011-11-04&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=I-25+IMPROVEMENTS+THROUGH+PUEBLO%2C+PUEBLO+COUNTY%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: November 4, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-12 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Failure mechanics of the Nile Valley landslide, Yakima County, Washington AN - 911677822; 2012-005466 AB - On October 11, 2009, a very large translational landslide, referred to as the Nile Valley Landslide (NVL), destroyed more than 2500 ft (750 m) of State Route 410 near the community of Nile, located about 25 mi northwest of Yakima, Washington. Based on eyewitness accounts, Pacific Northwest Seismic Network records, and an intensive subsurface investigation, we infer two translational failure mechanisms: an initial shallow failure within the unconsolidated surficial deposits, followed by failure within a deep, adversely dipping, claystone interbed between two Grand Ronde Basalt flows. The underlying basalt flow contains a highly pressurized aquifer that significantly reduces the effective stress within the inferred deep failure zone and its stability. Recent inclinometer data showing slope movement within both the shallow and deep failure zones support this interpretation. The NVL is located at the base of Cleman Mountain, an anticlinal ridge that hosts the enormous and currently dormant Sanford Pasture landslide complex (SPLC). Geochemical analyses of basalts encountered in the numerous borings and outcrops within and around the NVL suggest that the basal failure zones of the NVL and SPLC are stratigraphically different and that the NVL is likely not a reactivation of the SPLC. JF - Environmental & Engineering Geoscience AU - Badger, Thomas C AU - Smith, Eric L AU - Lowell, Steve M Y1 - 2011/11// PY - 2011 DA - November 2011 SP - 353 EP - 376 PB - Association of Environmental & Engineering Geologists and The Geological Society of America, College Station, TX VL - 17 IS - 4 SN - 1078-7275, 1078-7275 KW - United States KW - Naches River KW - uplifts KW - mechanism KW - Cleman Mountain KW - erosion features KW - Cenozoic KW - substrates KW - Yakima County Washington KW - seismicity KW - mass movements KW - stratigraphy KW - soil mechanics KW - failures KW - Washington KW - Nile Valley landslide KW - Grande Ronde Basalt KW - Nile Washington KW - Miocene KW - landslides KW - Tertiary KW - detection KW - Neogene KW - unconsolidated materials KW - slope stability KW - 30:Engineering geology KW - 23:Geomorphology UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/911677822?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=Environmental+%26+Engineering+Geoscience&rft.atitle=Failure+mechanics+of+the+Nile+Valley+landslide%2C+Yakima+County%2C+Washington&rft.au=Badger%2C+Thomas+C%3BSmith%2C+Eric+L%3BLowell%2C+Steve+M&rft.aulast=Badger&rft.aufirst=Thomas&rft.date=2011-11-01&rft.volume=17&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=353&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Environmental+%26+Engineering+Geoscience&rft.issn=10787275&rft_id=info:doi/10.2113%2Fgseegeosci.17.4.353 L2 - http://eeg.geoscienceworld.org/ LA - English DB - GeoRef N1 - Copyright - GeoRef, Copyright 2012, American Geosciences Institute. Abstract, Copyright, Association of Engineering Geologists and the Geological Society of America | Reference includes data from GeoScienceWorld, Alexandria, VA, United States N1 - Date revised - 2012-01-01 N1 - Number of references - 18 N1 - PubXState - TX N1 - Document feature - illus. incl. sects., 3 tables, geol. sketch maps N1 - Last updated - 2012-06-07 N1 - CODEN - ENGEA9 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Cenozoic; Cleman Mountain; detection; erosion features; failures; Grande Ronde Basalt; landslides; mass movements; mechanism; Miocene; Naches River; Neogene; Nile Valley landslide; Nile Washington; seismicity; slope stability; soil mechanics; stratigraphy; substrates; Tertiary; unconsolidated materials; United States; uplifts; Washington; Yakima County Washington DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.2113/gseegeosci.17.4.353 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Risk-based siting considerations for LNG terminals - Comparative perspectives of United States & Europe AN - 899165791; 15795051 AB - Siting regulations and industrial standards for liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminals are evolving along different paths within Europe and the United States (U.S.). The 49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 190 continues to delineate the United States process to adopt and revise safety regulations pertaining to LNG terminals and peak shaving plant sitting. Embodied in these regulations are rich legal and regulatory traditions that are unique to the U.S. perspective. For example, the public is encouraged to petition existing regulations and to comment on regulatory proposals. Litigation within the U.S. court system is another means by which industry and the public may seek regulatory change. This approach promotes public involvement in governmental oversight and creates a distinctive obligation and accountability for U.S. regulatory agencies, which uniquely shape technical, safety, risk mitigation, and societal risk perspectives for siting LNG terminals. European traditions shape siting regulations for LNG terminals as well. Though American siting guidance includes references to the National Fire Protection Association's NFPA 59A and 49 CFR, Part 193, European developers also apply the guidance within EN 1473 - a risk-based case-by-case analysis directive. The NFPA 59A standard is applied for a basis to examine property line spacing as they pertain or may relate to off-site hazard impacts. The European approach applies the assessment and suitability of code compliance and the application of accepted engineering practices. In addition the approach incorporates the application of empirical risk assessments and computational modeling to reach an understanding of risk exposures. European policies set limits on the population's cumulative exposure to facility risks and require LNG facility developers not to exceed established risk criteria. This paper describes how the U.S. and Europe site LNG terminals, identifies key differences in their risk-based approaches, and explains why these differences exist. This discussion also examines historical precedents that have influenced regulations and approval processes for siting LNG terminals within each continent. JF - Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries AU - Licari, Frank A AU - Weimer, CDavid AD - Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE, Washington, DC, USA, frank.licari@dot.gov Y1 - 2011/11// PY - 2011 DA - Nov 2011 SP - 736 EP - 752 PB - Elsevier B.V., The Boulevard Kidlington Oxford OX5 1GB United Kingdom VL - 24 IS - 6 SN - 0950-4230, 0950-4230 KW - Risk Abstracts; Health & Safety Science Abstracts KW - Risk-based siting KW - LNG terminals KW - Comparative perspectives of United States & Europe KW - Regulatory analysis KW - Key siting differences KW - Risk assessment KW - Fires KW - USA KW - Federal regulations KW - Liquefied natural gas KW - safety engineering KW - public involvement KW - safety regulations KW - Europe KW - traditions KW - Litigation KW - R2 23090:Policy and planning KW - H 7000:Fire Safety UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/899165791?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+Loss+Prevention+in+the+Process+Industries&rft.atitle=Risk-based+siting+considerations+for+LNG+terminals+-+Comparative+perspectives+of+United+States+%26amp%3B+Europe&rft.au=Licari%2C+Frank+A%3BWeimer%2C+CDavid&rft.aulast=Licari&rft.aufirst=Frank&rft.date=2011-11-01&rft.volume=24&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=736&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Journal+of+Loss+Prevention+in+the+Process+Industries&rft.issn=09504230&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016%2Fj.jlp.2011.04.009 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - Last updated - 2015-03-19 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Risk assessment; Fires; Federal regulations; safety engineering; Liquefied natural gas; safety regulations; public involvement; traditions; Litigation; USA; Europe DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2011.04.009 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Application of Improved Quantitative Theory in Prediction of Road Section Accident Rate AN - 1257746717; 17433535 AB - Traffic accident prediction model is built to accurately judge the traffic safety of road sections in this paper. Firstly, accident rate of road section is selected as the prediction objective, and seven factors, including driving years, number of lanes, radius of horizontal curve, longitudinal grade, road surface status, type of intersection and width of road surface, are selected as major influencing factors, which are further classified into many items. Then based on quantitative theories, an improved traffic accidents prediction model is established. To verify this model, an application in an accident-prone section 333.5 km to 334.0 km is carried out with the data of road accident and actual structure from 222.888 km to 377.387 km on the same national highway as an example. The calculating result indicates that the three-way intersection has the greatest influence on road traffic, next are less than 3 years of driving experience and crossroad on this road. JF - Zhongguo Anquan Kexue Xuebao / China Safety Science Journal AU - Qin, Li-Yan AU - Qin, Yu-Quan AU - Shao, Chun-Fu AU - Zhang, Meng AD - Department of Transportation & Logistics, Shandong Jiaotong University, Ji'nan Shandong 250023, China, qly72@sina.com Y1 - 2011/11// PY - 2011 DA - Nov 2011 SP - 87 EP - 91 PB - Zhongguo Laodong Baohu Kexue Jishu Xuehui Bianji Chubanbu, A4, Section 9, Hepingli Dongcheng District Beijing 100013 VL - 21 IS - 11 SN - 1003-3033, 1003-3033 KW - Health & Safety Science Abstracts KW - Prediction KW - Accidents KW - Driving ability KW - Prediction models KW - Traffic safety KW - Highways KW - Traffic KW - H 2000:Transportation UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1257746717?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=Zhongguo+Anquan+Kexue+Xuebao+%2F+China+Safety+Science+Journal&rft.atitle=Application+of+Improved+Quantitative+Theory+in+Prediction+of+Road+Section+Accident+Rate&rft.au=Qin%2C+Li-Yan%3BQin%2C+Yu-Quan%3BShao%2C+Chun-Fu%3BZhang%2C+Meng&rft.aulast=Qin&rft.aufirst=Li-Yan&rft.date=2011-11-01&rft.volume=21&rft.issue=11&rft.spage=87&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 - 5 N1 - Last updated - 2015-03-19 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Prediction; Accidents; Driving ability; Prediction models; Traffic safety; Highways; Traffic ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Taking Care of Children: The Case for Booster Seats AN - 1010708960; 201208776 AB - Around the age of 4 years, many children will outgrow their forward-harnessed car seats. Both the American Academy of Pediatrics and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration recommend the use of a booster seat until adult belts fit correctly. [Copyright Elsevier B.V.] JF - Journal of Emergency Nursing AU - Kuska, Thelma AD - National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (US Department of Transportation), Palos Heights, IL Y1 - 2011/11// PY - 2011 DA - November 2011 SP - 580 EP - 583 PB - Elsevier Ltd, The Netherlands VL - 37 IS - 6 SN - 0099-1767, 0099-1767 KW - Paediatrics KW - Safety KW - Universities KW - Children KW - Traffic KW - article UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1010708960?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%3Aassia&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Journal+of+Emergency+Nursing&rft.atitle=Taking+Care+of+Children%3A+The+Case+for+Booster+Seats&rft.au=Kuska%2C+Thelma&rft.aulast=Kuska&rft.aufirst=Thelma&rft.date=2011-11-01&rft.volume=37&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=580&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Journal+of+Emergency+Nursing&rft.issn=00991767&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016%2Fj.jen.2011.07.015%2C LA - English DB - Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA) N1 - Date revised - 2012-05-01 N1 - Last updated - 2016-09-27 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Children; Safety; Universities; Traffic; Paediatrics DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jen.2011.07.015, ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. [Part 8 of 16] T2 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. AN - 916688040; 15122-5_0008 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a five-lane arterial roadway, known as the Provo Westside Connector (PWC), between Provo Airport and the vicinity of the Interstate 15 (I-15) Interchange with University Avenue and 1860 South Street in Provo, Utah is proposed. The project area is located in southwest Provo and includes the neighborhoods of Provo Bay, Sunset, and Lakewood. The Provo Airport and other commercial properties are currently accessed by passing through residential neighborhoods along Center Street and 3110 West Street. As the planned conversion from agricultural land uses to commercial land uses continues, and as residential areas expand, commercial vehicle use of residential roads will increase and exacerbate safety concerns. In addition to the PWC, the proposed improvements would include the extension of existing residential collector streets 500 West and 1150 West to intersect with the proposed arterial, a 10-foot-wide paved bicycle and pedestrian trail, and parking pull-outs to access the trail. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. The three build alternatives include the 1860 South Alternative and two versions of the I-15 Overpass/Underpass Alternative, the University Avenue A Alternative and the University Avenue B Alternative. The 1860 South Alternative was selected as the preferred alternative based on public comment preferences, agency comment preferences, reduced land use impacts, superior transportation performance, lack of visual impacts, lack of noise impacts, fewer commercial property impacts, and practicable avoidance and minimization of wetland impacts. Construction costs of the preferred alternative are estimated at $57.2 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new roadway would support planned development in southwest Provo, planned improvements at the Provo Airport, and related commercial and industrial development in the vicinity of the airport. The direct roadway link between the residential areas west of I-15 and the commercial center of Provo east of I-15, including the Provo Towne Centre Mall, would support the continued economic viability of the commercial center of Provo. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way would require acquisition and pavement of 121.6 acres and commercial property take of 11,000 square feet. Project implementation would impact 9.3 acres of wetlands, 1,594 linear feet of streams, 93 acres of mixed-use agriculture habitat, and 15.3 acres of residential wildlife habitat The proposed project would affect a relatively small portion of a historic canal and irrigation system. 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 10-0474D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110365, Final EIS--380 pages, Appendices and Maps--296 pages, October 28, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-10-01-F KW - Highways KW - Airports KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Use KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Utah 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/916688040?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-28&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 28, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-19 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. [Part 7 of 16] T2 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. AN - 916688031; 15122-5_0007 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a five-lane arterial roadway, known as the Provo Westside Connector (PWC), between Provo Airport and the vicinity of the Interstate 15 (I-15) Interchange with University Avenue and 1860 South Street in Provo, Utah is proposed. The project area is located in southwest Provo and includes the neighborhoods of Provo Bay, Sunset, and Lakewood. The Provo Airport and other commercial properties are currently accessed by passing through residential neighborhoods along Center Street and 3110 West Street. As the planned conversion from agricultural land uses to commercial land uses continues, and as residential areas expand, commercial vehicle use of residential roads will increase and exacerbate safety concerns. In addition to the PWC, the proposed improvements would include the extension of existing residential collector streets 500 West and 1150 West to intersect with the proposed arterial, a 10-foot-wide paved bicycle and pedestrian trail, and parking pull-outs to access the trail. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. The three build alternatives include the 1860 South Alternative and two versions of the I-15 Overpass/Underpass Alternative, the University Avenue A Alternative and the University Avenue B Alternative. The 1860 South Alternative was selected as the preferred alternative based on public comment preferences, agency comment preferences, reduced land use impacts, superior transportation performance, lack of visual impacts, lack of noise impacts, fewer commercial property impacts, and practicable avoidance and minimization of wetland impacts. Construction costs of the preferred alternative are estimated at $57.2 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new roadway would support planned development in southwest Provo, planned improvements at the Provo Airport, and related commercial and industrial development in the vicinity of the airport. The direct roadway link between the residential areas west of I-15 and the commercial center of Provo east of I-15, including the Provo Towne Centre Mall, would support the continued economic viability of the commercial center of Provo. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way would require acquisition and pavement of 121.6 acres and commercial property take of 11,000 square feet. Project implementation would impact 9.3 acres of wetlands, 1,594 linear feet of streams, 93 acres of mixed-use agriculture habitat, and 15.3 acres of residential wildlife habitat The proposed project would affect a relatively small portion of a historic canal and irrigation system. 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 10-0474D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110365, Final EIS--380 pages, Appendices and Maps--296 pages, October 28, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-10-01-F KW - Highways KW - Airports KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Use KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Utah 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/916688031?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-28&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 28, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-19 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. [Part 6 of 16] T2 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. AN - 916688024; 15122-5_0006 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a five-lane arterial roadway, known as the Provo Westside Connector (PWC), between Provo Airport and the vicinity of the Interstate 15 (I-15) Interchange with University Avenue and 1860 South Street in Provo, Utah is proposed. The project area is located in southwest Provo and includes the neighborhoods of Provo Bay, Sunset, and Lakewood. The Provo Airport and other commercial properties are currently accessed by passing through residential neighborhoods along Center Street and 3110 West Street. As the planned conversion from agricultural land uses to commercial land uses continues, and as residential areas expand, commercial vehicle use of residential roads will increase and exacerbate safety concerns. In addition to the PWC, the proposed improvements would include the extension of existing residential collector streets 500 West and 1150 West to intersect with the proposed arterial, a 10-foot-wide paved bicycle and pedestrian trail, and parking pull-outs to access the trail. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. The three build alternatives include the 1860 South Alternative and two versions of the I-15 Overpass/Underpass Alternative, the University Avenue A Alternative and the University Avenue B Alternative. The 1860 South Alternative was selected as the preferred alternative based on public comment preferences, agency comment preferences, reduced land use impacts, superior transportation performance, lack of visual impacts, lack of noise impacts, fewer commercial property impacts, and practicable avoidance and minimization of wetland impacts. Construction costs of the preferred alternative are estimated at $57.2 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new roadway would support planned development in southwest Provo, planned improvements at the Provo Airport, and related commercial and industrial development in the vicinity of the airport. The direct roadway link between the residential areas west of I-15 and the commercial center of Provo east of I-15, including the Provo Towne Centre Mall, would support the continued economic viability of the commercial center of Provo. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way would require acquisition and pavement of 121.6 acres and commercial property take of 11,000 square feet. Project implementation would impact 9.3 acres of wetlands, 1,594 linear feet of streams, 93 acres of mixed-use agriculture habitat, and 15.3 acres of residential wildlife habitat The proposed project would affect a relatively small portion of a historic canal and irrigation system. 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 10-0474D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110365, Final EIS--380 pages, Appendices and Maps--296 pages, October 28, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-10-01-F KW - Highways KW - Airports KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Use KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Utah 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/916688024?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-28&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 28, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-19 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. [Part 4 of 16] T2 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. AN - 916688000; 15122-5_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a five-lane arterial roadway, known as the Provo Westside Connector (PWC), between Provo Airport and the vicinity of the Interstate 15 (I-15) Interchange with University Avenue and 1860 South Street in Provo, Utah is proposed. The project area is located in southwest Provo and includes the neighborhoods of Provo Bay, Sunset, and Lakewood. The Provo Airport and other commercial properties are currently accessed by passing through residential neighborhoods along Center Street and 3110 West Street. As the planned conversion from agricultural land uses to commercial land uses continues, and as residential areas expand, commercial vehicle use of residential roads will increase and exacerbate safety concerns. In addition to the PWC, the proposed improvements would include the extension of existing residential collector streets 500 West and 1150 West to intersect with the proposed arterial, a 10-foot-wide paved bicycle and pedestrian trail, and parking pull-outs to access the trail. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. The three build alternatives include the 1860 South Alternative and two versions of the I-15 Overpass/Underpass Alternative, the University Avenue A Alternative and the University Avenue B Alternative. The 1860 South Alternative was selected as the preferred alternative based on public comment preferences, agency comment preferences, reduced land use impacts, superior transportation performance, lack of visual impacts, lack of noise impacts, fewer commercial property impacts, and practicable avoidance and minimization of wetland impacts. Construction costs of the preferred alternative are estimated at $57.2 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new roadway would support planned development in southwest Provo, planned improvements at the Provo Airport, and related commercial and industrial development in the vicinity of the airport. The direct roadway link between the residential areas west of I-15 and the commercial center of Provo east of I-15, including the Provo Towne Centre Mall, would support the continued economic viability of the commercial center of Provo. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way would require acquisition and pavement of 121.6 acres and commercial property take of 11,000 square feet. Project implementation would impact 9.3 acres of wetlands, 1,594 linear feet of streams, 93 acres of mixed-use agriculture habitat, and 15.3 acres of residential wildlife habitat The proposed project would affect a relatively small portion of a historic canal and irrigation system. 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 10-0474D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110365, Final EIS--380 pages, Appendices and Maps--296 pages, October 28, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-10-01-F KW - Highways KW - Airports KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Use KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Utah 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/916688000?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-28&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 28, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-19 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. [Part 14 of 16] T2 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. AN - 916687914; 15122-5_0014 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a five-lane arterial roadway, known as the Provo Westside Connector (PWC), between Provo Airport and the vicinity of the Interstate 15 (I-15) Interchange with University Avenue and 1860 South Street in Provo, Utah is proposed. The project area is located in southwest Provo and includes the neighborhoods of Provo Bay, Sunset, and Lakewood. The Provo Airport and other commercial properties are currently accessed by passing through residential neighborhoods along Center Street and 3110 West Street. As the planned conversion from agricultural land uses to commercial land uses continues, and as residential areas expand, commercial vehicle use of residential roads will increase and exacerbate safety concerns. In addition to the PWC, the proposed improvements would include the extension of existing residential collector streets 500 West and 1150 West to intersect with the proposed arterial, a 10-foot-wide paved bicycle and pedestrian trail, and parking pull-outs to access the trail. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. The three build alternatives include the 1860 South Alternative and two versions of the I-15 Overpass/Underpass Alternative, the University Avenue A Alternative and the University Avenue B Alternative. The 1860 South Alternative was selected as the preferred alternative based on public comment preferences, agency comment preferences, reduced land use impacts, superior transportation performance, lack of visual impacts, lack of noise impacts, fewer commercial property impacts, and practicable avoidance and minimization of wetland impacts. Construction costs of the preferred alternative are estimated at $57.2 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new roadway would support planned development in southwest Provo, planned improvements at the Provo Airport, and related commercial and industrial development in the vicinity of the airport. The direct roadway link between the residential areas west of I-15 and the commercial center of Provo east of I-15, including the Provo Towne Centre Mall, would support the continued economic viability of the commercial center of Provo. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way would require acquisition and pavement of 121.6 acres and commercial property take of 11,000 square feet. Project implementation would impact 9.3 acres of wetlands, 1,594 linear feet of streams, 93 acres of mixed-use agriculture habitat, and 15.3 acres of residential wildlife habitat The proposed project would affect a relatively small portion of a historic canal and irrigation system. 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 10-0474D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110365, Final EIS--380 pages, Appendices and Maps--296 pages, October 28, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 14 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-10-01-F KW - Highways KW - Airports KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Use KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Utah 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/916687914?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-28&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 28, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-19 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. [Part 13 of 16] T2 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. AN - 916687910; 15122-5_0013 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a five-lane arterial roadway, known as the Provo Westside Connector (PWC), between Provo Airport and the vicinity of the Interstate 15 (I-15) Interchange with University Avenue and 1860 South Street in Provo, Utah is proposed. The project area is located in southwest Provo and includes the neighborhoods of Provo Bay, Sunset, and Lakewood. The Provo Airport and other commercial properties are currently accessed by passing through residential neighborhoods along Center Street and 3110 West Street. As the planned conversion from agricultural land uses to commercial land uses continues, and as residential areas expand, commercial vehicle use of residential roads will increase and exacerbate safety concerns. In addition to the PWC, the proposed improvements would include the extension of existing residential collector streets 500 West and 1150 West to intersect with the proposed arterial, a 10-foot-wide paved bicycle and pedestrian trail, and parking pull-outs to access the trail. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. The three build alternatives include the 1860 South Alternative and two versions of the I-15 Overpass/Underpass Alternative, the University Avenue A Alternative and the University Avenue B Alternative. The 1860 South Alternative was selected as the preferred alternative based on public comment preferences, agency comment preferences, reduced land use impacts, superior transportation performance, lack of visual impacts, lack of noise impacts, fewer commercial property impacts, and practicable avoidance and minimization of wetland impacts. Construction costs of the preferred alternative are estimated at $57.2 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new roadway would support planned development in southwest Provo, planned improvements at the Provo Airport, and related commercial and industrial development in the vicinity of the airport. The direct roadway link between the residential areas west of I-15 and the commercial center of Provo east of I-15, including the Provo Towne Centre Mall, would support the continued economic viability of the commercial center of Provo. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way would require acquisition and pavement of 121.6 acres and commercial property take of 11,000 square feet. Project implementation would impact 9.3 acres of wetlands, 1,594 linear feet of streams, 93 acres of mixed-use agriculture habitat, and 15.3 acres of residential wildlife habitat The proposed project would affect a relatively small portion of a historic canal and irrigation system. 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 10-0474D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110365, Final EIS--380 pages, Appendices and Maps--296 pages, October 28, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 13 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-10-01-F KW - Highways KW - Airports KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Use KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Utah 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/916687910?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-28&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 28, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-19 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. [Part 12 of 16] T2 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. AN - 916687905; 15122-5_0012 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a five-lane arterial roadway, known as the Provo Westside Connector (PWC), between Provo Airport and the vicinity of the Interstate 15 (I-15) Interchange with University Avenue and 1860 South Street in Provo, Utah is proposed. The project area is located in southwest Provo and includes the neighborhoods of Provo Bay, Sunset, and Lakewood. The Provo Airport and other commercial properties are currently accessed by passing through residential neighborhoods along Center Street and 3110 West Street. As the planned conversion from agricultural land uses to commercial land uses continues, and as residential areas expand, commercial vehicle use of residential roads will increase and exacerbate safety concerns. In addition to the PWC, the proposed improvements would include the extension of existing residential collector streets 500 West and 1150 West to intersect with the proposed arterial, a 10-foot-wide paved bicycle and pedestrian trail, and parking pull-outs to access the trail. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. The three build alternatives include the 1860 South Alternative and two versions of the I-15 Overpass/Underpass Alternative, the University Avenue A Alternative and the University Avenue B Alternative. The 1860 South Alternative was selected as the preferred alternative based on public comment preferences, agency comment preferences, reduced land use impacts, superior transportation performance, lack of visual impacts, lack of noise impacts, fewer commercial property impacts, and practicable avoidance and minimization of wetland impacts. Construction costs of the preferred alternative are estimated at $57.2 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new roadway would support planned development in southwest Provo, planned improvements at the Provo Airport, and related commercial and industrial development in the vicinity of the airport. The direct roadway link between the residential areas west of I-15 and the commercial center of Provo east of I-15, including the Provo Towne Centre Mall, would support the continued economic viability of the commercial center of Provo. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way would require acquisition and pavement of 121.6 acres and commercial property take of 11,000 square feet. Project implementation would impact 9.3 acres of wetlands, 1,594 linear feet of streams, 93 acres of mixed-use agriculture habitat, and 15.3 acres of residential wildlife habitat The proposed project would affect a relatively small portion of a historic canal and irrigation system. 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 10-0474D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110365, Final EIS--380 pages, Appendices and Maps--296 pages, October 28, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 12 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-10-01-F KW - Highways KW - Airports KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Use KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Utah 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/916687905?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-28&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 28, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-19 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. [Part 11 of 16] T2 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. AN - 916687899; 15122-5_0011 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a five-lane arterial roadway, known as the Provo Westside Connector (PWC), between Provo Airport and the vicinity of the Interstate 15 (I-15) Interchange with University Avenue and 1860 South Street in Provo, Utah is proposed. The project area is located in southwest Provo and includes the neighborhoods of Provo Bay, Sunset, and Lakewood. The Provo Airport and other commercial properties are currently accessed by passing through residential neighborhoods along Center Street and 3110 West Street. As the planned conversion from agricultural land uses to commercial land uses continues, and as residential areas expand, commercial vehicle use of residential roads will increase and exacerbate safety concerns. In addition to the PWC, the proposed improvements would include the extension of existing residential collector streets 500 West and 1150 West to intersect with the proposed arterial, a 10-foot-wide paved bicycle and pedestrian trail, and parking pull-outs to access the trail. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. The three build alternatives include the 1860 South Alternative and two versions of the I-15 Overpass/Underpass Alternative, the University Avenue A Alternative and the University Avenue B Alternative. The 1860 South Alternative was selected as the preferred alternative based on public comment preferences, agency comment preferences, reduced land use impacts, superior transportation performance, lack of visual impacts, lack of noise impacts, fewer commercial property impacts, and practicable avoidance and minimization of wetland impacts. Construction costs of the preferred alternative are estimated at $57.2 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new roadway would support planned development in southwest Provo, planned improvements at the Provo Airport, and related commercial and industrial development in the vicinity of the airport. The direct roadway link between the residential areas west of I-15 and the commercial center of Provo east of I-15, including the Provo Towne Centre Mall, would support the continued economic viability of the commercial center of Provo. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way would require acquisition and pavement of 121.6 acres and commercial property take of 11,000 square feet. Project implementation would impact 9.3 acres of wetlands, 1,594 linear feet of streams, 93 acres of mixed-use agriculture habitat, and 15.3 acres of residential wildlife habitat The proposed project would affect a relatively small portion of a historic canal and irrigation system. 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 10-0474D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110365, Final EIS--380 pages, Appendices and Maps--296 pages, October 28, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 11 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-10-01-F KW - Highways KW - Airports KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Use KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Utah 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/916687899?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-28&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 28, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-19 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. [Part 10 of 16] T2 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. AN - 916687896; 15122-5_0010 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a five-lane arterial roadway, known as the Provo Westside Connector (PWC), between Provo Airport and the vicinity of the Interstate 15 (I-15) Interchange with University Avenue and 1860 South Street in Provo, Utah is proposed. The project area is located in southwest Provo and includes the neighborhoods of Provo Bay, Sunset, and Lakewood. The Provo Airport and other commercial properties are currently accessed by passing through residential neighborhoods along Center Street and 3110 West Street. As the planned conversion from agricultural land uses to commercial land uses continues, and as residential areas expand, commercial vehicle use of residential roads will increase and exacerbate safety concerns. In addition to the PWC, the proposed improvements would include the extension of existing residential collector streets 500 West and 1150 West to intersect with the proposed arterial, a 10-foot-wide paved bicycle and pedestrian trail, and parking pull-outs to access the trail. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. The three build alternatives include the 1860 South Alternative and two versions of the I-15 Overpass/Underpass Alternative, the University Avenue A Alternative and the University Avenue B Alternative. The 1860 South Alternative was selected as the preferred alternative based on public comment preferences, agency comment preferences, reduced land use impacts, superior transportation performance, lack of visual impacts, lack of noise impacts, fewer commercial property impacts, and practicable avoidance and minimization of wetland impacts. Construction costs of the preferred alternative are estimated at $57.2 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new roadway would support planned development in southwest Provo, planned improvements at the Provo Airport, and related commercial and industrial development in the vicinity of the airport. The direct roadway link between the residential areas west of I-15 and the commercial center of Provo east of I-15, including the Provo Towne Centre Mall, would support the continued economic viability of the commercial center of Provo. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way would require acquisition and pavement of 121.6 acres and commercial property take of 11,000 square feet. Project implementation would impact 9.3 acres of wetlands, 1,594 linear feet of streams, 93 acres of mixed-use agriculture habitat, and 15.3 acres of residential wildlife habitat The proposed project would affect a relatively small portion of a historic canal and irrigation system. 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 10-0474D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110365, Final EIS--380 pages, Appendices and Maps--296 pages, October 28, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-10-01-F KW - Highways KW - Airports KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Use KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Utah 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/916687896?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-28&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 28, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-19 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. [Part 9 of 16] T2 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. AN - 916687888; 15122-5_0009 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a five-lane arterial roadway, known as the Provo Westside Connector (PWC), between Provo Airport and the vicinity of the Interstate 15 (I-15) Interchange with University Avenue and 1860 South Street in Provo, Utah is proposed. The project area is located in southwest Provo and includes the neighborhoods of Provo Bay, Sunset, and Lakewood. The Provo Airport and other commercial properties are currently accessed by passing through residential neighborhoods along Center Street and 3110 West Street. As the planned conversion from agricultural land uses to commercial land uses continues, and as residential areas expand, commercial vehicle use of residential roads will increase and exacerbate safety concerns. In addition to the PWC, the proposed improvements would include the extension of existing residential collector streets 500 West and 1150 West to intersect with the proposed arterial, a 10-foot-wide paved bicycle and pedestrian trail, and parking pull-outs to access the trail. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. The three build alternatives include the 1860 South Alternative and two versions of the I-15 Overpass/Underpass Alternative, the University Avenue A Alternative and the University Avenue B Alternative. The 1860 South Alternative was selected as the preferred alternative based on public comment preferences, agency comment preferences, reduced land use impacts, superior transportation performance, lack of visual impacts, lack of noise impacts, fewer commercial property impacts, and practicable avoidance and minimization of wetland impacts. Construction costs of the preferred alternative are estimated at $57.2 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new roadway would support planned development in southwest Provo, planned improvements at the Provo Airport, and related commercial and industrial development in the vicinity of the airport. The direct roadway link between the residential areas west of I-15 and the commercial center of Provo east of I-15, including the Provo Towne Centre Mall, would support the continued economic viability of the commercial center of Provo. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way would require acquisition and pavement of 121.6 acres and commercial property take of 11,000 square feet. Project implementation would impact 9.3 acres of wetlands, 1,594 linear feet of streams, 93 acres of mixed-use agriculture habitat, and 15.3 acres of residential wildlife habitat The proposed project would affect a relatively small portion of a historic canal and irrigation system. 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 10-0474D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110365, Final EIS--380 pages, Appendices and Maps--296 pages, October 28, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 9 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-10-01-F KW - Highways KW - Airports KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Use KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Utah 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/916687888?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-28&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 28, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-19 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. [Part 16 of 16] T2 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. AN - 916687673; 15122-5_0016 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a five-lane arterial roadway, known as the Provo Westside Connector (PWC), between Provo Airport and the vicinity of the Interstate 15 (I-15) Interchange with University Avenue and 1860 South Street in Provo, Utah is proposed. The project area is located in southwest Provo and includes the neighborhoods of Provo Bay, Sunset, and Lakewood. The Provo Airport and other commercial properties are currently accessed by passing through residential neighborhoods along Center Street and 3110 West Street. As the planned conversion from agricultural land uses to commercial land uses continues, and as residential areas expand, commercial vehicle use of residential roads will increase and exacerbate safety concerns. In addition to the PWC, the proposed improvements would include the extension of existing residential collector streets 500 West and 1150 West to intersect with the proposed arterial, a 10-foot-wide paved bicycle and pedestrian trail, and parking pull-outs to access the trail. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. The three build alternatives include the 1860 South Alternative and two versions of the I-15 Overpass/Underpass Alternative, the University Avenue A Alternative and the University Avenue B Alternative. The 1860 South Alternative was selected as the preferred alternative based on public comment preferences, agency comment preferences, reduced land use impacts, superior transportation performance, lack of visual impacts, lack of noise impacts, fewer commercial property impacts, and practicable avoidance and minimization of wetland impacts. Construction costs of the preferred alternative are estimated at $57.2 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new roadway would support planned development in southwest Provo, planned improvements at the Provo Airport, and related commercial and industrial development in the vicinity of the airport. The direct roadway link between the residential areas west of I-15 and the commercial center of Provo east of I-15, including the Provo Towne Centre Mall, would support the continued economic viability of the commercial center of Provo. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way would require acquisition and pavement of 121.6 acres and commercial property take of 11,000 square feet. Project implementation would impact 9.3 acres of wetlands, 1,594 linear feet of streams, 93 acres of mixed-use agriculture habitat, and 15.3 acres of residential wildlife habitat The proposed project would affect a relatively small portion of a historic canal and irrigation system. 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 10-0474D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110365, Final EIS--380 pages, Appendices and Maps--296 pages, October 28, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 16 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-10-01-F KW - Highways KW - Airports KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Use KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Utah 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/916687673?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-28&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 28, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-19 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. [Part 15 of 16] T2 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. AN - 916687663; 15122-5_0015 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a five-lane arterial roadway, known as the Provo Westside Connector (PWC), between Provo Airport and the vicinity of the Interstate 15 (I-15) Interchange with University Avenue and 1860 South Street in Provo, Utah is proposed. The project area is located in southwest Provo and includes the neighborhoods of Provo Bay, Sunset, and Lakewood. The Provo Airport and other commercial properties are currently accessed by passing through residential neighborhoods along Center Street and 3110 West Street. As the planned conversion from agricultural land uses to commercial land uses continues, and as residential areas expand, commercial vehicle use of residential roads will increase and exacerbate safety concerns. In addition to the PWC, the proposed improvements would include the extension of existing residential collector streets 500 West and 1150 West to intersect with the proposed arterial, a 10-foot-wide paved bicycle and pedestrian trail, and parking pull-outs to access the trail. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. The three build alternatives include the 1860 South Alternative and two versions of the I-15 Overpass/Underpass Alternative, the University Avenue A Alternative and the University Avenue B Alternative. The 1860 South Alternative was selected as the preferred alternative based on public comment preferences, agency comment preferences, reduced land use impacts, superior transportation performance, lack of visual impacts, lack of noise impacts, fewer commercial property impacts, and practicable avoidance and minimization of wetland impacts. Construction costs of the preferred alternative are estimated at $57.2 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new roadway would support planned development in southwest Provo, planned improvements at the Provo Airport, and related commercial and industrial development in the vicinity of the airport. The direct roadway link between the residential areas west of I-15 and the commercial center of Provo east of I-15, including the Provo Towne Centre Mall, would support the continued economic viability of the commercial center of Provo. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way would require acquisition and pavement of 121.6 acres and commercial property take of 11,000 square feet. Project implementation would impact 9.3 acres of wetlands, 1,594 linear feet of streams, 93 acres of mixed-use agriculture habitat, and 15.3 acres of residential wildlife habitat The proposed project would affect a relatively small portion of a historic canal and irrigation system. 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 10-0474D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110365, Final EIS--380 pages, Appendices and Maps--296 pages, October 28, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 15 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-10-01-F KW - Highways KW - Airports KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Use KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Utah 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/916687663?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-28&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 28, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-19 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. [Part 2 of 16] T2 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. AN - 916687648; 15122-5_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a five-lane arterial roadway, known as the Provo Westside Connector (PWC), between Provo Airport and the vicinity of the Interstate 15 (I-15) Interchange with University Avenue and 1860 South Street in Provo, Utah is proposed. The project area is located in southwest Provo and includes the neighborhoods of Provo Bay, Sunset, and Lakewood. The Provo Airport and other commercial properties are currently accessed by passing through residential neighborhoods along Center Street and 3110 West Street. As the planned conversion from agricultural land uses to commercial land uses continues, and as residential areas expand, commercial vehicle use of residential roads will increase and exacerbate safety concerns. In addition to the PWC, the proposed improvements would include the extension of existing residential collector streets 500 West and 1150 West to intersect with the proposed arterial, a 10-foot-wide paved bicycle and pedestrian trail, and parking pull-outs to access the trail. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. The three build alternatives include the 1860 South Alternative and two versions of the I-15 Overpass/Underpass Alternative, the University Avenue A Alternative and the University Avenue B Alternative. The 1860 South Alternative was selected as the preferred alternative based on public comment preferences, agency comment preferences, reduced land use impacts, superior transportation performance, lack of visual impacts, lack of noise impacts, fewer commercial property impacts, and practicable avoidance and minimization of wetland impacts. Construction costs of the preferred alternative are estimated at $57.2 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new roadway would support planned development in southwest Provo, planned improvements at the Provo Airport, and related commercial and industrial development in the vicinity of the airport. The direct roadway link between the residential areas west of I-15 and the commercial center of Provo east of I-15, including the Provo Towne Centre Mall, would support the continued economic viability of the commercial center of Provo. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way would require acquisition and pavement of 121.6 acres and commercial property take of 11,000 square feet. Project implementation would impact 9.3 acres of wetlands, 1,594 linear feet of streams, 93 acres of mixed-use agriculture habitat, and 15.3 acres of residential wildlife habitat The proposed project would affect a relatively small portion of a historic canal and irrigation system. 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 10-0474D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110365, Final EIS--380 pages, Appendices and Maps--296 pages, October 28, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-10-01-F KW - Highways KW - Airports KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Use KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Utah 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/916687648?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-28&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 28, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-19 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. [Part 1 of 16] T2 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. AN - 916687641; 15122-5_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a five-lane arterial roadway, known as the Provo Westside Connector (PWC), between Provo Airport and the vicinity of the Interstate 15 (I-15) Interchange with University Avenue and 1860 South Street in Provo, Utah is proposed. The project area is located in southwest Provo and includes the neighborhoods of Provo Bay, Sunset, and Lakewood. The Provo Airport and other commercial properties are currently accessed by passing through residential neighborhoods along Center Street and 3110 West Street. As the planned conversion from agricultural land uses to commercial land uses continues, and as residential areas expand, commercial vehicle use of residential roads will increase and exacerbate safety concerns. In addition to the PWC, the proposed improvements would include the extension of existing residential collector streets 500 West and 1150 West to intersect with the proposed arterial, a 10-foot-wide paved bicycle and pedestrian trail, and parking pull-outs to access the trail. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. The three build alternatives include the 1860 South Alternative and two versions of the I-15 Overpass/Underpass Alternative, the University Avenue A Alternative and the University Avenue B Alternative. The 1860 South Alternative was selected as the preferred alternative based on public comment preferences, agency comment preferences, reduced land use impacts, superior transportation performance, lack of visual impacts, lack of noise impacts, fewer commercial property impacts, and practicable avoidance and minimization of wetland impacts. Construction costs of the preferred alternative are estimated at $57.2 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new roadway would support planned development in southwest Provo, planned improvements at the Provo Airport, and related commercial and industrial development in the vicinity of the airport. The direct roadway link between the residential areas west of I-15 and the commercial center of Provo east of I-15, including the Provo Towne Centre Mall, would support the continued economic viability of the commercial center of Provo. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way would require acquisition and pavement of 121.6 acres and commercial property take of 11,000 square feet. Project implementation would impact 9.3 acres of wetlands, 1,594 linear feet of streams, 93 acres of mixed-use agriculture habitat, and 15.3 acres of residential wildlife habitat The proposed project would affect a relatively small portion of a historic canal and irrigation system. 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 10-0474D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110365, Final EIS--380 pages, Appendices and Maps--296 pages, October 28, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-10-01-F KW - Highways KW - Airports KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Use KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Utah 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/916687641?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-28&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 28, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-19 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - PROVO WESTSIDE CONNECTOR, PROVO, UTAH. AN - 16377130; 15122 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a five-lane arterial roadway, known as the Provo Westside Connector (PWC), between Provo Airport and the vicinity of the Interstate 15 (I-15) Interchange with University Avenue and 1860 South Street in Provo, Utah is proposed. The project area is located in southwest Provo and includes the neighborhoods of Provo Bay, Sunset, and Lakewood. The Provo Airport and other commercial properties are currently accessed by passing through residential neighborhoods along Center Street and 3110 West Street. As the planned conversion from agricultural land uses to commercial land uses continues, and as residential areas expand, commercial vehicle use of residential roads will increase and exacerbate safety concerns. In addition to the PWC, the proposed improvements would include the extension of existing residential collector streets 500 West and 1150 West to intersect with the proposed arterial, a 10-foot-wide paved bicycle and pedestrian trail, and parking pull-outs to access the trail. Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this final EIS. The three build alternatives include the 1860 South Alternative and two versions of the I-15 Overpass/Underpass Alternative, the University Avenue A Alternative and the University Avenue B Alternative. The 1860 South Alternative was selected as the preferred alternative based on public comment preferences, agency comment preferences, reduced land use impacts, superior transportation performance, lack of visual impacts, lack of noise impacts, fewer commercial property impacts, and practicable avoidance and minimization of wetland impacts. Construction costs of the preferred alternative are estimated at $57.2 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: A new roadway would support planned development in southwest Provo, planned improvements at the Provo Airport, and related commercial and industrial development in the vicinity of the airport. The direct roadway link between the residential areas west of I-15 and the commercial center of Provo east of I-15, including the Provo Towne Centre Mall, would support the continued economic viability of the commercial center of Provo. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way would require acquisition and pavement of 121.6 acres and commercial property take of 11,000 square feet. Project implementation would impact 9.3 acres of wetlands, 1,594 linear feet of streams, 93 acres of mixed-use agriculture habitat, and 15.3 acres of residential wildlife habitat The proposed project would affect a relatively small portion of a historic canal and irrigation system. 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 10-0474D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110365, Final EIS--380 pages, Appendices and Maps--296 pages, October 28, 2011 PY - 2011 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-UT-EIS-10-01-F KW - Highways KW - Airports KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Use KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Utah 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/16377130?accountid=14244 L2 - http://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=2011-10-28&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%2C+UTAH.&rft.title=PROVO+WESTSIDE+CONNECTOR%2C+PROVO%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 - 2012-01-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 28, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2012-01-04 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 5] T2 - YERBA BUENA ISLAND RAMPS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ON INTERSTATE 80 (I-80), CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. AN - 912103876; 15109-2_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the existing westbound on- and off-ramps 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, approximately 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 and the associated 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 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. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two build alternatives. Alternative 2b is the preferred alternative and 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 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, pedestrian/bike path and two 12-foot-wide lanes within the Caltrans right-of-way. 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 is currently located. Total cost for implementing Alternative 2b is estimated at $79 million. 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 create 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. Quarters 10/Building 267 would be acquired and relocated. 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: 110352, Volume I--768 pages and maps, Volume II--1,356 pages, October 21, 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/912103876?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-21&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - YERBA BUENA ISLAND RAMPS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ON INTERSTATE 80 (I-80), CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. [Part 2 of 5] T2 - YERBA BUENA ISLAND RAMPS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ON INTERSTATE 80 (I-80), CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. AN - 912103871; 15109-2_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the existing westbound on- and off-ramps 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, approximately 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 and the associated 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 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. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two build alternatives. Alternative 2b is the preferred alternative and 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 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, pedestrian/bike path and two 12-foot-wide lanes within the Caltrans right-of-way. 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 is currently located. Total cost for implementing Alternative 2b is estimated at $79 million. 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 create 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. Quarters 10/Building 267 would be acquired and relocated. 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: 110352, Volume I--768 pages and maps, Volume II--1,356 pages, October 21, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 2 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/912103871?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-21&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 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 5] T2 - YERBA BUENA ISLAND RAMPS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ON INTERSTATE 80 (I-80), CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. AN - 912103853; 15109-2_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the existing westbound on- and off-ramps 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, approximately 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 and the associated 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 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. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two build alternatives. Alternative 2b is the preferred alternative and 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 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, pedestrian/bike path and two 12-foot-wide lanes within the Caltrans right-of-way. 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 is currently located. Total cost for implementing Alternative 2b is estimated at $79 million. 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 create 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. Quarters 10/Building 267 would be acquired and relocated. 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: 110352, Volume I--768 pages and maps, Volume II--1,356 pages, October 21, 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/912103853?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-21&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 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 5] T2 - YERBA BUENA ISLAND RAMPS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ON INTERSTATE 80 (I-80), CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. AN - 912102059; 15109-2_0005 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the existing westbound on- and off-ramps 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, approximately 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 and the associated 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 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. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two build alternatives. Alternative 2b is the preferred alternative and 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 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, pedestrian/bike path and two 12-foot-wide lanes within the Caltrans right-of-way. 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 is currently located. Total cost for implementing Alternative 2b is estimated at $79 million. 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 create 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. Quarters 10/Building 267 would be acquired and relocated. 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: 110352, Volume I--768 pages and maps, Volume II--1,356 pages, October 21, 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/912102059?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-21&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 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 5] T2 - YERBA BUENA ISLAND RAMPS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ON INTERSTATE 80 (I-80), CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. AN - 912102048; 15109-2_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the existing westbound on- and off-ramps 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, approximately 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 and the associated 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 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. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two build alternatives. Alternative 2b is the preferred alternative and 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 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, pedestrian/bike path and two 12-foot-wide lanes within the Caltrans right-of-way. 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 is currently located. Total cost for implementing Alternative 2b is estimated at $79 million. 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 create 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. Quarters 10/Building 267 would be acquired and relocated. 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: 110352, Volume I--768 pages and maps, Volume II--1,356 pages, October 21, 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/912102048?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-21&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTHWEST CORRIDOR PROJECT, IMPROVEMENTS TO I-75/I-575, COBB AND CHEROKEE COUNTIES, GEORGIA. [Part 4 of 7] T2 - NORTHWEST CORRIDOR PROJECT, IMPROVEMENTS TO I-75/I-575, COBB AND CHEROKEE COUNTIES, GEORGIA. AN - 912100557; 15112-5_0004 AB - PURPOSE: Highway improvements for Interstate 75 (I-75) and I-575 in Cobb and Cherokee counties, Georgia are proposed. The Northwest Corridor is one of the most severely congested highway corridors in the Atlanta metropolitan region, and improvements are needed to reduce congestion. Over the past two decades, urban development in Cobb and Cherokee Counties, in terms of both population and employment growth, has substantially increased traffic congestion on both I-75 and I-575. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative and the preferred Two-Lane Reversible Alternative, which would extend the two I-75 high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes (one in each direction) that currently terminate at Akers Mill Road south of the I-75/I-285 interchange. Two new managed lanes would extend north to the I-75/I-575 interchange. A single managed lane would continue north on I-75 from the I-75/I-575 interchange to just beyond Hickory Grove Road. Similarly, a single managed lane would continue north on I-575 from the I-75/I-575 interchange to the Sixes Road interchange. The managed-lane facility would include improvements of 16.8 miles on I-75, 11.3 miles on I-575, and 1.6 miles on I-285. The proposed 29.7 miles of new managed lanes would be designed for highway speeds of 55 miles per hour (mph) on I-75 between I-285 and I-575 and 65 mph on each corridor north of the I-75/I-575 interchange. The ramps connecting the I-75 managed lanes to I-285 would be designed for 45 mph. Unlike the existing HOV lanes on I-75 south of I-285, the new managed lanes on I-75 would be reversible, meaning the directional flow of traffic in the lanes would change during the day. Like the two reversible lanes on I-75, the single reversible lanes north of the I-75/I-575 interchange on both I-75 and I-575 would only accommodate peak period directional flows. The two new managed lanes would be on elevated structures or on walls on the west side of I-75 between Akers Mill Road and the I-75/I-575 interchange. Along this segment, the managed lanes also would be elevated on structures over existing roadways that cross the highway. The managed lanes on I-75 would connect to the general-purpose lanes on I-285. 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, slip ramps would be constructed near existing general-purpose interchanges at Barrett Parkway, Shallowford Road and Sixes Road. Conceptual capital cost of the build alternative is estimated at $968.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve the performance and safety of the regional transportation system and result in reduced emission of criteria air pollutants. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Development of the build alternative would result in 13 full and 63 partial property acquisitions resulting in the displacement of six residences and 12 businesses. Low-income and minority groups would be disproportionately affected by the displacements. The project would impact 3,025 linear feet of stream, 17 acres of floodplain, and 0.3 acres of wetlands. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity of well over 700 sensitive 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 abstracts of the draft and draft supplemental EISs, see 07-0383D, Volume 31, Number 3 and 10-0501D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110355, Summary--36 pages, Volume 1--830 pages, Volume 2--91 pages (plans and maps), Comments and Responses--1,466 pages, Technical Reports--17 volumes, October 21, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Wetlands 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/912100557?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTHWEST+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+IMPROVEMENTS+TO+I-75%2FI-575%2C+COBB+AND+CHEROKEE+COUNTIES%2C+GEORGIA.&rft.title=NORTHWEST+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+IMPROVEMENTS+TO+I-75%2FI-575%2C+COBB+AND+CHEROKEE+COUNTIES%2C+GEORGIA.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTHWEST CORRIDOR PROJECT, IMPROVEMENTS TO I-75/I-575, COBB AND CHEROKEE COUNTIES, GEORGIA. [Part 3 of 7] T2 - NORTHWEST CORRIDOR PROJECT, IMPROVEMENTS TO I-75/I-575, COBB AND CHEROKEE COUNTIES, GEORGIA. AN - 912100544; 15112-5_0003 AB - PURPOSE: Highway improvements for Interstate 75 (I-75) and I-575 in Cobb and Cherokee counties, Georgia are proposed. The Northwest Corridor is one of the most severely congested highway corridors in the Atlanta metropolitan region, and improvements are needed to reduce congestion. Over the past two decades, urban development in Cobb and Cherokee Counties, in terms of both population and employment growth, has substantially increased traffic congestion on both I-75 and I-575. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative and the preferred Two-Lane Reversible Alternative, which would extend the two I-75 high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes (one in each direction) that currently terminate at Akers Mill Road south of the I-75/I-285 interchange. Two new managed lanes would extend north to the I-75/I-575 interchange. A single managed lane would continue north on I-75 from the I-75/I-575 interchange to just beyond Hickory Grove Road. Similarly, a single managed lane would continue north on I-575 from the I-75/I-575 interchange to the Sixes Road interchange. The managed-lane facility would include improvements of 16.8 miles on I-75, 11.3 miles on I-575, and 1.6 miles on I-285. The proposed 29.7 miles of new managed lanes would be designed for highway speeds of 55 miles per hour (mph) on I-75 between I-285 and I-575 and 65 mph on each corridor north of the I-75/I-575 interchange. The ramps connecting the I-75 managed lanes to I-285 would be designed for 45 mph. Unlike the existing HOV lanes on I-75 south of I-285, the new managed lanes on I-75 would be reversible, meaning the directional flow of traffic in the lanes would change during the day. Like the two reversible lanes on I-75, the single reversible lanes north of the I-75/I-575 interchange on both I-75 and I-575 would only accommodate peak period directional flows. The two new managed lanes would be on elevated structures or on walls on the west side of I-75 between Akers Mill Road and the I-75/I-575 interchange. Along this segment, the managed lanes also would be elevated on structures over existing roadways that cross the highway. The managed lanes on I-75 would connect to the general-purpose lanes on I-285. 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, slip ramps would be constructed near existing general-purpose interchanges at Barrett Parkway, Shallowford Road and Sixes Road. Conceptual capital cost of the build alternative is estimated at $968.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve the performance and safety of the regional transportation system and result in reduced emission of criteria air pollutants. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Development of the build alternative would result in 13 full and 63 partial property acquisitions resulting in the displacement of six residences and 12 businesses. Low-income and minority groups would be disproportionately affected by the displacements. The project would impact 3,025 linear feet of stream, 17 acres of floodplain, and 0.3 acres of wetlands. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity of well over 700 sensitive 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 abstracts of the draft and draft supplemental EISs, see 07-0383D, Volume 31, Number 3 and 10-0501D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110355, Summary--36 pages, Volume 1--830 pages, Volume 2--91 pages (plans and maps), Comments and Responses--1,466 pages, Technical Reports--17 volumes, October 21, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Wetlands 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/912100544?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTHWEST+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+IMPROVEMENTS+TO+I-75%2FI-575%2C+COBB+AND+CHEROKEE+COUNTIES%2C+GEORGIA.&rft.title=NORTHWEST+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+IMPROVEMENTS+TO+I-75%2FI-575%2C+COBB+AND+CHEROKEE+COUNTIES%2C+GEORGIA.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTHWEST CORRIDOR PROJECT, IMPROVEMENTS TO I-75/I-575, COBB AND CHEROKEE COUNTIES, GEORGIA. [Part 2 of 7] T2 - NORTHWEST CORRIDOR PROJECT, IMPROVEMENTS TO I-75/I-575, COBB AND CHEROKEE COUNTIES, GEORGIA. AN - 912100526; 15112-5_0002 AB - PURPOSE: Highway improvements for Interstate 75 (I-75) and I-575 in Cobb and Cherokee counties, Georgia are proposed. The Northwest Corridor is one of the most severely congested highway corridors in the Atlanta metropolitan region, and improvements are needed to reduce congestion. Over the past two decades, urban development in Cobb and Cherokee Counties, in terms of both population and employment growth, has substantially increased traffic congestion on both I-75 and I-575. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative and the preferred Two-Lane Reversible Alternative, which would extend the two I-75 high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes (one in each direction) that currently terminate at Akers Mill Road south of the I-75/I-285 interchange. Two new managed lanes would extend north to the I-75/I-575 interchange. A single managed lane would continue north on I-75 from the I-75/I-575 interchange to just beyond Hickory Grove Road. Similarly, a single managed lane would continue north on I-575 from the I-75/I-575 interchange to the Sixes Road interchange. The managed-lane facility would include improvements of 16.8 miles on I-75, 11.3 miles on I-575, and 1.6 miles on I-285. The proposed 29.7 miles of new managed lanes would be designed for highway speeds of 55 miles per hour (mph) on I-75 between I-285 and I-575 and 65 mph on each corridor north of the I-75/I-575 interchange. The ramps connecting the I-75 managed lanes to I-285 would be designed for 45 mph. Unlike the existing HOV lanes on I-75 south of I-285, the new managed lanes on I-75 would be reversible, meaning the directional flow of traffic in the lanes would change during the day. Like the two reversible lanes on I-75, the single reversible lanes north of the I-75/I-575 interchange on both I-75 and I-575 would only accommodate peak period directional flows. The two new managed lanes would be on elevated structures or on walls on the west side of I-75 between Akers Mill Road and the I-75/I-575 interchange. Along this segment, the managed lanes also would be elevated on structures over existing roadways that cross the highway. The managed lanes on I-75 would connect to the general-purpose lanes on I-285. 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, slip ramps would be constructed near existing general-purpose interchanges at Barrett Parkway, Shallowford Road and Sixes Road. Conceptual capital cost of the build alternative is estimated at $968.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve the performance and safety of the regional transportation system and result in reduced emission of criteria air pollutants. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Development of the build alternative would result in 13 full and 63 partial property acquisitions resulting in the displacement of six residences and 12 businesses. Low-income and minority groups would be disproportionately affected by the displacements. The project would impact 3,025 linear feet of stream, 17 acres of floodplain, and 0.3 acres of wetlands. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity of well over 700 sensitive 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 abstracts of the draft and draft supplemental EISs, see 07-0383D, Volume 31, Number 3 and 10-0501D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110355, Summary--36 pages, Volume 1--830 pages, Volume 2--91 pages (plans and maps), Comments and Responses--1,466 pages, Technical Reports--17 volumes, October 21, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Wetlands 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/912100526?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTHWEST+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+IMPROVEMENTS+TO+I-75%2FI-575%2C+COBB+AND+CHEROKEE+COUNTIES%2C+GEORGIA.&rft.title=NORTHWEST+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+IMPROVEMENTS+TO+I-75%2FI-575%2C+COBB+AND+CHEROKEE+COUNTIES%2C+GEORGIA.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTHWEST CORRIDOR PROJECT, IMPROVEMENTS TO I-75/I-575, COBB AND CHEROKEE COUNTIES, GEORGIA. [Part 1 of 7] T2 - NORTHWEST CORRIDOR PROJECT, IMPROVEMENTS TO I-75/I-575, COBB AND CHEROKEE COUNTIES, GEORGIA. AN - 912100487; 15112-5_0001 AB - PURPOSE: Highway improvements for Interstate 75 (I-75) and I-575 in Cobb and Cherokee counties, Georgia are proposed. The Northwest Corridor is one of the most severely congested highway corridors in the Atlanta metropolitan region, and improvements are needed to reduce congestion. Over the past two decades, urban development in Cobb and Cherokee Counties, in terms of both population and employment growth, has substantially increased traffic congestion on both I-75 and I-575. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative and the preferred Two-Lane Reversible Alternative, which would extend the two I-75 high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes (one in each direction) that currently terminate at Akers Mill Road south of the I-75/I-285 interchange. Two new managed lanes would extend north to the I-75/I-575 interchange. A single managed lane would continue north on I-75 from the I-75/I-575 interchange to just beyond Hickory Grove Road. Similarly, a single managed lane would continue north on I-575 from the I-75/I-575 interchange to the Sixes Road interchange. The managed-lane facility would include improvements of 16.8 miles on I-75, 11.3 miles on I-575, and 1.6 miles on I-285. The proposed 29.7 miles of new managed lanes would be designed for highway speeds of 55 miles per hour (mph) on I-75 between I-285 and I-575 and 65 mph on each corridor north of the I-75/I-575 interchange. The ramps connecting the I-75 managed lanes to I-285 would be designed for 45 mph. Unlike the existing HOV lanes on I-75 south of I-285, the new managed lanes on I-75 would be reversible, meaning the directional flow of traffic in the lanes would change during the day. Like the two reversible lanes on I-75, the single reversible lanes north of the I-75/I-575 interchange on both I-75 and I-575 would only accommodate peak period directional flows. The two new managed lanes would be on elevated structures or on walls on the west side of I-75 between Akers Mill Road and the I-75/I-575 interchange. Along this segment, the managed lanes also would be elevated on structures over existing roadways that cross the highway. The managed lanes on I-75 would connect to the general-purpose lanes on I-285. 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, slip ramps would be constructed near existing general-purpose interchanges at Barrett Parkway, Shallowford Road and Sixes Road. Conceptual capital cost of the build alternative is estimated at $968.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve the performance and safety of the regional transportation system and result in reduced emission of criteria air pollutants. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Development of the build alternative would result in 13 full and 63 partial property acquisitions resulting in the displacement of six residences and 12 businesses. Low-income and minority groups would be disproportionately affected by the displacements. The project would impact 3,025 linear feet of stream, 17 acres of floodplain, and 0.3 acres of wetlands. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity of well over 700 sensitive 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 abstracts of the draft and draft supplemental EISs, see 07-0383D, Volume 31, Number 3 and 10-0501D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110355, Summary--36 pages, Volume 1--830 pages, Volume 2--91 pages (plans and maps), Comments and Responses--1,466 pages, Technical Reports--17 volumes, October 21, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Wetlands 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/912100487?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTHWEST+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+IMPROVEMENTS+TO+I-75%2FI-575%2C+COBB+AND+CHEROKEE+COUNTIES%2C+GEORGIA.&rft.title=NORTHWEST+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+IMPROVEMENTS+TO+I-75%2FI-575%2C+COBB+AND+CHEROKEE+COUNTIES%2C+GEORGIA.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTHWEST CORRIDOR PROJECT, IMPROVEMENTS TO I-75/I-575, COBB AND CHEROKEE COUNTIES, GEORGIA. [Part 7 of 7] T2 - NORTHWEST CORRIDOR PROJECT, IMPROVEMENTS TO I-75/I-575, COBB AND CHEROKEE COUNTIES, GEORGIA. AN - 912099603; 15112-5_0007 AB - PURPOSE: Highway improvements for Interstate 75 (I-75) and I-575 in Cobb and Cherokee counties, Georgia are proposed. The Northwest Corridor is one of the most severely congested highway corridors in the Atlanta metropolitan region, and improvements are needed to reduce congestion. Over the past two decades, urban development in Cobb and Cherokee Counties, in terms of both population and employment growth, has substantially increased traffic congestion on both I-75 and I-575. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative and the preferred Two-Lane Reversible Alternative, which would extend the two I-75 high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes (one in each direction) that currently terminate at Akers Mill Road south of the I-75/I-285 interchange. Two new managed lanes would extend north to the I-75/I-575 interchange. A single managed lane would continue north on I-75 from the I-75/I-575 interchange to just beyond Hickory Grove Road. Similarly, a single managed lane would continue north on I-575 from the I-75/I-575 interchange to the Sixes Road interchange. The managed-lane facility would include improvements of 16.8 miles on I-75, 11.3 miles on I-575, and 1.6 miles on I-285. The proposed 29.7 miles of new managed lanes would be designed for highway speeds of 55 miles per hour (mph) on I-75 between I-285 and I-575 and 65 mph on each corridor north of the I-75/I-575 interchange. The ramps connecting the I-75 managed lanes to I-285 would be designed for 45 mph. Unlike the existing HOV lanes on I-75 south of I-285, the new managed lanes on I-75 would be reversible, meaning the directional flow of traffic in the lanes would change during the day. Like the two reversible lanes on I-75, the single reversible lanes north of the I-75/I-575 interchange on both I-75 and I-575 would only accommodate peak period directional flows. The two new managed lanes would be on elevated structures or on walls on the west side of I-75 between Akers Mill Road and the I-75/I-575 interchange. Along this segment, the managed lanes also would be elevated on structures over existing roadways that cross the highway. The managed lanes on I-75 would connect to the general-purpose lanes on I-285. 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, slip ramps would be constructed near existing general-purpose interchanges at Barrett Parkway, Shallowford Road and Sixes Road. Conceptual capital cost of the build alternative is estimated at $968.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve the performance and safety of the regional transportation system and result in reduced emission of criteria air pollutants. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Development of the build alternative would result in 13 full and 63 partial property acquisitions resulting in the displacement of six residences and 12 businesses. Low-income and minority groups would be disproportionately affected by the displacements. The project would impact 3,025 linear feet of stream, 17 acres of floodplain, and 0.3 acres of wetlands. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity of well over 700 sensitive 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 abstracts of the draft and draft supplemental EISs, see 07-0383D, Volume 31, Number 3 and 10-0501D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110355, Summary--36 pages, Volume 1--830 pages, Volume 2--91 pages (plans and maps), Comments and Responses--1,466 pages, Technical Reports--17 volumes, October 21, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Wetlands 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/912099603?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTHWEST+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+IMPROVEMENTS+TO+I-75%2FI-575%2C+COBB+AND+CHEROKEE+COUNTIES%2C+GEORGIA.&rft.title=NORTHWEST+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+IMPROVEMENTS+TO+I-75%2FI-575%2C+COBB+AND+CHEROKEE+COUNTIES%2C+GEORGIA.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTHWEST CORRIDOR PROJECT, IMPROVEMENTS TO I-75/I-575, COBB AND CHEROKEE COUNTIES, GEORGIA. [Part 6 of 7] T2 - NORTHWEST CORRIDOR PROJECT, IMPROVEMENTS TO I-75/I-575, COBB AND CHEROKEE COUNTIES, GEORGIA. AN - 912099573; 15112-5_0006 AB - PURPOSE: Highway improvements for Interstate 75 (I-75) and I-575 in Cobb and Cherokee counties, Georgia are proposed. The Northwest Corridor is one of the most severely congested highway corridors in the Atlanta metropolitan region, and improvements are needed to reduce congestion. Over the past two decades, urban development in Cobb and Cherokee Counties, in terms of both population and employment growth, has substantially increased traffic congestion on both I-75 and I-575. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative and the preferred Two-Lane Reversible Alternative, which would extend the two I-75 high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes (one in each direction) that currently terminate at Akers Mill Road south of the I-75/I-285 interchange. Two new managed lanes would extend north to the I-75/I-575 interchange. A single managed lane would continue north on I-75 from the I-75/I-575 interchange to just beyond Hickory Grove Road. Similarly, a single managed lane would continue north on I-575 from the I-75/I-575 interchange to the Sixes Road interchange. The managed-lane facility would include improvements of 16.8 miles on I-75, 11.3 miles on I-575, and 1.6 miles on I-285. The proposed 29.7 miles of new managed lanes would be designed for highway speeds of 55 miles per hour (mph) on I-75 between I-285 and I-575 and 65 mph on each corridor north of the I-75/I-575 interchange. The ramps connecting the I-75 managed lanes to I-285 would be designed for 45 mph. Unlike the existing HOV lanes on I-75 south of I-285, the new managed lanes on I-75 would be reversible, meaning the directional flow of traffic in the lanes would change during the day. Like the two reversible lanes on I-75, the single reversible lanes north of the I-75/I-575 interchange on both I-75 and I-575 would only accommodate peak period directional flows. The two new managed lanes would be on elevated structures or on walls on the west side of I-75 between Akers Mill Road and the I-75/I-575 interchange. Along this segment, the managed lanes also would be elevated on structures over existing roadways that cross the highway. The managed lanes on I-75 would connect to the general-purpose lanes on I-285. 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, slip ramps would be constructed near existing general-purpose interchanges at Barrett Parkway, Shallowford Road and Sixes Road. Conceptual capital cost of the build alternative is estimated at $968.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve the performance and safety of the regional transportation system and result in reduced emission of criteria air pollutants. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Development of the build alternative would result in 13 full and 63 partial property acquisitions resulting in the displacement of six residences and 12 businesses. Low-income and minority groups would be disproportionately affected by the displacements. The project would impact 3,025 linear feet of stream, 17 acres of floodplain, and 0.3 acres of wetlands. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity of well over 700 sensitive 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 abstracts of the draft and draft supplemental EISs, see 07-0383D, Volume 31, Number 3 and 10-0501D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110355, Summary--36 pages, Volume 1--830 pages, Volume 2--91 pages (plans and maps), Comments and Responses--1,466 pages, Technical Reports--17 volumes, October 21, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Wetlands 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/912099573?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTHWEST+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+IMPROVEMENTS+TO+I-75%2FI-575%2C+COBB+AND+CHEROKEE+COUNTIES%2C+GEORGIA.&rft.title=NORTHWEST+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+IMPROVEMENTS+TO+I-75%2FI-575%2C+COBB+AND+CHEROKEE+COUNTIES%2C+GEORGIA.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTHWEST CORRIDOR PROJECT, IMPROVEMENTS TO I-75/I-575, COBB AND CHEROKEE COUNTIES, GEORGIA. [Part 5 of 7] T2 - NORTHWEST CORRIDOR PROJECT, IMPROVEMENTS TO I-75/I-575, COBB AND CHEROKEE COUNTIES, GEORGIA. AN - 912099534; 15112-5_0005 AB - PURPOSE: Highway improvements for Interstate 75 (I-75) and I-575 in Cobb and Cherokee counties, Georgia are proposed. The Northwest Corridor is one of the most severely congested highway corridors in the Atlanta metropolitan region, and improvements are needed to reduce congestion. Over the past two decades, urban development in Cobb and Cherokee Counties, in terms of both population and employment growth, has substantially increased traffic congestion on both I-75 and I-575. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative and the preferred Two-Lane Reversible Alternative, which would extend the two I-75 high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes (one in each direction) that currently terminate at Akers Mill Road south of the I-75/I-285 interchange. Two new managed lanes would extend north to the I-75/I-575 interchange. A single managed lane would continue north on I-75 from the I-75/I-575 interchange to just beyond Hickory Grove Road. Similarly, a single managed lane would continue north on I-575 from the I-75/I-575 interchange to the Sixes Road interchange. The managed-lane facility would include improvements of 16.8 miles on I-75, 11.3 miles on I-575, and 1.6 miles on I-285. The proposed 29.7 miles of new managed lanes would be designed for highway speeds of 55 miles per hour (mph) on I-75 between I-285 and I-575 and 65 mph on each corridor north of the I-75/I-575 interchange. The ramps connecting the I-75 managed lanes to I-285 would be designed for 45 mph. Unlike the existing HOV lanes on I-75 south of I-285, the new managed lanes on I-75 would be reversible, meaning the directional flow of traffic in the lanes would change during the day. Like the two reversible lanes on I-75, the single reversible lanes north of the I-75/I-575 interchange on both I-75 and I-575 would only accommodate peak period directional flows. The two new managed lanes would be on elevated structures or on walls on the west side of I-75 between Akers Mill Road and the I-75/I-575 interchange. Along this segment, the managed lanes also would be elevated on structures over existing roadways that cross the highway. The managed lanes on I-75 would connect to the general-purpose lanes on I-285. 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, slip ramps would be constructed near existing general-purpose interchanges at Barrett Parkway, Shallowford Road and Sixes Road. Conceptual capital cost of the build alternative is estimated at $968.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve the performance and safety of the regional transportation system and result in reduced emission of criteria air pollutants. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Development of the build alternative would result in 13 full and 63 partial property acquisitions resulting in the displacement of six residences and 12 businesses. Low-income and minority groups would be disproportionately affected by the displacements. The project would impact 3,025 linear feet of stream, 17 acres of floodplain, and 0.3 acres of wetlands. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity of well over 700 sensitive 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 abstracts of the draft and draft supplemental EISs, see 07-0383D, Volume 31, Number 3 and 10-0501D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110355, Summary--36 pages, Volume 1--830 pages, Volume 2--91 pages (plans and maps), Comments and Responses--1,466 pages, Technical Reports--17 volumes, October 21, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Wetlands 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/912099534?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTHWEST+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+IMPROVEMENTS+TO+I-75%2FI-575%2C+COBB+AND+CHEROKEE+COUNTIES%2C+GEORGIA.&rft.title=NORTHWEST+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+IMPROVEMENTS+TO+I-75%2FI-575%2C+COBB+AND+CHEROKEE+COUNTIES%2C+GEORGIA.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 21, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTHWEST CORRIDOR PROJECT, IMPROVEMENTS TO I-75/I-575, COBB AND CHEROKEE COUNTIES, GEORGIA. AN - 911145090; 15112 AB - PURPOSE: Highway improvements for Interstate 75 (I-75) and I-575 in Cobb and Cherokee counties, Georgia are proposed. The Northwest Corridor is one of the most severely congested highway corridors in the Atlanta metropolitan region, and improvements are needed to reduce congestion. Over the past two decades, urban development in Cobb and Cherokee Counties, in terms of both population and employment growth, has substantially increased traffic congestion on both I-75 and I-575. This final EIS considers a No Build Alternative and the preferred Two-Lane Reversible Alternative, which would extend the two I-75 high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes (one in each direction) that currently terminate at Akers Mill Road south of the I-75/I-285 interchange. Two new managed lanes would extend north to the I-75/I-575 interchange. A single managed lane would continue north on I-75 from the I-75/I-575 interchange to just beyond Hickory Grove Road. Similarly, a single managed lane would continue north on I-575 from the I-75/I-575 interchange to the Sixes Road interchange. The managed-lane facility would include improvements of 16.8 miles on I-75, 11.3 miles on I-575, and 1.6 miles on I-285. The proposed 29.7 miles of new managed lanes would be designed for highway speeds of 55 miles per hour (mph) on I-75 between I-285 and I-575 and 65 mph on each corridor north of the I-75/I-575 interchange. The ramps connecting the I-75 managed lanes to I-285 would be designed for 45 mph. Unlike the existing HOV lanes on I-75 south of I-285, the new managed lanes on I-75 would be reversible, meaning the directional flow of traffic in the lanes would change during the day. Like the two reversible lanes on I-75, the single reversible lanes north of the I-75/I-575 interchange on both I-75 and I-575 would only accommodate peak period directional flows. The two new managed lanes would be on elevated structures or on walls on the west side of I-75 between Akers Mill Road and the I-75/I-575 interchange. Along this segment, the managed lanes also would be elevated on structures over existing roadways that cross the highway. The managed lanes on I-75 would connect to the general-purpose lanes on I-285. 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, slip ramps would be constructed near existing general-purpose interchanges at Barrett Parkway, Shallowford Road and Sixes Road. Conceptual capital cost of the build alternative is estimated at $968.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would improve the performance and safety of the regional transportation system and result in reduced emission of criteria air pollutants. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Development of the build alternative would result in 13 full and 63 partial property acquisitions resulting in the displacement of six residences and 12 businesses. Low-income and minority groups would be disproportionately affected by the displacements. The project would impact 3,025 linear feet of stream, 17 acres of floodplain, and 0.3 acres of wetlands. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity of well over 700 sensitive 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 abstracts of the draft and draft supplemental EISs, see 07-0383D, Volume 31, Number 3 and 10-0501D, Volume 34, Number 2, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110355, Summary--36 pages, Volume 1--830 pages, Volume 2--91 pages (plans and maps), Comments and Responses--1,466 pages, Technical Reports--17 volumes, October 21, 2011 PY - 2011 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Wetlands 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/911145090?accountid=14244 L2 - http://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=2011-10-21&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTHWEST+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+IMPROVEMENTS+TO+I-75%2FI-575%2C+COBB+AND+CHEROKEE+COUNTIES%2C+GEORGIA.&rft.title=NORTHWEST+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+IMPROVEMENTS+TO+I-75%2FI-575%2C+COBB+AND+CHEROKEE+COUNTIES%2C+GEORGIA.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 21, 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 - 911145076; 15109 AB - PURPOSE: The replacement of the existing westbound on- and off-ramps 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, approximately 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 and the associated 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 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. This final EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and two build alternatives. Alternative 2b is the preferred alternative and 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 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, pedestrian/bike path and two 12-foot-wide lanes within the Caltrans right-of-way. 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 is currently located. Total cost for implementing Alternative 2b is estimated at $79 million. 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 create 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. Quarters 10/Building 267 would be acquired and relocated. 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: 110352, Volume I--768 pages and maps, Volume II--1,356 pages, October 21, 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/911145076?accountid=14244 L2 - http://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=2011-10-21&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 21, 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. [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. AN - 912110928; 15100-3_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. 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 local streets affected by the freeway reconstruction; and enhancing the appearance of the reconstructed freeway. I-94 is a major east-west freeway link and I-894 is a bypass around Milwaukee that provides an important connection for several Milwaukee County communities. US 45 is a north-south highway link connecting the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, Oshkosh, Fond du Lac, West Bend, Milwaukee, Chicagos OHare International Airport, and points south. The Zoo Interchange carries more than 300,000 vehicles on an average weekday and crash rates in the study area are up to five times higher than on other similar freeways in the state. This final EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative, the Modernization with No Added Capacity Alternative (six lanes), the Modernization with Added Capacity Alternative (eight lanes), and the Reduced Impacts Alternative. An adjacent arterials component is also considered in order to provide needed improvements for freeway traffic diverted to State Highway 100, Watertown Plank Road, Bluemound Road, and 84th Street. The Reduced Impacts Alternative with the adjacent arterials component is the preferred alternative. Eight lanes would be provided in the north-south direction. Four east-west lanes would be provided through the core while additional capacity in the form of auxiliary lanes would be provided east and west of the core to accommodate future traffic volumes. The Zoo Interchange would include full eight-foot to 12-foot shoulders on all ramps and freeways, two to three lanes on all through routes, and three to four lanes on all four approach legs. Smoother curves on all interchange ramps would provide a minimum design speed of 45 miles per hour (mph). I-94 and US 45 would have a 60 mph design speed. The interchange would have four levels, making it about 20 feet higher than the existing core. Expenditures for the Reduced Impacts Alternative estimated in year-of-construction dollars are $1.7 billion. The adjacent arterials component would cost $65 to $73 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system, replace deteriorating pavement and bridges, and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The preferred alternative would require 76 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 1.6 acres of wetlands and 8.8 acres of parkland. Eight residences and five businesses would be displaced. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. Noise impacts would occur at 426 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: 110343, Final EIS--379 pages, Appendices and Exhibits--497 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 18 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands 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/912110928?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&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.&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.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 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. [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. AN - 912110925; 15100-3_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. 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 local streets affected by the freeway reconstruction; and enhancing the appearance of the reconstructed freeway. I-94 is a major east-west freeway link and I-894 is a bypass around Milwaukee that provides an important connection for several Milwaukee County communities. US 45 is a north-south highway link connecting the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, Oshkosh, Fond du Lac, West Bend, Milwaukee, Chicagos OHare International Airport, and points south. The Zoo Interchange carries more than 300,000 vehicles on an average weekday and crash rates in the study area are up to five times higher than on other similar freeways in the state. This final EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative, the Modernization with No Added Capacity Alternative (six lanes), the Modernization with Added Capacity Alternative (eight lanes), and the Reduced Impacts Alternative. An adjacent arterials component is also considered in order to provide needed improvements for freeway traffic diverted to State Highway 100, Watertown Plank Road, Bluemound Road, and 84th Street. The Reduced Impacts Alternative with the adjacent arterials component is the preferred alternative. Eight lanes would be provided in the north-south direction. Four east-west lanes would be provided through the core while additional capacity in the form of auxiliary lanes would be provided east and west of the core to accommodate future traffic volumes. The Zoo Interchange would include full eight-foot to 12-foot shoulders on all ramps and freeways, two to three lanes on all through routes, and three to four lanes on all four approach legs. Smoother curves on all interchange ramps would provide a minimum design speed of 45 miles per hour (mph). I-94 and US 45 would have a 60 mph design speed. The interchange would have four levels, making it about 20 feet higher than the existing core. Expenditures for the Reduced Impacts Alternative estimated in year-of-construction dollars are $1.7 billion. The adjacent arterials component would cost $65 to $73 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system, replace deteriorating pavement and bridges, and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The preferred alternative would require 76 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 1.6 acres of wetlands and 8.8 acres of parkland. Eight residences and five businesses would be displaced. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. Noise impacts would occur at 426 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: 110343, Final EIS--379 pages, Appendices and Exhibits--497 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 17 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands 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/912110925?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&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.&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.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 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. [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. AN - 912110922; 15100-3_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. 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 local streets affected by the freeway reconstruction; and enhancing the appearance of the reconstructed freeway. I-94 is a major east-west freeway link and I-894 is a bypass around Milwaukee that provides an important connection for several Milwaukee County communities. US 45 is a north-south highway link connecting the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, Oshkosh, Fond du Lac, West Bend, Milwaukee, Chicagos OHare International Airport, and points south. The Zoo Interchange carries more than 300,000 vehicles on an average weekday and crash rates in the study area are up to five times higher than on other similar freeways in the state. This final EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative, the Modernization with No Added Capacity Alternative (six lanes), the Modernization with Added Capacity Alternative (eight lanes), and the Reduced Impacts Alternative. An adjacent arterials component is also considered in order to provide needed improvements for freeway traffic diverted to State Highway 100, Watertown Plank Road, Bluemound Road, and 84th Street. The Reduced Impacts Alternative with the adjacent arterials component is the preferred alternative. Eight lanes would be provided in the north-south direction. Four east-west lanes would be provided through the core while additional capacity in the form of auxiliary lanes would be provided east and west of the core to accommodate future traffic volumes. The Zoo Interchange would include full eight-foot to 12-foot shoulders on all ramps and freeways, two to three lanes on all through routes, and three to four lanes on all four approach legs. Smoother curves on all interchange ramps would provide a minimum design speed of 45 miles per hour (mph). I-94 and US 45 would have a 60 mph design speed. The interchange would have four levels, making it about 20 feet higher than the existing core. Expenditures for the Reduced Impacts Alternative estimated in year-of-construction dollars are $1.7 billion. The adjacent arterials component would cost $65 to $73 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system, replace deteriorating pavement and bridges, and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The preferred alternative would require 76 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 1.6 acres of wetlands and 8.8 acres of parkland. Eight residences and five businesses would be displaced. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. Noise impacts would occur at 426 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: 110343, Final EIS--379 pages, Appendices and Exhibits--497 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 16 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands 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/912110922?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&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.&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.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 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. [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. AN - 912110919; 15100-3_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. 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 local streets affected by the freeway reconstruction; and enhancing the appearance of the reconstructed freeway. I-94 is a major east-west freeway link and I-894 is a bypass around Milwaukee that provides an important connection for several Milwaukee County communities. US 45 is a north-south highway link connecting the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, Oshkosh, Fond du Lac, West Bend, Milwaukee, Chicagos OHare International Airport, and points south. The Zoo Interchange carries more than 300,000 vehicles on an average weekday and crash rates in the study area are up to five times higher than on other similar freeways in the state. This final EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative, the Modernization with No Added Capacity Alternative (six lanes), the Modernization with Added Capacity Alternative (eight lanes), and the Reduced Impacts Alternative. An adjacent arterials component is also considered in order to provide needed improvements for freeway traffic diverted to State Highway 100, Watertown Plank Road, Bluemound Road, and 84th Street. The Reduced Impacts Alternative with the adjacent arterials component is the preferred alternative. Eight lanes would be provided in the north-south direction. Four east-west lanes would be provided through the core while additional capacity in the form of auxiliary lanes would be provided east and west of the core to accommodate future traffic volumes. The Zoo Interchange would include full eight-foot to 12-foot shoulders on all ramps and freeways, two to three lanes on all through routes, and three to four lanes on all four approach legs. Smoother curves on all interchange ramps would provide a minimum design speed of 45 miles per hour (mph). I-94 and US 45 would have a 60 mph design speed. The interchange would have four levels, making it about 20 feet higher than the existing core. Expenditures for the Reduced Impacts Alternative estimated in year-of-construction dollars are $1.7 billion. The adjacent arterials component would cost $65 to $73 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system, replace deteriorating pavement and bridges, and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The preferred alternative would require 76 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 1.6 acres of wetlands and 8.8 acres of parkland. Eight residences and five businesses would be displaced. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. Noise impacts would occur at 426 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: 110343, Final EIS--379 pages, Appendices and Exhibits--497 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 15 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands 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/912110919?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&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.&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.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 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. [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. AN - 912110918; 15100-3_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. 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 local streets affected by the freeway reconstruction; and enhancing the appearance of the reconstructed freeway. I-94 is a major east-west freeway link and I-894 is a bypass around Milwaukee that provides an important connection for several Milwaukee County communities. US 45 is a north-south highway link connecting the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, Oshkosh, Fond du Lac, West Bend, Milwaukee, Chicagos OHare International Airport, and points south. The Zoo Interchange carries more than 300,000 vehicles on an average weekday and crash rates in the study area are up to five times higher than on other similar freeways in the state. This final EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative, the Modernization with No Added Capacity Alternative (six lanes), the Modernization with Added Capacity Alternative (eight lanes), and the Reduced Impacts Alternative. An adjacent arterials component is also considered in order to provide needed improvements for freeway traffic diverted to State Highway 100, Watertown Plank Road, Bluemound Road, and 84th Street. The Reduced Impacts Alternative with the adjacent arterials component is the preferred alternative. Eight lanes would be provided in the north-south direction. Four east-west lanes would be provided through the core while additional capacity in the form of auxiliary lanes would be provided east and west of the core to accommodate future traffic volumes. The Zoo Interchange would include full eight-foot to 12-foot shoulders on all ramps and freeways, two to three lanes on all through routes, and three to four lanes on all four approach legs. Smoother curves on all interchange ramps would provide a minimum design speed of 45 miles per hour (mph). I-94 and US 45 would have a 60 mph design speed. The interchange would have four levels, making it about 20 feet higher than the existing core. Expenditures for the Reduced Impacts Alternative estimated in year-of-construction dollars are $1.7 billion. The adjacent arterials component would cost $65 to $73 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system, replace deteriorating pavement and bridges, and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The preferred alternative would require 76 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 1.6 acres of wetlands and 8.8 acres of parkland. Eight residences and five businesses would be displaced. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. Noise impacts would occur at 426 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: 110343, Final EIS--379 pages, Appendices and Exhibits--497 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 14 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands 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/912110918?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&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.&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.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 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. [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. AN - 912110917; 15100-3_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. 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 local streets affected by the freeway reconstruction; and enhancing the appearance of the reconstructed freeway. I-94 is a major east-west freeway link and I-894 is a bypass around Milwaukee that provides an important connection for several Milwaukee County communities. US 45 is a north-south highway link connecting the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, Oshkosh, Fond du Lac, West Bend, Milwaukee, Chicagos OHare International Airport, and points south. The Zoo Interchange carries more than 300,000 vehicles on an average weekday and crash rates in the study area are up to five times higher than on other similar freeways in the state. This final EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative, the Modernization with No Added Capacity Alternative (six lanes), the Modernization with Added Capacity Alternative (eight lanes), and the Reduced Impacts Alternative. An adjacent arterials component is also considered in order to provide needed improvements for freeway traffic diverted to State Highway 100, Watertown Plank Road, Bluemound Road, and 84th Street. The Reduced Impacts Alternative with the adjacent arterials component is the preferred alternative. Eight lanes would be provided in the north-south direction. Four east-west lanes would be provided through the core while additional capacity in the form of auxiliary lanes would be provided east and west of the core to accommodate future traffic volumes. The Zoo Interchange would include full eight-foot to 12-foot shoulders on all ramps and freeways, two to three lanes on all through routes, and three to four lanes on all four approach legs. Smoother curves on all interchange ramps would provide a minimum design speed of 45 miles per hour (mph). I-94 and US 45 would have a 60 mph design speed. The interchange would have four levels, making it about 20 feet higher than the existing core. Expenditures for the Reduced Impacts Alternative estimated in year-of-construction dollars are $1.7 billion. The adjacent arterials component would cost $65 to $73 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system, replace deteriorating pavement and bridges, and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The preferred alternative would require 76 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 1.6 acres of wetlands and 8.8 acres of parkland. Eight residences and five businesses would be displaced. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. Noise impacts would occur at 426 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: 110343, Final EIS--379 pages, Appendices and Exhibits--497 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 13 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands 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/912110917?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&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.&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.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 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. [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. AN - 912109824; 15100-3_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. 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 local streets affected by the freeway reconstruction; and enhancing the appearance of the reconstructed freeway. I-94 is a major east-west freeway link and I-894 is a bypass around Milwaukee that provides an important connection for several Milwaukee County communities. US 45 is a north-south highway link connecting the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, Oshkosh, Fond du Lac, West Bend, Milwaukee, Chicagos OHare International Airport, and points south. The Zoo Interchange carries more than 300,000 vehicles on an average weekday and crash rates in the study area are up to five times higher than on other similar freeways in the state. This final EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative, the Modernization with No Added Capacity Alternative (six lanes), the Modernization with Added Capacity Alternative (eight lanes), and the Reduced Impacts Alternative. An adjacent arterials component is also considered in order to provide needed improvements for freeway traffic diverted to State Highway 100, Watertown Plank Road, Bluemound Road, and 84th Street. The Reduced Impacts Alternative with the adjacent arterials component is the preferred alternative. Eight lanes would be provided in the north-south direction. Four east-west lanes would be provided through the core while additional capacity in the form of auxiliary lanes would be provided east and west of the core to accommodate future traffic volumes. The Zoo Interchange would include full eight-foot to 12-foot shoulders on all ramps and freeways, two to three lanes on all through routes, and three to four lanes on all four approach legs. Smoother curves on all interchange ramps would provide a minimum design speed of 45 miles per hour (mph). I-94 and US 45 would have a 60 mph design speed. The interchange would have four levels, making it about 20 feet higher than the existing core. Expenditures for the Reduced Impacts Alternative estimated in year-of-construction dollars are $1.7 billion. The adjacent arterials component would cost $65 to $73 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system, replace deteriorating pavement and bridges, and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The preferred alternative would require 76 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 1.6 acres of wetlands and 8.8 acres of parkland. Eight residences and five businesses would be displaced. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. Noise impacts would occur at 426 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: 110343, Final EIS--379 pages, Appendices and Exhibits--497 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 22 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands 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/912109824?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&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.&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.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 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. [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. AN - 912109813; 15100-3_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. 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 local streets affected by the freeway reconstruction; and enhancing the appearance of the reconstructed freeway. I-94 is a major east-west freeway link and I-894 is a bypass around Milwaukee that provides an important connection for several Milwaukee County communities. US 45 is a north-south highway link connecting the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, Oshkosh, Fond du Lac, West Bend, Milwaukee, Chicagos OHare International Airport, and points south. The Zoo Interchange carries more than 300,000 vehicles on an average weekday and crash rates in the study area are up to five times higher than on other similar freeways in the state. This final EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative, the Modernization with No Added Capacity Alternative (six lanes), the Modernization with Added Capacity Alternative (eight lanes), and the Reduced Impacts Alternative. An adjacent arterials component is also considered in order to provide needed improvements for freeway traffic diverted to State Highway 100, Watertown Plank Road, Bluemound Road, and 84th Street. The Reduced Impacts Alternative with the adjacent arterials component is the preferred alternative. Eight lanes would be provided in the north-south direction. Four east-west lanes would be provided through the core while additional capacity in the form of auxiliary lanes would be provided east and west of the core to accommodate future traffic volumes. The Zoo Interchange would include full eight-foot to 12-foot shoulders on all ramps and freeways, two to three lanes on all through routes, and three to four lanes on all four approach legs. Smoother curves on all interchange ramps would provide a minimum design speed of 45 miles per hour (mph). I-94 and US 45 would have a 60 mph design speed. The interchange would have four levels, making it about 20 feet higher than the existing core. Expenditures for the Reduced Impacts Alternative estimated in year-of-construction dollars are $1.7 billion. The adjacent arterials component would cost $65 to $73 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system, replace deteriorating pavement and bridges, and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The preferred alternative would require 76 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 1.6 acres of wetlands and 8.8 acres of parkland. Eight residences and five businesses would be displaced. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. Noise impacts would occur at 426 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: 110343, Final EIS--379 pages, Appendices and Exhibits--497 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 21 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands 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/912109813?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&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.&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.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 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. [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. AN - 912109802; 15100-3_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. 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 local streets affected by the freeway reconstruction; and enhancing the appearance of the reconstructed freeway. I-94 is a major east-west freeway link and I-894 is a bypass around Milwaukee that provides an important connection for several Milwaukee County communities. US 45 is a north-south highway link connecting the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, Oshkosh, Fond du Lac, West Bend, Milwaukee, Chicagos OHare International Airport, and points south. The Zoo Interchange carries more than 300,000 vehicles on an average weekday and crash rates in the study area are up to five times higher than on other similar freeways in the state. This final EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative, the Modernization with No Added Capacity Alternative (six lanes), the Modernization with Added Capacity Alternative (eight lanes), and the Reduced Impacts Alternative. An adjacent arterials component is also considered in order to provide needed improvements for freeway traffic diverted to State Highway 100, Watertown Plank Road, Bluemound Road, and 84th Street. The Reduced Impacts Alternative with the adjacent arterials component is the preferred alternative. Eight lanes would be provided in the north-south direction. Four east-west lanes would be provided through the core while additional capacity in the form of auxiliary lanes would be provided east and west of the core to accommodate future traffic volumes. The Zoo Interchange would include full eight-foot to 12-foot shoulders on all ramps and freeways, two to three lanes on all through routes, and three to four lanes on all four approach legs. Smoother curves on all interchange ramps would provide a minimum design speed of 45 miles per hour (mph). I-94 and US 45 would have a 60 mph design speed. The interchange would have four levels, making it about 20 feet higher than the existing core. Expenditures for the Reduced Impacts Alternative estimated in year-of-construction dollars are $1.7 billion. The adjacent arterials component would cost $65 to $73 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system, replace deteriorating pavement and bridges, and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The preferred alternative would require 76 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 1.6 acres of wetlands and 8.8 acres of parkland. Eight residences and five businesses would be displaced. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. Noise impacts would occur at 426 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: 110343, Final EIS--379 pages, Appendices and Exhibits--497 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 20 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands 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/912109802?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&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.&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.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 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. [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. AN - 912109793; 15100-3_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. 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 local streets affected by the freeway reconstruction; and enhancing the appearance of the reconstructed freeway. I-94 is a major east-west freeway link and I-894 is a bypass around Milwaukee that provides an important connection for several Milwaukee County communities. US 45 is a north-south highway link connecting the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, Oshkosh, Fond du Lac, West Bend, Milwaukee, Chicagos OHare International Airport, and points south. The Zoo Interchange carries more than 300,000 vehicles on an average weekday and crash rates in the study area are up to five times higher than on other similar freeways in the state. This final EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative, the Modernization with No Added Capacity Alternative (six lanes), the Modernization with Added Capacity Alternative (eight lanes), and the Reduced Impacts Alternative. An adjacent arterials component is also considered in order to provide needed improvements for freeway traffic diverted to State Highway 100, Watertown Plank Road, Bluemound Road, and 84th Street. The Reduced Impacts Alternative with the adjacent arterials component is the preferred alternative. Eight lanes would be provided in the north-south direction. Four east-west lanes would be provided through the core while additional capacity in the form of auxiliary lanes would be provided east and west of the core to accommodate future traffic volumes. The Zoo Interchange would include full eight-foot to 12-foot shoulders on all ramps and freeways, two to three lanes on all through routes, and three to four lanes on all four approach legs. Smoother curves on all interchange ramps would provide a minimum design speed of 45 miles per hour (mph). I-94 and US 45 would have a 60 mph design speed. The interchange would have four levels, making it about 20 feet higher than the existing core. Expenditures for the Reduced Impacts Alternative estimated in year-of-construction dollars are $1.7 billion. The adjacent arterials component would cost $65 to $73 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system, replace deteriorating pavement and bridges, and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The preferred alternative would require 76 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 1.6 acres of wetlands and 8.8 acres of parkland. Eight residences and five businesses would be displaced. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. Noise impacts would occur at 426 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: 110343, Final EIS--379 pages, Appendices and Exhibits--497 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 19 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands 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/912109793?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&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.&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.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 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. [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. AN - 912109784; 15100-3_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. 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 local streets affected by the freeway reconstruction; and enhancing the appearance of the reconstructed freeway. I-94 is a major east-west freeway link and I-894 is a bypass around Milwaukee that provides an important connection for several Milwaukee County communities. US 45 is a north-south highway link connecting the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, Oshkosh, Fond du Lac, West Bend, Milwaukee, Chicagos OHare International Airport, and points south. The Zoo Interchange carries more than 300,000 vehicles on an average weekday and crash rates in the study area are up to five times higher than on other similar freeways in the state. This final EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative, the Modernization with No Added Capacity Alternative (six lanes), the Modernization with Added Capacity Alternative (eight lanes), and the Reduced Impacts Alternative. An adjacent arterials component is also considered in order to provide needed improvements for freeway traffic diverted to State Highway 100, Watertown Plank Road, Bluemound Road, and 84th Street. The Reduced Impacts Alternative with the adjacent arterials component is the preferred alternative. Eight lanes would be provided in the north-south direction. Four east-west lanes would be provided through the core while additional capacity in the form of auxiliary lanes would be provided east and west of the core to accommodate future traffic volumes. The Zoo Interchange would include full eight-foot to 12-foot shoulders on all ramps and freeways, two to three lanes on all through routes, and three to four lanes on all four approach legs. Smoother curves on all interchange ramps would provide a minimum design speed of 45 miles per hour (mph). I-94 and US 45 would have a 60 mph design speed. The interchange would have four levels, making it about 20 feet higher than the existing core. Expenditures for the Reduced Impacts Alternative estimated in year-of-construction dollars are $1.7 billion. The adjacent arterials component would cost $65 to $73 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system, replace deteriorating pavement and bridges, and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The preferred alternative would require 76 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 1.6 acres of wetlands and 8.8 acres of parkland. Eight residences and five businesses would be displaced. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. Noise impacts would occur at 426 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: 110343, Final EIS--379 pages, Appendices and Exhibits--497 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 11 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands 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/912109784?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&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.&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.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 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. [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. AN - 912109771; 15100-3_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. 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 local streets affected by the freeway reconstruction; and enhancing the appearance of the reconstructed freeway. I-94 is a major east-west freeway link and I-894 is a bypass around Milwaukee that provides an important connection for several Milwaukee County communities. US 45 is a north-south highway link connecting the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, Oshkosh, Fond du Lac, West Bend, Milwaukee, Chicagos OHare International Airport, and points south. The Zoo Interchange carries more than 300,000 vehicles on an average weekday and crash rates in the study area are up to five times higher than on other similar freeways in the state. This final EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative, the Modernization with No Added Capacity Alternative (six lanes), the Modernization with Added Capacity Alternative (eight lanes), and the Reduced Impacts Alternative. An adjacent arterials component is also considered in order to provide needed improvements for freeway traffic diverted to State Highway 100, Watertown Plank Road, Bluemound Road, and 84th Street. The Reduced Impacts Alternative with the adjacent arterials component is the preferred alternative. Eight lanes would be provided in the north-south direction. Four east-west lanes would be provided through the core while additional capacity in the form of auxiliary lanes would be provided east and west of the core to accommodate future traffic volumes. The Zoo Interchange would include full eight-foot to 12-foot shoulders on all ramps and freeways, two to three lanes on all through routes, and three to four lanes on all four approach legs. Smoother curves on all interchange ramps would provide a minimum design speed of 45 miles per hour (mph). I-94 and US 45 would have a 60 mph design speed. The interchange would have four levels, making it about 20 feet higher than the existing core. Expenditures for the Reduced Impacts Alternative estimated in year-of-construction dollars are $1.7 billion. The adjacent arterials component would cost $65 to $73 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system, replace deteriorating pavement and bridges, and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The preferred alternative would require 76 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 1.6 acres of wetlands and 8.8 acres of parkland. Eight residences and five businesses would be displaced. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. Noise impacts would occur at 426 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: 110343, Final EIS--379 pages, Appendices and Exhibits--497 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands 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/912109771?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&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.&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.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 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. [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. AN - 912109765; 15100-3_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. 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 local streets affected by the freeway reconstruction; and enhancing the appearance of the reconstructed freeway. I-94 is a major east-west freeway link and I-894 is a bypass around Milwaukee that provides an important connection for several Milwaukee County communities. US 45 is a north-south highway link connecting the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, Oshkosh, Fond du Lac, West Bend, Milwaukee, Chicagos OHare International Airport, and points south. The Zoo Interchange carries more than 300,000 vehicles on an average weekday and crash rates in the study area are up to five times higher than on other similar freeways in the state. This final EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative, the Modernization with No Added Capacity Alternative (six lanes), the Modernization with Added Capacity Alternative (eight lanes), and the Reduced Impacts Alternative. An adjacent arterials component is also considered in order to provide needed improvements for freeway traffic diverted to State Highway 100, Watertown Plank Road, Bluemound Road, and 84th Street. The Reduced Impacts Alternative with the adjacent arterials component is the preferred alternative. Eight lanes would be provided in the north-south direction. Four east-west lanes would be provided through the core while additional capacity in the form of auxiliary lanes would be provided east and west of the core to accommodate future traffic volumes. The Zoo Interchange would include full eight-foot to 12-foot shoulders on all ramps and freeways, two to three lanes on all through routes, and three to four lanes on all four approach legs. Smoother curves on all interchange ramps would provide a minimum design speed of 45 miles per hour (mph). I-94 and US 45 would have a 60 mph design speed. The interchange would have four levels, making it about 20 feet higher than the existing core. Expenditures for the Reduced Impacts Alternative estimated in year-of-construction dollars are $1.7 billion. The adjacent arterials component would cost $65 to $73 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system, replace deteriorating pavement and bridges, and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The preferred alternative would require 76 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 1.6 acres of wetlands and 8.8 acres of parkland. Eight residences and five businesses would be displaced. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. Noise impacts would occur at 426 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: 110343, Final EIS--379 pages, Appendices and Exhibits--497 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 9 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands 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/912109765?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&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.&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.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 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. [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. AN - 912109756; 15100-3_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. 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 local streets affected by the freeway reconstruction; and enhancing the appearance of the reconstructed freeway. I-94 is a major east-west freeway link and I-894 is a bypass around Milwaukee that provides an important connection for several Milwaukee County communities. US 45 is a north-south highway link connecting the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, Oshkosh, Fond du Lac, West Bend, Milwaukee, Chicagos OHare International Airport, and points south. The Zoo Interchange carries more than 300,000 vehicles on an average weekday and crash rates in the study area are up to five times higher than on other similar freeways in the state. This final EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative, the Modernization with No Added Capacity Alternative (six lanes), the Modernization with Added Capacity Alternative (eight lanes), and the Reduced Impacts Alternative. An adjacent arterials component is also considered in order to provide needed improvements for freeway traffic diverted to State Highway 100, Watertown Plank Road, Bluemound Road, and 84th Street. The Reduced Impacts Alternative with the adjacent arterials component is the preferred alternative. Eight lanes would be provided in the north-south direction. Four east-west lanes would be provided through the core while additional capacity in the form of auxiliary lanes would be provided east and west of the core to accommodate future traffic volumes. The Zoo Interchange would include full eight-foot to 12-foot shoulders on all ramps and freeways, two to three lanes on all through routes, and three to four lanes on all four approach legs. Smoother curves on all interchange ramps would provide a minimum design speed of 45 miles per hour (mph). I-94 and US 45 would have a 60 mph design speed. The interchange would have four levels, making it about 20 feet higher than the existing core. Expenditures for the Reduced Impacts Alternative estimated in year-of-construction dollars are $1.7 billion. The adjacent arterials component would cost $65 to $73 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system, replace deteriorating pavement and bridges, and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The preferred alternative would require 76 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 1.6 acres of wetlands and 8.8 acres of parkland. Eight residences and five businesses would be displaced. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. Noise impacts would occur at 426 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: 110343, Final EIS--379 pages, Appendices and Exhibits--497 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands 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/912109756?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&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.&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.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 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. [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. AN - 912109745; 15100-3_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. 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 local streets affected by the freeway reconstruction; and enhancing the appearance of the reconstructed freeway. I-94 is a major east-west freeway link and I-894 is a bypass around Milwaukee that provides an important connection for several Milwaukee County communities. US 45 is a north-south highway link connecting the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, Oshkosh, Fond du Lac, West Bend, Milwaukee, Chicagos OHare International Airport, and points south. The Zoo Interchange carries more than 300,000 vehicles on an average weekday and crash rates in the study area are up to five times higher than on other similar freeways in the state. This final EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative, the Modernization with No Added Capacity Alternative (six lanes), the Modernization with Added Capacity Alternative (eight lanes), and the Reduced Impacts Alternative. An adjacent arterials component is also considered in order to provide needed improvements for freeway traffic diverted to State Highway 100, Watertown Plank Road, Bluemound Road, and 84th Street. The Reduced Impacts Alternative with the adjacent arterials component is the preferred alternative. Eight lanes would be provided in the north-south direction. Four east-west lanes would be provided through the core while additional capacity in the form of auxiliary lanes would be provided east and west of the core to accommodate future traffic volumes. The Zoo Interchange would include full eight-foot to 12-foot shoulders on all ramps and freeways, two to three lanes on all through routes, and three to four lanes on all four approach legs. Smoother curves on all interchange ramps would provide a minimum design speed of 45 miles per hour (mph). I-94 and US 45 would have a 60 mph design speed. The interchange would have four levels, making it about 20 feet higher than the existing core. Expenditures for the Reduced Impacts Alternative estimated in year-of-construction dollars are $1.7 billion. The adjacent arterials component would cost $65 to $73 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system, replace deteriorating pavement and bridges, and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The preferred alternative would require 76 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 1.6 acres of wetlands and 8.8 acres of parkland. Eight residences and five businesses would be displaced. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. Noise impacts would occur at 426 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: 110343, Final EIS--379 pages, Appendices and Exhibits--497 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands 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/912109745?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&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.&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.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - U.S. HIGHWAY 160 FROM DURANGO TO BAYFIELD, LA PLATA COUNTY, COLORADO (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2006). [Part 5 of 19] T2 - U.S. HIGHWAY 160 FROM DURANGO TO BAYFIELD, LA PLATA COUNTY, COLORADO (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2006). AN - 912109530; 15099-2_0005 AB - PURPOSE: Design changes to a limited portion of the US 160 Corridor Project where US 550 connects to US 160 east of Durango, Colorado are proposed. The selected alternative from the 2006 Record of Decision on US 160 is 16.2 miles, extending from milepost (MP) 88.0, located east of Durango, to MP 104.2, located east of Bayfield. The selected alternative extends four lanes on US 160 to east of Bayfield, generally along the existing alignment with an alignment to the south in Gem Village from MP 100 to MP 101. It also includes reconstruction of the US 160/US 550 (south) intersection as an interchange and a new section of US 550 that is necessary to connect the interchange on US 160 to the US 550 corridor south of Durango. The action proposed in this draft supplemental EIS would revise the location and length of US 550 from south of County Road (CR) 220 to where it connects to US 160. The design shift would lessen impacts and avoid a gas well. The realigned 1.5-mile section of US 550 would be improved from a two-lane to a four-lane highway. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated. The Revised G Modified Alternative is the preferred alternative and would connect US 550 to US 160 via the Grandview Interchange. The Revised F Modified and the Eastern Realignment alternatives would connect US 550 to US 160 at the single-point urban interchange at CR 233 (Three Springs). Estimated costs of the Revised G Modified, Revised F Modified, and Eastern Realignment alternatives are $77.6 million, $77.4 million, and $93.1 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would increase travel efficiency and capacity to meet current and future needs, improve safety for the traveling public by reducing the number and severity of accidents, and provide for controlled access to the highway corridors affected. Intersections with county roads would be upgraded to meet current design standards. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 18.4 acres of farmland, 42.5 acres of wildlife habitat, and 0.3 acres of wetlands. Two historic ranches and six archaeological sites eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places would be affected. 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 abstracts of the draft and final EISs, see 06-0127D, Volume 30, Number 1 and 06-0415F, Volume 30, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110342, Draft Supplemental EIS--402 pages and maps, Appendices--916 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites 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/912109530?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=U.S.+HIGHWAY+160+FROM+DURANGO+TO+BAYFIELD%2C+LA+PLATA+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2006%29.&rft.title=U.S.+HIGHWAY+160+FROM+DURANGO+TO+BAYFIELD%2C+LA+PLATA+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2006%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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - U.S. HIGHWAY 160 FROM DURANGO TO BAYFIELD, LA PLATA COUNTY, COLORADO (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2006). [Part 4 of 19] T2 - U.S. HIGHWAY 160 FROM DURANGO TO BAYFIELD, LA PLATA COUNTY, COLORADO (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2006). AN - 912109505; 15099-2_0004 AB - PURPOSE: Design changes to a limited portion of the US 160 Corridor Project where US 550 connects to US 160 east of Durango, Colorado are proposed. The selected alternative from the 2006 Record of Decision on US 160 is 16.2 miles, extending from milepost (MP) 88.0, located east of Durango, to MP 104.2, located east of Bayfield. The selected alternative extends four lanes on US 160 to east of Bayfield, generally along the existing alignment with an alignment to the south in Gem Village from MP 100 to MP 101. It also includes reconstruction of the US 160/US 550 (south) intersection as an interchange and a new section of US 550 that is necessary to connect the interchange on US 160 to the US 550 corridor south of Durango. The action proposed in this draft supplemental EIS would revise the location and length of US 550 from south of County Road (CR) 220 to where it connects to US 160. The design shift would lessen impacts and avoid a gas well. The realigned 1.5-mile section of US 550 would be improved from a two-lane to a four-lane highway. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated. The Revised G Modified Alternative is the preferred alternative and would connect US 550 to US 160 via the Grandview Interchange. The Revised F Modified and the Eastern Realignment alternatives would connect US 550 to US 160 at the single-point urban interchange at CR 233 (Three Springs). Estimated costs of the Revised G Modified, Revised F Modified, and Eastern Realignment alternatives are $77.6 million, $77.4 million, and $93.1 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would increase travel efficiency and capacity to meet current and future needs, improve safety for the traveling public by reducing the number and severity of accidents, and provide for controlled access to the highway corridors affected. Intersections with county roads would be upgraded to meet current design standards. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 18.4 acres of farmland, 42.5 acres of wildlife habitat, and 0.3 acres of wetlands. Two historic ranches and six archaeological sites eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places would be affected. 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 abstracts of the draft and final EISs, see 06-0127D, Volume 30, Number 1 and 06-0415F, Volume 30, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110342, Draft Supplemental EIS--402 pages and maps, Appendices--916 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites 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/912109505?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=U.S.+HIGHWAY+160+FROM+DURANGO+TO+BAYFIELD%2C+LA+PLATA+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2006%29.&rft.title=U.S.+HIGHWAY+160+FROM+DURANGO+TO+BAYFIELD%2C+LA+PLATA+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2006%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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - U.S. HIGHWAY 160 FROM DURANGO TO BAYFIELD, LA PLATA COUNTY, COLORADO (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2006). [Part 3 of 19] T2 - U.S. HIGHWAY 160 FROM DURANGO TO BAYFIELD, LA PLATA COUNTY, COLORADO (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2006). AN - 912109501; 15099-2_0003 AB - PURPOSE: Design changes to a limited portion of the US 160 Corridor Project where US 550 connects to US 160 east of Durango, Colorado are proposed. The selected alternative from the 2006 Record of Decision on US 160 is 16.2 miles, extending from milepost (MP) 88.0, located east of Durango, to MP 104.2, located east of Bayfield. The selected alternative extends four lanes on US 160 to east of Bayfield, generally along the existing alignment with an alignment to the south in Gem Village from MP 100 to MP 101. It also includes reconstruction of the US 160/US 550 (south) intersection as an interchange and a new section of US 550 that is necessary to connect the interchange on US 160 to the US 550 corridor south of Durango. The action proposed in this draft supplemental EIS would revise the location and length of US 550 from south of County Road (CR) 220 to where it connects to US 160. The design shift would lessen impacts and avoid a gas well. The realigned 1.5-mile section of US 550 would be improved from a two-lane to a four-lane highway. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated. The Revised G Modified Alternative is the preferred alternative and would connect US 550 to US 160 via the Grandview Interchange. The Revised F Modified and the Eastern Realignment alternatives would connect US 550 to US 160 at the single-point urban interchange at CR 233 (Three Springs). Estimated costs of the Revised G Modified, Revised F Modified, and Eastern Realignment alternatives are $77.6 million, $77.4 million, and $93.1 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would increase travel efficiency and capacity to meet current and future needs, improve safety for the traveling public by reducing the number and severity of accidents, and provide for controlled access to the highway corridors affected. Intersections with county roads would be upgraded to meet current design standards. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 18.4 acres of farmland, 42.5 acres of wildlife habitat, and 0.3 acres of wetlands. Two historic ranches and six archaeological sites eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places would be affected. 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 abstracts of the draft and final EISs, see 06-0127D, Volume 30, Number 1 and 06-0415F, Volume 30, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110342, Draft Supplemental EIS--402 pages and maps, Appendices--916 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites 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/912109501?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=U.S.+HIGHWAY+160+FROM+DURANGO+TO+BAYFIELD%2C+LA+PLATA+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2006%29.&rft.title=U.S.+HIGHWAY+160+FROM+DURANGO+TO+BAYFIELD%2C+LA+PLATA+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2006%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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 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. [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. AN - 912109497; 15100-3_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. 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 local streets affected by the freeway reconstruction; and enhancing the appearance of the reconstructed freeway. I-94 is a major east-west freeway link and I-894 is a bypass around Milwaukee that provides an important connection for several Milwaukee County communities. US 45 is a north-south highway link connecting the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, Oshkosh, Fond du Lac, West Bend, Milwaukee, Chicagos OHare International Airport, and points south. The Zoo Interchange carries more than 300,000 vehicles on an average weekday and crash rates in the study area are up to five times higher than on other similar freeways in the state. This final EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative, the Modernization with No Added Capacity Alternative (six lanes), the Modernization with Added Capacity Alternative (eight lanes), and the Reduced Impacts Alternative. An adjacent arterials component is also considered in order to provide needed improvements for freeway traffic diverted to State Highway 100, Watertown Plank Road, Bluemound Road, and 84th Street. The Reduced Impacts Alternative with the adjacent arterials component is the preferred alternative. Eight lanes would be provided in the north-south direction. Four east-west lanes would be provided through the core while additional capacity in the form of auxiliary lanes would be provided east and west of the core to accommodate future traffic volumes. The Zoo Interchange would include full eight-foot to 12-foot shoulders on all ramps and freeways, two to three lanes on all through routes, and three to four lanes on all four approach legs. Smoother curves on all interchange ramps would provide a minimum design speed of 45 miles per hour (mph). I-94 and US 45 would have a 60 mph design speed. The interchange would have four levels, making it about 20 feet higher than the existing core. Expenditures for the Reduced Impacts Alternative estimated in year-of-construction dollars are $1.7 billion. The adjacent arterials component would cost $65 to $73 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system, replace deteriorating pavement and bridges, and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The preferred alternative would require 76 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 1.6 acres of wetlands and 8.8 acres of parkland. Eight residences and five businesses would be displaced. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. Noise impacts would occur at 426 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: 110343, Final EIS--379 pages, Appendices and Exhibits--497 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands 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/912109497?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&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.&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.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 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. [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. AN - 912109489; 15100-3_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. 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 local streets affected by the freeway reconstruction; and enhancing the appearance of the reconstructed freeway. I-94 is a major east-west freeway link and I-894 is a bypass around Milwaukee that provides an important connection for several Milwaukee County communities. US 45 is a north-south highway link connecting the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, Oshkosh, Fond du Lac, West Bend, Milwaukee, Chicagos OHare International Airport, and points south. The Zoo Interchange carries more than 300,000 vehicles on an average weekday and crash rates in the study area are up to five times higher than on other similar freeways in the state. This final EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative, the Modernization with No Added Capacity Alternative (six lanes), the Modernization with Added Capacity Alternative (eight lanes), and the Reduced Impacts Alternative. An adjacent arterials component is also considered in order to provide needed improvements for freeway traffic diverted to State Highway 100, Watertown Plank Road, Bluemound Road, and 84th Street. The Reduced Impacts Alternative with the adjacent arterials component is the preferred alternative. Eight lanes would be provided in the north-south direction. Four east-west lanes would be provided through the core while additional capacity in the form of auxiliary lanes would be provided east and west of the core to accommodate future traffic volumes. The Zoo Interchange would include full eight-foot to 12-foot shoulders on all ramps and freeways, two to three lanes on all through routes, and three to four lanes on all four approach legs. Smoother curves on all interchange ramps would provide a minimum design speed of 45 miles per hour (mph). I-94 and US 45 would have a 60 mph design speed. The interchange would have four levels, making it about 20 feet higher than the existing core. Expenditures for the Reduced Impacts Alternative estimated in year-of-construction dollars are $1.7 billion. The adjacent arterials component would cost $65 to $73 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system, replace deteriorating pavement and bridges, and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The preferred alternative would require 76 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 1.6 acres of wetlands and 8.8 acres of parkland. Eight residences and five businesses would be displaced. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. Noise impacts would occur at 426 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: 110343, Final EIS--379 pages, Appendices and Exhibits--497 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands 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/912109489?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&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.&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.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - U.S. HIGHWAY 160 FROM DURANGO TO BAYFIELD, LA PLATA COUNTY, COLORADO (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2006). [Part 2 of 19] T2 - U.S. HIGHWAY 160 FROM DURANGO TO BAYFIELD, LA PLATA COUNTY, COLORADO (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2006). AN - 912109487; 15099-2_0002 AB - PURPOSE: Design changes to a limited portion of the US 160 Corridor Project where US 550 connects to US 160 east of Durango, Colorado are proposed. The selected alternative from the 2006 Record of Decision on US 160 is 16.2 miles, extending from milepost (MP) 88.0, located east of Durango, to MP 104.2, located east of Bayfield. The selected alternative extends four lanes on US 160 to east of Bayfield, generally along the existing alignment with an alignment to the south in Gem Village from MP 100 to MP 101. It also includes reconstruction of the US 160/US 550 (south) intersection as an interchange and a new section of US 550 that is necessary to connect the interchange on US 160 to the US 550 corridor south of Durango. The action proposed in this draft supplemental EIS would revise the location and length of US 550 from south of County Road (CR) 220 to where it connects to US 160. The design shift would lessen impacts and avoid a gas well. The realigned 1.5-mile section of US 550 would be improved from a two-lane to a four-lane highway. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated. The Revised G Modified Alternative is the preferred alternative and would connect US 550 to US 160 via the Grandview Interchange. The Revised F Modified and the Eastern Realignment alternatives would connect US 550 to US 160 at the single-point urban interchange at CR 233 (Three Springs). Estimated costs of the Revised G Modified, Revised F Modified, and Eastern Realignment alternatives are $77.6 million, $77.4 million, and $93.1 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would increase travel efficiency and capacity to meet current and future needs, improve safety for the traveling public by reducing the number and severity of accidents, and provide for controlled access to the highway corridors affected. Intersections with county roads would be upgraded to meet current design standards. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 18.4 acres of farmland, 42.5 acres of wildlife habitat, and 0.3 acres of wetlands. Two historic ranches and six archaeological sites eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places would be affected. 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 abstracts of the draft and final EISs, see 06-0127D, Volume 30, Number 1 and 06-0415F, Volume 30, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110342, Draft Supplemental EIS--402 pages and maps, Appendices--916 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites 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/912109487?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=U.S.+HIGHWAY+160+FROM+DURANGO+TO+BAYFIELD%2C+LA+PLATA+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2006%29.&rft.title=U.S.+HIGHWAY+160+FROM+DURANGO+TO+BAYFIELD%2C+LA+PLATA+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2006%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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 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. [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. AN - 912109471; 15100-3_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. 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 local streets affected by the freeway reconstruction; and enhancing the appearance of the reconstructed freeway. I-94 is a major east-west freeway link and I-894 is a bypass around Milwaukee that provides an important connection for several Milwaukee County communities. US 45 is a north-south highway link connecting the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, Oshkosh, Fond du Lac, West Bend, Milwaukee, Chicagos OHare International Airport, and points south. The Zoo Interchange carries more than 300,000 vehicles on an average weekday and crash rates in the study area are up to five times higher than on other similar freeways in the state. This final EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative, the Modernization with No Added Capacity Alternative (six lanes), the Modernization with Added Capacity Alternative (eight lanes), and the Reduced Impacts Alternative. An adjacent arterials component is also considered in order to provide needed improvements for freeway traffic diverted to State Highway 100, Watertown Plank Road, Bluemound Road, and 84th Street. The Reduced Impacts Alternative with the adjacent arterials component is the preferred alternative. Eight lanes would be provided in the north-south direction. Four east-west lanes would be provided through the core while additional capacity in the form of auxiliary lanes would be provided east and west of the core to accommodate future traffic volumes. The Zoo Interchange would include full eight-foot to 12-foot shoulders on all ramps and freeways, two to three lanes on all through routes, and three to four lanes on all four approach legs. Smoother curves on all interchange ramps would provide a minimum design speed of 45 miles per hour (mph). I-94 and US 45 would have a 60 mph design speed. The interchange would have four levels, making it about 20 feet higher than the existing core. Expenditures for the Reduced Impacts Alternative estimated in year-of-construction dollars are $1.7 billion. The adjacent arterials component would cost $65 to $73 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system, replace deteriorating pavement and bridges, and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The preferred alternative would require 76 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 1.6 acres of wetlands and 8.8 acres of parkland. Eight residences and five businesses would be displaced. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. Noise impacts would occur at 426 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: 110343, Final EIS--379 pages, Appendices and Exhibits--497 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands 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/912109471?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&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.&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.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - U.S. HIGHWAY 160 FROM DURANGO TO BAYFIELD, LA PLATA COUNTY, COLORADO (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2006). [Part 1 of 19] T2 - U.S. HIGHWAY 160 FROM DURANGO TO BAYFIELD, LA PLATA COUNTY, COLORADO (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2006). AN - 912109467; 15099-2_0001 AB - PURPOSE: Design changes to a limited portion of the US 160 Corridor Project where US 550 connects to US 160 east of Durango, Colorado are proposed. The selected alternative from the 2006 Record of Decision on US 160 is 16.2 miles, extending from milepost (MP) 88.0, located east of Durango, to MP 104.2, located east of Bayfield. The selected alternative extends four lanes on US 160 to east of Bayfield, generally along the existing alignment with an alignment to the south in Gem Village from MP 100 to MP 101. It also includes reconstruction of the US 160/US 550 (south) intersection as an interchange and a new section of US 550 that is necessary to connect the interchange on US 160 to the US 550 corridor south of Durango. The action proposed in this draft supplemental EIS would revise the location and length of US 550 from south of County Road (CR) 220 to where it connects to US 160. The design shift would lessen impacts and avoid a gas well. The realigned 1.5-mile section of US 550 would be improved from a two-lane to a four-lane highway. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated. The Revised G Modified Alternative is the preferred alternative and would connect US 550 to US 160 via the Grandview Interchange. The Revised F Modified and the Eastern Realignment alternatives would connect US 550 to US 160 at the single-point urban interchange at CR 233 (Three Springs). Estimated costs of the Revised G Modified, Revised F Modified, and Eastern Realignment alternatives are $77.6 million, $77.4 million, and $93.1 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would increase travel efficiency and capacity to meet current and future needs, improve safety for the traveling public by reducing the number and severity of accidents, and provide for controlled access to the highway corridors affected. Intersections with county roads would be upgraded to meet current design standards. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 18.4 acres of farmland, 42.5 acres of wildlife habitat, and 0.3 acres of wetlands. Two historic ranches and six archaeological sites eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places would be affected. 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 abstracts of the draft and final EISs, see 06-0127D, Volume 30, Number 1 and 06-0415F, Volume 30, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110342, Draft Supplemental EIS--402 pages and maps, Appendices--916 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites 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/912109467?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=U.S.+HIGHWAY+160+FROM+DURANGO+TO+BAYFIELD%2C+LA+PLATA+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2006%29.&rft.title=U.S.+HIGHWAY+160+FROM+DURANGO+TO+BAYFIELD%2C+LA+PLATA+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2006%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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 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. [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. AN - 912109462; 15100-3_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. 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 local streets affected by the freeway reconstruction; and enhancing the appearance of the reconstructed freeway. I-94 is a major east-west freeway link and I-894 is a bypass around Milwaukee that provides an important connection for several Milwaukee County communities. US 45 is a north-south highway link connecting the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, Oshkosh, Fond du Lac, West Bend, Milwaukee, Chicagos OHare International Airport, and points south. The Zoo Interchange carries more than 300,000 vehicles on an average weekday and crash rates in the study area are up to five times higher than on other similar freeways in the state. This final EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative, the Modernization with No Added Capacity Alternative (six lanes), the Modernization with Added Capacity Alternative (eight lanes), and the Reduced Impacts Alternative. An adjacent arterials component is also considered in order to provide needed improvements for freeway traffic diverted to State Highway 100, Watertown Plank Road, Bluemound Road, and 84th Street. The Reduced Impacts Alternative with the adjacent arterials component is the preferred alternative. Eight lanes would be provided in the north-south direction. Four east-west lanes would be provided through the core while additional capacity in the form of auxiliary lanes would be provided east and west of the core to accommodate future traffic volumes. The Zoo Interchange would include full eight-foot to 12-foot shoulders on all ramps and freeways, two to three lanes on all through routes, and three to four lanes on all four approach legs. Smoother curves on all interchange ramps would provide a minimum design speed of 45 miles per hour (mph). I-94 and US 45 would have a 60 mph design speed. The interchange would have four levels, making it about 20 feet higher than the existing core. Expenditures for the Reduced Impacts Alternative estimated in year-of-construction dollars are $1.7 billion. The adjacent arterials component would cost $65 to $73 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system, replace deteriorating pavement and bridges, and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The preferred alternative would require 76 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 1.6 acres of wetlands and 8.8 acres of parkland. Eight residences and five businesses would be displaced. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. Noise impacts would occur at 426 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: 110343, Final EIS--379 pages, Appendices and Exhibits--497 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands 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/912109462?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&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.&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.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 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. [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. AN - 912109439; 15100-3_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. 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 local streets affected by the freeway reconstruction; and enhancing the appearance of the reconstructed freeway. I-94 is a major east-west freeway link and I-894 is a bypass around Milwaukee that provides an important connection for several Milwaukee County communities. US 45 is a north-south highway link connecting the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, Oshkosh, Fond du Lac, West Bend, Milwaukee, Chicagos OHare International Airport, and points south. The Zoo Interchange carries more than 300,000 vehicles on an average weekday and crash rates in the study area are up to five times higher than on other similar freeways in the state. This final EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative, the Modernization with No Added Capacity Alternative (six lanes), the Modernization with Added Capacity Alternative (eight lanes), and the Reduced Impacts Alternative. An adjacent arterials component is also considered in order to provide needed improvements for freeway traffic diverted to State Highway 100, Watertown Plank Road, Bluemound Road, and 84th Street. The Reduced Impacts Alternative with the adjacent arterials component is the preferred alternative. Eight lanes would be provided in the north-south direction. Four east-west lanes would be provided through the core while additional capacity in the form of auxiliary lanes would be provided east and west of the core to accommodate future traffic volumes. The Zoo Interchange would include full eight-foot to 12-foot shoulders on all ramps and freeways, two to three lanes on all through routes, and three to four lanes on all four approach legs. Smoother curves on all interchange ramps would provide a minimum design speed of 45 miles per hour (mph). I-94 and US 45 would have a 60 mph design speed. The interchange would have four levels, making it about 20 feet higher than the existing core. Expenditures for the Reduced Impacts Alternative estimated in year-of-construction dollars are $1.7 billion. The adjacent arterials component would cost $65 to $73 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system, replace deteriorating pavement and bridges, and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The preferred alternative would require 76 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 1.6 acres of wetlands and 8.8 acres of parkland. Eight residences and five businesses would be displaced. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. Noise impacts would occur at 426 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: 110343, Final EIS--379 pages, Appendices and Exhibits--497 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands 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/912109439?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&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.&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.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 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. [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. AN - 912109428; 15100-3_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. 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 local streets affected by the freeway reconstruction; and enhancing the appearance of the reconstructed freeway. I-94 is a major east-west freeway link and I-894 is a bypass around Milwaukee that provides an important connection for several Milwaukee County communities. US 45 is a north-south highway link connecting the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, Oshkosh, Fond du Lac, West Bend, Milwaukee, Chicagos OHare International Airport, and points south. The Zoo Interchange carries more than 300,000 vehicles on an average weekday and crash rates in the study area are up to five times higher than on other similar freeways in the state. This final EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative, the Modernization with No Added Capacity Alternative (six lanes), the Modernization with Added Capacity Alternative (eight lanes), and the Reduced Impacts Alternative. An adjacent arterials component is also considered in order to provide needed improvements for freeway traffic diverted to State Highway 100, Watertown Plank Road, Bluemound Road, and 84th Street. The Reduced Impacts Alternative with the adjacent arterials component is the preferred alternative. Eight lanes would be provided in the north-south direction. Four east-west lanes would be provided through the core while additional capacity in the form of auxiliary lanes would be provided east and west of the core to accommodate future traffic volumes. The Zoo Interchange would include full eight-foot to 12-foot shoulders on all ramps and freeways, two to three lanes on all through routes, and three to four lanes on all four approach legs. Smoother curves on all interchange ramps would provide a minimum design speed of 45 miles per hour (mph). I-94 and US 45 would have a 60 mph design speed. The interchange would have four levels, making it about 20 feet higher than the existing core. Expenditures for the Reduced Impacts Alternative estimated in year-of-construction dollars are $1.7 billion. The adjacent arterials component would cost $65 to $73 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system, replace deteriorating pavement and bridges, and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The preferred alternative would require 76 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 1.6 acres of wetlands and 8.8 acres of parkland. Eight residences and five businesses would be displaced. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. Noise impacts would occur at 426 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: 110343, Final EIS--379 pages, Appendices and Exhibits--497 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands 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/912109428?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&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.&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.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - U.S. HIGHWAY 160 FROM DURANGO TO BAYFIELD, LA PLATA COUNTY, COLORADO (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2006). [Part 19 of 19] T2 - U.S. HIGHWAY 160 FROM DURANGO TO BAYFIELD, LA PLATA COUNTY, COLORADO (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2006). AN - 912109422; 15099-2_0019 AB - PURPOSE: Design changes to a limited portion of the US 160 Corridor Project where US 550 connects to US 160 east of Durango, Colorado are proposed. The selected alternative from the 2006 Record of Decision on US 160 is 16.2 miles, extending from milepost (MP) 88.0, located east of Durango, to MP 104.2, located east of Bayfield. The selected alternative extends four lanes on US 160 to east of Bayfield, generally along the existing alignment with an alignment to the south in Gem Village from MP 100 to MP 101. It also includes reconstruction of the US 160/US 550 (south) intersection as an interchange and a new section of US 550 that is necessary to connect the interchange on US 160 to the US 550 corridor south of Durango. The action proposed in this draft supplemental EIS would revise the location and length of US 550 from south of County Road (CR) 220 to where it connects to US 160. The design shift would lessen impacts and avoid a gas well. The realigned 1.5-mile section of US 550 would be improved from a two-lane to a four-lane highway. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated. The Revised G Modified Alternative is the preferred alternative and would connect US 550 to US 160 via the Grandview Interchange. The Revised F Modified and the Eastern Realignment alternatives would connect US 550 to US 160 at the single-point urban interchange at CR 233 (Three Springs). Estimated costs of the Revised G Modified, Revised F Modified, and Eastern Realignment alternatives are $77.6 million, $77.4 million, and $93.1 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would increase travel efficiency and capacity to meet current and future needs, improve safety for the traveling public by reducing the number and severity of accidents, and provide for controlled access to the highway corridors affected. Intersections with county roads would be upgraded to meet current design standards. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 18.4 acres of farmland, 42.5 acres of wildlife habitat, and 0.3 acres of wetlands. Two historic ranches and six archaeological sites eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places would be affected. 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 abstracts of the draft and final EISs, see 06-0127D, Volume 30, Number 1 and 06-0415F, Volume 30, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110342, Draft Supplemental EIS--402 pages and maps, Appendices--916 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 19 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites 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/912109422?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=U.S.+HIGHWAY+160+FROM+DURANGO+TO+BAYFIELD%2C+LA+PLATA+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2006%29.&rft.title=U.S.+HIGHWAY+160+FROM+DURANGO+TO+BAYFIELD%2C+LA+PLATA+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2006%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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - U.S. HIGHWAY 160 FROM DURANGO TO BAYFIELD, LA PLATA COUNTY, COLORADO (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2006). [Part 18 of 19] T2 - U.S. HIGHWAY 160 FROM DURANGO TO BAYFIELD, LA PLATA COUNTY, COLORADO (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2006). AN - 912109414; 15099-2_0018 AB - PURPOSE: Design changes to a limited portion of the US 160 Corridor Project where US 550 connects to US 160 east of Durango, Colorado are proposed. The selected alternative from the 2006 Record of Decision on US 160 is 16.2 miles, extending from milepost (MP) 88.0, located east of Durango, to MP 104.2, located east of Bayfield. The selected alternative extends four lanes on US 160 to east of Bayfield, generally along the existing alignment with an alignment to the south in Gem Village from MP 100 to MP 101. It also includes reconstruction of the US 160/US 550 (south) intersection as an interchange and a new section of US 550 that is necessary to connect the interchange on US 160 to the US 550 corridor south of Durango. The action proposed in this draft supplemental EIS would revise the location and length of US 550 from south of County Road (CR) 220 to where it connects to US 160. The design shift would lessen impacts and avoid a gas well. The realigned 1.5-mile section of US 550 would be improved from a two-lane to a four-lane highway. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated. The Revised G Modified Alternative is the preferred alternative and would connect US 550 to US 160 via the Grandview Interchange. The Revised F Modified and the Eastern Realignment alternatives would connect US 550 to US 160 at the single-point urban interchange at CR 233 (Three Springs). Estimated costs of the Revised G Modified, Revised F Modified, and Eastern Realignment alternatives are $77.6 million, $77.4 million, and $93.1 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would increase travel efficiency and capacity to meet current and future needs, improve safety for the traveling public by reducing the number and severity of accidents, and provide for controlled access to the highway corridors affected. Intersections with county roads would be upgraded to meet current design standards. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 18.4 acres of farmland, 42.5 acres of wildlife habitat, and 0.3 acres of wetlands. Two historic ranches and six archaeological sites eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places would be affected. 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 abstracts of the draft and final EISs, see 06-0127D, Volume 30, Number 1 and 06-0415F, Volume 30, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110342, Draft Supplemental EIS--402 pages and maps, Appendices--916 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 18 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites 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/912109414?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=U.S.+HIGHWAY+160+FROM+DURANGO+TO+BAYFIELD%2C+LA+PLATA+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2006%29.&rft.title=U.S.+HIGHWAY+160+FROM+DURANGO+TO+BAYFIELD%2C+LA+PLATA+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2006%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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - U.S. HIGHWAY 160 FROM DURANGO TO BAYFIELD, LA PLATA COUNTY, COLORADO (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2006). [Part 17 of 19] T2 - U.S. HIGHWAY 160 FROM DURANGO TO BAYFIELD, LA PLATA COUNTY, COLORADO (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2006). AN - 912109409; 15099-2_0017 AB - PURPOSE: Design changes to a limited portion of the US 160 Corridor Project where US 550 connects to US 160 east of Durango, Colorado are proposed. The selected alternative from the 2006 Record of Decision on US 160 is 16.2 miles, extending from milepost (MP) 88.0, located east of Durango, to MP 104.2, located east of Bayfield. The selected alternative extends four lanes on US 160 to east of Bayfield, generally along the existing alignment with an alignment to the south in Gem Village from MP 100 to MP 101. It also includes reconstruction of the US 160/US 550 (south) intersection as an interchange and a new section of US 550 that is necessary to connect the interchange on US 160 to the US 550 corridor south of Durango. The action proposed in this draft supplemental EIS would revise the location and length of US 550 from south of County Road (CR) 220 to where it connects to US 160. The design shift would lessen impacts and avoid a gas well. The realigned 1.5-mile section of US 550 would be improved from a two-lane to a four-lane highway. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated. The Revised G Modified Alternative is the preferred alternative and would connect US 550 to US 160 via the Grandview Interchange. The Revised F Modified and the Eastern Realignment alternatives would connect US 550 to US 160 at the single-point urban interchange at CR 233 (Three Springs). Estimated costs of the Revised G Modified, Revised F Modified, and Eastern Realignment alternatives are $77.6 million, $77.4 million, and $93.1 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would increase travel efficiency and capacity to meet current and future needs, improve safety for the traveling public by reducing the number and severity of accidents, and provide for controlled access to the highway corridors affected. Intersections with county roads would be upgraded to meet current design standards. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 18.4 acres of farmland, 42.5 acres of wildlife habitat, and 0.3 acres of wetlands. Two historic ranches and six archaeological sites eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places would be affected. 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 abstracts of the draft and final EISs, see 06-0127D, Volume 30, Number 1 and 06-0415F, Volume 30, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110342, Draft Supplemental EIS--402 pages and maps, Appendices--916 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 17 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites 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/912109409?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=U.S.+HIGHWAY+160+FROM+DURANGO+TO+BAYFIELD%2C+LA+PLATA+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2006%29.&rft.title=U.S.+HIGHWAY+160+FROM+DURANGO+TO+BAYFIELD%2C+LA+PLATA+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2006%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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - U.S. HIGHWAY 160 FROM DURANGO TO BAYFIELD, LA PLATA COUNTY, COLORADO (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2006). [Part 16 of 19] T2 - U.S. HIGHWAY 160 FROM DURANGO TO BAYFIELD, LA PLATA COUNTY, COLORADO (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2006). AN - 912109403; 15099-2_0016 AB - PURPOSE: Design changes to a limited portion of the US 160 Corridor Project where US 550 connects to US 160 east of Durango, Colorado are proposed. The selected alternative from the 2006 Record of Decision on US 160 is 16.2 miles, extending from milepost (MP) 88.0, located east of Durango, to MP 104.2, located east of Bayfield. The selected alternative extends four lanes on US 160 to east of Bayfield, generally along the existing alignment with an alignment to the south in Gem Village from MP 100 to MP 101. It also includes reconstruction of the US 160/US 550 (south) intersection as an interchange and a new section of US 550 that is necessary to connect the interchange on US 160 to the US 550 corridor south of Durango. The action proposed in this draft supplemental EIS would revise the location and length of US 550 from south of County Road (CR) 220 to where it connects to US 160. The design shift would lessen impacts and avoid a gas well. The realigned 1.5-mile section of US 550 would be improved from a two-lane to a four-lane highway. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated. The Revised G Modified Alternative is the preferred alternative and would connect US 550 to US 160 via the Grandview Interchange. The Revised F Modified and the Eastern Realignment alternatives would connect US 550 to US 160 at the single-point urban interchange at CR 233 (Three Springs). Estimated costs of the Revised G Modified, Revised F Modified, and Eastern Realignment alternatives are $77.6 million, $77.4 million, and $93.1 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would increase travel efficiency and capacity to meet current and future needs, improve safety for the traveling public by reducing the number and severity of accidents, and provide for controlled access to the highway corridors affected. Intersections with county roads would be upgraded to meet current design standards. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 18.4 acres of farmland, 42.5 acres of wildlife habitat, and 0.3 acres of wetlands. Two historic ranches and six archaeological sites eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places would be affected. 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 abstracts of the draft and final EISs, see 06-0127D, Volume 30, Number 1 and 06-0415F, Volume 30, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110342, Draft Supplemental EIS--402 pages and maps, Appendices--916 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 16 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites 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/912109403?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=U.S.+HIGHWAY+160+FROM+DURANGO+TO+BAYFIELD%2C+LA+PLATA+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2006%29.&rft.title=U.S.+HIGHWAY+160+FROM+DURANGO+TO+BAYFIELD%2C+LA+PLATA+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2006%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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - U.S. HIGHWAY 160 FROM DURANGO TO BAYFIELD, LA PLATA COUNTY, COLORADO (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2006). [Part 15 of 19] T2 - U.S. HIGHWAY 160 FROM DURANGO TO BAYFIELD, LA PLATA COUNTY, COLORADO (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2006). AN - 912109393; 15099-2_0015 AB - PURPOSE: Design changes to a limited portion of the US 160 Corridor Project where US 550 connects to US 160 east of Durango, Colorado are proposed. The selected alternative from the 2006 Record of Decision on US 160 is 16.2 miles, extending from milepost (MP) 88.0, located east of Durango, to MP 104.2, located east of Bayfield. The selected alternative extends four lanes on US 160 to east of Bayfield, generally along the existing alignment with an alignment to the south in Gem Village from MP 100 to MP 101. It also includes reconstruction of the US 160/US 550 (south) intersection as an interchange and a new section of US 550 that is necessary to connect the interchange on US 160 to the US 550 corridor south of Durango. The action proposed in this draft supplemental EIS would revise the location and length of US 550 from south of County Road (CR) 220 to where it connects to US 160. The design shift would lessen impacts and avoid a gas well. The realigned 1.5-mile section of US 550 would be improved from a two-lane to a four-lane highway. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated. The Revised G Modified Alternative is the preferred alternative and would connect US 550 to US 160 via the Grandview Interchange. The Revised F Modified and the Eastern Realignment alternatives would connect US 550 to US 160 at the single-point urban interchange at CR 233 (Three Springs). Estimated costs of the Revised G Modified, Revised F Modified, and Eastern Realignment alternatives are $77.6 million, $77.4 million, and $93.1 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would increase travel efficiency and capacity to meet current and future needs, improve safety for the traveling public by reducing the number and severity of accidents, and provide for controlled access to the highway corridors affected. Intersections with county roads would be upgraded to meet current design standards. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 18.4 acres of farmland, 42.5 acres of wildlife habitat, and 0.3 acres of wetlands. Two historic ranches and six archaeological sites eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places would be affected. 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 abstracts of the draft and final EISs, see 06-0127D, Volume 30, Number 1 and 06-0415F, Volume 30, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110342, Draft Supplemental EIS--402 pages and maps, Appendices--916 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 15 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites 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/912109393?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=U.S.+HIGHWAY+160+FROM+DURANGO+TO+BAYFIELD%2C+LA+PLATA+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2006%29.&rft.title=U.S.+HIGHWAY+160+FROM+DURANGO+TO+BAYFIELD%2C+LA+PLATA+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2006%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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - U.S. HIGHWAY 160 FROM DURANGO TO BAYFIELD, LA PLATA COUNTY, COLORADO (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2006). [Part 14 of 19] T2 - U.S. HIGHWAY 160 FROM DURANGO TO BAYFIELD, LA PLATA COUNTY, COLORADO (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2006). AN - 912109384; 15099-2_0014 AB - PURPOSE: Design changes to a limited portion of the US 160 Corridor Project where US 550 connects to US 160 east of Durango, Colorado are proposed. The selected alternative from the 2006 Record of Decision on US 160 is 16.2 miles, extending from milepost (MP) 88.0, located east of Durango, to MP 104.2, located east of Bayfield. The selected alternative extends four lanes on US 160 to east of Bayfield, generally along the existing alignment with an alignment to the south in Gem Village from MP 100 to MP 101. It also includes reconstruction of the US 160/US 550 (south) intersection as an interchange and a new section of US 550 that is necessary to connect the interchange on US 160 to the US 550 corridor south of Durango. The action proposed in this draft supplemental EIS would revise the location and length of US 550 from south of County Road (CR) 220 to where it connects to US 160. The design shift would lessen impacts and avoid a gas well. The realigned 1.5-mile section of US 550 would be improved from a two-lane to a four-lane highway. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated. The Revised G Modified Alternative is the preferred alternative and would connect US 550 to US 160 via the Grandview Interchange. The Revised F Modified and the Eastern Realignment alternatives would connect US 550 to US 160 at the single-point urban interchange at CR 233 (Three Springs). Estimated costs of the Revised G Modified, Revised F Modified, and Eastern Realignment alternatives are $77.6 million, $77.4 million, and $93.1 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would increase travel efficiency and capacity to meet current and future needs, improve safety for the traveling public by reducing the number and severity of accidents, and provide for controlled access to the highway corridors affected. Intersections with county roads would be upgraded to meet current design standards. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 18.4 acres of farmland, 42.5 acres of wildlife habitat, and 0.3 acres of wetlands. Two historic ranches and six archaeological sites eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places would be affected. 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 abstracts of the draft and final EISs, see 06-0127D, Volume 30, Number 1 and 06-0415F, Volume 30, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110342, Draft Supplemental EIS--402 pages and maps, Appendices--916 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 14 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites 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/912109384?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=U.S.+HIGHWAY+160+FROM+DURANGO+TO+BAYFIELD%2C+LA+PLATA+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2006%29.&rft.title=U.S.+HIGHWAY+160+FROM+DURANGO+TO+BAYFIELD%2C+LA+PLATA+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2006%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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - U.S. HIGHWAY 160 FROM DURANGO TO BAYFIELD, LA PLATA COUNTY, COLORADO (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2006). [Part 13 of 19] T2 - U.S. HIGHWAY 160 FROM DURANGO TO BAYFIELD, LA PLATA COUNTY, COLORADO (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2006). AN - 912109375; 15099-2_0013 AB - PURPOSE: Design changes to a limited portion of the US 160 Corridor Project where US 550 connects to US 160 east of Durango, Colorado are proposed. The selected alternative from the 2006 Record of Decision on US 160 is 16.2 miles, extending from milepost (MP) 88.0, located east of Durango, to MP 104.2, located east of Bayfield. The selected alternative extends four lanes on US 160 to east of Bayfield, generally along the existing alignment with an alignment to the south in Gem Village from MP 100 to MP 101. It also includes reconstruction of the US 160/US 550 (south) intersection as an interchange and a new section of US 550 that is necessary to connect the interchange on US 160 to the US 550 corridor south of Durango. The action proposed in this draft supplemental EIS would revise the location and length of US 550 from south of County Road (CR) 220 to where it connects to US 160. The design shift would lessen impacts and avoid a gas well. The realigned 1.5-mile section of US 550 would be improved from a two-lane to a four-lane highway. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated. The Revised G Modified Alternative is the preferred alternative and would connect US 550 to US 160 via the Grandview Interchange. The Revised F Modified and the Eastern Realignment alternatives would connect US 550 to US 160 at the single-point urban interchange at CR 233 (Three Springs). Estimated costs of the Revised G Modified, Revised F Modified, and Eastern Realignment alternatives are $77.6 million, $77.4 million, and $93.1 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would increase travel efficiency and capacity to meet current and future needs, improve safety for the traveling public by reducing the number and severity of accidents, and provide for controlled access to the highway corridors affected. Intersections with county roads would be upgraded to meet current design standards. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 18.4 acres of farmland, 42.5 acres of wildlife habitat, and 0.3 acres of wetlands. Two historic ranches and six archaeological sites eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places would be affected. 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 abstracts of the draft and final EISs, see 06-0127D, Volume 30, Number 1 and 06-0415F, Volume 30, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110342, Draft Supplemental EIS--402 pages and maps, Appendices--916 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 13 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites 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/912109375?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=U.S.+HIGHWAY+160+FROM+DURANGO+TO+BAYFIELD%2C+LA+PLATA+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2006%29.&rft.title=U.S.+HIGHWAY+160+FROM+DURANGO+TO+BAYFIELD%2C+LA+PLATA+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2006%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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - U.S. HIGHWAY 160 FROM DURANGO TO BAYFIELD, LA PLATA COUNTY, COLORADO (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2006). [Part 12 of 19] T2 - U.S. HIGHWAY 160 FROM DURANGO TO BAYFIELD, LA PLATA COUNTY, COLORADO (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2006). AN - 912108365; 15099-2_0012 AB - PURPOSE: Design changes to a limited portion of the US 160 Corridor Project where US 550 connects to US 160 east of Durango, Colorado are proposed. The selected alternative from the 2006 Record of Decision on US 160 is 16.2 miles, extending from milepost (MP) 88.0, located east of Durango, to MP 104.2, located east of Bayfield. The selected alternative extends four lanes on US 160 to east of Bayfield, generally along the existing alignment with an alignment to the south in Gem Village from MP 100 to MP 101. It also includes reconstruction of the US 160/US 550 (south) intersection as an interchange and a new section of US 550 that is necessary to connect the interchange on US 160 to the US 550 corridor south of Durango. The action proposed in this draft supplemental EIS would revise the location and length of US 550 from south of County Road (CR) 220 to where it connects to US 160. The design shift would lessen impacts and avoid a gas well. The realigned 1.5-mile section of US 550 would be improved from a two-lane to a four-lane highway. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated. The Revised G Modified Alternative is the preferred alternative and would connect US 550 to US 160 via the Grandview Interchange. The Revised F Modified and the Eastern Realignment alternatives would connect US 550 to US 160 at the single-point urban interchange at CR 233 (Three Springs). Estimated costs of the Revised G Modified, Revised F Modified, and Eastern Realignment alternatives are $77.6 million, $77.4 million, and $93.1 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would increase travel efficiency and capacity to meet current and future needs, improve safety for the traveling public by reducing the number and severity of accidents, and provide for controlled access to the highway corridors affected. Intersections with county roads would be upgraded to meet current design standards. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 18.4 acres of farmland, 42.5 acres of wildlife habitat, and 0.3 acres of wetlands. Two historic ranches and six archaeological sites eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places would be affected. 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 abstracts of the draft and final EISs, see 06-0127D, Volume 30, Number 1 and 06-0415F, Volume 30, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110342, Draft Supplemental EIS--402 pages and maps, Appendices--916 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 12 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites 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/912108365?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=U.S.+HIGHWAY+160+FROM+DURANGO+TO+BAYFIELD%2C+LA+PLATA+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2006%29.&rft.title=U.S.+HIGHWAY+160+FROM+DURANGO+TO+BAYFIELD%2C+LA+PLATA+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2006%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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - U.S. HIGHWAY 160 FROM DURANGO TO BAYFIELD, LA PLATA COUNTY, COLORADO (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2006). [Part 11 of 19] T2 - U.S. HIGHWAY 160 FROM DURANGO TO BAYFIELD, LA PLATA COUNTY, COLORADO (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2006). AN - 912108358; 15099-2_0011 AB - PURPOSE: Design changes to a limited portion of the US 160 Corridor Project where US 550 connects to US 160 east of Durango, Colorado are proposed. The selected alternative from the 2006 Record of Decision on US 160 is 16.2 miles, extending from milepost (MP) 88.0, located east of Durango, to MP 104.2, located east of Bayfield. The selected alternative extends four lanes on US 160 to east of Bayfield, generally along the existing alignment with an alignment to the south in Gem Village from MP 100 to MP 101. It also includes reconstruction of the US 160/US 550 (south) intersection as an interchange and a new section of US 550 that is necessary to connect the interchange on US 160 to the US 550 corridor south of Durango. The action proposed in this draft supplemental EIS would revise the location and length of US 550 from south of County Road (CR) 220 to where it connects to US 160. The design shift would lessen impacts and avoid a gas well. The realigned 1.5-mile section of US 550 would be improved from a two-lane to a four-lane highway. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated. The Revised G Modified Alternative is the preferred alternative and would connect US 550 to US 160 via the Grandview Interchange. The Revised F Modified and the Eastern Realignment alternatives would connect US 550 to US 160 at the single-point urban interchange at CR 233 (Three Springs). Estimated costs of the Revised G Modified, Revised F Modified, and Eastern Realignment alternatives are $77.6 million, $77.4 million, and $93.1 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would increase travel efficiency and capacity to meet current and future needs, improve safety for the traveling public by reducing the number and severity of accidents, and provide for controlled access to the highway corridors affected. Intersections with county roads would be upgraded to meet current design standards. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 18.4 acres of farmland, 42.5 acres of wildlife habitat, and 0.3 acres of wetlands. Two historic ranches and six archaeological sites eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places would be affected. 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 abstracts of the draft and final EISs, see 06-0127D, Volume 30, Number 1 and 06-0415F, Volume 30, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110342, Draft Supplemental EIS--402 pages and maps, Appendices--916 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 11 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites 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/912108358?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=U.S.+HIGHWAY+160+FROM+DURANGO+TO+BAYFIELD%2C+LA+PLATA+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2006%29.&rft.title=U.S.+HIGHWAY+160+FROM+DURANGO+TO+BAYFIELD%2C+LA+PLATA+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2006%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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - U.S. HIGHWAY 160 FROM DURANGO TO BAYFIELD, LA PLATA COUNTY, COLORADO (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2006). [Part 10 of 19] T2 - U.S. HIGHWAY 160 FROM DURANGO TO BAYFIELD, LA PLATA COUNTY, COLORADO (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2006). AN - 912108351; 15099-2_0010 AB - PURPOSE: Design changes to a limited portion of the US 160 Corridor Project where US 550 connects to US 160 east of Durango, Colorado are proposed. The selected alternative from the 2006 Record of Decision on US 160 is 16.2 miles, extending from milepost (MP) 88.0, located east of Durango, to MP 104.2, located east of Bayfield. The selected alternative extends four lanes on US 160 to east of Bayfield, generally along the existing alignment with an alignment to the south in Gem Village from MP 100 to MP 101. It also includes reconstruction of the US 160/US 550 (south) intersection as an interchange and a new section of US 550 that is necessary to connect the interchange on US 160 to the US 550 corridor south of Durango. The action proposed in this draft supplemental EIS would revise the location and length of US 550 from south of County Road (CR) 220 to where it connects to US 160. The design shift would lessen impacts and avoid a gas well. The realigned 1.5-mile section of US 550 would be improved from a two-lane to a four-lane highway. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated. The Revised G Modified Alternative is the preferred alternative and would connect US 550 to US 160 via the Grandview Interchange. The Revised F Modified and the Eastern Realignment alternatives would connect US 550 to US 160 at the single-point urban interchange at CR 233 (Three Springs). Estimated costs of the Revised G Modified, Revised F Modified, and Eastern Realignment alternatives are $77.6 million, $77.4 million, and $93.1 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would increase travel efficiency and capacity to meet current and future needs, improve safety for the traveling public by reducing the number and severity of accidents, and provide for controlled access to the highway corridors affected. Intersections with county roads would be upgraded to meet current design standards. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 18.4 acres of farmland, 42.5 acres of wildlife habitat, and 0.3 acres of wetlands. Two historic ranches and six archaeological sites eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places would be affected. 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 abstracts of the draft and final EISs, see 06-0127D, Volume 30, Number 1 and 06-0415F, Volume 30, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110342, Draft Supplemental EIS--402 pages and maps, Appendices--916 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites 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/912108351?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=U.S.+HIGHWAY+160+FROM+DURANGO+TO+BAYFIELD%2C+LA+PLATA+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2006%29.&rft.title=U.S.+HIGHWAY+160+FROM+DURANGO+TO+BAYFIELD%2C+LA+PLATA+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2006%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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - U.S. HIGHWAY 160 FROM DURANGO TO BAYFIELD, LA PLATA COUNTY, COLORADO (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2006). [Part 9 of 19] T2 - U.S. HIGHWAY 160 FROM DURANGO TO BAYFIELD, LA PLATA COUNTY, COLORADO (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2006). AN - 912108345; 15099-2_0009 AB - PURPOSE: Design changes to a limited portion of the US 160 Corridor Project where US 550 connects to US 160 east of Durango, Colorado are proposed. The selected alternative from the 2006 Record of Decision on US 160 is 16.2 miles, extending from milepost (MP) 88.0, located east of Durango, to MP 104.2, located east of Bayfield. The selected alternative extends four lanes on US 160 to east of Bayfield, generally along the existing alignment with an alignment to the south in Gem Village from MP 100 to MP 101. It also includes reconstruction of the US 160/US 550 (south) intersection as an interchange and a new section of US 550 that is necessary to connect the interchange on US 160 to the US 550 corridor south of Durango. The action proposed in this draft supplemental EIS would revise the location and length of US 550 from south of County Road (CR) 220 to where it connects to US 160. The design shift would lessen impacts and avoid a gas well. The realigned 1.5-mile section of US 550 would be improved from a two-lane to a four-lane highway. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated. The Revised G Modified Alternative is the preferred alternative and would connect US 550 to US 160 via the Grandview Interchange. The Revised F Modified and the Eastern Realignment alternatives would connect US 550 to US 160 at the single-point urban interchange at CR 233 (Three Springs). Estimated costs of the Revised G Modified, Revised F Modified, and Eastern Realignment alternatives are $77.6 million, $77.4 million, and $93.1 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would increase travel efficiency and capacity to meet current and future needs, improve safety for the traveling public by reducing the number and severity of accidents, and provide for controlled access to the highway corridors affected. Intersections with county roads would be upgraded to meet current design standards. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 18.4 acres of farmland, 42.5 acres of wildlife habitat, and 0.3 acres of wetlands. Two historic ranches and six archaeological sites eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places would be affected. 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 abstracts of the draft and final EISs, see 06-0127D, Volume 30, Number 1 and 06-0415F, Volume 30, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110342, Draft Supplemental EIS--402 pages and maps, Appendices--916 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 9 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites 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/912108345?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=U.S.+HIGHWAY+160+FROM+DURANGO+TO+BAYFIELD%2C+LA+PLATA+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2006%29.&rft.title=U.S.+HIGHWAY+160+FROM+DURANGO+TO+BAYFIELD%2C+LA+PLATA+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2006%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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - U.S. HIGHWAY 160 FROM DURANGO TO BAYFIELD, LA PLATA COUNTY, COLORADO (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2006). [Part 8 of 19] T2 - U.S. HIGHWAY 160 FROM DURANGO TO BAYFIELD, LA PLATA COUNTY, COLORADO (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2006). AN - 912108337; 15099-2_0008 AB - PURPOSE: Design changes to a limited portion of the US 160 Corridor Project where US 550 connects to US 160 east of Durango, Colorado are proposed. The selected alternative from the 2006 Record of Decision on US 160 is 16.2 miles, extending from milepost (MP) 88.0, located east of Durango, to MP 104.2, located east of Bayfield. The selected alternative extends four lanes on US 160 to east of Bayfield, generally along the existing alignment with an alignment to the south in Gem Village from MP 100 to MP 101. It also includes reconstruction of the US 160/US 550 (south) intersection as an interchange and a new section of US 550 that is necessary to connect the interchange on US 160 to the US 550 corridor south of Durango. The action proposed in this draft supplemental EIS would revise the location and length of US 550 from south of County Road (CR) 220 to where it connects to US 160. The design shift would lessen impacts and avoid a gas well. The realigned 1.5-mile section of US 550 would be improved from a two-lane to a four-lane highway. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated. The Revised G Modified Alternative is the preferred alternative and would connect US 550 to US 160 via the Grandview Interchange. The Revised F Modified and the Eastern Realignment alternatives would connect US 550 to US 160 at the single-point urban interchange at CR 233 (Three Springs). Estimated costs of the Revised G Modified, Revised F Modified, and Eastern Realignment alternatives are $77.6 million, $77.4 million, and $93.1 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would increase travel efficiency and capacity to meet current and future needs, improve safety for the traveling public by reducing the number and severity of accidents, and provide for controlled access to the highway corridors affected. Intersections with county roads would be upgraded to meet current design standards. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 18.4 acres of farmland, 42.5 acres of wildlife habitat, and 0.3 acres of wetlands. Two historic ranches and six archaeological sites eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places would be affected. 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 abstracts of the draft and final EISs, see 06-0127D, Volume 30, Number 1 and 06-0415F, Volume 30, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110342, Draft Supplemental EIS--402 pages and maps, Appendices--916 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites 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/912108337?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=U.S.+HIGHWAY+160+FROM+DURANGO+TO+BAYFIELD%2C+LA+PLATA+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2006%29.&rft.title=U.S.+HIGHWAY+160+FROM+DURANGO+TO+BAYFIELD%2C+LA+PLATA+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2006%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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - U.S. HIGHWAY 160 FROM DURANGO TO BAYFIELD, LA PLATA COUNTY, COLORADO (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2006). [Part 7 of 19] T2 - U.S. HIGHWAY 160 FROM DURANGO TO BAYFIELD, LA PLATA COUNTY, COLORADO (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2006). AN - 912108329; 15099-2_0007 AB - PURPOSE: Design changes to a limited portion of the US 160 Corridor Project where US 550 connects to US 160 east of Durango, Colorado are proposed. The selected alternative from the 2006 Record of Decision on US 160 is 16.2 miles, extending from milepost (MP) 88.0, located east of Durango, to MP 104.2, located east of Bayfield. The selected alternative extends four lanes on US 160 to east of Bayfield, generally along the existing alignment with an alignment to the south in Gem Village from MP 100 to MP 101. It also includes reconstruction of the US 160/US 550 (south) intersection as an interchange and a new section of US 550 that is necessary to connect the interchange on US 160 to the US 550 corridor south of Durango. The action proposed in this draft supplemental EIS would revise the location and length of US 550 from south of County Road (CR) 220 to where it connects to US 160. The design shift would lessen impacts and avoid a gas well. The realigned 1.5-mile section of US 550 would be improved from a two-lane to a four-lane highway. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated. The Revised G Modified Alternative is the preferred alternative and would connect US 550 to US 160 via the Grandview Interchange. The Revised F Modified and the Eastern Realignment alternatives would connect US 550 to US 160 at the single-point urban interchange at CR 233 (Three Springs). Estimated costs of the Revised G Modified, Revised F Modified, and Eastern Realignment alternatives are $77.6 million, $77.4 million, and $93.1 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would increase travel efficiency and capacity to meet current and future needs, improve safety for the traveling public by reducing the number and severity of accidents, and provide for controlled access to the highway corridors affected. Intersections with county roads would be upgraded to meet current design standards. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 18.4 acres of farmland, 42.5 acres of wildlife habitat, and 0.3 acres of wetlands. Two historic ranches and six archaeological sites eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places would be affected. 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 abstracts of the draft and final EISs, see 06-0127D, Volume 30, Number 1 and 06-0415F, Volume 30, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110342, Draft Supplemental EIS--402 pages and maps, Appendices--916 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites 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/912108329?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=U.S.+HIGHWAY+160+FROM+DURANGO+TO+BAYFIELD%2C+LA+PLATA+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2006%29.&rft.title=U.S.+HIGHWAY+160+FROM+DURANGO+TO+BAYFIELD%2C+LA+PLATA+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2006%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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - U.S. HIGHWAY 160 FROM DURANGO TO BAYFIELD, LA PLATA COUNTY, COLORADO (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2006). [Part 6 of 19] T2 - U.S. HIGHWAY 160 FROM DURANGO TO BAYFIELD, LA PLATA COUNTY, COLORADO (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2006). AN - 912108316; 15099-2_0006 AB - PURPOSE: Design changes to a limited portion of the US 160 Corridor Project where US 550 connects to US 160 east of Durango, Colorado are proposed. The selected alternative from the 2006 Record of Decision on US 160 is 16.2 miles, extending from milepost (MP) 88.0, located east of Durango, to MP 104.2, located east of Bayfield. The selected alternative extends four lanes on US 160 to east of Bayfield, generally along the existing alignment with an alignment to the south in Gem Village from MP 100 to MP 101. It also includes reconstruction of the US 160/US 550 (south) intersection as an interchange and a new section of US 550 that is necessary to connect the interchange on US 160 to the US 550 corridor south of Durango. The action proposed in this draft supplemental EIS would revise the location and length of US 550 from south of County Road (CR) 220 to where it connects to US 160. The design shift would lessen impacts and avoid a gas well. The realigned 1.5-mile section of US 550 would be improved from a two-lane to a four-lane highway. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated. The Revised G Modified Alternative is the preferred alternative and would connect US 550 to US 160 via the Grandview Interchange. The Revised F Modified and the Eastern Realignment alternatives would connect US 550 to US 160 at the single-point urban interchange at CR 233 (Three Springs). Estimated costs of the Revised G Modified, Revised F Modified, and Eastern Realignment alternatives are $77.6 million, $77.4 million, and $93.1 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would increase travel efficiency and capacity to meet current and future needs, improve safety for the traveling public by reducing the number and severity of accidents, and provide for controlled access to the highway corridors affected. Intersections with county roads would be upgraded to meet current design standards. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 18.4 acres of farmland, 42.5 acres of wildlife habitat, and 0.3 acres of wetlands. Two historic ranches and six archaeological sites eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places would be affected. 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 abstracts of the draft and final EISs, see 06-0127D, Volume 30, Number 1 and 06-0415F, Volume 30, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110342, Draft Supplemental EIS--402 pages and maps, Appendices--916 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites 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/912108316?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=U.S.+HIGHWAY+160+FROM+DURANGO+TO+BAYFIELD%2C+LA+PLATA+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2006%29.&rft.title=U.S.+HIGHWAY+160+FROM+DURANGO+TO+BAYFIELD%2C+LA+PLATA+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2006%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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 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. [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. AN - 912105177; 15100-3_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. 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 local streets affected by the freeway reconstruction; and enhancing the appearance of the reconstructed freeway. I-94 is a major east-west freeway link and I-894 is a bypass around Milwaukee that provides an important connection for several Milwaukee County communities. US 45 is a north-south highway link connecting the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, Oshkosh, Fond du Lac, West Bend, Milwaukee, Chicagos OHare International Airport, and points south. The Zoo Interchange carries more than 300,000 vehicles on an average weekday and crash rates in the study area are up to five times higher than on other similar freeways in the state. This final EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative, the Modernization with No Added Capacity Alternative (six lanes), the Modernization with Added Capacity Alternative (eight lanes), and the Reduced Impacts Alternative. An adjacent arterials component is also considered in order to provide needed improvements for freeway traffic diverted to State Highway 100, Watertown Plank Road, Bluemound Road, and 84th Street. The Reduced Impacts Alternative with the adjacent arterials component is the preferred alternative. Eight lanes would be provided in the north-south direction. Four east-west lanes would be provided through the core while additional capacity in the form of auxiliary lanes would be provided east and west of the core to accommodate future traffic volumes. The Zoo Interchange would include full eight-foot to 12-foot shoulders on all ramps and freeways, two to three lanes on all through routes, and three to four lanes on all four approach legs. Smoother curves on all interchange ramps would provide a minimum design speed of 45 miles per hour (mph). I-94 and US 45 would have a 60 mph design speed. The interchange would have four levels, making it about 20 feet higher than the existing core. Expenditures for the Reduced Impacts Alternative estimated in year-of-construction dollars are $1.7 billion. The adjacent arterials component would cost $65 to $73 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system, replace deteriorating pavement and bridges, and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The preferred alternative would require 76 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 1.6 acres of wetlands and 8.8 acres of parkland. Eight residences and five businesses would be displaced. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. Noise impacts would occur at 426 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: 110343, Final EIS--379 pages, Appendices and Exhibits--497 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 12 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands 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/912105177?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&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.&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.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 36 of 37] T2 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 912103303; 15098-1_0036 AB - PURPOSE: A 9.4-mile extension of the LYNX Blue Line light rail service within the Northeast Corridor of the City of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The corridor is a major employment, shopping and educational destination, anchored by Center City Charlotte at the southern end and University City at the northern end. Several major roadways and intersections currently are experiencing peak hour volumes that exceed capacity and 23 percent of the total miles on roadways within the Northeast Corridor operate at or above capacity. The Charlotte Area Transit System began operation of the LYNX Blue Line in November 2007 with 15 stations in the South Corridor. This final EIS evaluates the proposed action, a transportation system management alternative, and a No Build Alternative. The LYNX Blue Line Extension is the preferred alternative and would utilize existing railroad rights-of-way for the first four miles and then the median of North Tryon Street/US 29 until it enters the University of North Carolina at Charlotte (UNC Charlotte) campus where it would terminate. The project would include 11 stations, park-and-ride facilities, and a storage yard with dispatch facility. Trains would operate seven days a week from 5:00 a.m. until 1:00 a.m. and would arrive at stations every 7.5 minutes during rush hour and every 15 minutes during non-peak hours. Bus service connections would be provided at most stations. Year of expenditure capital costs are projected to be $1.07 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would ensure future mobility by providing high-capacity, fixed-guideway transit service in a congested travel corridor and would support regional land use policies and goals for sustainable growth and development. The new service would offer a convenient, time-competitive travel alternative and reduce dependence on single-occupant automobiles. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would eliminate 10.5 acres of mixed pine/hardwood forest and impact 3,304 linear feet of streams and 0.5 acres of wetlands. Full and partial property acquisitions would result in 14 business displacements. Implementation would create potential for overflow parking on neighborhood streets adjacent to stations. Noise impacts would be severe at one residential property and two college dormitories. 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 10-0491D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110341, Final EIS--398 pages, Appendices--349 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 36 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Creeks KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Universities KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits 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/912103303?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 35 of 37] T2 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 912103292; 15098-1_0035 AB - PURPOSE: A 9.4-mile extension of the LYNX Blue Line light rail service within the Northeast Corridor of the City of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The corridor is a major employment, shopping and educational destination, anchored by Center City Charlotte at the southern end and University City at the northern end. Several major roadways and intersections currently are experiencing peak hour volumes that exceed capacity and 23 percent of the total miles on roadways within the Northeast Corridor operate at or above capacity. The Charlotte Area Transit System began operation of the LYNX Blue Line in November 2007 with 15 stations in the South Corridor. This final EIS evaluates the proposed action, a transportation system management alternative, and a No Build Alternative. The LYNX Blue Line Extension is the preferred alternative and would utilize existing railroad rights-of-way for the first four miles and then the median of North Tryon Street/US 29 until it enters the University of North Carolina at Charlotte (UNC Charlotte) campus where it would terminate. The project would include 11 stations, park-and-ride facilities, and a storage yard with dispatch facility. Trains would operate seven days a week from 5:00 a.m. until 1:00 a.m. and would arrive at stations every 7.5 minutes during rush hour and every 15 minutes during non-peak hours. Bus service connections would be provided at most stations. Year of expenditure capital costs are projected to be $1.07 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would ensure future mobility by providing high-capacity, fixed-guideway transit service in a congested travel corridor and would support regional land use policies and goals for sustainable growth and development. The new service would offer a convenient, time-competitive travel alternative and reduce dependence on single-occupant automobiles. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would eliminate 10.5 acres of mixed pine/hardwood forest and impact 3,304 linear feet of streams and 0.5 acres of wetlands. Full and partial property acquisitions would result in 14 business displacements. Implementation would create potential for overflow parking on neighborhood streets adjacent to stations. Noise impacts would be severe at one residential property and two college dormitories. 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 10-0491D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110341, Final EIS--398 pages, Appendices--349 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 35 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Creeks KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Universities KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits 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/912103292?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 34 of 37] T2 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 912103281; 15098-1_0034 AB - PURPOSE: A 9.4-mile extension of the LYNX Blue Line light rail service within the Northeast Corridor of the City of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The corridor is a major employment, shopping and educational destination, anchored by Center City Charlotte at the southern end and University City at the northern end. Several major roadways and intersections currently are experiencing peak hour volumes that exceed capacity and 23 percent of the total miles on roadways within the Northeast Corridor operate at or above capacity. The Charlotte Area Transit System began operation of the LYNX Blue Line in November 2007 with 15 stations in the South Corridor. This final EIS evaluates the proposed action, a transportation system management alternative, and a No Build Alternative. The LYNX Blue Line Extension is the preferred alternative and would utilize existing railroad rights-of-way for the first four miles and then the median of North Tryon Street/US 29 until it enters the University of North Carolina at Charlotte (UNC Charlotte) campus where it would terminate. The project would include 11 stations, park-and-ride facilities, and a storage yard with dispatch facility. Trains would operate seven days a week from 5:00 a.m. until 1:00 a.m. and would arrive at stations every 7.5 minutes during rush hour and every 15 minutes during non-peak hours. Bus service connections would be provided at most stations. Year of expenditure capital costs are projected to be $1.07 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would ensure future mobility by providing high-capacity, fixed-guideway transit service in a congested travel corridor and would support regional land use policies and goals for sustainable growth and development. The new service would offer a convenient, time-competitive travel alternative and reduce dependence on single-occupant automobiles. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would eliminate 10.5 acres of mixed pine/hardwood forest and impact 3,304 linear feet of streams and 0.5 acres of wetlands. Full and partial property acquisitions would result in 14 business displacements. Implementation would create potential for overflow parking on neighborhood streets adjacent to stations. Noise impacts would be severe at one residential property and two college dormitories. 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 10-0491D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110341, Final EIS--398 pages, Appendices--349 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 34 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Creeks KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Universities KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits 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/912103281?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 27 of 37] T2 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 912103264; 15098-1_0027 AB - PURPOSE: A 9.4-mile extension of the LYNX Blue Line light rail service within the Northeast Corridor of the City of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The corridor is a major employment, shopping and educational destination, anchored by Center City Charlotte at the southern end and University City at the northern end. Several major roadways and intersections currently are experiencing peak hour volumes that exceed capacity and 23 percent of the total miles on roadways within the Northeast Corridor operate at or above capacity. The Charlotte Area Transit System began operation of the LYNX Blue Line in November 2007 with 15 stations in the South Corridor. This final EIS evaluates the proposed action, a transportation system management alternative, and a No Build Alternative. The LYNX Blue Line Extension is the preferred alternative and would utilize existing railroad rights-of-way for the first four miles and then the median of North Tryon Street/US 29 until it enters the University of North Carolina at Charlotte (UNC Charlotte) campus where it would terminate. The project would include 11 stations, park-and-ride facilities, and a storage yard with dispatch facility. Trains would operate seven days a week from 5:00 a.m. until 1:00 a.m. and would arrive at stations every 7.5 minutes during rush hour and every 15 minutes during non-peak hours. Bus service connections would be provided at most stations. Year of expenditure capital costs are projected to be $1.07 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would ensure future mobility by providing high-capacity, fixed-guideway transit service in a congested travel corridor and would support regional land use policies and goals for sustainable growth and development. The new service would offer a convenient, time-competitive travel alternative and reduce dependence on single-occupant automobiles. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would eliminate 10.5 acres of mixed pine/hardwood forest and impact 3,304 linear feet of streams and 0.5 acres of wetlands. Full and partial property acquisitions would result in 14 business displacements. Implementation would create potential for overflow parking on neighborhood streets adjacent to stations. Noise impacts would be severe at one residential property and two college dormitories. 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 10-0491D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110341, Final EIS--398 pages, Appendices--349 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 27 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Creeks KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Universities KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits 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/912103264?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 26 of 37] T2 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 912103253; 15098-1_0026 AB - PURPOSE: A 9.4-mile extension of the LYNX Blue Line light rail service within the Northeast Corridor of the City of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The corridor is a major employment, shopping and educational destination, anchored by Center City Charlotte at the southern end and University City at the northern end. Several major roadways and intersections currently are experiencing peak hour volumes that exceed capacity and 23 percent of the total miles on roadways within the Northeast Corridor operate at or above capacity. The Charlotte Area Transit System began operation of the LYNX Blue Line in November 2007 with 15 stations in the South Corridor. This final EIS evaluates the proposed action, a transportation system management alternative, and a No Build Alternative. The LYNX Blue Line Extension is the preferred alternative and would utilize existing railroad rights-of-way for the first four miles and then the median of North Tryon Street/US 29 until it enters the University of North Carolina at Charlotte (UNC Charlotte) campus where it would terminate. The project would include 11 stations, park-and-ride facilities, and a storage yard with dispatch facility. Trains would operate seven days a week from 5:00 a.m. until 1:00 a.m. and would arrive at stations every 7.5 minutes during rush hour and every 15 minutes during non-peak hours. Bus service connections would be provided at most stations. Year of expenditure capital costs are projected to be $1.07 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would ensure future mobility by providing high-capacity, fixed-guideway transit service in a congested travel corridor and would support regional land use policies and goals for sustainable growth and development. The new service would offer a convenient, time-competitive travel alternative and reduce dependence on single-occupant automobiles. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would eliminate 10.5 acres of mixed pine/hardwood forest and impact 3,304 linear feet of streams and 0.5 acres of wetlands. Full and partial property acquisitions would result in 14 business displacements. Implementation would create potential for overflow parking on neighborhood streets adjacent to stations. Noise impacts would be severe at one residential property and two college dormitories. 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 10-0491D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110341, Final EIS--398 pages, Appendices--349 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 26 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Creeks KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Universities KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits 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/912103253?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 24 of 37] T2 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 912103225; 15098-1_0024 AB - PURPOSE: A 9.4-mile extension of the LYNX Blue Line light rail service within the Northeast Corridor of the City of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The corridor is a major employment, shopping and educational destination, anchored by Center City Charlotte at the southern end and University City at the northern end. Several major roadways and intersections currently are experiencing peak hour volumes that exceed capacity and 23 percent of the total miles on roadways within the Northeast Corridor operate at or above capacity. The Charlotte Area Transit System began operation of the LYNX Blue Line in November 2007 with 15 stations in the South Corridor. This final EIS evaluates the proposed action, a transportation system management alternative, and a No Build Alternative. The LYNX Blue Line Extension is the preferred alternative and would utilize existing railroad rights-of-way for the first four miles and then the median of North Tryon Street/US 29 until it enters the University of North Carolina at Charlotte (UNC Charlotte) campus where it would terminate. The project would include 11 stations, park-and-ride facilities, and a storage yard with dispatch facility. Trains would operate seven days a week from 5:00 a.m. until 1:00 a.m. and would arrive at stations every 7.5 minutes during rush hour and every 15 minutes during non-peak hours. Bus service connections would be provided at most stations. Year of expenditure capital costs are projected to be $1.07 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would ensure future mobility by providing high-capacity, fixed-guideway transit service in a congested travel corridor and would support regional land use policies and goals for sustainable growth and development. The new service would offer a convenient, time-competitive travel alternative and reduce dependence on single-occupant automobiles. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would eliminate 10.5 acres of mixed pine/hardwood forest and impact 3,304 linear feet of streams and 0.5 acres of wetlands. Full and partial property acquisitions would result in 14 business displacements. Implementation would create potential for overflow parking on neighborhood streets adjacent to stations. Noise impacts would be severe at one residential property and two college dormitories. 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 10-0491D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110341, Final EIS--398 pages, Appendices--349 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 24 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Creeks KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Universities KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits 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/912103225?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 23 of 37] T2 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 912103213; 15098-1_0023 AB - PURPOSE: A 9.4-mile extension of the LYNX Blue Line light rail service within the Northeast Corridor of the City of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The corridor is a major employment, shopping and educational destination, anchored by Center City Charlotte at the southern end and University City at the northern end. Several major roadways and intersections currently are experiencing peak hour volumes that exceed capacity and 23 percent of the total miles on roadways within the Northeast Corridor operate at or above capacity. The Charlotte Area Transit System began operation of the LYNX Blue Line in November 2007 with 15 stations in the South Corridor. This final EIS evaluates the proposed action, a transportation system management alternative, and a No Build Alternative. The LYNX Blue Line Extension is the preferred alternative and would utilize existing railroad rights-of-way for the first four miles and then the median of North Tryon Street/US 29 until it enters the University of North Carolina at Charlotte (UNC Charlotte) campus where it would terminate. The project would include 11 stations, park-and-ride facilities, and a storage yard with dispatch facility. Trains would operate seven days a week from 5:00 a.m. until 1:00 a.m. and would arrive at stations every 7.5 minutes during rush hour and every 15 minutes during non-peak hours. Bus service connections would be provided at most stations. Year of expenditure capital costs are projected to be $1.07 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would ensure future mobility by providing high-capacity, fixed-guideway transit service in a congested travel corridor and would support regional land use policies and goals for sustainable growth and development. The new service would offer a convenient, time-competitive travel alternative and reduce dependence on single-occupant automobiles. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would eliminate 10.5 acres of mixed pine/hardwood forest and impact 3,304 linear feet of streams and 0.5 acres of wetlands. Full and partial property acquisitions would result in 14 business displacements. Implementation would create potential for overflow parking on neighborhood streets adjacent to stations. Noise impacts would be severe at one residential property and two college dormitories. 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 10-0491D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110341, Final EIS--398 pages, Appendices--349 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 23 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Creeks KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Universities KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits 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/912103213?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 22 of 37] T2 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 912103196; 15098-1_0022 AB - PURPOSE: A 9.4-mile extension of the LYNX Blue Line light rail service within the Northeast Corridor of the City of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The corridor is a major employment, shopping and educational destination, anchored by Center City Charlotte at the southern end and University City at the northern end. Several major roadways and intersections currently are experiencing peak hour volumes that exceed capacity and 23 percent of the total miles on roadways within the Northeast Corridor operate at or above capacity. The Charlotte Area Transit System began operation of the LYNX Blue Line in November 2007 with 15 stations in the South Corridor. This final EIS evaluates the proposed action, a transportation system management alternative, and a No Build Alternative. The LYNX Blue Line Extension is the preferred alternative and would utilize existing railroad rights-of-way for the first four miles and then the median of North Tryon Street/US 29 until it enters the University of North Carolina at Charlotte (UNC Charlotte) campus where it would terminate. The project would include 11 stations, park-and-ride facilities, and a storage yard with dispatch facility. Trains would operate seven days a week from 5:00 a.m. until 1:00 a.m. and would arrive at stations every 7.5 minutes during rush hour and every 15 minutes during non-peak hours. Bus service connections would be provided at most stations. Year of expenditure capital costs are projected to be $1.07 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would ensure future mobility by providing high-capacity, fixed-guideway transit service in a congested travel corridor and would support regional land use policies and goals for sustainable growth and development. The new service would offer a convenient, time-competitive travel alternative and reduce dependence on single-occupant automobiles. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would eliminate 10.5 acres of mixed pine/hardwood forest and impact 3,304 linear feet of streams and 0.5 acres of wetlands. Full and partial property acquisitions would result in 14 business displacements. Implementation would create potential for overflow parking on neighborhood streets adjacent to stations. Noise impacts would be severe at one residential property and two college dormitories. 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 10-0491D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110341, Final EIS--398 pages, Appendices--349 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 22 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Creeks KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Universities KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits 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/912103196?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 21 of 37] T2 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 912103180; 15098-1_0021 AB - PURPOSE: A 9.4-mile extension of the LYNX Blue Line light rail service within the Northeast Corridor of the City of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The corridor is a major employment, shopping and educational destination, anchored by Center City Charlotte at the southern end and University City at the northern end. Several major roadways and intersections currently are experiencing peak hour volumes that exceed capacity and 23 percent of the total miles on roadways within the Northeast Corridor operate at or above capacity. The Charlotte Area Transit System began operation of the LYNX Blue Line in November 2007 with 15 stations in the South Corridor. This final EIS evaluates the proposed action, a transportation system management alternative, and a No Build Alternative. The LYNX Blue Line Extension is the preferred alternative and would utilize existing railroad rights-of-way for the first four miles and then the median of North Tryon Street/US 29 until it enters the University of North Carolina at Charlotte (UNC Charlotte) campus where it would terminate. The project would include 11 stations, park-and-ride facilities, and a storage yard with dispatch facility. Trains would operate seven days a week from 5:00 a.m. until 1:00 a.m. and would arrive at stations every 7.5 minutes during rush hour and every 15 minutes during non-peak hours. Bus service connections would be provided at most stations. Year of expenditure capital costs are projected to be $1.07 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would ensure future mobility by providing high-capacity, fixed-guideway transit service in a congested travel corridor and would support regional land use policies and goals for sustainable growth and development. The new service would offer a convenient, time-competitive travel alternative and reduce dependence on single-occupant automobiles. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would eliminate 10.5 acres of mixed pine/hardwood forest and impact 3,304 linear feet of streams and 0.5 acres of wetlands. Full and partial property acquisitions would result in 14 business displacements. Implementation would create potential for overflow parking on neighborhood streets adjacent to stations. Noise impacts would be severe at one residential property and two college dormitories. 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 10-0491D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110341, Final EIS--398 pages, Appendices--349 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 21 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Creeks KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Universities KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits 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/912103180?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 20 of 37] T2 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 912103165; 15098-1_0020 AB - PURPOSE: A 9.4-mile extension of the LYNX Blue Line light rail service within the Northeast Corridor of the City of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The corridor is a major employment, shopping and educational destination, anchored by Center City Charlotte at the southern end and University City at the northern end. Several major roadways and intersections currently are experiencing peak hour volumes that exceed capacity and 23 percent of the total miles on roadways within the Northeast Corridor operate at or above capacity. The Charlotte Area Transit System began operation of the LYNX Blue Line in November 2007 with 15 stations in the South Corridor. This final EIS evaluates the proposed action, a transportation system management alternative, and a No Build Alternative. The LYNX Blue Line Extension is the preferred alternative and would utilize existing railroad rights-of-way for the first four miles and then the median of North Tryon Street/US 29 until it enters the University of North Carolina at Charlotte (UNC Charlotte) campus where it would terminate. The project would include 11 stations, park-and-ride facilities, and a storage yard with dispatch facility. Trains would operate seven days a week from 5:00 a.m. until 1:00 a.m. and would arrive at stations every 7.5 minutes during rush hour and every 15 minutes during non-peak hours. Bus service connections would be provided at most stations. Year of expenditure capital costs are projected to be $1.07 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would ensure future mobility by providing high-capacity, fixed-guideway transit service in a congested travel corridor and would support regional land use policies and goals for sustainable growth and development. The new service would offer a convenient, time-competitive travel alternative and reduce dependence on single-occupant automobiles. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would eliminate 10.5 acres of mixed pine/hardwood forest and impact 3,304 linear feet of streams and 0.5 acres of wetlands. Full and partial property acquisitions would result in 14 business displacements. Implementation would create potential for overflow parking on neighborhood streets adjacent to stations. Noise impacts would be severe at one residential property and two college dormitories. 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 10-0491D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110341, Final EIS--398 pages, Appendices--349 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 20 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Creeks KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Universities KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits 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/912103165?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 19 of 37] T2 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 912103156; 15098-1_0019 AB - PURPOSE: A 9.4-mile extension of the LYNX Blue Line light rail service within the Northeast Corridor of the City of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The corridor is a major employment, shopping and educational destination, anchored by Center City Charlotte at the southern end and University City at the northern end. Several major roadways and intersections currently are experiencing peak hour volumes that exceed capacity and 23 percent of the total miles on roadways within the Northeast Corridor operate at or above capacity. The Charlotte Area Transit System began operation of the LYNX Blue Line in November 2007 with 15 stations in the South Corridor. This final EIS evaluates the proposed action, a transportation system management alternative, and a No Build Alternative. The LYNX Blue Line Extension is the preferred alternative and would utilize existing railroad rights-of-way for the first four miles and then the median of North Tryon Street/US 29 until it enters the University of North Carolina at Charlotte (UNC Charlotte) campus where it would terminate. The project would include 11 stations, park-and-ride facilities, and a storage yard with dispatch facility. Trains would operate seven days a week from 5:00 a.m. until 1:00 a.m. and would arrive at stations every 7.5 minutes during rush hour and every 15 minutes during non-peak hours. Bus service connections would be provided at most stations. Year of expenditure capital costs are projected to be $1.07 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would ensure future mobility by providing high-capacity, fixed-guideway transit service in a congested travel corridor and would support regional land use policies and goals for sustainable growth and development. The new service would offer a convenient, time-competitive travel alternative and reduce dependence on single-occupant automobiles. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would eliminate 10.5 acres of mixed pine/hardwood forest and impact 3,304 linear feet of streams and 0.5 acres of wetlands. Full and partial property acquisitions would result in 14 business displacements. Implementation would create potential for overflow parking on neighborhood streets adjacent to stations. Noise impacts would be severe at one residential property and two college dormitories. 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 10-0491D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110341, Final EIS--398 pages, Appendices--349 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 19 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Creeks KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Universities KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits 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/912103156?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 18 of 37] T2 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 912103144; 15098-1_0018 AB - PURPOSE: A 9.4-mile extension of the LYNX Blue Line light rail service within the Northeast Corridor of the City of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The corridor is a major employment, shopping and educational destination, anchored by Center City Charlotte at the southern end and University City at the northern end. Several major roadways and intersections currently are experiencing peak hour volumes that exceed capacity and 23 percent of the total miles on roadways within the Northeast Corridor operate at or above capacity. The Charlotte Area Transit System began operation of the LYNX Blue Line in November 2007 with 15 stations in the South Corridor. This final EIS evaluates the proposed action, a transportation system management alternative, and a No Build Alternative. The LYNX Blue Line Extension is the preferred alternative and would utilize existing railroad rights-of-way for the first four miles and then the median of North Tryon Street/US 29 until it enters the University of North Carolina at Charlotte (UNC Charlotte) campus where it would terminate. The project would include 11 stations, park-and-ride facilities, and a storage yard with dispatch facility. Trains would operate seven days a week from 5:00 a.m. until 1:00 a.m. and would arrive at stations every 7.5 minutes during rush hour and every 15 minutes during non-peak hours. Bus service connections would be provided at most stations. Year of expenditure capital costs are projected to be $1.07 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would ensure future mobility by providing high-capacity, fixed-guideway transit service in a congested travel corridor and would support regional land use policies and goals for sustainable growth and development. The new service would offer a convenient, time-competitive travel alternative and reduce dependence on single-occupant automobiles. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would eliminate 10.5 acres of mixed pine/hardwood forest and impact 3,304 linear feet of streams and 0.5 acres of wetlands. Full and partial property acquisitions would result in 14 business displacements. Implementation would create potential for overflow parking on neighborhood streets adjacent to stations. Noise impacts would be severe at one residential property and two college dormitories. 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 10-0491D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110341, Final EIS--398 pages, Appendices--349 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 18 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Creeks KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Universities KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits 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/912103144?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 17 of 37] T2 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 912103132; 15098-1_0017 AB - PURPOSE: A 9.4-mile extension of the LYNX Blue Line light rail service within the Northeast Corridor of the City of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The corridor is a major employment, shopping and educational destination, anchored by Center City Charlotte at the southern end and University City at the northern end. Several major roadways and intersections currently are experiencing peak hour volumes that exceed capacity and 23 percent of the total miles on roadways within the Northeast Corridor operate at or above capacity. The Charlotte Area Transit System began operation of the LYNX Blue Line in November 2007 with 15 stations in the South Corridor. This final EIS evaluates the proposed action, a transportation system management alternative, and a No Build Alternative. The LYNX Blue Line Extension is the preferred alternative and would utilize existing railroad rights-of-way for the first four miles and then the median of North Tryon Street/US 29 until it enters the University of North Carolina at Charlotte (UNC Charlotte) campus where it would terminate. The project would include 11 stations, park-and-ride facilities, and a storage yard with dispatch facility. Trains would operate seven days a week from 5:00 a.m. until 1:00 a.m. and would arrive at stations every 7.5 minutes during rush hour and every 15 minutes during non-peak hours. Bus service connections would be provided at most stations. Year of expenditure capital costs are projected to be $1.07 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would ensure future mobility by providing high-capacity, fixed-guideway transit service in a congested travel corridor and would support regional land use policies and goals for sustainable growth and development. The new service would offer a convenient, time-competitive travel alternative and reduce dependence on single-occupant automobiles. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would eliminate 10.5 acres of mixed pine/hardwood forest and impact 3,304 linear feet of streams and 0.5 acres of wetlands. Full and partial property acquisitions would result in 14 business displacements. Implementation would create potential for overflow parking on neighborhood streets adjacent to stations. Noise impacts would be severe at one residential property and two college dormitories. 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 10-0491D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110341, Final EIS--398 pages, Appendices--349 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 17 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Creeks KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Universities KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits 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/912103132?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 15 of 37] T2 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 912103106; 15098-1_0015 AB - PURPOSE: A 9.4-mile extension of the LYNX Blue Line light rail service within the Northeast Corridor of the City of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The corridor is a major employment, shopping and educational destination, anchored by Center City Charlotte at the southern end and University City at the northern end. Several major roadways and intersections currently are experiencing peak hour volumes that exceed capacity and 23 percent of the total miles on roadways within the Northeast Corridor operate at or above capacity. The Charlotte Area Transit System began operation of the LYNX Blue Line in November 2007 with 15 stations in the South Corridor. This final EIS evaluates the proposed action, a transportation system management alternative, and a No Build Alternative. The LYNX Blue Line Extension is the preferred alternative and would utilize existing railroad rights-of-way for the first four miles and then the median of North Tryon Street/US 29 until it enters the University of North Carolina at Charlotte (UNC Charlotte) campus where it would terminate. The project would include 11 stations, park-and-ride facilities, and a storage yard with dispatch facility. Trains would operate seven days a week from 5:00 a.m. until 1:00 a.m. and would arrive at stations every 7.5 minutes during rush hour and every 15 minutes during non-peak hours. Bus service connections would be provided at most stations. Year of expenditure capital costs are projected to be $1.07 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would ensure future mobility by providing high-capacity, fixed-guideway transit service in a congested travel corridor and would support regional land use policies and goals for sustainable growth and development. The new service would offer a convenient, time-competitive travel alternative and reduce dependence on single-occupant automobiles. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would eliminate 10.5 acres of mixed pine/hardwood forest and impact 3,304 linear feet of streams and 0.5 acres of wetlands. Full and partial property acquisitions would result in 14 business displacements. Implementation would create potential for overflow parking on neighborhood streets adjacent to stations. Noise impacts would be severe at one residential property and two college dormitories. 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 10-0491D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110341, Final EIS--398 pages, Appendices--349 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 15 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Creeks KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Universities KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits 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/912103106?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 2 of 37] T2 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 912101069; 15098-1_0002 AB - PURPOSE: A 9.4-mile extension of the LYNX Blue Line light rail service within the Northeast Corridor of the City of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The corridor is a major employment, shopping and educational destination, anchored by Center City Charlotte at the southern end and University City at the northern end. Several major roadways and intersections currently are experiencing peak hour volumes that exceed capacity and 23 percent of the total miles on roadways within the Northeast Corridor operate at or above capacity. The Charlotte Area Transit System began operation of the LYNX Blue Line in November 2007 with 15 stations in the South Corridor. This final EIS evaluates the proposed action, a transportation system management alternative, and a No Build Alternative. The LYNX Blue Line Extension is the preferred alternative and would utilize existing railroad rights-of-way for the first four miles and then the median of North Tryon Street/US 29 until it enters the University of North Carolina at Charlotte (UNC Charlotte) campus where it would terminate. The project would include 11 stations, park-and-ride facilities, and a storage yard with dispatch facility. Trains would operate seven days a week from 5:00 a.m. until 1:00 a.m. and would arrive at stations every 7.5 minutes during rush hour and every 15 minutes during non-peak hours. Bus service connections would be provided at most stations. Year of expenditure capital costs are projected to be $1.07 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would ensure future mobility by providing high-capacity, fixed-guideway transit service in a congested travel corridor and would support regional land use policies and goals for sustainable growth and development. The new service would offer a convenient, time-competitive travel alternative and reduce dependence on single-occupant automobiles. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would eliminate 10.5 acres of mixed pine/hardwood forest and impact 3,304 linear feet of streams and 0.5 acres of wetlands. Full and partial property acquisitions would result in 14 business displacements. Implementation would create potential for overflow parking on neighborhood streets adjacent to stations. Noise impacts would be severe at one residential property and two college dormitories. 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 10-0491D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110341, Final EIS--398 pages, Appendices--349 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Creeks KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Universities KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits 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/912101069?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 1 of 37] T2 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 912101059; 15098-1_0001 AB - PURPOSE: A 9.4-mile extension of the LYNX Blue Line light rail service within the Northeast Corridor of the City of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The corridor is a major employment, shopping and educational destination, anchored by Center City Charlotte at the southern end and University City at the northern end. Several major roadways and intersections currently are experiencing peak hour volumes that exceed capacity and 23 percent of the total miles on roadways within the Northeast Corridor operate at or above capacity. The Charlotte Area Transit System began operation of the LYNX Blue Line in November 2007 with 15 stations in the South Corridor. This final EIS evaluates the proposed action, a transportation system management alternative, and a No Build Alternative. The LYNX Blue Line Extension is the preferred alternative and would utilize existing railroad rights-of-way for the first four miles and then the median of North Tryon Street/US 29 until it enters the University of North Carolina at Charlotte (UNC Charlotte) campus where it would terminate. The project would include 11 stations, park-and-ride facilities, and a storage yard with dispatch facility. Trains would operate seven days a week from 5:00 a.m. until 1:00 a.m. and would arrive at stations every 7.5 minutes during rush hour and every 15 minutes during non-peak hours. Bus service connections would be provided at most stations. Year of expenditure capital costs are projected to be $1.07 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would ensure future mobility by providing high-capacity, fixed-guideway transit service in a congested travel corridor and would support regional land use policies and goals for sustainable growth and development. The new service would offer a convenient, time-competitive travel alternative and reduce dependence on single-occupant automobiles. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would eliminate 10.5 acres of mixed pine/hardwood forest and impact 3,304 linear feet of streams and 0.5 acres of wetlands. Full and partial property acquisitions would result in 14 business displacements. Implementation would create potential for overflow parking on neighborhood streets adjacent to stations. Noise impacts would be severe at one residential property and two college dormitories. 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 10-0491D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110341, Final EIS--398 pages, Appendices--349 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Creeks KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Universities KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits 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/912101059?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 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. [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. AN - 912101049; 15100-3_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. 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 local streets affected by the freeway reconstruction; and enhancing the appearance of the reconstructed freeway. I-94 is a major east-west freeway link and I-894 is a bypass around Milwaukee that provides an important connection for several Milwaukee County communities. US 45 is a north-south highway link connecting the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, Oshkosh, Fond du Lac, West Bend, Milwaukee, Chicagos OHare International Airport, and points south. The Zoo Interchange carries more than 300,000 vehicles on an average weekday and crash rates in the study area are up to five times higher than on other similar freeways in the state. This final EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative, the Modernization with No Added Capacity Alternative (six lanes), the Modernization with Added Capacity Alternative (eight lanes), and the Reduced Impacts Alternative. An adjacent arterials component is also considered in order to provide needed improvements for freeway traffic diverted to State Highway 100, Watertown Plank Road, Bluemound Road, and 84th Street. The Reduced Impacts Alternative with the adjacent arterials component is the preferred alternative. Eight lanes would be provided in the north-south direction. Four east-west lanes would be provided through the core while additional capacity in the form of auxiliary lanes would be provided east and west of the core to accommodate future traffic volumes. The Zoo Interchange would include full eight-foot to 12-foot shoulders on all ramps and freeways, two to three lanes on all through routes, and three to four lanes on all four approach legs. Smoother curves on all interchange ramps would provide a minimum design speed of 45 miles per hour (mph). I-94 and US 45 would have a 60 mph design speed. The interchange would have four levels, making it about 20 feet higher than the existing core. Expenditures for the Reduced Impacts Alternative estimated in year-of-construction dollars are $1.7 billion. The adjacent arterials component would cost $65 to $73 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system, replace deteriorating pavement and bridges, and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The preferred alternative would require 76 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 1.6 acres of wetlands and 8.8 acres of parkland. Eight residences and five businesses would be displaced. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. Noise impacts would occur at 426 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: 110343, Final EIS--379 pages, Appendices and Exhibits--497 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 29 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands 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/912101049?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&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.&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.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 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. [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. AN - 912101042; 15100-3_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. 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 local streets affected by the freeway reconstruction; and enhancing the appearance of the reconstructed freeway. I-94 is a major east-west freeway link and I-894 is a bypass around Milwaukee that provides an important connection for several Milwaukee County communities. US 45 is a north-south highway link connecting the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, Oshkosh, Fond du Lac, West Bend, Milwaukee, Chicagos OHare International Airport, and points south. The Zoo Interchange carries more than 300,000 vehicles on an average weekday and crash rates in the study area are up to five times higher than on other similar freeways in the state. This final EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative, the Modernization with No Added Capacity Alternative (six lanes), the Modernization with Added Capacity Alternative (eight lanes), and the Reduced Impacts Alternative. An adjacent arterials component is also considered in order to provide needed improvements for freeway traffic diverted to State Highway 100, Watertown Plank Road, Bluemound Road, and 84th Street. The Reduced Impacts Alternative with the adjacent arterials component is the preferred alternative. Eight lanes would be provided in the north-south direction. Four east-west lanes would be provided through the core while additional capacity in the form of auxiliary lanes would be provided east and west of the core to accommodate future traffic volumes. The Zoo Interchange would include full eight-foot to 12-foot shoulders on all ramps and freeways, two to three lanes on all through routes, and three to four lanes on all four approach legs. Smoother curves on all interchange ramps would provide a minimum design speed of 45 miles per hour (mph). I-94 and US 45 would have a 60 mph design speed. The interchange would have four levels, making it about 20 feet higher than the existing core. Expenditures for the Reduced Impacts Alternative estimated in year-of-construction dollars are $1.7 billion. The adjacent arterials component would cost $65 to $73 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system, replace deteriorating pavement and bridges, and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The preferred alternative would require 76 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 1.6 acres of wetlands and 8.8 acres of parkland. Eight residences and five businesses would be displaced. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. Noise impacts would occur at 426 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: 110343, Final EIS--379 pages, Appendices and Exhibits--497 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 28 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands 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/912101042?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&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.&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.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 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. [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. AN - 912101034; 15100-3_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. 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 local streets affected by the freeway reconstruction; and enhancing the appearance of the reconstructed freeway. I-94 is a major east-west freeway link and I-894 is a bypass around Milwaukee that provides an important connection for several Milwaukee County communities. US 45 is a north-south highway link connecting the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, Oshkosh, Fond du Lac, West Bend, Milwaukee, Chicagos OHare International Airport, and points south. The Zoo Interchange carries more than 300,000 vehicles on an average weekday and crash rates in the study area are up to five times higher than on other similar freeways in the state. This final EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative, the Modernization with No Added Capacity Alternative (six lanes), the Modernization with Added Capacity Alternative (eight lanes), and the Reduced Impacts Alternative. An adjacent arterials component is also considered in order to provide needed improvements for freeway traffic diverted to State Highway 100, Watertown Plank Road, Bluemound Road, and 84th Street. The Reduced Impacts Alternative with the adjacent arterials component is the preferred alternative. Eight lanes would be provided in the north-south direction. Four east-west lanes would be provided through the core while additional capacity in the form of auxiliary lanes would be provided east and west of the core to accommodate future traffic volumes. The Zoo Interchange would include full eight-foot to 12-foot shoulders on all ramps and freeways, two to three lanes on all through routes, and three to four lanes on all four approach legs. Smoother curves on all interchange ramps would provide a minimum design speed of 45 miles per hour (mph). I-94 and US 45 would have a 60 mph design speed. The interchange would have four levels, making it about 20 feet higher than the existing core. Expenditures for the Reduced Impacts Alternative estimated in year-of-construction dollars are $1.7 billion. The adjacent arterials component would cost $65 to $73 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system, replace deteriorating pavement and bridges, and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The preferred alternative would require 76 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 1.6 acres of wetlands and 8.8 acres of parkland. Eight residences and five businesses would be displaced. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. Noise impacts would occur at 426 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: 110343, Final EIS--379 pages, Appendices and Exhibits--497 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 27 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands 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/912101034?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&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.&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.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 33 of 37] T2 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 912101026; 15098-1_0033 AB - PURPOSE: A 9.4-mile extension of the LYNX Blue Line light rail service within the Northeast Corridor of the City of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The corridor is a major employment, shopping and educational destination, anchored by Center City Charlotte at the southern end and University City at the northern end. Several major roadways and intersections currently are experiencing peak hour volumes that exceed capacity and 23 percent of the total miles on roadways within the Northeast Corridor operate at or above capacity. The Charlotte Area Transit System began operation of the LYNX Blue Line in November 2007 with 15 stations in the South Corridor. This final EIS evaluates the proposed action, a transportation system management alternative, and a No Build Alternative. The LYNX Blue Line Extension is the preferred alternative and would utilize existing railroad rights-of-way for the first four miles and then the median of North Tryon Street/US 29 until it enters the University of North Carolina at Charlotte (UNC Charlotte) campus where it would terminate. The project would include 11 stations, park-and-ride facilities, and a storage yard with dispatch facility. Trains would operate seven days a week from 5:00 a.m. until 1:00 a.m. and would arrive at stations every 7.5 minutes during rush hour and every 15 minutes during non-peak hours. Bus service connections would be provided at most stations. Year of expenditure capital costs are projected to be $1.07 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would ensure future mobility by providing high-capacity, fixed-guideway transit service in a congested travel corridor and would support regional land use policies and goals for sustainable growth and development. The new service would offer a convenient, time-competitive travel alternative and reduce dependence on single-occupant automobiles. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would eliminate 10.5 acres of mixed pine/hardwood forest and impact 3,304 linear feet of streams and 0.5 acres of wetlands. Full and partial property acquisitions would result in 14 business displacements. Implementation would create potential for overflow parking on neighborhood streets adjacent to stations. Noise impacts would be severe at one residential property and two college dormitories. 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 10-0491D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110341, Final EIS--398 pages, Appendices--349 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 33 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Creeks KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Universities KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits 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/912101026?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 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. [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. AN - 912101023; 15100-3_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. 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 local streets affected by the freeway reconstruction; and enhancing the appearance of the reconstructed freeway. I-94 is a major east-west freeway link and I-894 is a bypass around Milwaukee that provides an important connection for several Milwaukee County communities. US 45 is a north-south highway link connecting the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, Oshkosh, Fond du Lac, West Bend, Milwaukee, Chicagos OHare International Airport, and points south. The Zoo Interchange carries more than 300,000 vehicles on an average weekday and crash rates in the study area are up to five times higher than on other similar freeways in the state. This final EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative, the Modernization with No Added Capacity Alternative (six lanes), the Modernization with Added Capacity Alternative (eight lanes), and the Reduced Impacts Alternative. An adjacent arterials component is also considered in order to provide needed improvements for freeway traffic diverted to State Highway 100, Watertown Plank Road, Bluemound Road, and 84th Street. The Reduced Impacts Alternative with the adjacent arterials component is the preferred alternative. Eight lanes would be provided in the north-south direction. Four east-west lanes would be provided through the core while additional capacity in the form of auxiliary lanes would be provided east and west of the core to accommodate future traffic volumes. The Zoo Interchange would include full eight-foot to 12-foot shoulders on all ramps and freeways, two to three lanes on all through routes, and three to four lanes on all four approach legs. Smoother curves on all interchange ramps would provide a minimum design speed of 45 miles per hour (mph). I-94 and US 45 would have a 60 mph design speed. The interchange would have four levels, making it about 20 feet higher than the existing core. Expenditures for the Reduced Impacts Alternative estimated in year-of-construction dollars are $1.7 billion. The adjacent arterials component would cost $65 to $73 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system, replace deteriorating pavement and bridges, and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The preferred alternative would require 76 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 1.6 acres of wetlands and 8.8 acres of parkland. Eight residences and five businesses would be displaced. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. Noise impacts would occur at 426 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: 110343, Final EIS--379 pages, Appendices and Exhibits--497 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 26 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands 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/912101023?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&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.&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.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 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. [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. AN - 912101016; 15100-3_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. 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 local streets affected by the freeway reconstruction; and enhancing the appearance of the reconstructed freeway. I-94 is a major east-west freeway link and I-894 is a bypass around Milwaukee that provides an important connection for several Milwaukee County communities. US 45 is a north-south highway link connecting the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, Oshkosh, Fond du Lac, West Bend, Milwaukee, Chicagos OHare International Airport, and points south. The Zoo Interchange carries more than 300,000 vehicles on an average weekday and crash rates in the study area are up to five times higher than on other similar freeways in the state. This final EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative, the Modernization with No Added Capacity Alternative (six lanes), the Modernization with Added Capacity Alternative (eight lanes), and the Reduced Impacts Alternative. An adjacent arterials component is also considered in order to provide needed improvements for freeway traffic diverted to State Highway 100, Watertown Plank Road, Bluemound Road, and 84th Street. The Reduced Impacts Alternative with the adjacent arterials component is the preferred alternative. Eight lanes would be provided in the north-south direction. Four east-west lanes would be provided through the core while additional capacity in the form of auxiliary lanes would be provided east and west of the core to accommodate future traffic volumes. The Zoo Interchange would include full eight-foot to 12-foot shoulders on all ramps and freeways, two to three lanes on all through routes, and three to four lanes on all four approach legs. Smoother curves on all interchange ramps would provide a minimum design speed of 45 miles per hour (mph). I-94 and US 45 would have a 60 mph design speed. The interchange would have four levels, making it about 20 feet higher than the existing core. Expenditures for the Reduced Impacts Alternative estimated in year-of-construction dollars are $1.7 billion. The adjacent arterials component would cost $65 to $73 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system, replace deteriorating pavement and bridges, and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The preferred alternative would require 76 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 1.6 acres of wetlands and 8.8 acres of parkland. Eight residences and five businesses would be displaced. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. Noise impacts would occur at 426 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: 110343, Final EIS--379 pages, Appendices and Exhibits--497 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 25 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands 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/912101016?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&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.&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.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 32 of 37] T2 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 912101015; 15098-1_0032 AB - PURPOSE: A 9.4-mile extension of the LYNX Blue Line light rail service within the Northeast Corridor of the City of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The corridor is a major employment, shopping and educational destination, anchored by Center City Charlotte at the southern end and University City at the northern end. Several major roadways and intersections currently are experiencing peak hour volumes that exceed capacity and 23 percent of the total miles on roadways within the Northeast Corridor operate at or above capacity. The Charlotte Area Transit System began operation of the LYNX Blue Line in November 2007 with 15 stations in the South Corridor. This final EIS evaluates the proposed action, a transportation system management alternative, and a No Build Alternative. The LYNX Blue Line Extension is the preferred alternative and would utilize existing railroad rights-of-way for the first four miles and then the median of North Tryon Street/US 29 until it enters the University of North Carolina at Charlotte (UNC Charlotte) campus where it would terminate. The project would include 11 stations, park-and-ride facilities, and a storage yard with dispatch facility. Trains would operate seven days a week from 5:00 a.m. until 1:00 a.m. and would arrive at stations every 7.5 minutes during rush hour and every 15 minutes during non-peak hours. Bus service connections would be provided at most stations. Year of expenditure capital costs are projected to be $1.07 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would ensure future mobility by providing high-capacity, fixed-guideway transit service in a congested travel corridor and would support regional land use policies and goals for sustainable growth and development. The new service would offer a convenient, time-competitive travel alternative and reduce dependence on single-occupant automobiles. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would eliminate 10.5 acres of mixed pine/hardwood forest and impact 3,304 linear feet of streams and 0.5 acres of wetlands. Full and partial property acquisitions would result in 14 business displacements. Implementation would create potential for overflow parking on neighborhood streets adjacent to stations. Noise impacts would be severe at one residential property and two college dormitories. 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 10-0491D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110341, Final EIS--398 pages, Appendices--349 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 32 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Creeks KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Universities KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits 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/912101015?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 31 of 37] T2 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 912101005; 15098-1_0031 AB - PURPOSE: A 9.4-mile extension of the LYNX Blue Line light rail service within the Northeast Corridor of the City of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The corridor is a major employment, shopping and educational destination, anchored by Center City Charlotte at the southern end and University City at the northern end. Several major roadways and intersections currently are experiencing peak hour volumes that exceed capacity and 23 percent of the total miles on roadways within the Northeast Corridor operate at or above capacity. The Charlotte Area Transit System began operation of the LYNX Blue Line in November 2007 with 15 stations in the South Corridor. This final EIS evaluates the proposed action, a transportation system management alternative, and a No Build Alternative. The LYNX Blue Line Extension is the preferred alternative and would utilize existing railroad rights-of-way for the first four miles and then the median of North Tryon Street/US 29 until it enters the University of North Carolina at Charlotte (UNC Charlotte) campus where it would terminate. The project would include 11 stations, park-and-ride facilities, and a storage yard with dispatch facility. Trains would operate seven days a week from 5:00 a.m. until 1:00 a.m. and would arrive at stations every 7.5 minutes during rush hour and every 15 minutes during non-peak hours. Bus service connections would be provided at most stations. Year of expenditure capital costs are projected to be $1.07 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would ensure future mobility by providing high-capacity, fixed-guideway transit service in a congested travel corridor and would support regional land use policies and goals for sustainable growth and development. The new service would offer a convenient, time-competitive travel alternative and reduce dependence on single-occupant automobiles. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would eliminate 10.5 acres of mixed pine/hardwood forest and impact 3,304 linear feet of streams and 0.5 acres of wetlands. Full and partial property acquisitions would result in 14 business displacements. Implementation would create potential for overflow parking on neighborhood streets adjacent to stations. Noise impacts would be severe at one residential property and two college dormitories. 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 10-0491D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110341, Final EIS--398 pages, Appendices--349 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 31 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Creeks KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Universities KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits 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/912101005?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 29 of 37] T2 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 912100985; 15098-1_0029 AB - PURPOSE: A 9.4-mile extension of the LYNX Blue Line light rail service within the Northeast Corridor of the City of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The corridor is a major employment, shopping and educational destination, anchored by Center City Charlotte at the southern end and University City at the northern end. Several major roadways and intersections currently are experiencing peak hour volumes that exceed capacity and 23 percent of the total miles on roadways within the Northeast Corridor operate at or above capacity. The Charlotte Area Transit System began operation of the LYNX Blue Line in November 2007 with 15 stations in the South Corridor. This final EIS evaluates the proposed action, a transportation system management alternative, and a No Build Alternative. The LYNX Blue Line Extension is the preferred alternative and would utilize existing railroad rights-of-way for the first four miles and then the median of North Tryon Street/US 29 until it enters the University of North Carolina at Charlotte (UNC Charlotte) campus where it would terminate. The project would include 11 stations, park-and-ride facilities, and a storage yard with dispatch facility. Trains would operate seven days a week from 5:00 a.m. until 1:00 a.m. and would arrive at stations every 7.5 minutes during rush hour and every 15 minutes during non-peak hours. Bus service connections would be provided at most stations. Year of expenditure capital costs are projected to be $1.07 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would ensure future mobility by providing high-capacity, fixed-guideway transit service in a congested travel corridor and would support regional land use policies and goals for sustainable growth and development. The new service would offer a convenient, time-competitive travel alternative and reduce dependence on single-occupant automobiles. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would eliminate 10.5 acres of mixed pine/hardwood forest and impact 3,304 linear feet of streams and 0.5 acres of wetlands. Full and partial property acquisitions would result in 14 business displacements. Implementation would create potential for overflow parking on neighborhood streets adjacent to stations. Noise impacts would be severe at one residential property and two college dormitories. 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 10-0491D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110341, Final EIS--398 pages, Appendices--349 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 29 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Creeks KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Universities KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits 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/912100985?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 28 of 37] T2 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 912100973; 15098-1_0028 AB - PURPOSE: A 9.4-mile extension of the LYNX Blue Line light rail service within the Northeast Corridor of the City of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The corridor is a major employment, shopping and educational destination, anchored by Center City Charlotte at the southern end and University City at the northern end. Several major roadways and intersections currently are experiencing peak hour volumes that exceed capacity and 23 percent of the total miles on roadways within the Northeast Corridor operate at or above capacity. The Charlotte Area Transit System began operation of the LYNX Blue Line in November 2007 with 15 stations in the South Corridor. This final EIS evaluates the proposed action, a transportation system management alternative, and a No Build Alternative. The LYNX Blue Line Extension is the preferred alternative and would utilize existing railroad rights-of-way for the first four miles and then the median of North Tryon Street/US 29 until it enters the University of North Carolina at Charlotte (UNC Charlotte) campus where it would terminate. The project would include 11 stations, park-and-ride facilities, and a storage yard with dispatch facility. Trains would operate seven days a week from 5:00 a.m. until 1:00 a.m. and would arrive at stations every 7.5 minutes during rush hour and every 15 minutes during non-peak hours. Bus service connections would be provided at most stations. Year of expenditure capital costs are projected to be $1.07 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would ensure future mobility by providing high-capacity, fixed-guideway transit service in a congested travel corridor and would support regional land use policies and goals for sustainable growth and development. The new service would offer a convenient, time-competitive travel alternative and reduce dependence on single-occupant automobiles. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would eliminate 10.5 acres of mixed pine/hardwood forest and impact 3,304 linear feet of streams and 0.5 acres of wetlands. Full and partial property acquisitions would result in 14 business displacements. Implementation would create potential for overflow parking on neighborhood streets adjacent to stations. Noise impacts would be severe at one residential property and two college dormitories. 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 10-0491D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110341, Final EIS--398 pages, Appendices--349 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 28 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Creeks KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Universities KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits 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/912100973?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 13 of 37] T2 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 912100733; 15098-1_0013 AB - PURPOSE: A 9.4-mile extension of the LYNX Blue Line light rail service within the Northeast Corridor of the City of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The corridor is a major employment, shopping and educational destination, anchored by Center City Charlotte at the southern end and University City at the northern end. Several major roadways and intersections currently are experiencing peak hour volumes that exceed capacity and 23 percent of the total miles on roadways within the Northeast Corridor operate at or above capacity. The Charlotte Area Transit System began operation of the LYNX Blue Line in November 2007 with 15 stations in the South Corridor. This final EIS evaluates the proposed action, a transportation system management alternative, and a No Build Alternative. The LYNX Blue Line Extension is the preferred alternative and would utilize existing railroad rights-of-way for the first four miles and then the median of North Tryon Street/US 29 until it enters the University of North Carolina at Charlotte (UNC Charlotte) campus where it would terminate. The project would include 11 stations, park-and-ride facilities, and a storage yard with dispatch facility. Trains would operate seven days a week from 5:00 a.m. until 1:00 a.m. and would arrive at stations every 7.5 minutes during rush hour and every 15 minutes during non-peak hours. Bus service connections would be provided at most stations. Year of expenditure capital costs are projected to be $1.07 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would ensure future mobility by providing high-capacity, fixed-guideway transit service in a congested travel corridor and would support regional land use policies and goals for sustainable growth and development. The new service would offer a convenient, time-competitive travel alternative and reduce dependence on single-occupant automobiles. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would eliminate 10.5 acres of mixed pine/hardwood forest and impact 3,304 linear feet of streams and 0.5 acres of wetlands. Full and partial property acquisitions would result in 14 business displacements. Implementation would create potential for overflow parking on neighborhood streets adjacent to stations. Noise impacts would be severe at one residential property and two college dormitories. 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 10-0491D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110341, Final EIS--398 pages, Appendices--349 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 13 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Creeks KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Universities KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits 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/912100733?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 12 of 37] T2 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 912100714; 15098-1_0012 AB - PURPOSE: A 9.4-mile extension of the LYNX Blue Line light rail service within the Northeast Corridor of the City of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The corridor is a major employment, shopping and educational destination, anchored by Center City Charlotte at the southern end and University City at the northern end. Several major roadways and intersections currently are experiencing peak hour volumes that exceed capacity and 23 percent of the total miles on roadways within the Northeast Corridor operate at or above capacity. The Charlotte Area Transit System began operation of the LYNX Blue Line in November 2007 with 15 stations in the South Corridor. This final EIS evaluates the proposed action, a transportation system management alternative, and a No Build Alternative. The LYNX Blue Line Extension is the preferred alternative and would utilize existing railroad rights-of-way for the first four miles and then the median of North Tryon Street/US 29 until it enters the University of North Carolina at Charlotte (UNC Charlotte) campus where it would terminate. The project would include 11 stations, park-and-ride facilities, and a storage yard with dispatch facility. Trains would operate seven days a week from 5:00 a.m. until 1:00 a.m. and would arrive at stations every 7.5 minutes during rush hour and every 15 minutes during non-peak hours. Bus service connections would be provided at most stations. Year of expenditure capital costs are projected to be $1.07 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would ensure future mobility by providing high-capacity, fixed-guideway transit service in a congested travel corridor and would support regional land use policies and goals for sustainable growth and development. The new service would offer a convenient, time-competitive travel alternative and reduce dependence on single-occupant automobiles. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would eliminate 10.5 acres of mixed pine/hardwood forest and impact 3,304 linear feet of streams and 0.5 acres of wetlands. Full and partial property acquisitions would result in 14 business displacements. Implementation would create potential for overflow parking on neighborhood streets adjacent to stations. Noise impacts would be severe at one residential property and two college dormitories. 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 10-0491D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110341, Final EIS--398 pages, Appendices--349 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 12 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Creeks KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Universities KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits 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/912100714?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 11 of 37] T2 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 912100694; 15098-1_0011 AB - PURPOSE: A 9.4-mile extension of the LYNX Blue Line light rail service within the Northeast Corridor of the City of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The corridor is a major employment, shopping and educational destination, anchored by Center City Charlotte at the southern end and University City at the northern end. Several major roadways and intersections currently are experiencing peak hour volumes that exceed capacity and 23 percent of the total miles on roadways within the Northeast Corridor operate at or above capacity. The Charlotte Area Transit System began operation of the LYNX Blue Line in November 2007 with 15 stations in the South Corridor. This final EIS evaluates the proposed action, a transportation system management alternative, and a No Build Alternative. The LYNX Blue Line Extension is the preferred alternative and would utilize existing railroad rights-of-way for the first four miles and then the median of North Tryon Street/US 29 until it enters the University of North Carolina at Charlotte (UNC Charlotte) campus where it would terminate. The project would include 11 stations, park-and-ride facilities, and a storage yard with dispatch facility. Trains would operate seven days a week from 5:00 a.m. until 1:00 a.m. and would arrive at stations every 7.5 minutes during rush hour and every 15 minutes during non-peak hours. Bus service connections would be provided at most stations. Year of expenditure capital costs are projected to be $1.07 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would ensure future mobility by providing high-capacity, fixed-guideway transit service in a congested travel corridor and would support regional land use policies and goals for sustainable growth and development. The new service would offer a convenient, time-competitive travel alternative and reduce dependence on single-occupant automobiles. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would eliminate 10.5 acres of mixed pine/hardwood forest and impact 3,304 linear feet of streams and 0.5 acres of wetlands. Full and partial property acquisitions would result in 14 business displacements. Implementation would create potential for overflow parking on neighborhood streets adjacent to stations. Noise impacts would be severe at one residential property and two college dormitories. 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 10-0491D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110341, Final EIS--398 pages, Appendices--349 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 11 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Creeks KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Universities KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits 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/912100694?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 10 of 37] T2 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 912100665; 15098-1_0010 AB - PURPOSE: A 9.4-mile extension of the LYNX Blue Line light rail service within the Northeast Corridor of the City of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The corridor is a major employment, shopping and educational destination, anchored by Center City Charlotte at the southern end and University City at the northern end. Several major roadways and intersections currently are experiencing peak hour volumes that exceed capacity and 23 percent of the total miles on roadways within the Northeast Corridor operate at or above capacity. The Charlotte Area Transit System began operation of the LYNX Blue Line in November 2007 with 15 stations in the South Corridor. This final EIS evaluates the proposed action, a transportation system management alternative, and a No Build Alternative. The LYNX Blue Line Extension is the preferred alternative and would utilize existing railroad rights-of-way for the first four miles and then the median of North Tryon Street/US 29 until it enters the University of North Carolina at Charlotte (UNC Charlotte) campus where it would terminate. The project would include 11 stations, park-and-ride facilities, and a storage yard with dispatch facility. Trains would operate seven days a week from 5:00 a.m. until 1:00 a.m. and would arrive at stations every 7.5 minutes during rush hour and every 15 minutes during non-peak hours. Bus service connections would be provided at most stations. Year of expenditure capital costs are projected to be $1.07 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would ensure future mobility by providing high-capacity, fixed-guideway transit service in a congested travel corridor and would support regional land use policies and goals for sustainable growth and development. The new service would offer a convenient, time-competitive travel alternative and reduce dependence on single-occupant automobiles. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would eliminate 10.5 acres of mixed pine/hardwood forest and impact 3,304 linear feet of streams and 0.5 acres of wetlands. Full and partial property acquisitions would result in 14 business displacements. Implementation would create potential for overflow parking on neighborhood streets adjacent to stations. Noise impacts would be severe at one residential property and two college dormitories. 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 10-0491D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110341, Final EIS--398 pages, Appendices--349 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Creeks KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Universities KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits 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/912100665?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 9 of 37] T2 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 912100651; 15098-1_0009 AB - PURPOSE: A 9.4-mile extension of the LYNX Blue Line light rail service within the Northeast Corridor of the City of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The corridor is a major employment, shopping and educational destination, anchored by Center City Charlotte at the southern end and University City at the northern end. Several major roadways and intersections currently are experiencing peak hour volumes that exceed capacity and 23 percent of the total miles on roadways within the Northeast Corridor operate at or above capacity. The Charlotte Area Transit System began operation of the LYNX Blue Line in November 2007 with 15 stations in the South Corridor. This final EIS evaluates the proposed action, a transportation system management alternative, and a No Build Alternative. The LYNX Blue Line Extension is the preferred alternative and would utilize existing railroad rights-of-way for the first four miles and then the median of North Tryon Street/US 29 until it enters the University of North Carolina at Charlotte (UNC Charlotte) campus where it would terminate. The project would include 11 stations, park-and-ride facilities, and a storage yard with dispatch facility. Trains would operate seven days a week from 5:00 a.m. until 1:00 a.m. and would arrive at stations every 7.5 minutes during rush hour and every 15 minutes during non-peak hours. Bus service connections would be provided at most stations. Year of expenditure capital costs are projected to be $1.07 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would ensure future mobility by providing high-capacity, fixed-guideway transit service in a congested travel corridor and would support regional land use policies and goals for sustainable growth and development. The new service would offer a convenient, time-competitive travel alternative and reduce dependence on single-occupant automobiles. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would eliminate 10.5 acres of mixed pine/hardwood forest and impact 3,304 linear feet of streams and 0.5 acres of wetlands. Full and partial property acquisitions would result in 14 business displacements. Implementation would create potential for overflow parking on neighborhood streets adjacent to stations. Noise impacts would be severe at one residential property and two college dormitories. 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 10-0491D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110341, Final EIS--398 pages, Appendices--349 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 9 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Creeks KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Universities KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits 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/912100651?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 8 of 37] T2 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 912100515; 15098-1_0008 AB - PURPOSE: A 9.4-mile extension of the LYNX Blue Line light rail service within the Northeast Corridor of the City of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The corridor is a major employment, shopping and educational destination, anchored by Center City Charlotte at the southern end and University City at the northern end. Several major roadways and intersections currently are experiencing peak hour volumes that exceed capacity and 23 percent of the total miles on roadways within the Northeast Corridor operate at or above capacity. The Charlotte Area Transit System began operation of the LYNX Blue Line in November 2007 with 15 stations in the South Corridor. This final EIS evaluates the proposed action, a transportation system management alternative, and a No Build Alternative. The LYNX Blue Line Extension is the preferred alternative and would utilize existing railroad rights-of-way for the first four miles and then the median of North Tryon Street/US 29 until it enters the University of North Carolina at Charlotte (UNC Charlotte) campus where it would terminate. The project would include 11 stations, park-and-ride facilities, and a storage yard with dispatch facility. Trains would operate seven days a week from 5:00 a.m. until 1:00 a.m. and would arrive at stations every 7.5 minutes during rush hour and every 15 minutes during non-peak hours. Bus service connections would be provided at most stations. Year of expenditure capital costs are projected to be $1.07 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would ensure future mobility by providing high-capacity, fixed-guideway transit service in a congested travel corridor and would support regional land use policies and goals for sustainable growth and development. The new service would offer a convenient, time-competitive travel alternative and reduce dependence on single-occupant automobiles. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would eliminate 10.5 acres of mixed pine/hardwood forest and impact 3,304 linear feet of streams and 0.5 acres of wetlands. Full and partial property acquisitions would result in 14 business displacements. Implementation would create potential for overflow parking on neighborhood streets adjacent to stations. Noise impacts would be severe at one residential property and two college dormitories. 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 10-0491D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110341, Final EIS--398 pages, Appendices--349 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Creeks KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Universities KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits 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/912100515?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 6 of 37] T2 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 912100472; 15098-1_0006 AB - PURPOSE: A 9.4-mile extension of the LYNX Blue Line light rail service within the Northeast Corridor of the City of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The corridor is a major employment, shopping and educational destination, anchored by Center City Charlotte at the southern end and University City at the northern end. Several major roadways and intersections currently are experiencing peak hour volumes that exceed capacity and 23 percent of the total miles on roadways within the Northeast Corridor operate at or above capacity. The Charlotte Area Transit System began operation of the LYNX Blue Line in November 2007 with 15 stations in the South Corridor. This final EIS evaluates the proposed action, a transportation system management alternative, and a No Build Alternative. The LYNX Blue Line Extension is the preferred alternative and would utilize existing railroad rights-of-way for the first four miles and then the median of North Tryon Street/US 29 until it enters the University of North Carolina at Charlotte (UNC Charlotte) campus where it would terminate. The project would include 11 stations, park-and-ride facilities, and a storage yard with dispatch facility. Trains would operate seven days a week from 5:00 a.m. until 1:00 a.m. and would arrive at stations every 7.5 minutes during rush hour and every 15 minutes during non-peak hours. Bus service connections would be provided at most stations. Year of expenditure capital costs are projected to be $1.07 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would ensure future mobility by providing high-capacity, fixed-guideway transit service in a congested travel corridor and would support regional land use policies and goals for sustainable growth and development. The new service would offer a convenient, time-competitive travel alternative and reduce dependence on single-occupant automobiles. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would eliminate 10.5 acres of mixed pine/hardwood forest and impact 3,304 linear feet of streams and 0.5 acres of wetlands. Full and partial property acquisitions would result in 14 business displacements. Implementation would create potential for overflow parking on neighborhood streets adjacent to stations. Noise impacts would be severe at one residential property and two college dormitories. 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 10-0491D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110341, Final EIS--398 pages, Appendices--349 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Creeks KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Universities KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits 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/912100472?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 5 of 37] T2 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 912100452; 15098-1_0005 AB - PURPOSE: A 9.4-mile extension of the LYNX Blue Line light rail service within the Northeast Corridor of the City of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The corridor is a major employment, shopping and educational destination, anchored by Center City Charlotte at the southern end and University City at the northern end. Several major roadways and intersections currently are experiencing peak hour volumes that exceed capacity and 23 percent of the total miles on roadways within the Northeast Corridor operate at or above capacity. The Charlotte Area Transit System began operation of the LYNX Blue Line in November 2007 with 15 stations in the South Corridor. This final EIS evaluates the proposed action, a transportation system management alternative, and a No Build Alternative. The LYNX Blue Line Extension is the preferred alternative and would utilize existing railroad rights-of-way for the first four miles and then the median of North Tryon Street/US 29 until it enters the University of North Carolina at Charlotte (UNC Charlotte) campus where it would terminate. The project would include 11 stations, park-and-ride facilities, and a storage yard with dispatch facility. Trains would operate seven days a week from 5:00 a.m. until 1:00 a.m. and would arrive at stations every 7.5 minutes during rush hour and every 15 minutes during non-peak hours. Bus service connections would be provided at most stations. Year of expenditure capital costs are projected to be $1.07 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would ensure future mobility by providing high-capacity, fixed-guideway transit service in a congested travel corridor and would support regional land use policies and goals for sustainable growth and development. The new service would offer a convenient, time-competitive travel alternative and reduce dependence on single-occupant automobiles. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would eliminate 10.5 acres of mixed pine/hardwood forest and impact 3,304 linear feet of streams and 0.5 acres of wetlands. Full and partial property acquisitions would result in 14 business displacements. Implementation would create potential for overflow parking on neighborhood streets adjacent to stations. Noise impacts would be severe at one residential property and two college dormitories. 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 10-0491D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110341, Final EIS--398 pages, Appendices--349 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Creeks KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Universities KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits 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/912100452?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 4 of 37] T2 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 912100437; 15098-1_0004 AB - PURPOSE: A 9.4-mile extension of the LYNX Blue Line light rail service within the Northeast Corridor of the City of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The corridor is a major employment, shopping and educational destination, anchored by Center City Charlotte at the southern end and University City at the northern end. Several major roadways and intersections currently are experiencing peak hour volumes that exceed capacity and 23 percent of the total miles on roadways within the Northeast Corridor operate at or above capacity. The Charlotte Area Transit System began operation of the LYNX Blue Line in November 2007 with 15 stations in the South Corridor. This final EIS evaluates the proposed action, a transportation system management alternative, and a No Build Alternative. The LYNX Blue Line Extension is the preferred alternative and would utilize existing railroad rights-of-way for the first four miles and then the median of North Tryon Street/US 29 until it enters the University of North Carolina at Charlotte (UNC Charlotte) campus where it would terminate. The project would include 11 stations, park-and-ride facilities, and a storage yard with dispatch facility. Trains would operate seven days a week from 5:00 a.m. until 1:00 a.m. and would arrive at stations every 7.5 minutes during rush hour and every 15 minutes during non-peak hours. Bus service connections would be provided at most stations. Year of expenditure capital costs are projected to be $1.07 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would ensure future mobility by providing high-capacity, fixed-guideway transit service in a congested travel corridor and would support regional land use policies and goals for sustainable growth and development. The new service would offer a convenient, time-competitive travel alternative and reduce dependence on single-occupant automobiles. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would eliminate 10.5 acres of mixed pine/hardwood forest and impact 3,304 linear feet of streams and 0.5 acres of wetlands. Full and partial property acquisitions would result in 14 business displacements. Implementation would create potential for overflow parking on neighborhood streets adjacent to stations. Noise impacts would be severe at one residential property and two college dormitories. 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 10-0491D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110341, Final EIS--398 pages, Appendices--349 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Creeks KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Universities KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits 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/912100437?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 3 of 37] T2 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 912100413; 15098-1_0003 AB - PURPOSE: A 9.4-mile extension of the LYNX Blue Line light rail service within the Northeast Corridor of the City of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The corridor is a major employment, shopping and educational destination, anchored by Center City Charlotte at the southern end and University City at the northern end. Several major roadways and intersections currently are experiencing peak hour volumes that exceed capacity and 23 percent of the total miles on roadways within the Northeast Corridor operate at or above capacity. The Charlotte Area Transit System began operation of the LYNX Blue Line in November 2007 with 15 stations in the South Corridor. This final EIS evaluates the proposed action, a transportation system management alternative, and a No Build Alternative. The LYNX Blue Line Extension is the preferred alternative and would utilize existing railroad rights-of-way for the first four miles and then the median of North Tryon Street/US 29 until it enters the University of North Carolina at Charlotte (UNC Charlotte) campus where it would terminate. The project would include 11 stations, park-and-ride facilities, and a storage yard with dispatch facility. Trains would operate seven days a week from 5:00 a.m. until 1:00 a.m. and would arrive at stations every 7.5 minutes during rush hour and every 15 minutes during non-peak hours. Bus service connections would be provided at most stations. Year of expenditure capital costs are projected to be $1.07 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would ensure future mobility by providing high-capacity, fixed-guideway transit service in a congested travel corridor and would support regional land use policies and goals for sustainable growth and development. The new service would offer a convenient, time-competitive travel alternative and reduce dependence on single-occupant automobiles. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would eliminate 10.5 acres of mixed pine/hardwood forest and impact 3,304 linear feet of streams and 0.5 acres of wetlands. Full and partial property acquisitions would result in 14 business displacements. Implementation would create potential for overflow parking on neighborhood streets adjacent to stations. Noise impacts would be severe at one residential property and two college dormitories. 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 10-0491D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110341, Final EIS--398 pages, Appendices--349 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Creeks KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Universities KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits 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/912100413?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 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. [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. AN - 912100019; 15100-3_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. 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 local streets affected by the freeway reconstruction; and enhancing the appearance of the reconstructed freeway. I-94 is a major east-west freeway link and I-894 is a bypass around Milwaukee that provides an important connection for several Milwaukee County communities. US 45 is a north-south highway link connecting the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, Oshkosh, Fond du Lac, West Bend, Milwaukee, Chicagos OHare International Airport, and points south. The Zoo Interchange carries more than 300,000 vehicles on an average weekday and crash rates in the study area are up to five times higher than on other similar freeways in the state. This final EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative, the Modernization with No Added Capacity Alternative (six lanes), the Modernization with Added Capacity Alternative (eight lanes), and the Reduced Impacts Alternative. An adjacent arterials component is also considered in order to provide needed improvements for freeway traffic diverted to State Highway 100, Watertown Plank Road, Bluemound Road, and 84th Street. The Reduced Impacts Alternative with the adjacent arterials component is the preferred alternative. Eight lanes would be provided in the north-south direction. Four east-west lanes would be provided through the core while additional capacity in the form of auxiliary lanes would be provided east and west of the core to accommodate future traffic volumes. The Zoo Interchange would include full eight-foot to 12-foot shoulders on all ramps and freeways, two to three lanes on all through routes, and three to four lanes on all four approach legs. Smoother curves on all interchange ramps would provide a minimum design speed of 45 miles per hour (mph). I-94 and US 45 would have a 60 mph design speed. The interchange would have four levels, making it about 20 feet higher than the existing core. Expenditures for the Reduced Impacts Alternative estimated in year-of-construction dollars are $1.7 billion. The adjacent arterials component would cost $65 to $73 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system, replace deteriorating pavement and bridges, and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The preferred alternative would require 76 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 1.6 acres of wetlands and 8.8 acres of parkland. Eight residences and five businesses would be displaced. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. Noise impacts would occur at 426 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: 110343, Final EIS--379 pages, Appendices and Exhibits--497 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 24 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands 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/912100019?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&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.&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.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 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. [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. AN - 912099994; 15100-3_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. 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 local streets affected by the freeway reconstruction; and enhancing the appearance of the reconstructed freeway. I-94 is a major east-west freeway link and I-894 is a bypass around Milwaukee that provides an important connection for several Milwaukee County communities. US 45 is a north-south highway link connecting the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, Oshkosh, Fond du Lac, West Bend, Milwaukee, Chicagos OHare International Airport, and points south. The Zoo Interchange carries more than 300,000 vehicles on an average weekday and crash rates in the study area are up to five times higher than on other similar freeways in the state. This final EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative, the Modernization with No Added Capacity Alternative (six lanes), the Modernization with Added Capacity Alternative (eight lanes), and the Reduced Impacts Alternative. An adjacent arterials component is also considered in order to provide needed improvements for freeway traffic diverted to State Highway 100, Watertown Plank Road, Bluemound Road, and 84th Street. The Reduced Impacts Alternative with the adjacent arterials component is the preferred alternative. Eight lanes would be provided in the north-south direction. Four east-west lanes would be provided through the core while additional capacity in the form of auxiliary lanes would be provided east and west of the core to accommodate future traffic volumes. The Zoo Interchange would include full eight-foot to 12-foot shoulders on all ramps and freeways, two to three lanes on all through routes, and three to four lanes on all four approach legs. Smoother curves on all interchange ramps would provide a minimum design speed of 45 miles per hour (mph). I-94 and US 45 would have a 60 mph design speed. The interchange would have four levels, making it about 20 feet higher than the existing core. Expenditures for the Reduced Impacts Alternative estimated in year-of-construction dollars are $1.7 billion. The adjacent arterials component would cost $65 to $73 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system, replace deteriorating pavement and bridges, and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The preferred alternative would require 76 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 1.6 acres of wetlands and 8.8 acres of parkland. Eight residences and five businesses would be displaced. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. Noise impacts would occur at 426 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: 110343, Final EIS--379 pages, Appendices and Exhibits--497 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 23 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands 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/912099994?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-10-14&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.&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.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-21 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. AN - 910686405; 15100 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. 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 local streets affected by the freeway reconstruction; and enhancing the appearance of the reconstructed freeway. I-94 is a major east-west freeway link and I-894 is a bypass around Milwaukee that provides an important connection for several Milwaukee County communities. US 45 is a north-south highway link connecting the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, Oshkosh, Fond du Lac, West Bend, Milwaukee, Chicagos OHare International Airport, and points south. The Zoo Interchange carries more than 300,000 vehicles on an average weekday and crash rates in the study area are up to five times higher than on other similar freeways in the state. This final EIS analyzes a No Build Alternative, the Modernization with No Added Capacity Alternative (six lanes), the Modernization with Added Capacity Alternative (eight lanes), and the Reduced Impacts Alternative. An adjacent arterials component is also considered in order to provide needed improvements for freeway traffic diverted to State Highway 100, Watertown Plank Road, Bluemound Road, and 84th Street. The Reduced Impacts Alternative with the adjacent arterials component is the preferred alternative. Eight lanes would be provided in the north-south direction. Four east-west lanes would be provided through the core while additional capacity in the form of auxiliary lanes would be provided east and west of the core to accommodate future traffic volumes. The Zoo Interchange would include full eight-foot to 12-foot shoulders on all ramps and freeways, two to three lanes on all through routes, and three to four lanes on all four approach legs. Smoother curves on all interchange ramps would provide a minimum design speed of 45 miles per hour (mph). I-94 and US 45 would have a 60 mph design speed. The interchange would have four levels, making it about 20 feet higher than the existing core. Expenditures for the Reduced Impacts Alternative estimated in year-of-construction dollars are $1.7 billion. The adjacent arterials component would cost $65 to $73 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Reconstruction would address the obsolete design of the study-area freeway system, replace deteriorating pavement and bridges, and accommodate future traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The preferred alternative would require 76 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 1.6 acres of wetlands and 8.8 acres of parkland. Eight residences and five businesses would be displaced. Bridge removal and construction of a new bridge could harm Butler's garter snakes. Noise impacts would occur at 426 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: 110343, Final EIS--379 pages, Appendices and Exhibits--497 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-09-01-F KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Parks KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands 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/910686405?accountid=14244 L2 - http://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=2011-10-14&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.&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.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - LYNX BLUE LINE EXTENSION NORTHEAST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL PROJECT, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 910685919; 15098 AB - PURPOSE: A 9.4-mile extension of the LYNX Blue Line light rail service within the Northeast Corridor of the City of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County, North Carolina is proposed. The corridor is a major employment, shopping and educational destination, anchored by Center City Charlotte at the southern end and University City at the northern end. Several major roadways and intersections currently are experiencing peak hour volumes that exceed capacity and 23 percent of the total miles on roadways within the Northeast Corridor operate at or above capacity. The Charlotte Area Transit System began operation of the LYNX Blue Line in November 2007 with 15 stations in the South Corridor. This final EIS evaluates the proposed action, a transportation system management alternative, and a No Build Alternative. The LYNX Blue Line Extension is the preferred alternative and would utilize existing railroad rights-of-way for the first four miles and then the median of North Tryon Street/US 29 until it enters the University of North Carolina at Charlotte (UNC Charlotte) campus where it would terminate. The project would include 11 stations, park-and-ride facilities, and a storage yard with dispatch facility. Trains would operate seven days a week from 5:00 a.m. until 1:00 a.m. and would arrive at stations every 7.5 minutes during rush hour and every 15 minutes during non-peak hours. Bus service connections would be provided at most stations. Year of expenditure capital costs are projected to be $1.07 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would ensure future mobility by providing high-capacity, fixed-guideway transit service in a congested travel corridor and would support regional land use policies and goals for sustainable growth and development. The new service would offer a convenient, time-competitive travel alternative and reduce dependence on single-occupant automobiles. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would eliminate 10.5 acres of mixed pine/hardwood forest and impact 3,304 linear feet of streams and 0.5 acres of wetlands. Full and partial property acquisitions would result in 14 business displacements. Implementation would create potential for overflow parking on neighborhood streets adjacent to stations. Noise impacts would be severe at one residential property and two college dormitories. 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 10-0491D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110341, Final EIS--398 pages, Appendices--349 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Central Business Districts KW - Creeks KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Universities KW - Wetlands KW - North Carolina KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits 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/910685919?accountid=14244 L2 - http://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=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=LYNX+BLUE+LINE+EXTENSION+NORTHEAST+CORRIDOR+LIGHT+RAIL+PROJECT%2C+CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-14 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - U.S. HIGHWAY 160 FROM DURANGO TO BAYFIELD, LA PLATA COUNTY, COLORADO (DRAFT SUPPLEMENT TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OF MAY 2006). AN - 910683770; 15099 AB - PURPOSE: Design changes to a limited portion of the US 160 Corridor Project where US 550 connects to US 160 east of Durango, Colorado are proposed. The selected alternative from the 2006 Record of Decision on US 160 is 16.2 miles, extending from milepost (MP) 88.0, located east of Durango, to MP 104.2, located east of Bayfield. The selected alternative extends four lanes on US 160 to east of Bayfield, generally along the existing alignment with an alignment to the south in Gem Village from MP 100 to MP 101. It also includes reconstruction of the US 160/US 550 (south) intersection as an interchange and a new section of US 550 that is necessary to connect the interchange on US 160 to the US 550 corridor south of Durango. The action proposed in this draft supplemental EIS would revise the location and length of US 550 from south of County Road (CR) 220 to where it connects to US 160. The design shift would lessen impacts and avoid a gas well. The realigned 1.5-mile section of US 550 would be improved from a two-lane to a four-lane highway. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated. The Revised G Modified Alternative is the preferred alternative and would connect US 550 to US 160 via the Grandview Interchange. The Revised F Modified and the Eastern Realignment alternatives would connect US 550 to US 160 at the single-point urban interchange at CR 233 (Three Springs). Estimated costs of the Revised G Modified, Revised F Modified, and Eastern Realignment alternatives are $77.6 million, $77.4 million, and $93.1 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The project would increase travel efficiency and capacity to meet current and future needs, improve safety for the traveling public by reducing the number and severity of accidents, and provide for controlled access to the highway corridors affected. Intersections with county roads would be upgraded to meet current design standards. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Implementation of the preferred alternative would impact 18.4 acres of farmland, 42.5 acres of wildlife habitat, and 0.3 acres of wetlands. Two historic ranches and six archaeological sites eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places would be affected. 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 abstracts of the draft and final EISs, see 06-0127D, Volume 30, Number 1 and 06-0415F, Volume 30, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110342, Draft Supplemental EIS--402 pages and maps, Appendices--916 pages, October 14, 2011 PY - 2011 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Historic Sites 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/910683770?accountid=14244 L2 - http://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=2011-10-14&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=U.S.+HIGHWAY+160+FROM+DURANGO+TO+BAYFIELD%2C+LA+PLATA+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2006%29.&rft.title=U.S.+HIGHWAY+160+FROM+DURANGO+TO+BAYFIELD%2C+LA+PLATA+COUNTY%2C+COLORADO+%28DRAFT+SUPPLEMENT+TO+THE+FINAL+ENVIRONMENTAL+IMPACT+STATEMENT+OF+MAY+2006%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 - 2011-12-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: October 14, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-14 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Commercial Aviation's Pursuit of Sustainable Alternative Aviation Fuels AN - 926881837; 16282569 AB - The commercial aviation industry has made tremendous progress in recent years in the research, testing, development, and approval of alternative jet fuels for commercial jet aircraft. What has driven this rapid advancement? Why is there such interest in alternative aviation fuels?. JF - TR News AU - Brown, N L AD - Office of Environment and Energy, Federal Aviation Administration, Washington, D.C., USA Y1 - 2011/10// PY - 2011 DA - Oct 2011 SP - 21 EP - 27 PB - Transportation Research Board IS - 276 SN - 0738-6826, 0738-6826 KW - Sustainability Science Abstracts KW - Aircraft KW - Fuels KW - Sustainable development KW - M3 1010:Issues in Sustainable Development UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/926881837?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=TR+News&rft.atitle=Commercial+Aviation%27s+Pursuit+of+Sustainable+Alternative+Aviation+Fuels&rft.au=Brown%2C+N+L&rft.aulast=Brown&rft.aufirst=N&rft.date=2011-10-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=276&rft.spage=21&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=TR+News&rft.issn=07386826&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2012-03-01 N1 - Last updated - 2015-03-19 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Aircraft; Fuels; Sustainable development ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Repeatable source, site, and path effects on the standard deviation for empirical ground-motion prediction models AN - 904459463; 2011-103242 AB - In this study, we quantify the reduction in the standard deviation for empirical ground-motion prediction models by removing ergodic assumption. We partition the modeling error (residual) into five components, three of which represent the repeatable source-location-specific, site-specific, and path-specific deviations from the population mean. A variance estimation procedure of these error components is developed for use with a set of recordings from earthquakes not heavily clustered in space. With most source locations and propagation paths sampled only once, we opt to exploit the spatial correlation of residuals to estimate the variances associated with the path-specific and the source-location-specific deviations. The estimation procedure is applied to ground-motion amplitudes from 64 shallow earthquakes in Taiwan recorded at 285 sites with at least 10 recordings per site. The estimated variance components are used to quantify the reduction in aleatory variability that can be used in hazard analysis for a single site and for a single path. For peak ground acceleration and spectral accelerations at periods of 0.1, 0.3, 0.5, 1.0, and 3.0 s, we find that the single-site standard deviations are 9%-14% smaller than the total standard deviation, whereas the single-path standard deviations are 39%-47% smaller. JF - Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America AU - Lin, Po-Shen AU - Chiou, Brian AU - Abrahamson, Norman AU - Walling, Melanie AU - Lee, Chyi-Tyi AU - Cheng, Chin-Tung Y1 - 2011/10// PY - 2011 DA - October 2011 SP - 2281 EP - 2295 PB - Seismological Society of America, Berkeley, CA VL - 101 IS - 5 SN - 0037-1106, 0037-1106 KW - models KW - strong motion KW - ground motion KW - prediction KW - elastic waves KW - algorithms KW - seismic sources KW - earthquakes KW - amplitude KW - 19:Seismology UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/904459463?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=Bulletin+of+the+Seismological+Society+of+America&rft.atitle=Repeatable+source%2C+site%2C+and+path+effects+on+the+standard+deviation+for+empirical+ground-motion+prediction+models&rft.au=Lin%2C+Po-Shen%3BChiou%2C+Brian%3BAbrahamson%2C+Norman%3BWalling%2C+Melanie%3BLee%2C+Chyi-Tyi%3BCheng%2C+Chin-Tung&rft.aulast=Lin&rft.aufirst=Po-Shen&rft.date=2011-10-01&rft.volume=101&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=2281&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Bulletin+of+the+Seismological+Society+of+America&rft.issn=00371106&rft_id=info:doi/10.1785%2F0120090312 LA - English DB - GeoRef N1 - Copyright - GeoRef, Copyright 2012, American Geosciences Institute. Abstract, Copyright, Seismological Society of America | Reference includes data from GeoScienceWorld, Alexandria, VA, United States N1 - Date revised - 2011-01-01 N1 - Number of references - 20 N1 - PubXState - CA N1 - Document feature - illus. incl. 10 tables, sketch map N1 - Last updated - 2012-06-07 N1 - CODEN - BSSAAP N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - algorithms; amplitude; earthquakes; elastic waves; ground motion; models; prediction; seismic sources; strong motion DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.1785/0120090312 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 CORRIDOR, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY NO. 14, JUNCTION I-20 NEAR HAUGHTON, LOUISIANA TO US 82 NEAR EL DORADO, ARKANSAS, BOSSIER, CLAIBORNE, AND WEBSTER PARISHES, LOUISIANA AND COLUMBIA AND UNION COUNTIES, ARKANSAS. [Part 2 of 2] T2 - I-69 CORRIDOR, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY NO. 14, JUNCTION I-20 NEAR HAUGHTON, LOUISIANA TO US 82 NEAR EL DORADO, ARKANSAS, BOSSIER, CLAIBORNE, AND WEBSTER PARISHES, LOUISIANA AND COLUMBIA AND UNION COUNTIES, ARKANSAS. AN - 909287709; 15083-5_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a four-lane, divided, fully-controlled access freeway within the Interstate 69 (I-69) Corridor between Shreveport, Louisiana and El Dorado, Arkansas is proposed. The freeway would extend approximately 62 miles from the junction of I-20 in Haughton, Louisiana near Shreveport and US 82 near El Dorado. This section of I-69 between Haughton and El Dorado is only one of many sections of the national I-69 Corridor connecting Port Huron, Michigan, to the border between Texas and Mexico. Each section has been identified as having a local benefit that it would serve beyond providing a vital link in the national I-69 route. The section in question is identified as Section of Independent Utility No. 14 (SIU 14). Eight build alternatives and a No Build Alternative were considered in the draft EIS of March 2005 and this final EIS identifies Alternative 4, Option 3 as the preferred alternative. Access to the freeway would be controlled via 20 grade separation structures, and three railroad crossings would be provided. Alignment revisions between I-20 and just east of LA 3008 and Bayou Dorcheat would avoid impacts to a community and address the connection with the termini of SIU 15 to the south. The total cost of implementing the project is estimated at $640.4 million in Louisiana and $389 million in Arkansas. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new freeway would complete the I-69 trade corridor and would boost regional economic development. Connectivity and accessibility within and between Arkansas and Louisiana communities would be improved, enhancing the National Highway System. The potential for accidents on the existing highway system would be reduced significantly. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development of 3,267 acres would result in displacement of nine residences, 1,877 acres of pine plantation, 971 acres of naturally wooded land, 94 acres of farmland, 338 acres of cleared land, 38 acres of urban land, six acres of streams, 304 acres of floodplain, and 109.7 acres of wetlands. The project would traverse 26 acres of the Sparta aquifer recharge area and 357 acres of the Chicot Terrace aquifer and encroach on 750 acres of potential habitat for the endangered red-cockaded woodpecker. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards in the vicinity of 51 residences. Scenic use of Bayou Dorcheat would be adversely affected. Construction workers would encounter nine hazardous materials sites. 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 05-0629D, Volume 29, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110325, Final EIS--760 pages and maps, Additional Appendices--CD-ROM, September 30, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-LA-EIS-05-01-F KW - Birds KW - Creeks KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Scenic Areas KW - Streams KW - Transportation KW - Water Quality KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas KW - Louisiana 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/909287709?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-30&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+CORRIDOR%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+NO.+14%2C+JUNCTION+I-20+NEAR+HAUGHTON%2C+LOUISIANA+TO+US+82+NEAR+EL+DORADO%2C+ARKANSAS%2C+BOSSIER%2C+CLAIBORNE%2C+AND+WEBSTER+PARISHES%2C+LOUISIANA+AND+COLUMBIA+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+ARKANSAS.&rft.title=I-69+CORRIDOR%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+NO.+14%2C+JUNCTION+I-20+NEAR+HAUGHTON%2C+LOUISIANA+TO+US+82+NEAR+EL+DORADO%2C+ARKANSAS%2C+BOSSIER%2C+CLAIBORNE%2C+AND+WEBSTER+PARISHES%2C+LOUISIANA+AND+COLUMBIA+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+ARKANSAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Baton Rouge, Louisiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 30, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 CORRIDOR, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY NO. 14, JUNCTION I-20 NEAR HAUGHTON, LOUISIANA TO US 82 NEAR EL DORADO, ARKANSAS, BOSSIER, CLAIBORNE, AND WEBSTER PARISHES, LOUISIANA AND COLUMBIA AND UNION COUNTIES, ARKANSAS. [Part 1 of 2] T2 - I-69 CORRIDOR, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY NO. 14, JUNCTION I-20 NEAR HAUGHTON, LOUISIANA TO US 82 NEAR EL DORADO, ARKANSAS, BOSSIER, CLAIBORNE, AND WEBSTER PARISHES, LOUISIANA AND COLUMBIA AND UNION COUNTIES, ARKANSAS. AN - 909287704; 15083-5_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a four-lane, divided, fully-controlled access freeway within the Interstate 69 (I-69) Corridor between Shreveport, Louisiana and El Dorado, Arkansas is proposed. The freeway would extend approximately 62 miles from the junction of I-20 in Haughton, Louisiana near Shreveport and US 82 near El Dorado. This section of I-69 between Haughton and El Dorado is only one of many sections of the national I-69 Corridor connecting Port Huron, Michigan, to the border between Texas and Mexico. Each section has been identified as having a local benefit that it would serve beyond providing a vital link in the national I-69 route. The section in question is identified as Section of Independent Utility No. 14 (SIU 14). Eight build alternatives and a No Build Alternative were considered in the draft EIS of March 2005 and this final EIS identifies Alternative 4, Option 3 as the preferred alternative. Access to the freeway would be controlled via 20 grade separation structures, and three railroad crossings would be provided. Alignment revisions between I-20 and just east of LA 3008 and Bayou Dorcheat would avoid impacts to a community and address the connection with the termini of SIU 15 to the south. The total cost of implementing the project is estimated at $640.4 million in Louisiana and $389 million in Arkansas. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new freeway would complete the I-69 trade corridor and would boost regional economic development. Connectivity and accessibility within and between Arkansas and Louisiana communities would be improved, enhancing the National Highway System. The potential for accidents on the existing highway system would be reduced significantly. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development of 3,267 acres would result in displacement of nine residences, 1,877 acres of pine plantation, 971 acres of naturally wooded land, 94 acres of farmland, 338 acres of cleared land, 38 acres of urban land, six acres of streams, 304 acres of floodplain, and 109.7 acres of wetlands. The project would traverse 26 acres of the Sparta aquifer recharge area and 357 acres of the Chicot Terrace aquifer and encroach on 750 acres of potential habitat for the endangered red-cockaded woodpecker. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards in the vicinity of 51 residences. Scenic use of Bayou Dorcheat would be adversely affected. Construction workers would encounter nine hazardous materials sites. 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 05-0629D, Volume 29, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110325, Final EIS--760 pages and maps, Additional Appendices--CD-ROM, September 30, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-LA-EIS-05-01-F KW - Birds KW - Creeks KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Scenic Areas KW - Streams KW - Transportation KW - Water Quality KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas KW - Louisiana 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/909287704?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-30&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+CORRIDOR%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+NO.+14%2C+JUNCTION+I-20+NEAR+HAUGHTON%2C+LOUISIANA+TO+US+82+NEAR+EL+DORADO%2C+ARKANSAS%2C+BOSSIER%2C+CLAIBORNE%2C+AND+WEBSTER+PARISHES%2C+LOUISIANA+AND+COLUMBIA+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+ARKANSAS.&rft.title=I-69+CORRIDOR%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+NO.+14%2C+JUNCTION+I-20+NEAR+HAUGHTON%2C+LOUISIANA+TO+US+82+NEAR+EL+DORADO%2C+ARKANSAS%2C+BOSSIER%2C+CLAIBORNE%2C+AND+WEBSTER+PARISHES%2C+LOUISIANA+AND+COLUMBIA+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+ARKANSAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Baton Rouge, Louisiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 30, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 70 HAVELOCK BYPASS, CRAVEN COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 1 of 1] T2 - US 70 HAVELOCK BYPASS, CRAVEN COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 909287694; 15087-9_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 10-mile, four-lane divided, controlled-access freeway on new location for US 70 around the southwest side of the city of Havelock and the Cherry Point U.S. Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS), Craven County, North Carolina is proposed. US 70 is an important intrastate corridor link between Raleigh and Morehead City and is also the principal highway access for the coastal beaches in Carteret County and provides essential traffic service during hurricane evacuations. The current section of US 70 through Havelock is an urban arterial with numerous signalized intersections and access points at public streets and private driveways. The Cherry Point MCAS is located on the northeast side of Havelock and covers more than 12,000 acres at its primary complex. Much of the region southwest of Havelock is part of the 159,886-acre Croatan National Forest (CNF). Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Alternative 1 was developed to minimize impacts to existing development and Alternative 2 was developed to minimize impacts to the natural areas in the CNF. Alternative 3 is the preferred alternative and would balance impacts by locating the new facility adjacent to an existing cleared power transmission line easement. At the southeastern terminus, the alternatives would interchange with existing US 70 southeast of State Route 1824 (SR 1824). At the northwestern terminus, the alternatives would interchange with existing US 70 just west of SR 1760. The proposed bypass would cross Tucker Creek 4,400 feet south of the North Carolina Railroad and then turn east and continue 6,000 feet to a CNF access road. Under Alternative 3, the corridor would turn southwest 2,600 feet southeast of the CNF access road crossing and continue along the eastern side of a transmission line easement to a grade separation at SR 1747. Southeast of SR 1747, the corridor would cross over the southwest prong of Slocum Creek and then turn back to the southeast to the interchange with SR 1756. Bridges are proposed to cross over the southwest and the east prongs of Slocum Creek. Total cost of implementing the preferred alternative is estimated at $163 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The US 70 Havelock Bypass would allow both commercial carriers and vacationers a means to avoid the traffic signals and the congestion along existing US 70. Construction would fulfill the recommendation in the Strategic Highway Corridors Plan for a freeway and likely create substantial economic benefits for the regional and local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way requirements for Alternative 3 would impact 115 acres of wetlands, 2,505 linear feet of streams, and 71 acres of prime farmland. Habitat for red-cockaded woodpecker and other species within the CNF would be affected. Mitigation would include the transfer of the adjacent Croatan Wetland Mitigation Bank property to the Forest Service. The proposed bypass would cross three major streams and require relocation of 16 residences, one business, and one church. A total of 30 residential receptors are predicted to approach or exceed noise abatement criteria. 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: 110329, 590 pages and maps, September 30, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Birds KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Noise KW - Transportation KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Cherry Point Marine Corps Air Station KW - Croatan National Forest 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/909287694?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-30&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+70+HAVELOCK+BYPASS%2C+CRAVEN+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=US+70+HAVELOCK+BYPASS%2C+CRAVEN+COUNTY%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 - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 30, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 70 HAVELOCK BYPASS, CRAVEN COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 907027122; 15087 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a 10-mile, four-lane divided, controlled-access freeway on new location for US 70 around the southwest side of the city of Havelock and the Cherry Point U.S. Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS), Craven County, North Carolina is proposed. US 70 is an important intrastate corridor link between Raleigh and Morehead City and is also the principal highway access for the coastal beaches in Carteret County and provides essential traffic service during hurricane evacuations. The current section of US 70 through Havelock is an urban arterial with numerous signalized intersections and access points at public streets and private driveways. The Cherry Point MCAS is located on the northeast side of Havelock and covers more than 12,000 acres at its primary complex. Much of the region southwest of Havelock is part of the 159,886-acre Croatan National Forest (CNF). Four alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. Alternative 1 was developed to minimize impacts to existing development and Alternative 2 was developed to minimize impacts to the natural areas in the CNF. Alternative 3 is the preferred alternative and would balance impacts by locating the new facility adjacent to an existing cleared power transmission line easement. At the southeastern terminus, the alternatives would interchange with existing US 70 southeast of State Route 1824 (SR 1824). At the northwestern terminus, the alternatives would interchange with existing US 70 just west of SR 1760. The proposed bypass would cross Tucker Creek 4,400 feet south of the North Carolina Railroad and then turn east and continue 6,000 feet to a CNF access road. Under Alternative 3, the corridor would turn southwest 2,600 feet southeast of the CNF access road crossing and continue along the eastern side of a transmission line easement to a grade separation at SR 1747. Southeast of SR 1747, the corridor would cross over the southwest prong of Slocum Creek and then turn back to the southeast to the interchange with SR 1756. Bridges are proposed to cross over the southwest and the east prongs of Slocum Creek. Total cost of implementing the preferred alternative is estimated at $163 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The US 70 Havelock Bypass would allow both commercial carriers and vacationers a means to avoid the traffic signals and the congestion along existing US 70. Construction would fulfill the recommendation in the Strategic Highway Corridors Plan for a freeway and likely create substantial economic benefits for the regional and local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way requirements for Alternative 3 would impact 115 acres of wetlands, 2,505 linear feet of streams, and 71 acres of prime farmland. Habitat for red-cockaded woodpecker and other species within the CNF would be affected. Mitigation would include the transfer of the adjacent Croatan Wetland Mitigation Bank property to the Forest Service. The proposed bypass would cross three major streams and require relocation of 16 residences, one business, and one church. A total of 30 residential receptors are predicted to approach or exceed noise abatement criteria. 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: 110329, 590 pages and maps, September 30, 2011 PY - 2011 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Birds KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Forests KW - Noise KW - Transportation KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Cherry Point Marine Corps Air Station KW - Croatan National Forest 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/907027122?accountid=14244 L2 - http://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=2011-09-30&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+70+HAVELOCK+BYPASS%2C+CRAVEN+COUNTY%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=US+70+HAVELOCK+BYPASS%2C+CRAVEN+COUNTY%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 - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 30, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 CORRIDOR, SECTION OF INDEPENDENT UTILITY NO. 14, JUNCTION I-20 NEAR HAUGHTON, LOUISIANA TO US 82 NEAR EL DORADO, ARKANSAS, BOSSIER, CLAIBORNE, AND WEBSTER PARISHES, LOUISIANA AND COLUMBIA AND UNION COUNTIES, ARKANSAS. AN - 907022518; 15083 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a four-lane, divided, fully-controlled access freeway within the Interstate 69 (I-69) Corridor between Shreveport, Louisiana and El Dorado, Arkansas is proposed. The freeway would extend approximately 62 miles from the junction of I-20 in Haughton, Louisiana near Shreveport and US 82 near El Dorado. This section of I-69 between Haughton and El Dorado is only one of many sections of the national I-69 Corridor connecting Port Huron, Michigan, to the border between Texas and Mexico. Each section has been identified as having a local benefit that it would serve beyond providing a vital link in the national I-69 route. The section in question is identified as Section of Independent Utility No. 14 (SIU 14). Eight build alternatives and a No Build Alternative were considered in the draft EIS of March 2005 and this final EIS identifies Alternative 4, Option 3 as the preferred alternative. Access to the freeway would be controlled via 20 grade separation structures, and three railroad crossings would be provided. Alignment revisions between I-20 and just east of LA 3008 and Bayou Dorcheat would avoid impacts to a community and address the connection with the termini of SIU 15 to the south. The total cost of implementing the project is estimated at $640.4 million in Louisiana and $389 million in Arkansas. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new freeway would complete the I-69 trade corridor and would boost regional economic development. Connectivity and accessibility within and between Arkansas and Louisiana communities would be improved, enhancing the National Highway System. The potential for accidents on the existing highway system would be reduced significantly. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development of 3,267 acres would result in displacement of nine residences, 1,877 acres of pine plantation, 971 acres of naturally wooded land, 94 acres of farmland, 338 acres of cleared land, 38 acres of urban land, six acres of streams, 304 acres of floodplain, and 109.7 acres of wetlands. The project would traverse 26 acres of the Sparta aquifer recharge area and 357 acres of the Chicot Terrace aquifer and encroach on 750 acres of potential habitat for the endangered red-cockaded woodpecker. Traffic-generated noise levels would exceed federal standards in the vicinity of 51 residences. Scenic use of Bayou Dorcheat would be adversely affected. Construction workers would encounter nine hazardous materials sites. 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 05-0629D, Volume 29, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110325, Final EIS--760 pages and maps, Additional Appendices--CD-ROM, September 30, 2011 PY - 2011 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-LA-EIS-05-01-F KW - Birds KW - Creeks KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Hazardous Materials KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Scenic Areas KW - Streams KW - Transportation KW - Water Quality KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arkansas KW - Louisiana 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/907022518?accountid=14244 L2 - http://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=2011-09-30&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+CORRIDOR%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+NO.+14%2C+JUNCTION+I-20+NEAR+HAUGHTON%2C+LOUISIANA+TO+US+82+NEAR+EL+DORADO%2C+ARKANSAS%2C+BOSSIER%2C+CLAIBORNE%2C+AND+WEBSTER+PARISHES%2C+LOUISIANA+AND+COLUMBIA+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+ARKANSAS.&rft.title=I-69+CORRIDOR%2C+SECTION+OF+INDEPENDENT+UTILITY+NO.+14%2C+JUNCTION+I-20+NEAR+HAUGHTON%2C+LOUISIANA+TO+US+82+NEAR+EL+DORADO%2C+ARKANSAS%2C+BOSSIER%2C+CLAIBORNE%2C+AND+WEBSTER+PARISHES%2C+LOUISIANA+AND+COLUMBIA+AND+UNION+COUNTIES%2C+ARKANSAS.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Baton Rouge, Louisiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 30, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Analytical Approach to Predict Temperature Profile in a Multilayered Pavement System Based on Measured Surface Temperature Data AN - 1827896412; PQ0003647746 AB - This paper presents an algorithm to predict one-dimensional (1D) temperature profiles in a multilayered pavement system on the basis of measured surface temperature data. The model inputs are pavement layer thicknesses, thermal conductivity and diffusivity of layer materials, average initial pavement temperatures along pavement depths, and measured pavement surface temperature data. The main mathematical tools employed in deriving the analytical solution of pavement layer temperature predictions are the Laplace transform and numerical inverse Laplace transform. Measured in situ temperature data from a two-layer flexible pavement system demonstrate that the derived analytical solution generates reasonable temperature profiles in the asphalt concrete layer. The main advantages of the proposed algorithm are that it can rapidly predict the pavement temperature profile when the thermal conductivity and diffusivity values of the layer material are selected and the surface temperature data are measured at end points of each equally spaced time interval. Climatic data, such as air temperature, solar radiation intensity, and wind speed, are not needed to implement this algorithm. This algorithm can be applied to assist field engineers in estimating temperature profiles in a multilayered pavement system for the period during which falling weight deflectometer (FWD) tests are performed. JF - Journal of Transportation Engineering AU - Wang, Dong AD - National Research Council Postdoctoral Research Associate, Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center, Federal Highway Administration, FHWA/HRDI-30/F-209, 6300 Georgetown Pike, McLean, VA 22101., dwangce@gmail.com Y1 - 2011/09/28/ PY - 2011 DA - 2011 Sep 28 SP - 674 EP - 679 PB - American Society of Civil Engineers, 345 E. 47th St. New York NY 10017-2398 United States VL - 138 IS - 5 SN - 0733-947X, 0733-947X KW - Environment Abstracts KW - Technical Notes KW - Technical Note KW - Pavements KW - Temperature effects KW - Analytical techniques KW - Predictions KW - Pavement temperature profile KW - FWD testing KW - Infrared pavement surface temperature KW - Laplace transformation KW - Numerical inversion of laplace transformation KW - Multilayered pavement system KW - Analytical approach KW - Prediction KW - Transportation KW - Thermal conductivity KW - Asphalt KW - Velocity KW - Solar radiation KW - Concrete KW - Air temperature KW - ENA 01:Air Pollution UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1827896412?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+Transportation+Engineering&rft.atitle=Analytical+Approach+to+Predict+Temperature+Profile+in+a+Multilayered+Pavement+System+Based+on+Measured+Surface+Temperature+Data&rft.au=Wang%2C+Dong&rft.aulast=Wang&rft.aufirst=Dong&rft.date=2011-09-28&rft.volume=138&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=674&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Journal+of+Transportation+Engineering&rft.issn=0733947X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1061%2F%28ASCE%29TE.1943-5436.0000362 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2016-10-01 N1 - Last updated - 2017-02-01 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Prediction; Transportation; Thermal conductivity; Asphalt; Velocity; Solar radiation; Concrete; Air temperature DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)TE.1943-5436.0000362 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 49 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909287635; 15082-4_0049 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 49 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909287635?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 48 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909287634; 15082-4_0048 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 48 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909287634?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 47 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909287633; 15082-4_0047 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 47 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909287633?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 46 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909287632; 15082-4_0046 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 46 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909287632?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 45 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909287631; 15082-4_0045 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 45 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909287631?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 44 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909287630; 15082-4_0044 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 44 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909287630?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 43 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909287629; 15082-4_0043 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 43 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909287629?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 42 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909287628; 15082-4_0042 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 42 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909287628?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 41 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909287627; 15082-4_0041 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 41 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909287627?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 40 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909287626; 15082-4_0040 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 40 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909287626?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 39 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909287625; 15082-4_0039 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 39 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909287625?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 38 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909287624; 15082-4_0038 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 38 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909287624?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 37 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909287623; 15082-4_0037 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 37 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909287623?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 36 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909287622; 15082-4_0036 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 36 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909287622?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 35 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909287621; 15082-4_0035 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 35 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909287621?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 34 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909287618; 15082-4_0034 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 34 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909287618?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 33 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909287616; 15082-4_0033 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 33 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909287616?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 32 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909287615; 15082-4_0032 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 32 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909287615?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 31 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909287613; 15082-4_0031 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 31 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909287613?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 30 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909287612; 15082-4_0030 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 30 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909287612?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 29 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909287611; 15082-4_0029 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 29 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909287611?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 28 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909287610; 15082-4_0028 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 28 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909287610?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 27 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909287609; 15082-4_0027 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 27 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909287609?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 26 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909287608; 15082-4_0026 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 26 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909287608?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 25 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909287605; 15082-4_0025 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 25 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909287605?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 24 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909287600; 15082-4_0024 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 24 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909287600?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 23 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909287594; 15082-4_0023 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 23 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909287594?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 22 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909287588; 15082-4_0022 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 22 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909287588?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 21 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909287583; 15082-4_0021 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 21 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909287583?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 20 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909287578; 15082-4_0020 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 20 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909287578?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 19 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909287571; 15082-4_0019 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 19 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909287571?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 18 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909287567; 15082-4_0018 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 18 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909287567?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 17 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909287560; 15082-4_0017 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 17 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909287560?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 16 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909287555; 15082-4_0016 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 16 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909287555?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 15 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909287549; 15082-4_0015 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 15 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909287549?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 14 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909287046; 15082-4_0014 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 14 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909287046?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 13 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909287033; 15082-4_0013 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 13 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909287033?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 12 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909287018; 15082-4_0012 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 12 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909287018?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 11 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909287009; 15082-4_0011 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 11 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909287009?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 10 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909286997; 15082-4_0010 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909286997?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 5 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909286987; 15082-4_0005 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909286987?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 4 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909286971; 15082-4_0004 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909286971?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 3 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909286959; 15082-4_0003 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909286959?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 2 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909286951; 15082-4_0002 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909286951?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 9 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909285717; 15082-4_0009 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 9 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909285717?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 8 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909285698; 15082-4_0008 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909285698?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 7 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909285678; 15082-4_0007 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909285678?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 1 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909285661; 15082-4_0001 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909285661?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. [Part 6 of 49] T2 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 909285649; 15082-4_0006 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/909285649?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-08 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NC-1409 (MILITARY CUTOFF ROAD) EXTENSION AND PROPOSED US 17 HAMPSTEAD BYPASS, NEW HANOVER AND PENDER COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. [Part 1 of 1] T2 - NC-1409 (MILITARY CUTOFF ROAD) EXTENSION AND PROPOSED US 17 HAMPSTEAD BYPASS, NEW HANOVER AND PENDER COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA. AN - 905872693; 15080-2_0001 AB - PURPOSE: Two transportation improvement projects, Military Cutoff Road Extension in New Hanover County and the US 17 Hampstead Bypass in New Hanover and Pender counties, in southeastern North Carolina are proposed. The US 17 Corridor Study area is the only coastal area in North Carolina that is accessible by interstate highway, making it a popular destination because of its proximity to the Atlantic Ocean, beaches, and estuarine waters. Wilmington and nearby communities of Hampstead, Topsail Island, Wrightsville Beach, Kure Beach, and Carolina Beach offer numerous options for dining, shopping, recreation, and entertainment. In addition to a No Build Alternative, this draft EIS considers six detailed study alternatives including four alternatives for the Hampstead Bypass (Project R-3300) and two alternatives for Military Cutoff Road Extension (Project U-4751). Alternatives for Hampstead Bypass include E-H, O, R, and U and would involve construction of a four-to-six lane freeway primarily on new location. Access to the proposed freeway would be provided at interchanges. Alternatives for Military Cutoff Road Extension include M1 and M2 and would involve construction of a six-lane roadway on new location. Access to the roadway would be provided at an interchange with US 17 Business (Market Street) and signalized intersections with Putnam Drive, Lendire Road and Torchwood Boulevard. Only right turns would be allowed onto Military Cutoff Road Extension from the signalized intersections. Signalized U-turn lanes would be provided. Total cost of the combined projects is estimated at $356.2 million to $404.8 million. Transportation system management, travel demand management, and mass transit alternatives were also considered. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project construction would improve the traffic carrying capacity and safety of the US 17 and Market Street corridor. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would impact 16.6 to 18.0 miles of streams, 218.4 to 384.4 acres of wetlands, 406 to 518 acres of forest, and 49.9 to 67.5 acres of important farmlands. Implementation would likely adversely affect federally-protected species including red-cockaded woodpecker, Cooleys meadowrue, golden sedge, and rough-leaved loosestrife. New right-of-way would displace 59 to 95 residences, 84 or 106 businesses, and one or four historic properties. Noise receptor impacts would range from 236 to 310. The Military Cutoff Road Extension could impact five properties that either have or formerly had underground storage tanks. 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: 110322, 312 pages and maps, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Birds KW - Creeks KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Endangered Species (Plants) KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands 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/905872693?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NC-1409+%28MILITARY+CUTOFF+ROAD%29+EXTENSION+AND+PROPOSED+US+17+HAMPSTEAD+BYPASS%2C+NEW+HANOVER+AND+PENDER+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.title=NC-1409+%28MILITARY+CUTOFF+ROAD%29+EXTENSION+AND+PROPOSED+US+17+HAMPSTEAD+BYPASS%2C+NEW+HANOVER+AND+PENDER+COUNTIES%2C+NORTH+CAROLINA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Wilmington, North Carolina; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - INTERSTATE 5, COLUMBIA RIVER CROSSING PROJECT, VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON AND PORTLAND, OREGON. AN - 904005040; 15082 AB - PURPOSE: Replacement or rehabilitation of the Interstate 5 (I-5) bridges across the Columbia River connecting Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington is proposed. I-5 is the only interstate corridor on the West Coast connecting Canada to Mexico and one of the only two highways crossing the Columbia River in the Portland-Vancouver Metropolitan Area. The study area extends five miles from State Route 500 in Vancouver to a point just short of Columbia Boulevard in Portland. The current bridge crossing has become congested and provides for only limited public transportation operation, connectivity, and reliability. Close interchange spacing contributes to congestion and the existing draw bridge hampers both river navigation and vehicular traffic flow. The area under the bridges is subject to extreme seismic activity and the foundations of both bridges, one built in 1917 and the other in 1958, could liquefy during a major earthquake. Alternatives considered in the draft EIS included a No Build Alternative and four multi-modal build alternatives that would either replace or rehabilitate the existing river crossing, provide highway improvements, either extend light rail or provide rapid transit along one of several transit alignment and length options, improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, consider tolling, and implement transportation demand and system management measures. In July 2008, the project sponsors adopted the locally preferred alternative (LPA) as a refined version of Alternative 3, which includes the following transportation improvements: a new river crossing and associated I-5 highway improvements, including seven interchanges, north and south of the river; a variety of bicycle and pedestrian improvements throughout the project corridor; extension of light rail transit from the Expo Center in Portland to Clark College in Vancouver, and associated transit improvements, including transit stations, park and rides, bus route changes, and expansion of a light rail transit maintenance facility; a new toll on motorists using the river crossing as both a financing and demand management tool; and transportation demand and system management measures to be implemented with the project. Capital cost of implementing the LPA is estimated in year-of-expenditure dollars at $3.4 to $3.8 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would vastly improve automobile, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation options between the two cities, as well as enhance the movement of goods and persons from western Canada to all points south. The crossing would no longer constitute a vehicular safety problem, nor would it be as likely as the existing structure to fail during an earthquake. Significant reductions in air pollutant emissions would be achieved due to less vehicular congestion and the presence of rapid transit options. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way development would result in 69 commercial and 59 residential displacements. Up to three sites eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic places and four acres of park and recreation resources would be affected. Traffic-generated and transit-generated noise would impact 325 and 31 receptors, respectively. Regardless of the engineering improvements achieved by the project, serious seismic events could result in significant damage to the bridges. 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.), River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 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 08-0215D, Volume 32, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110324, Final EIS--801 pages and maps, Appendices--838 pages, September 23, 2011 PY - 2011 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Archaeological Sites Surveys KW - Bridges KW - Earthquakes KW - Economic Assessments KW - Geologic Surveys KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Hydrologic Assessments KW - Navigation KW - Noise KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Resources Surveys KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Transportation Surveys KW - Visual Resources Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Columbia River KW - Oregon KW - Washington KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 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/904005040?accountid=14244 L2 - http://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=2011-09-23&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=INTERSTATE+5%2C+COLUMBIA+RIVER+CROSSING+PROJECT%2C+VANCOUVER%2C+WASHINGTON+AND+PORTLAND%2C+OREGON.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Vancouver, Washington; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 23, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - CPAPER T1 - Management and Mitigation Options of Rockfall and Rockslide Geologic Hazards at Mile Marker 125 along Interstate 70 in Glenwood Canyon T2 - 54th Annual Meeting of Association of Engineering Geologists (AEG 2011) AN - 1312985352; 6044107 JF - 54th Annual Meeting of Association of Engineering Geologists (AEG 2011) AU - Ortiz, Ty AU - Arndt, Ben AU - Olson, Larry Y1 - 2011/09/19/ PY - 2011 DA - 2011 Sep 19 KW - Geology KW - mitigation KW - canyons KW - Hazards UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1312985352?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%3Acpi&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=conference&rft.jtitle=54th+Annual+Meeting+of+Association+of+Engineering+Geologists+%28AEG+2011%29&rft.atitle=Management+and+Mitigation+Options+of+Rockfall+and+Rockslide+Geologic+Hazards+at+Mile+Marker+125+along+Interstate+70+in+Glenwood+Canyon&rft.au=Ortiz%2C+Ty%3BArndt%2C+Ben%3BOlson%2C+Larry&rft.aulast=Ortiz&rft.aufirst=Ty&rft.date=2011-09-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=54th+Annual+Meeting+of+Association+of+Engineering+Geologists+%28AEG+2011%29&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://www.aegweb.org/files/public/PWA_2011.pdf LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2013-02-26 N1 - Last updated - 2013-02-28 ER - TY - CPAPER T1 - Always Walk up the Hill: A Transportation Related Landslide Case History T2 - 54th Annual Meeting of Association of Engineering Geologists (AEG 2011) AN - 1312964980; 6044160 JF - 54th Annual Meeting of Association of Engineering Geologists (AEG 2011) AU - Castelli, Kathryn Y1 - 2011/09/19/ PY - 2011 DA - 2011 Sep 19 KW - Landslides KW - Historical account KW - Transportation KW - hills UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1312964980?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%3Acpi&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=conference&rft.jtitle=54th+Annual+Meeting+of+Association+of+Engineering+Geologists+%28AEG+2011%29&rft.atitle=Always+Walk+up+the+Hill%3A+A+Transportation+Related+Landslide+Case+History&rft.au=Castelli%2C+Kathryn&rft.aulast=Castelli&rft.aufirst=Kathryn&rft.date=2011-09-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=54th+Annual+Meeting+of+Association+of+Engineering+Geologists+%28AEG+2011%29&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://www.aegweb.org/files/public/PWA_2011.pdf LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2013-02-26 N1 - Last updated - 2013-02-28 ER - TY - CPAPER T1 - Geotechnical Asset Management Performance Measures T2 - 54th Annual Meeting of Association of Engineering Geologists (AEG 2011) AN - 1312960794; 6044157 JF - 54th Annual Meeting of Association of Engineering Geologists (AEG 2011) AU - Stanley, David AU - Pierson, Larry Y1 - 2011/09/19/ PY - 2011 DA - 2011 Sep 19 KW - Earth sciences KW - Geologists UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1312960794?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%3Acpi&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=conference&rft.jtitle=54th+Annual+Meeting+of+Association+of+Engineering+Geologists+%28AEG+2011%29&rft.atitle=Geotechnical+Asset+Management+Performance+Measures&rft.au=Stanley%2C+David%3BPierson%2C+Larry&rft.aulast=Stanley&rft.aufirst=David&rft.date=2011-09-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=54th+Annual+Meeting+of+Association+of+Engineering+Geologists+%28AEG+2011%29&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://www.aegweb.org/files/public/PWA_2011.pdf LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2013-02-26 N1 - Last updated - 2013-02-28 ER - TY - CPAPER T1 - Coastal Engineering Design Adaptations for a Changing Alaska: Over Twenty-Five Years of Applied Coastal Engineering T2 - 54th Annual Meeting of Association of Engineering Geologists (AEG 2011) AN - 1312899365; 6044184 JF - 54th Annual Meeting of Association of Engineering Geologists (AEG 2011) AU - Smith, Harvey AU - Carter, Ruth Y1 - 2011/09/19/ PY - 2011 DA - 2011 Sep 19 KW - USA, Alaska KW - Coastal engineering KW - adaptability KW - Adaptations UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1312899365?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%3Acpi&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=conference&rft.jtitle=54th+Annual+Meeting+of+Association+of+Engineering+Geologists+%28AEG+2011%29&rft.atitle=Coastal+Engineering+Design+Adaptations+for+a+Changing+Alaska%3A+Over+Twenty-Five+Years+of+Applied+Coastal+Engineering&rft.au=Smith%2C+Harvey%3BCarter%2C+Ruth&rft.aulast=Smith&rft.aufirst=Harvey&rft.date=2011-09-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=54th+Annual+Meeting+of+Association+of+Engineering+Geologists+%28AEG+2011%29&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://www.aegweb.org/files/public/PWA_2011.pdf LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2013-02-26 N1 - Last updated - 2013-02-28 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. [Part 33 of 36] T2 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. AN - 905874139; 15069-1_0033 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a certificate of public convenience and necessity to construct, operate, and maintain expansions of existing interstate natural gas pipeline systems in New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut is proposed. Texas Eastern Transmission, LP (Texas Eastern) and Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC (Algonquin), both indirect wholly owned subsidiaries of Spectra Energy Corporation, filed an application on December 20, 2010 for the New Jersey - New York Expansion Project (NJ-NY Project) which would involve the construction and operation of approximately 19.8 miles of natural gas pipeline and associated equipment and facilities. Of this total, 15.0 miles would consist of new 30-inch-diameter pipeline in the Boroughs of Staten Island and Manhattan, New York and the cities of Bayonne, Jersey City, and Hoboken, New Jersey, and 4.8 miles would consist of 42-inch-diameter replacement pipeline in the Borough of Staten Island, New York and the city of Linden, New Jersey. Texas Eastern and Algonquin also propose to abandon 8.95 miles of existing 12-, 20-, and 24-inch-diameter pipeline in the City of Linden, New Jersey and the Borough of Staten Island, New York. The applicants also propose to construct and operate six new metering and regulating stations; modify existing compressor stations; and remove, replace, or install launchers and receivers and pipeline valves at several locations along the pipeline. Major issues raised during scoping include safety and the proximity of the pipelines and construction activities to homes, businesses, and public buildings; alternative routing/siting for the proposed facilities; impacts on residents and businesses during construction; impacts on waterbodies, wetlands, and public parklands; and impacts on community infrastructure and water supplies. In addition to the proposed action, this draft EIS addresses a No Action or Postponed Action Alternative, system alternatives, route alternatives, minor route variations, and aboveground facility site alternatives. Texas Eastern and Algonquin propose to begin construction in 2012 and place the project facilities in service by November of 2013. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide Consolidated Edison Companys (Con Edison) customers with access to diverse natural gas supplies from liquefied natural gas and Canadian gas supplies via Algonquins system; access to supplies from the Gulf Coast, Mid-continent, and Rockies through Texas Easterns system; and access to the growing supply of natural gas from the Marcellus Shale Basin via both pipeline systems. The NJ-NY Project would eliminate a critical capacity constraint, enhance customer choice, and provide additional operational flexibility for Texas Eastern, Algonquin, and Con Edison. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would involve a total of 33 waterbody crossings, including the removal of pipe from one waterbody. Nine of the proposed crossings would involve major waterbodies, the largest of which would be the Arthur Kill, Kill Van Kull, and the Hudson River. A total of 25.5 acres of wetlands would be temporarily impacted and 3.8 acres of permanent wetland impacts would occur within the maintained portion of the proposed permanent right-of-way. Essential fish habitat and habitat associated with a variety of migratory bird species could be affected. Multiple areas of known soil contamination would be crossed by the proposed pipeline. One historic property, and possibly two properties that are on or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717 f(c)), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110311, Draft EIS--449 pages, Appendices--593 pages, September 16, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 33 KW - Energy KW - Agency number: FERC/EIS-0241D KW - Dredging KW - Drilling KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Natural Gas KW - Pipelines KW - Rivers KW - Soils KW - Vegetation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arthur Kill KW - Connecticut KW - Hudson River KW - Kill Van Kull KW - New Jersey KW - New York KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Natural Gas Act, Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/905874139?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.title=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Office of Energy Projects, Washington, District of Columbia; FERC N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 16, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. [Part 32 of 36] T2 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. AN - 905874132; 15069-1_0032 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a certificate of public convenience and necessity to construct, operate, and maintain expansions of existing interstate natural gas pipeline systems in New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut is proposed. Texas Eastern Transmission, LP (Texas Eastern) and Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC (Algonquin), both indirect wholly owned subsidiaries of Spectra Energy Corporation, filed an application on December 20, 2010 for the New Jersey - New York Expansion Project (NJ-NY Project) which would involve the construction and operation of approximately 19.8 miles of natural gas pipeline and associated equipment and facilities. Of this total, 15.0 miles would consist of new 30-inch-diameter pipeline in the Boroughs of Staten Island and Manhattan, New York and the cities of Bayonne, Jersey City, and Hoboken, New Jersey, and 4.8 miles would consist of 42-inch-diameter replacement pipeline in the Borough of Staten Island, New York and the city of Linden, New Jersey. Texas Eastern and Algonquin also propose to abandon 8.95 miles of existing 12-, 20-, and 24-inch-diameter pipeline in the City of Linden, New Jersey and the Borough of Staten Island, New York. The applicants also propose to construct and operate six new metering and regulating stations; modify existing compressor stations; and remove, replace, or install launchers and receivers and pipeline valves at several locations along the pipeline. Major issues raised during scoping include safety and the proximity of the pipelines and construction activities to homes, businesses, and public buildings; alternative routing/siting for the proposed facilities; impacts on residents and businesses during construction; impacts on waterbodies, wetlands, and public parklands; and impacts on community infrastructure and water supplies. In addition to the proposed action, this draft EIS addresses a No Action or Postponed Action Alternative, system alternatives, route alternatives, minor route variations, and aboveground facility site alternatives. Texas Eastern and Algonquin propose to begin construction in 2012 and place the project facilities in service by November of 2013. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide Consolidated Edison Companys (Con Edison) customers with access to diverse natural gas supplies from liquefied natural gas and Canadian gas supplies via Algonquins system; access to supplies from the Gulf Coast, Mid-continent, and Rockies through Texas Easterns system; and access to the growing supply of natural gas from the Marcellus Shale Basin via both pipeline systems. The NJ-NY Project would eliminate a critical capacity constraint, enhance customer choice, and provide additional operational flexibility for Texas Eastern, Algonquin, and Con Edison. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would involve a total of 33 waterbody crossings, including the removal of pipe from one waterbody. Nine of the proposed crossings would involve major waterbodies, the largest of which would be the Arthur Kill, Kill Van Kull, and the Hudson River. A total of 25.5 acres of wetlands would be temporarily impacted and 3.8 acres of permanent wetland impacts would occur within the maintained portion of the proposed permanent right-of-way. Essential fish habitat and habitat associated with a variety of migratory bird species could be affected. Multiple areas of known soil contamination would be crossed by the proposed pipeline. One historic property, and possibly two properties that are on or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717 f(c)), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110311, Draft EIS--449 pages, Appendices--593 pages, September 16, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 32 KW - Energy KW - Agency number: FERC/EIS-0241D KW - Dredging KW - Drilling KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Natural Gas KW - Pipelines KW - Rivers KW - Soils KW - Vegetation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arthur Kill KW - Connecticut KW - Hudson River KW - Kill Van Kull KW - New Jersey KW - New York KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Natural Gas Act, Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/905874132?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.title=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Office of Energy Projects, Washington, District of Columbia; FERC N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 16, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. [Part 31 of 36] T2 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. AN - 905874129; 15069-1_0031 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a certificate of public convenience and necessity to construct, operate, and maintain expansions of existing interstate natural gas pipeline systems in New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut is proposed. Texas Eastern Transmission, LP (Texas Eastern) and Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC (Algonquin), both indirect wholly owned subsidiaries of Spectra Energy Corporation, filed an application on December 20, 2010 for the New Jersey - New York Expansion Project (NJ-NY Project) which would involve the construction and operation of approximately 19.8 miles of natural gas pipeline and associated equipment and facilities. Of this total, 15.0 miles would consist of new 30-inch-diameter pipeline in the Boroughs of Staten Island and Manhattan, New York and the cities of Bayonne, Jersey City, and Hoboken, New Jersey, and 4.8 miles would consist of 42-inch-diameter replacement pipeline in the Borough of Staten Island, New York and the city of Linden, New Jersey. Texas Eastern and Algonquin also propose to abandon 8.95 miles of existing 12-, 20-, and 24-inch-diameter pipeline in the City of Linden, New Jersey and the Borough of Staten Island, New York. The applicants also propose to construct and operate six new metering and regulating stations; modify existing compressor stations; and remove, replace, or install launchers and receivers and pipeline valves at several locations along the pipeline. Major issues raised during scoping include safety and the proximity of the pipelines and construction activities to homes, businesses, and public buildings; alternative routing/siting for the proposed facilities; impacts on residents and businesses during construction; impacts on waterbodies, wetlands, and public parklands; and impacts on community infrastructure and water supplies. In addition to the proposed action, this draft EIS addresses a No Action or Postponed Action Alternative, system alternatives, route alternatives, minor route variations, and aboveground facility site alternatives. Texas Eastern and Algonquin propose to begin construction in 2012 and place the project facilities in service by November of 2013. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide Consolidated Edison Companys (Con Edison) customers with access to diverse natural gas supplies from liquefied natural gas and Canadian gas supplies via Algonquins system; access to supplies from the Gulf Coast, Mid-continent, and Rockies through Texas Easterns system; and access to the growing supply of natural gas from the Marcellus Shale Basin via both pipeline systems. The NJ-NY Project would eliminate a critical capacity constraint, enhance customer choice, and provide additional operational flexibility for Texas Eastern, Algonquin, and Con Edison. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would involve a total of 33 waterbody crossings, including the removal of pipe from one waterbody. Nine of the proposed crossings would involve major waterbodies, the largest of which would be the Arthur Kill, Kill Van Kull, and the Hudson River. A total of 25.5 acres of wetlands would be temporarily impacted and 3.8 acres of permanent wetland impacts would occur within the maintained portion of the proposed permanent right-of-way. Essential fish habitat and habitat associated with a variety of migratory bird species could be affected. Multiple areas of known soil contamination would be crossed by the proposed pipeline. One historic property, and possibly two properties that are on or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717 f(c)), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110311, Draft EIS--449 pages, Appendices--593 pages, September 16, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 31 KW - Energy KW - Agency number: FERC/EIS-0241D KW - Dredging KW - Drilling KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Natural Gas KW - Pipelines KW - Rivers KW - Soils KW - Vegetation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arthur Kill KW - Connecticut KW - Hudson River KW - Kill Van Kull KW - New Jersey KW - New York KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Natural Gas Act, Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/905874129?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.title=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Office of Energy Projects, Washington, District of Columbia; FERC N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 16, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. [Part 28 of 36] T2 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. AN - 905874115; 15069-1_0028 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a certificate of public convenience and necessity to construct, operate, and maintain expansions of existing interstate natural gas pipeline systems in New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut is proposed. Texas Eastern Transmission, LP (Texas Eastern) and Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC (Algonquin), both indirect wholly owned subsidiaries of Spectra Energy Corporation, filed an application on December 20, 2010 for the New Jersey - New York Expansion Project (NJ-NY Project) which would involve the construction and operation of approximately 19.8 miles of natural gas pipeline and associated equipment and facilities. Of this total, 15.0 miles would consist of new 30-inch-diameter pipeline in the Boroughs of Staten Island and Manhattan, New York and the cities of Bayonne, Jersey City, and Hoboken, New Jersey, and 4.8 miles would consist of 42-inch-diameter replacement pipeline in the Borough of Staten Island, New York and the city of Linden, New Jersey. Texas Eastern and Algonquin also propose to abandon 8.95 miles of existing 12-, 20-, and 24-inch-diameter pipeline in the City of Linden, New Jersey and the Borough of Staten Island, New York. The applicants also propose to construct and operate six new metering and regulating stations; modify existing compressor stations; and remove, replace, or install launchers and receivers and pipeline valves at several locations along the pipeline. Major issues raised during scoping include safety and the proximity of the pipelines and construction activities to homes, businesses, and public buildings; alternative routing/siting for the proposed facilities; impacts on residents and businesses during construction; impacts on waterbodies, wetlands, and public parklands; and impacts on community infrastructure and water supplies. In addition to the proposed action, this draft EIS addresses a No Action or Postponed Action Alternative, system alternatives, route alternatives, minor route variations, and aboveground facility site alternatives. Texas Eastern and Algonquin propose to begin construction in 2012 and place the project facilities in service by November of 2013. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide Consolidated Edison Companys (Con Edison) customers with access to diverse natural gas supplies from liquefied natural gas and Canadian gas supplies via Algonquins system; access to supplies from the Gulf Coast, Mid-continent, and Rockies through Texas Easterns system; and access to the growing supply of natural gas from the Marcellus Shale Basin via both pipeline systems. The NJ-NY Project would eliminate a critical capacity constraint, enhance customer choice, and provide additional operational flexibility for Texas Eastern, Algonquin, and Con Edison. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would involve a total of 33 waterbody crossings, including the removal of pipe from one waterbody. Nine of the proposed crossings would involve major waterbodies, the largest of which would be the Arthur Kill, Kill Van Kull, and the Hudson River. A total of 25.5 acres of wetlands would be temporarily impacted and 3.8 acres of permanent wetland impacts would occur within the maintained portion of the proposed permanent right-of-way. Essential fish habitat and habitat associated with a variety of migratory bird species could be affected. Multiple areas of known soil contamination would be crossed by the proposed pipeline. One historic property, and possibly two properties that are on or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717 f(c)), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110311, Draft EIS--449 pages, Appendices--593 pages, September 16, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 28 KW - Energy KW - Agency number: FERC/EIS-0241D KW - Dredging KW - Drilling KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Natural Gas KW - Pipelines KW - Rivers KW - Soils KW - Vegetation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arthur Kill KW - Connecticut KW - Hudson River KW - Kill Van Kull KW - New Jersey KW - New York KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Natural Gas Act, Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/905874115?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.title=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Office of Energy Projects, Washington, District of Columbia; FERC N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 16, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. [Part 27 of 36] T2 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. AN - 905874112; 15069-1_0027 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a certificate of public convenience and necessity to construct, operate, and maintain expansions of existing interstate natural gas pipeline systems in New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut is proposed. Texas Eastern Transmission, LP (Texas Eastern) and Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC (Algonquin), both indirect wholly owned subsidiaries of Spectra Energy Corporation, filed an application on December 20, 2010 for the New Jersey - New York Expansion Project (NJ-NY Project) which would involve the construction and operation of approximately 19.8 miles of natural gas pipeline and associated equipment and facilities. Of this total, 15.0 miles would consist of new 30-inch-diameter pipeline in the Boroughs of Staten Island and Manhattan, New York and the cities of Bayonne, Jersey City, and Hoboken, New Jersey, and 4.8 miles would consist of 42-inch-diameter replacement pipeline in the Borough of Staten Island, New York and the city of Linden, New Jersey. Texas Eastern and Algonquin also propose to abandon 8.95 miles of existing 12-, 20-, and 24-inch-diameter pipeline in the City of Linden, New Jersey and the Borough of Staten Island, New York. The applicants also propose to construct and operate six new metering and regulating stations; modify existing compressor stations; and remove, replace, or install launchers and receivers and pipeline valves at several locations along the pipeline. Major issues raised during scoping include safety and the proximity of the pipelines and construction activities to homes, businesses, and public buildings; alternative routing/siting for the proposed facilities; impacts on residents and businesses during construction; impacts on waterbodies, wetlands, and public parklands; and impacts on community infrastructure and water supplies. In addition to the proposed action, this draft EIS addresses a No Action or Postponed Action Alternative, system alternatives, route alternatives, minor route variations, and aboveground facility site alternatives. Texas Eastern and Algonquin propose to begin construction in 2012 and place the project facilities in service by November of 2013. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide Consolidated Edison Companys (Con Edison) customers with access to diverse natural gas supplies from liquefied natural gas and Canadian gas supplies via Algonquins system; access to supplies from the Gulf Coast, Mid-continent, and Rockies through Texas Easterns system; and access to the growing supply of natural gas from the Marcellus Shale Basin via both pipeline systems. The NJ-NY Project would eliminate a critical capacity constraint, enhance customer choice, and provide additional operational flexibility for Texas Eastern, Algonquin, and Con Edison. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would involve a total of 33 waterbody crossings, including the removal of pipe from one waterbody. Nine of the proposed crossings would involve major waterbodies, the largest of which would be the Arthur Kill, Kill Van Kull, and the Hudson River. A total of 25.5 acres of wetlands would be temporarily impacted and 3.8 acres of permanent wetland impacts would occur within the maintained portion of the proposed permanent right-of-way. Essential fish habitat and habitat associated with a variety of migratory bird species could be affected. Multiple areas of known soil contamination would be crossed by the proposed pipeline. One historic property, and possibly two properties that are on or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717 f(c)), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110311, Draft EIS--449 pages, Appendices--593 pages, September 16, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 27 KW - Energy KW - Agency number: FERC/EIS-0241D KW - Dredging KW - Drilling KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Natural Gas KW - Pipelines KW - Rivers KW - Soils KW - Vegetation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arthur Kill KW - Connecticut KW - Hudson River KW - Kill Van Kull KW - New Jersey KW - New York KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Natural Gas Act, Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/905874112?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.title=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Office of Energy Projects, Washington, District of Columbia; FERC N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 16, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. [Part 26 of 36] T2 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. AN - 905874107; 15069-1_0026 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a certificate of public convenience and necessity to construct, operate, and maintain expansions of existing interstate natural gas pipeline systems in New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut is proposed. Texas Eastern Transmission, LP (Texas Eastern) and Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC (Algonquin), both indirect wholly owned subsidiaries of Spectra Energy Corporation, filed an application on December 20, 2010 for the New Jersey - New York Expansion Project (NJ-NY Project) which would involve the construction and operation of approximately 19.8 miles of natural gas pipeline and associated equipment and facilities. Of this total, 15.0 miles would consist of new 30-inch-diameter pipeline in the Boroughs of Staten Island and Manhattan, New York and the cities of Bayonne, Jersey City, and Hoboken, New Jersey, and 4.8 miles would consist of 42-inch-diameter replacement pipeline in the Borough of Staten Island, New York and the city of Linden, New Jersey. Texas Eastern and Algonquin also propose to abandon 8.95 miles of existing 12-, 20-, and 24-inch-diameter pipeline in the City of Linden, New Jersey and the Borough of Staten Island, New York. The applicants also propose to construct and operate six new metering and regulating stations; modify existing compressor stations; and remove, replace, or install launchers and receivers and pipeline valves at several locations along the pipeline. Major issues raised during scoping include safety and the proximity of the pipelines and construction activities to homes, businesses, and public buildings; alternative routing/siting for the proposed facilities; impacts on residents and businesses during construction; impacts on waterbodies, wetlands, and public parklands; and impacts on community infrastructure and water supplies. In addition to the proposed action, this draft EIS addresses a No Action or Postponed Action Alternative, system alternatives, route alternatives, minor route variations, and aboveground facility site alternatives. Texas Eastern and Algonquin propose to begin construction in 2012 and place the project facilities in service by November of 2013. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide Consolidated Edison Companys (Con Edison) customers with access to diverse natural gas supplies from liquefied natural gas and Canadian gas supplies via Algonquins system; access to supplies from the Gulf Coast, Mid-continent, and Rockies through Texas Easterns system; and access to the growing supply of natural gas from the Marcellus Shale Basin via both pipeline systems. The NJ-NY Project would eliminate a critical capacity constraint, enhance customer choice, and provide additional operational flexibility for Texas Eastern, Algonquin, and Con Edison. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would involve a total of 33 waterbody crossings, including the removal of pipe from one waterbody. Nine of the proposed crossings would involve major waterbodies, the largest of which would be the Arthur Kill, Kill Van Kull, and the Hudson River. A total of 25.5 acres of wetlands would be temporarily impacted and 3.8 acres of permanent wetland impacts would occur within the maintained portion of the proposed permanent right-of-way. Essential fish habitat and habitat associated with a variety of migratory bird species could be affected. Multiple areas of known soil contamination would be crossed by the proposed pipeline. One historic property, and possibly two properties that are on or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717 f(c)), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110311, Draft EIS--449 pages, Appendices--593 pages, September 16, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 26 KW - Energy KW - Agency number: FERC/EIS-0241D KW - Dredging KW - Drilling KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Natural Gas KW - Pipelines KW - Rivers KW - Soils KW - Vegetation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arthur Kill KW - Connecticut KW - Hudson River KW - Kill Van Kull KW - New Jersey KW - New York KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Natural Gas Act, Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/905874107?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.title=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Office of Energy Projects, Washington, District of Columbia; FERC N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 16, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. [Part 25 of 36] T2 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. AN - 905874103; 15069-1_0025 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a certificate of public convenience and necessity to construct, operate, and maintain expansions of existing interstate natural gas pipeline systems in New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut is proposed. Texas Eastern Transmission, LP (Texas Eastern) and Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC (Algonquin), both indirect wholly owned subsidiaries of Spectra Energy Corporation, filed an application on December 20, 2010 for the New Jersey - New York Expansion Project (NJ-NY Project) which would involve the construction and operation of approximately 19.8 miles of natural gas pipeline and associated equipment and facilities. Of this total, 15.0 miles would consist of new 30-inch-diameter pipeline in the Boroughs of Staten Island and Manhattan, New York and the cities of Bayonne, Jersey City, and Hoboken, New Jersey, and 4.8 miles would consist of 42-inch-diameter replacement pipeline in the Borough of Staten Island, New York and the city of Linden, New Jersey. Texas Eastern and Algonquin also propose to abandon 8.95 miles of existing 12-, 20-, and 24-inch-diameter pipeline in the City of Linden, New Jersey and the Borough of Staten Island, New York. The applicants also propose to construct and operate six new metering and regulating stations; modify existing compressor stations; and remove, replace, or install launchers and receivers and pipeline valves at several locations along the pipeline. Major issues raised during scoping include safety and the proximity of the pipelines and construction activities to homes, businesses, and public buildings; alternative routing/siting for the proposed facilities; impacts on residents and businesses during construction; impacts on waterbodies, wetlands, and public parklands; and impacts on community infrastructure and water supplies. In addition to the proposed action, this draft EIS addresses a No Action or Postponed Action Alternative, system alternatives, route alternatives, minor route variations, and aboveground facility site alternatives. Texas Eastern and Algonquin propose to begin construction in 2012 and place the project facilities in service by November of 2013. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide Consolidated Edison Companys (Con Edison) customers with access to diverse natural gas supplies from liquefied natural gas and Canadian gas supplies via Algonquins system; access to supplies from the Gulf Coast, Mid-continent, and Rockies through Texas Easterns system; and access to the growing supply of natural gas from the Marcellus Shale Basin via both pipeline systems. The NJ-NY Project would eliminate a critical capacity constraint, enhance customer choice, and provide additional operational flexibility for Texas Eastern, Algonquin, and Con Edison. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would involve a total of 33 waterbody crossings, including the removal of pipe from one waterbody. Nine of the proposed crossings would involve major waterbodies, the largest of which would be the Arthur Kill, Kill Van Kull, and the Hudson River. A total of 25.5 acres of wetlands would be temporarily impacted and 3.8 acres of permanent wetland impacts would occur within the maintained portion of the proposed permanent right-of-way. Essential fish habitat and habitat associated with a variety of migratory bird species could be affected. Multiple areas of known soil contamination would be crossed by the proposed pipeline. One historic property, and possibly two properties that are on or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717 f(c)), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110311, Draft EIS--449 pages, Appendices--593 pages, September 16, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 25 KW - Energy KW - Agency number: FERC/EIS-0241D KW - Dredging KW - Drilling KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Natural Gas KW - Pipelines KW - Rivers KW - Soils KW - Vegetation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arthur Kill KW - Connecticut KW - Hudson River KW - Kill Van Kull KW - New Jersey KW - New York KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Natural Gas Act, Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/905874103?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.title=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Office of Energy Projects, Washington, District of Columbia; FERC N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 16, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. [Part 24 of 36] T2 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. AN - 905874098; 15069-1_0024 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a certificate of public convenience and necessity to construct, operate, and maintain expansions of existing interstate natural gas pipeline systems in New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut is proposed. Texas Eastern Transmission, LP (Texas Eastern) and Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC (Algonquin), both indirect wholly owned subsidiaries of Spectra Energy Corporation, filed an application on December 20, 2010 for the New Jersey - New York Expansion Project (NJ-NY Project) which would involve the construction and operation of approximately 19.8 miles of natural gas pipeline and associated equipment and facilities. Of this total, 15.0 miles would consist of new 30-inch-diameter pipeline in the Boroughs of Staten Island and Manhattan, New York and the cities of Bayonne, Jersey City, and Hoboken, New Jersey, and 4.8 miles would consist of 42-inch-diameter replacement pipeline in the Borough of Staten Island, New York and the city of Linden, New Jersey. Texas Eastern and Algonquin also propose to abandon 8.95 miles of existing 12-, 20-, and 24-inch-diameter pipeline in the City of Linden, New Jersey and the Borough of Staten Island, New York. The applicants also propose to construct and operate six new metering and regulating stations; modify existing compressor stations; and remove, replace, or install launchers and receivers and pipeline valves at several locations along the pipeline. Major issues raised during scoping include safety and the proximity of the pipelines and construction activities to homes, businesses, and public buildings; alternative routing/siting for the proposed facilities; impacts on residents and businesses during construction; impacts on waterbodies, wetlands, and public parklands; and impacts on community infrastructure and water supplies. In addition to the proposed action, this draft EIS addresses a No Action or Postponed Action Alternative, system alternatives, route alternatives, minor route variations, and aboveground facility site alternatives. Texas Eastern and Algonquin propose to begin construction in 2012 and place the project facilities in service by November of 2013. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide Consolidated Edison Companys (Con Edison) customers with access to diverse natural gas supplies from liquefied natural gas and Canadian gas supplies via Algonquins system; access to supplies from the Gulf Coast, Mid-continent, and Rockies through Texas Easterns system; and access to the growing supply of natural gas from the Marcellus Shale Basin via both pipeline systems. The NJ-NY Project would eliminate a critical capacity constraint, enhance customer choice, and provide additional operational flexibility for Texas Eastern, Algonquin, and Con Edison. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would involve a total of 33 waterbody crossings, including the removal of pipe from one waterbody. Nine of the proposed crossings would involve major waterbodies, the largest of which would be the Arthur Kill, Kill Van Kull, and the Hudson River. A total of 25.5 acres of wetlands would be temporarily impacted and 3.8 acres of permanent wetland impacts would occur within the maintained portion of the proposed permanent right-of-way. Essential fish habitat and habitat associated with a variety of migratory bird species could be affected. Multiple areas of known soil contamination would be crossed by the proposed pipeline. One historic property, and possibly two properties that are on or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717 f(c)), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110311, Draft EIS--449 pages, Appendices--593 pages, September 16, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 24 KW - Energy KW - Agency number: FERC/EIS-0241D KW - Dredging KW - Drilling KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Natural Gas KW - Pipelines KW - Rivers KW - Soils KW - Vegetation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arthur Kill KW - Connecticut KW - Hudson River KW - Kill Van Kull KW - New Jersey KW - New York KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Natural Gas Act, Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/905874098?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.title=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Office of Energy Projects, Washington, District of Columbia; FERC N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 16, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. [Part 23 of 36] T2 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. AN - 905874095; 15069-1_0023 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a certificate of public convenience and necessity to construct, operate, and maintain expansions of existing interstate natural gas pipeline systems in New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut is proposed. Texas Eastern Transmission, LP (Texas Eastern) and Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC (Algonquin), both indirect wholly owned subsidiaries of Spectra Energy Corporation, filed an application on December 20, 2010 for the New Jersey - New York Expansion Project (NJ-NY Project) which would involve the construction and operation of approximately 19.8 miles of natural gas pipeline and associated equipment and facilities. Of this total, 15.0 miles would consist of new 30-inch-diameter pipeline in the Boroughs of Staten Island and Manhattan, New York and the cities of Bayonne, Jersey City, and Hoboken, New Jersey, and 4.8 miles would consist of 42-inch-diameter replacement pipeline in the Borough of Staten Island, New York and the city of Linden, New Jersey. Texas Eastern and Algonquin also propose to abandon 8.95 miles of existing 12-, 20-, and 24-inch-diameter pipeline in the City of Linden, New Jersey and the Borough of Staten Island, New York. The applicants also propose to construct and operate six new metering and regulating stations; modify existing compressor stations; and remove, replace, or install launchers and receivers and pipeline valves at several locations along the pipeline. Major issues raised during scoping include safety and the proximity of the pipelines and construction activities to homes, businesses, and public buildings; alternative routing/siting for the proposed facilities; impacts on residents and businesses during construction; impacts on waterbodies, wetlands, and public parklands; and impacts on community infrastructure and water supplies. In addition to the proposed action, this draft EIS addresses a No Action or Postponed Action Alternative, system alternatives, route alternatives, minor route variations, and aboveground facility site alternatives. Texas Eastern and Algonquin propose to begin construction in 2012 and place the project facilities in service by November of 2013. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide Consolidated Edison Companys (Con Edison) customers with access to diverse natural gas supplies from liquefied natural gas and Canadian gas supplies via Algonquins system; access to supplies from the Gulf Coast, Mid-continent, and Rockies through Texas Easterns system; and access to the growing supply of natural gas from the Marcellus Shale Basin via both pipeline systems. The NJ-NY Project would eliminate a critical capacity constraint, enhance customer choice, and provide additional operational flexibility for Texas Eastern, Algonquin, and Con Edison. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would involve a total of 33 waterbody crossings, including the removal of pipe from one waterbody. Nine of the proposed crossings would involve major waterbodies, the largest of which would be the Arthur Kill, Kill Van Kull, and the Hudson River. A total of 25.5 acres of wetlands would be temporarily impacted and 3.8 acres of permanent wetland impacts would occur within the maintained portion of the proposed permanent right-of-way. Essential fish habitat and habitat associated with a variety of migratory bird species could be affected. Multiple areas of known soil contamination would be crossed by the proposed pipeline. One historic property, and possibly two properties that are on or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717 f(c)), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110311, Draft EIS--449 pages, Appendices--593 pages, September 16, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 23 KW - Energy KW - Agency number: FERC/EIS-0241D KW - Dredging KW - Drilling KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Natural Gas KW - Pipelines KW - Rivers KW - Soils KW - Vegetation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arthur Kill KW - Connecticut KW - Hudson River KW - Kill Van Kull KW - New Jersey KW - New York KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Natural Gas Act, Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/905874095?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.title=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Office of Energy Projects, Washington, District of Columbia; FERC N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 16, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. [Part 22 of 36] T2 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. AN - 905874090; 15069-1_0022 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a certificate of public convenience and necessity to construct, operate, and maintain expansions of existing interstate natural gas pipeline systems in New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut is proposed. Texas Eastern Transmission, LP (Texas Eastern) and Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC (Algonquin), both indirect wholly owned subsidiaries of Spectra Energy Corporation, filed an application on December 20, 2010 for the New Jersey - New York Expansion Project (NJ-NY Project) which would involve the construction and operation of approximately 19.8 miles of natural gas pipeline and associated equipment and facilities. Of this total, 15.0 miles would consist of new 30-inch-diameter pipeline in the Boroughs of Staten Island and Manhattan, New York and the cities of Bayonne, Jersey City, and Hoboken, New Jersey, and 4.8 miles would consist of 42-inch-diameter replacement pipeline in the Borough of Staten Island, New York and the city of Linden, New Jersey. Texas Eastern and Algonquin also propose to abandon 8.95 miles of existing 12-, 20-, and 24-inch-diameter pipeline in the City of Linden, New Jersey and the Borough of Staten Island, New York. The applicants also propose to construct and operate six new metering and regulating stations; modify existing compressor stations; and remove, replace, or install launchers and receivers and pipeline valves at several locations along the pipeline. Major issues raised during scoping include safety and the proximity of the pipelines and construction activities to homes, businesses, and public buildings; alternative routing/siting for the proposed facilities; impacts on residents and businesses during construction; impacts on waterbodies, wetlands, and public parklands; and impacts on community infrastructure and water supplies. In addition to the proposed action, this draft EIS addresses a No Action or Postponed Action Alternative, system alternatives, route alternatives, minor route variations, and aboveground facility site alternatives. Texas Eastern and Algonquin propose to begin construction in 2012 and place the project facilities in service by November of 2013. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide Consolidated Edison Companys (Con Edison) customers with access to diverse natural gas supplies from liquefied natural gas and Canadian gas supplies via Algonquins system; access to supplies from the Gulf Coast, Mid-continent, and Rockies through Texas Easterns system; and access to the growing supply of natural gas from the Marcellus Shale Basin via both pipeline systems. The NJ-NY Project would eliminate a critical capacity constraint, enhance customer choice, and provide additional operational flexibility for Texas Eastern, Algonquin, and Con Edison. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would involve a total of 33 waterbody crossings, including the removal of pipe from one waterbody. Nine of the proposed crossings would involve major waterbodies, the largest of which would be the Arthur Kill, Kill Van Kull, and the Hudson River. A total of 25.5 acres of wetlands would be temporarily impacted and 3.8 acres of permanent wetland impacts would occur within the maintained portion of the proposed permanent right-of-way. Essential fish habitat and habitat associated with a variety of migratory bird species could be affected. Multiple areas of known soil contamination would be crossed by the proposed pipeline. One historic property, and possibly two properties that are on or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717 f(c)), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110311, Draft EIS--449 pages, Appendices--593 pages, September 16, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 22 KW - Energy KW - Agency number: FERC/EIS-0241D KW - Dredging KW - Drilling KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Natural Gas KW - Pipelines KW - Rivers KW - Soils KW - Vegetation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arthur Kill KW - Connecticut KW - Hudson River KW - Kill Van Kull KW - New Jersey KW - New York KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Natural Gas Act, Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/905874090?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.title=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Office of Energy Projects, Washington, District of Columbia; FERC N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 16, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. [Part 21 of 36] T2 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. AN - 905874087; 15069-1_0021 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a certificate of public convenience and necessity to construct, operate, and maintain expansions of existing interstate natural gas pipeline systems in New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut is proposed. Texas Eastern Transmission, LP (Texas Eastern) and Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC (Algonquin), both indirect wholly owned subsidiaries of Spectra Energy Corporation, filed an application on December 20, 2010 for the New Jersey - New York Expansion Project (NJ-NY Project) which would involve the construction and operation of approximately 19.8 miles of natural gas pipeline and associated equipment and facilities. Of this total, 15.0 miles would consist of new 30-inch-diameter pipeline in the Boroughs of Staten Island and Manhattan, New York and the cities of Bayonne, Jersey City, and Hoboken, New Jersey, and 4.8 miles would consist of 42-inch-diameter replacement pipeline in the Borough of Staten Island, New York and the city of Linden, New Jersey. Texas Eastern and Algonquin also propose to abandon 8.95 miles of existing 12-, 20-, and 24-inch-diameter pipeline in the City of Linden, New Jersey and the Borough of Staten Island, New York. The applicants also propose to construct and operate six new metering and regulating stations; modify existing compressor stations; and remove, replace, or install launchers and receivers and pipeline valves at several locations along the pipeline. Major issues raised during scoping include safety and the proximity of the pipelines and construction activities to homes, businesses, and public buildings; alternative routing/siting for the proposed facilities; impacts on residents and businesses during construction; impacts on waterbodies, wetlands, and public parklands; and impacts on community infrastructure and water supplies. In addition to the proposed action, this draft EIS addresses a No Action or Postponed Action Alternative, system alternatives, route alternatives, minor route variations, and aboveground facility site alternatives. Texas Eastern and Algonquin propose to begin construction in 2012 and place the project facilities in service by November of 2013. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide Consolidated Edison Companys (Con Edison) customers with access to diverse natural gas supplies from liquefied natural gas and Canadian gas supplies via Algonquins system; access to supplies from the Gulf Coast, Mid-continent, and Rockies through Texas Easterns system; and access to the growing supply of natural gas from the Marcellus Shale Basin via both pipeline systems. The NJ-NY Project would eliminate a critical capacity constraint, enhance customer choice, and provide additional operational flexibility for Texas Eastern, Algonquin, and Con Edison. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would involve a total of 33 waterbody crossings, including the removal of pipe from one waterbody. Nine of the proposed crossings would involve major waterbodies, the largest of which would be the Arthur Kill, Kill Van Kull, and the Hudson River. A total of 25.5 acres of wetlands would be temporarily impacted and 3.8 acres of permanent wetland impacts would occur within the maintained portion of the proposed permanent right-of-way. Essential fish habitat and habitat associated with a variety of migratory bird species could be affected. Multiple areas of known soil contamination would be crossed by the proposed pipeline. One historic property, and possibly two properties that are on or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717 f(c)), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110311, Draft EIS--449 pages, Appendices--593 pages, September 16, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 21 KW - Energy KW - Agency number: FERC/EIS-0241D KW - Dredging KW - Drilling KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Natural Gas KW - Pipelines KW - Rivers KW - Soils KW - Vegetation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arthur Kill KW - Connecticut KW - Hudson River KW - Kill Van Kull KW - New Jersey KW - New York KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Natural Gas Act, Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/905874087?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.title=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Office of Energy Projects, Washington, District of Columbia; FERC N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 16, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. [Part 20 of 36] T2 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. AN - 905874079; 15069-1_0020 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a certificate of public convenience and necessity to construct, operate, and maintain expansions of existing interstate natural gas pipeline systems in New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut is proposed. Texas Eastern Transmission, LP (Texas Eastern) and Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC (Algonquin), both indirect wholly owned subsidiaries of Spectra Energy Corporation, filed an application on December 20, 2010 for the New Jersey - New York Expansion Project (NJ-NY Project) which would involve the construction and operation of approximately 19.8 miles of natural gas pipeline and associated equipment and facilities. Of this total, 15.0 miles would consist of new 30-inch-diameter pipeline in the Boroughs of Staten Island and Manhattan, New York and the cities of Bayonne, Jersey City, and Hoboken, New Jersey, and 4.8 miles would consist of 42-inch-diameter replacement pipeline in the Borough of Staten Island, New York and the city of Linden, New Jersey. Texas Eastern and Algonquin also propose to abandon 8.95 miles of existing 12-, 20-, and 24-inch-diameter pipeline in the City of Linden, New Jersey and the Borough of Staten Island, New York. The applicants also propose to construct and operate six new metering and regulating stations; modify existing compressor stations; and remove, replace, or install launchers and receivers and pipeline valves at several locations along the pipeline. Major issues raised during scoping include safety and the proximity of the pipelines and construction activities to homes, businesses, and public buildings; alternative routing/siting for the proposed facilities; impacts on residents and businesses during construction; impacts on waterbodies, wetlands, and public parklands; and impacts on community infrastructure and water supplies. In addition to the proposed action, this draft EIS addresses a No Action or Postponed Action Alternative, system alternatives, route alternatives, minor route variations, and aboveground facility site alternatives. Texas Eastern and Algonquin propose to begin construction in 2012 and place the project facilities in service by November of 2013. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide Consolidated Edison Companys (Con Edison) customers with access to diverse natural gas supplies from liquefied natural gas and Canadian gas supplies via Algonquins system; access to supplies from the Gulf Coast, Mid-continent, and Rockies through Texas Easterns system; and access to the growing supply of natural gas from the Marcellus Shale Basin via both pipeline systems. The NJ-NY Project would eliminate a critical capacity constraint, enhance customer choice, and provide additional operational flexibility for Texas Eastern, Algonquin, and Con Edison. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would involve a total of 33 waterbody crossings, including the removal of pipe from one waterbody. Nine of the proposed crossings would involve major waterbodies, the largest of which would be the Arthur Kill, Kill Van Kull, and the Hudson River. A total of 25.5 acres of wetlands would be temporarily impacted and 3.8 acres of permanent wetland impacts would occur within the maintained portion of the proposed permanent right-of-way. Essential fish habitat and habitat associated with a variety of migratory bird species could be affected. Multiple areas of known soil contamination would be crossed by the proposed pipeline. One historic property, and possibly two properties that are on or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717 f(c)), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110311, Draft EIS--449 pages, Appendices--593 pages, September 16, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 20 KW - Energy KW - Agency number: FERC/EIS-0241D KW - Dredging KW - Drilling KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Natural Gas KW - Pipelines KW - Rivers KW - Soils KW - Vegetation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arthur Kill KW - Connecticut KW - Hudson River KW - Kill Van Kull KW - New Jersey KW - New York KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Natural Gas Act, Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/905874079?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.title=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Office of Energy Projects, Washington, District of Columbia; FERC N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 16, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. [Part 18 of 36] T2 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. AN - 905874072; 15069-1_0018 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a certificate of public convenience and necessity to construct, operate, and maintain expansions of existing interstate natural gas pipeline systems in New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut is proposed. Texas Eastern Transmission, LP (Texas Eastern) and Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC (Algonquin), both indirect wholly owned subsidiaries of Spectra Energy Corporation, filed an application on December 20, 2010 for the New Jersey - New York Expansion Project (NJ-NY Project) which would involve the construction and operation of approximately 19.8 miles of natural gas pipeline and associated equipment and facilities. Of this total, 15.0 miles would consist of new 30-inch-diameter pipeline in the Boroughs of Staten Island and Manhattan, New York and the cities of Bayonne, Jersey City, and Hoboken, New Jersey, and 4.8 miles would consist of 42-inch-diameter replacement pipeline in the Borough of Staten Island, New York and the city of Linden, New Jersey. Texas Eastern and Algonquin also propose to abandon 8.95 miles of existing 12-, 20-, and 24-inch-diameter pipeline in the City of Linden, New Jersey and the Borough of Staten Island, New York. The applicants also propose to construct and operate six new metering and regulating stations; modify existing compressor stations; and remove, replace, or install launchers and receivers and pipeline valves at several locations along the pipeline. Major issues raised during scoping include safety and the proximity of the pipelines and construction activities to homes, businesses, and public buildings; alternative routing/siting for the proposed facilities; impacts on residents and businesses during construction; impacts on waterbodies, wetlands, and public parklands; and impacts on community infrastructure and water supplies. In addition to the proposed action, this draft EIS addresses a No Action or Postponed Action Alternative, system alternatives, route alternatives, minor route variations, and aboveground facility site alternatives. Texas Eastern and Algonquin propose to begin construction in 2012 and place the project facilities in service by November of 2013. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide Consolidated Edison Companys (Con Edison) customers with access to diverse natural gas supplies from liquefied natural gas and Canadian gas supplies via Algonquins system; access to supplies from the Gulf Coast, Mid-continent, and Rockies through Texas Easterns system; and access to the growing supply of natural gas from the Marcellus Shale Basin via both pipeline systems. The NJ-NY Project would eliminate a critical capacity constraint, enhance customer choice, and provide additional operational flexibility for Texas Eastern, Algonquin, and Con Edison. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would involve a total of 33 waterbody crossings, including the removal of pipe from one waterbody. Nine of the proposed crossings would involve major waterbodies, the largest of which would be the Arthur Kill, Kill Van Kull, and the Hudson River. A total of 25.5 acres of wetlands would be temporarily impacted and 3.8 acres of permanent wetland impacts would occur within the maintained portion of the proposed permanent right-of-way. Essential fish habitat and habitat associated with a variety of migratory bird species could be affected. Multiple areas of known soil contamination would be crossed by the proposed pipeline. One historic property, and possibly two properties that are on or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717 f(c)), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110311, Draft EIS--449 pages, Appendices--593 pages, September 16, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 18 KW - Energy KW - Agency number: FERC/EIS-0241D KW - Dredging KW - Drilling KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Natural Gas KW - Pipelines KW - Rivers KW - Soils KW - Vegetation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arthur Kill KW - Connecticut KW - Hudson River KW - Kill Van Kull KW - New Jersey KW - New York KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Natural Gas Act, Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/905874072?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.title=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Office of Energy Projects, Washington, District of Columbia; FERC N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 16, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. [Part 17 of 36] T2 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. AN - 905874066; 15069-1_0017 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a certificate of public convenience and necessity to construct, operate, and maintain expansions of existing interstate natural gas pipeline systems in New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut is proposed. Texas Eastern Transmission, LP (Texas Eastern) and Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC (Algonquin), both indirect wholly owned subsidiaries of Spectra Energy Corporation, filed an application on December 20, 2010 for the New Jersey - New York Expansion Project (NJ-NY Project) which would involve the construction and operation of approximately 19.8 miles of natural gas pipeline and associated equipment and facilities. Of this total, 15.0 miles would consist of new 30-inch-diameter pipeline in the Boroughs of Staten Island and Manhattan, New York and the cities of Bayonne, Jersey City, and Hoboken, New Jersey, and 4.8 miles would consist of 42-inch-diameter replacement pipeline in the Borough of Staten Island, New York and the city of Linden, New Jersey. Texas Eastern and Algonquin also propose to abandon 8.95 miles of existing 12-, 20-, and 24-inch-diameter pipeline in the City of Linden, New Jersey and the Borough of Staten Island, New York. The applicants also propose to construct and operate six new metering and regulating stations; modify existing compressor stations; and remove, replace, or install launchers and receivers and pipeline valves at several locations along the pipeline. Major issues raised during scoping include safety and the proximity of the pipelines and construction activities to homes, businesses, and public buildings; alternative routing/siting for the proposed facilities; impacts on residents and businesses during construction; impacts on waterbodies, wetlands, and public parklands; and impacts on community infrastructure and water supplies. In addition to the proposed action, this draft EIS addresses a No Action or Postponed Action Alternative, system alternatives, route alternatives, minor route variations, and aboveground facility site alternatives. Texas Eastern and Algonquin propose to begin construction in 2012 and place the project facilities in service by November of 2013. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide Consolidated Edison Companys (Con Edison) customers with access to diverse natural gas supplies from liquefied natural gas and Canadian gas supplies via Algonquins system; access to supplies from the Gulf Coast, Mid-continent, and Rockies through Texas Easterns system; and access to the growing supply of natural gas from the Marcellus Shale Basin via both pipeline systems. The NJ-NY Project would eliminate a critical capacity constraint, enhance customer choice, and provide additional operational flexibility for Texas Eastern, Algonquin, and Con Edison. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would involve a total of 33 waterbody crossings, including the removal of pipe from one waterbody. Nine of the proposed crossings would involve major waterbodies, the largest of which would be the Arthur Kill, Kill Van Kull, and the Hudson River. A total of 25.5 acres of wetlands would be temporarily impacted and 3.8 acres of permanent wetland impacts would occur within the maintained portion of the proposed permanent right-of-way. Essential fish habitat and habitat associated with a variety of migratory bird species could be affected. Multiple areas of known soil contamination would be crossed by the proposed pipeline. One historic property, and possibly two properties that are on or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717 f(c)), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110311, Draft EIS--449 pages, Appendices--593 pages, September 16, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 17 KW - Energy KW - Agency number: FERC/EIS-0241D KW - Dredging KW - Drilling KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Natural Gas KW - Pipelines KW - Rivers KW - Soils KW - Vegetation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arthur Kill KW - Connecticut KW - Hudson River KW - Kill Van Kull KW - New Jersey KW - New York KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Natural Gas Act, Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/905874066?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.title=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Office of Energy Projects, Washington, District of Columbia; FERC N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 16, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. [Part 14 of 36] T2 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. AN - 905874062; 15069-1_0014 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a certificate of public convenience and necessity to construct, operate, and maintain expansions of existing interstate natural gas pipeline systems in New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut is proposed. Texas Eastern Transmission, LP (Texas Eastern) and Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC (Algonquin), both indirect wholly owned subsidiaries of Spectra Energy Corporation, filed an application on December 20, 2010 for the New Jersey - New York Expansion Project (NJ-NY Project) which would involve the construction and operation of approximately 19.8 miles of natural gas pipeline and associated equipment and facilities. Of this total, 15.0 miles would consist of new 30-inch-diameter pipeline in the Boroughs of Staten Island and Manhattan, New York and the cities of Bayonne, Jersey City, and Hoboken, New Jersey, and 4.8 miles would consist of 42-inch-diameter replacement pipeline in the Borough of Staten Island, New York and the city of Linden, New Jersey. Texas Eastern and Algonquin also propose to abandon 8.95 miles of existing 12-, 20-, and 24-inch-diameter pipeline in the City of Linden, New Jersey and the Borough of Staten Island, New York. The applicants also propose to construct and operate six new metering and regulating stations; modify existing compressor stations; and remove, replace, or install launchers and receivers and pipeline valves at several locations along the pipeline. Major issues raised during scoping include safety and the proximity of the pipelines and construction activities to homes, businesses, and public buildings; alternative routing/siting for the proposed facilities; impacts on residents and businesses during construction; impacts on waterbodies, wetlands, and public parklands; and impacts on community infrastructure and water supplies. In addition to the proposed action, this draft EIS addresses a No Action or Postponed Action Alternative, system alternatives, route alternatives, minor route variations, and aboveground facility site alternatives. Texas Eastern and Algonquin propose to begin construction in 2012 and place the project facilities in service by November of 2013. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide Consolidated Edison Companys (Con Edison) customers with access to diverse natural gas supplies from liquefied natural gas and Canadian gas supplies via Algonquins system; access to supplies from the Gulf Coast, Mid-continent, and Rockies through Texas Easterns system; and access to the growing supply of natural gas from the Marcellus Shale Basin via both pipeline systems. The NJ-NY Project would eliminate a critical capacity constraint, enhance customer choice, and provide additional operational flexibility for Texas Eastern, Algonquin, and Con Edison. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would involve a total of 33 waterbody crossings, including the removal of pipe from one waterbody. Nine of the proposed crossings would involve major waterbodies, the largest of which would be the Arthur Kill, Kill Van Kull, and the Hudson River. A total of 25.5 acres of wetlands would be temporarily impacted and 3.8 acres of permanent wetland impacts would occur within the maintained portion of the proposed permanent right-of-way. Essential fish habitat and habitat associated with a variety of migratory bird species could be affected. Multiple areas of known soil contamination would be crossed by the proposed pipeline. One historic property, and possibly two properties that are on or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717 f(c)), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110311, Draft EIS--449 pages, Appendices--593 pages, September 16, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 14 KW - Energy KW - Agency number: FERC/EIS-0241D KW - Dredging KW - Drilling KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Natural Gas KW - Pipelines KW - Rivers KW - Soils KW - Vegetation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arthur Kill KW - Connecticut KW - Hudson River KW - Kill Van Kull KW - New Jersey KW - New York KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Natural Gas Act, Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/905874062?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.title=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Office of Energy Projects, Washington, District of Columbia; FERC N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 16, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. [Part 13 of 36] T2 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. AN - 905874059; 15069-1_0013 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a certificate of public convenience and necessity to construct, operate, and maintain expansions of existing interstate natural gas pipeline systems in New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut is proposed. Texas Eastern Transmission, LP (Texas Eastern) and Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC (Algonquin), both indirect wholly owned subsidiaries of Spectra Energy Corporation, filed an application on December 20, 2010 for the New Jersey - New York Expansion Project (NJ-NY Project) which would involve the construction and operation of approximately 19.8 miles of natural gas pipeline and associated equipment and facilities. Of this total, 15.0 miles would consist of new 30-inch-diameter pipeline in the Boroughs of Staten Island and Manhattan, New York and the cities of Bayonne, Jersey City, and Hoboken, New Jersey, and 4.8 miles would consist of 42-inch-diameter replacement pipeline in the Borough of Staten Island, New York and the city of Linden, New Jersey. Texas Eastern and Algonquin also propose to abandon 8.95 miles of existing 12-, 20-, and 24-inch-diameter pipeline in the City of Linden, New Jersey and the Borough of Staten Island, New York. The applicants also propose to construct and operate six new metering and regulating stations; modify existing compressor stations; and remove, replace, or install launchers and receivers and pipeline valves at several locations along the pipeline. Major issues raised during scoping include safety and the proximity of the pipelines and construction activities to homes, businesses, and public buildings; alternative routing/siting for the proposed facilities; impacts on residents and businesses during construction; impacts on waterbodies, wetlands, and public parklands; and impacts on community infrastructure and water supplies. In addition to the proposed action, this draft EIS addresses a No Action or Postponed Action Alternative, system alternatives, route alternatives, minor route variations, and aboveground facility site alternatives. Texas Eastern and Algonquin propose to begin construction in 2012 and place the project facilities in service by November of 2013. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide Consolidated Edison Companys (Con Edison) customers with access to diverse natural gas supplies from liquefied natural gas and Canadian gas supplies via Algonquins system; access to supplies from the Gulf Coast, Mid-continent, and Rockies through Texas Easterns system; and access to the growing supply of natural gas from the Marcellus Shale Basin via both pipeline systems. The NJ-NY Project would eliminate a critical capacity constraint, enhance customer choice, and provide additional operational flexibility for Texas Eastern, Algonquin, and Con Edison. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would involve a total of 33 waterbody crossings, including the removal of pipe from one waterbody. Nine of the proposed crossings would involve major waterbodies, the largest of which would be the Arthur Kill, Kill Van Kull, and the Hudson River. A total of 25.5 acres of wetlands would be temporarily impacted and 3.8 acres of permanent wetland impacts would occur within the maintained portion of the proposed permanent right-of-way. Essential fish habitat and habitat associated with a variety of migratory bird species could be affected. Multiple areas of known soil contamination would be crossed by the proposed pipeline. One historic property, and possibly two properties that are on or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717 f(c)), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110311, Draft EIS--449 pages, Appendices--593 pages, September 16, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 13 KW - Energy KW - Agency number: FERC/EIS-0241D KW - Dredging KW - Drilling KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Natural Gas KW - Pipelines KW - Rivers KW - Soils KW - Vegetation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arthur Kill KW - Connecticut KW - Hudson River KW - Kill Van Kull KW - New Jersey KW - New York KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Natural Gas Act, Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/905874059?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.title=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Office of Energy Projects, Washington, District of Columbia; FERC N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 16, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. [Part 12 of 36] T2 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. AN - 905874058; 15069-1_0012 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a certificate of public convenience and necessity to construct, operate, and maintain expansions of existing interstate natural gas pipeline systems in New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut is proposed. Texas Eastern Transmission, LP (Texas Eastern) and Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC (Algonquin), both indirect wholly owned subsidiaries of Spectra Energy Corporation, filed an application on December 20, 2010 for the New Jersey - New York Expansion Project (NJ-NY Project) which would involve the construction and operation of approximately 19.8 miles of natural gas pipeline and associated equipment and facilities. Of this total, 15.0 miles would consist of new 30-inch-diameter pipeline in the Boroughs of Staten Island and Manhattan, New York and the cities of Bayonne, Jersey City, and Hoboken, New Jersey, and 4.8 miles would consist of 42-inch-diameter replacement pipeline in the Borough of Staten Island, New York and the city of Linden, New Jersey. Texas Eastern and Algonquin also propose to abandon 8.95 miles of existing 12-, 20-, and 24-inch-diameter pipeline in the City of Linden, New Jersey and the Borough of Staten Island, New York. The applicants also propose to construct and operate six new metering and regulating stations; modify existing compressor stations; and remove, replace, or install launchers and receivers and pipeline valves at several locations along the pipeline. Major issues raised during scoping include safety and the proximity of the pipelines and construction activities to homes, businesses, and public buildings; alternative routing/siting for the proposed facilities; impacts on residents and businesses during construction; impacts on waterbodies, wetlands, and public parklands; and impacts on community infrastructure and water supplies. In addition to the proposed action, this draft EIS addresses a No Action or Postponed Action Alternative, system alternatives, route alternatives, minor route variations, and aboveground facility site alternatives. Texas Eastern and Algonquin propose to begin construction in 2012 and place the project facilities in service by November of 2013. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide Consolidated Edison Companys (Con Edison) customers with access to diverse natural gas supplies from liquefied natural gas and Canadian gas supplies via Algonquins system; access to supplies from the Gulf Coast, Mid-continent, and Rockies through Texas Easterns system; and access to the growing supply of natural gas from the Marcellus Shale Basin via both pipeline systems. The NJ-NY Project would eliminate a critical capacity constraint, enhance customer choice, and provide additional operational flexibility for Texas Eastern, Algonquin, and Con Edison. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would involve a total of 33 waterbody crossings, including the removal of pipe from one waterbody. Nine of the proposed crossings would involve major waterbodies, the largest of which would be the Arthur Kill, Kill Van Kull, and the Hudson River. A total of 25.5 acres of wetlands would be temporarily impacted and 3.8 acres of permanent wetland impacts would occur within the maintained portion of the proposed permanent right-of-way. Essential fish habitat and habitat associated with a variety of migratory bird species could be affected. Multiple areas of known soil contamination would be crossed by the proposed pipeline. One historic property, and possibly two properties that are on or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717 f(c)), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110311, Draft EIS--449 pages, Appendices--593 pages, September 16, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 12 KW - Energy KW - Agency number: FERC/EIS-0241D KW - Dredging KW - Drilling KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Natural Gas KW - Pipelines KW - Rivers KW - Soils KW - Vegetation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arthur Kill KW - Connecticut KW - Hudson River KW - Kill Van Kull KW - New Jersey KW - New York KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Natural Gas Act, Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/905874058?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.title=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Office of Energy Projects, Washington, District of Columbia; FERC N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 16, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. [Part 36 of 36] T2 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. AN - 905874046; 15069-1_0036 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a certificate of public convenience and necessity to construct, operate, and maintain expansions of existing interstate natural gas pipeline systems in New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut is proposed. Texas Eastern Transmission, LP (Texas Eastern) and Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC (Algonquin), both indirect wholly owned subsidiaries of Spectra Energy Corporation, filed an application on December 20, 2010 for the New Jersey - New York Expansion Project (NJ-NY Project) which would involve the construction and operation of approximately 19.8 miles of natural gas pipeline and associated equipment and facilities. Of this total, 15.0 miles would consist of new 30-inch-diameter pipeline in the Boroughs of Staten Island and Manhattan, New York and the cities of Bayonne, Jersey City, and Hoboken, New Jersey, and 4.8 miles would consist of 42-inch-diameter replacement pipeline in the Borough of Staten Island, New York and the city of Linden, New Jersey. Texas Eastern and Algonquin also propose to abandon 8.95 miles of existing 12-, 20-, and 24-inch-diameter pipeline in the City of Linden, New Jersey and the Borough of Staten Island, New York. The applicants also propose to construct and operate six new metering and regulating stations; modify existing compressor stations; and remove, replace, or install launchers and receivers and pipeline valves at several locations along the pipeline. Major issues raised during scoping include safety and the proximity of the pipelines and construction activities to homes, businesses, and public buildings; alternative routing/siting for the proposed facilities; impacts on residents and businesses during construction; impacts on waterbodies, wetlands, and public parklands; and impacts on community infrastructure and water supplies. In addition to the proposed action, this draft EIS addresses a No Action or Postponed Action Alternative, system alternatives, route alternatives, minor route variations, and aboveground facility site alternatives. Texas Eastern and Algonquin propose to begin construction in 2012 and place the project facilities in service by November of 2013. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide Consolidated Edison Companys (Con Edison) customers with access to diverse natural gas supplies from liquefied natural gas and Canadian gas supplies via Algonquins system; access to supplies from the Gulf Coast, Mid-continent, and Rockies through Texas Easterns system; and access to the growing supply of natural gas from the Marcellus Shale Basin via both pipeline systems. The NJ-NY Project would eliminate a critical capacity constraint, enhance customer choice, and provide additional operational flexibility for Texas Eastern, Algonquin, and Con Edison. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would involve a total of 33 waterbody crossings, including the removal of pipe from one waterbody. Nine of the proposed crossings would involve major waterbodies, the largest of which would be the Arthur Kill, Kill Van Kull, and the Hudson River. A total of 25.5 acres of wetlands would be temporarily impacted and 3.8 acres of permanent wetland impacts would occur within the maintained portion of the proposed permanent right-of-way. Essential fish habitat and habitat associated with a variety of migratory bird species could be affected. Multiple areas of known soil contamination would be crossed by the proposed pipeline. One historic property, and possibly two properties that are on or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717 f(c)), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110311, Draft EIS--449 pages, Appendices--593 pages, September 16, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 36 KW - Energy KW - Agency number: FERC/EIS-0241D KW - Dredging KW - Drilling KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Natural Gas KW - Pipelines KW - Rivers KW - Soils KW - Vegetation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arthur Kill KW - Connecticut KW - Hudson River KW - Kill Van Kull KW - New Jersey KW - New York KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Natural Gas Act, Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/905874046?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.title=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Office of Energy Projects, Washington, District of Columbia; FERC N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 16, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. [Part 35 of 36] T2 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. AN - 905874044; 15069-1_0035 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a certificate of public convenience and necessity to construct, operate, and maintain expansions of existing interstate natural gas pipeline systems in New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut is proposed. Texas Eastern Transmission, LP (Texas Eastern) and Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC (Algonquin), both indirect wholly owned subsidiaries of Spectra Energy Corporation, filed an application on December 20, 2010 for the New Jersey - New York Expansion Project (NJ-NY Project) which would involve the construction and operation of approximately 19.8 miles of natural gas pipeline and associated equipment and facilities. Of this total, 15.0 miles would consist of new 30-inch-diameter pipeline in the Boroughs of Staten Island and Manhattan, New York and the cities of Bayonne, Jersey City, and Hoboken, New Jersey, and 4.8 miles would consist of 42-inch-diameter replacement pipeline in the Borough of Staten Island, New York and the city of Linden, New Jersey. Texas Eastern and Algonquin also propose to abandon 8.95 miles of existing 12-, 20-, and 24-inch-diameter pipeline in the City of Linden, New Jersey and the Borough of Staten Island, New York. The applicants also propose to construct and operate six new metering and regulating stations; modify existing compressor stations; and remove, replace, or install launchers and receivers and pipeline valves at several locations along the pipeline. Major issues raised during scoping include safety and the proximity of the pipelines and construction activities to homes, businesses, and public buildings; alternative routing/siting for the proposed facilities; impacts on residents and businesses during construction; impacts on waterbodies, wetlands, and public parklands; and impacts on community infrastructure and water supplies. In addition to the proposed action, this draft EIS addresses a No Action or Postponed Action Alternative, system alternatives, route alternatives, minor route variations, and aboveground facility site alternatives. Texas Eastern and Algonquin propose to begin construction in 2012 and place the project facilities in service by November of 2013. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide Consolidated Edison Companys (Con Edison) customers with access to diverse natural gas supplies from liquefied natural gas and Canadian gas supplies via Algonquins system; access to supplies from the Gulf Coast, Mid-continent, and Rockies through Texas Easterns system; and access to the growing supply of natural gas from the Marcellus Shale Basin via both pipeline systems. The NJ-NY Project would eliminate a critical capacity constraint, enhance customer choice, and provide additional operational flexibility for Texas Eastern, Algonquin, and Con Edison. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would involve a total of 33 waterbody crossings, including the removal of pipe from one waterbody. Nine of the proposed crossings would involve major waterbodies, the largest of which would be the Arthur Kill, Kill Van Kull, and the Hudson River. A total of 25.5 acres of wetlands would be temporarily impacted and 3.8 acres of permanent wetland impacts would occur within the maintained portion of the proposed permanent right-of-way. Essential fish habitat and habitat associated with a variety of migratory bird species could be affected. Multiple areas of known soil contamination would be crossed by the proposed pipeline. One historic property, and possibly two properties that are on or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717 f(c)), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110311, Draft EIS--449 pages, Appendices--593 pages, September 16, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 35 KW - Energy KW - Agency number: FERC/EIS-0241D KW - Dredging KW - Drilling KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Natural Gas KW - Pipelines KW - Rivers KW - Soils KW - Vegetation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arthur Kill KW - Connecticut KW - Hudson River KW - Kill Van Kull KW - New Jersey KW - New York KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Natural Gas Act, Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/905874044?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.title=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Office of Energy Projects, Washington, District of Columbia; FERC N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 16, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. [Part 34 of 36] T2 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. AN - 905874039; 15069-1_0034 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a certificate of public convenience and necessity to construct, operate, and maintain expansions of existing interstate natural gas pipeline systems in New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut is proposed. Texas Eastern Transmission, LP (Texas Eastern) and Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC (Algonquin), both indirect wholly owned subsidiaries of Spectra Energy Corporation, filed an application on December 20, 2010 for the New Jersey - New York Expansion Project (NJ-NY Project) which would involve the construction and operation of approximately 19.8 miles of natural gas pipeline and associated equipment and facilities. Of this total, 15.0 miles would consist of new 30-inch-diameter pipeline in the Boroughs of Staten Island and Manhattan, New York and the cities of Bayonne, Jersey City, and Hoboken, New Jersey, and 4.8 miles would consist of 42-inch-diameter replacement pipeline in the Borough of Staten Island, New York and the city of Linden, New Jersey. Texas Eastern and Algonquin also propose to abandon 8.95 miles of existing 12-, 20-, and 24-inch-diameter pipeline in the City of Linden, New Jersey and the Borough of Staten Island, New York. The applicants also propose to construct and operate six new metering and regulating stations; modify existing compressor stations; and remove, replace, or install launchers and receivers and pipeline valves at several locations along the pipeline. Major issues raised during scoping include safety and the proximity of the pipelines and construction activities to homes, businesses, and public buildings; alternative routing/siting for the proposed facilities; impacts on residents and businesses during construction; impacts on waterbodies, wetlands, and public parklands; and impacts on community infrastructure and water supplies. In addition to the proposed action, this draft EIS addresses a No Action or Postponed Action Alternative, system alternatives, route alternatives, minor route variations, and aboveground facility site alternatives. Texas Eastern and Algonquin propose to begin construction in 2012 and place the project facilities in service by November of 2013. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide Consolidated Edison Companys (Con Edison) customers with access to diverse natural gas supplies from liquefied natural gas and Canadian gas supplies via Algonquins system; access to supplies from the Gulf Coast, Mid-continent, and Rockies through Texas Easterns system; and access to the growing supply of natural gas from the Marcellus Shale Basin via both pipeline systems. The NJ-NY Project would eliminate a critical capacity constraint, enhance customer choice, and provide additional operational flexibility for Texas Eastern, Algonquin, and Con Edison. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would involve a total of 33 waterbody crossings, including the removal of pipe from one waterbody. Nine of the proposed crossings would involve major waterbodies, the largest of which would be the Arthur Kill, Kill Van Kull, and the Hudson River. A total of 25.5 acres of wetlands would be temporarily impacted and 3.8 acres of permanent wetland impacts would occur within the maintained portion of the proposed permanent right-of-way. Essential fish habitat and habitat associated with a variety of migratory bird species could be affected. Multiple areas of known soil contamination would be crossed by the proposed pipeline. One historic property, and possibly two properties that are on or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717 f(c)), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110311, Draft EIS--449 pages, Appendices--593 pages, September 16, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 34 KW - Energy KW - Agency number: FERC/EIS-0241D KW - Dredging KW - Drilling KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Natural Gas KW - Pipelines KW - Rivers KW - Soils KW - Vegetation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arthur Kill KW - Connecticut KW - Hudson River KW - Kill Van Kull KW - New Jersey KW - New York KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Natural Gas Act, Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/905874039?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.title=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Office of Energy Projects, Washington, District of Columbia; FERC N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 16, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. [Part 16 of 36] T2 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. AN - 905874033; 15069-1_0016 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a certificate of public convenience and necessity to construct, operate, and maintain expansions of existing interstate natural gas pipeline systems in New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut is proposed. Texas Eastern Transmission, LP (Texas Eastern) and Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC (Algonquin), both indirect wholly owned subsidiaries of Spectra Energy Corporation, filed an application on December 20, 2010 for the New Jersey - New York Expansion Project (NJ-NY Project) which would involve the construction and operation of approximately 19.8 miles of natural gas pipeline and associated equipment and facilities. Of this total, 15.0 miles would consist of new 30-inch-diameter pipeline in the Boroughs of Staten Island and Manhattan, New York and the cities of Bayonne, Jersey City, and Hoboken, New Jersey, and 4.8 miles would consist of 42-inch-diameter replacement pipeline in the Borough of Staten Island, New York and the city of Linden, New Jersey. Texas Eastern and Algonquin also propose to abandon 8.95 miles of existing 12-, 20-, and 24-inch-diameter pipeline in the City of Linden, New Jersey and the Borough of Staten Island, New York. The applicants also propose to construct and operate six new metering and regulating stations; modify existing compressor stations; and remove, replace, or install launchers and receivers and pipeline valves at several locations along the pipeline. Major issues raised during scoping include safety and the proximity of the pipelines and construction activities to homes, businesses, and public buildings; alternative routing/siting for the proposed facilities; impacts on residents and businesses during construction; impacts on waterbodies, wetlands, and public parklands; and impacts on community infrastructure and water supplies. In addition to the proposed action, this draft EIS addresses a No Action or Postponed Action Alternative, system alternatives, route alternatives, minor route variations, and aboveground facility site alternatives. Texas Eastern and Algonquin propose to begin construction in 2012 and place the project facilities in service by November of 2013. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide Consolidated Edison Companys (Con Edison) customers with access to diverse natural gas supplies from liquefied natural gas and Canadian gas supplies via Algonquins system; access to supplies from the Gulf Coast, Mid-continent, and Rockies through Texas Easterns system; and access to the growing supply of natural gas from the Marcellus Shale Basin via both pipeline systems. The NJ-NY Project would eliminate a critical capacity constraint, enhance customer choice, and provide additional operational flexibility for Texas Eastern, Algonquin, and Con Edison. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would involve a total of 33 waterbody crossings, including the removal of pipe from one waterbody. Nine of the proposed crossings would involve major waterbodies, the largest of which would be the Arthur Kill, Kill Van Kull, and the Hudson River. A total of 25.5 acres of wetlands would be temporarily impacted and 3.8 acres of permanent wetland impacts would occur within the maintained portion of the proposed permanent right-of-way. Essential fish habitat and habitat associated with a variety of migratory bird species could be affected. Multiple areas of known soil contamination would be crossed by the proposed pipeline. One historic property, and possibly two properties that are on or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717 f(c)), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110311, Draft EIS--449 pages, Appendices--593 pages, September 16, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 16 KW - Energy KW - Agency number: FERC/EIS-0241D KW - Dredging KW - Drilling KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Natural Gas KW - Pipelines KW - Rivers KW - Soils KW - Vegetation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arthur Kill KW - Connecticut KW - Hudson River KW - Kill Van Kull KW - New Jersey KW - New York KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Natural Gas Act, Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/905874033?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.title=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Office of Energy Projects, Washington, District of Columbia; FERC N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 16, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. [Part 15 of 36] T2 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. AN - 905874032; 15069-1_0015 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a certificate of public convenience and necessity to construct, operate, and maintain expansions of existing interstate natural gas pipeline systems in New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut is proposed. Texas Eastern Transmission, LP (Texas Eastern) and Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC (Algonquin), both indirect wholly owned subsidiaries of Spectra Energy Corporation, filed an application on December 20, 2010 for the New Jersey - New York Expansion Project (NJ-NY Project) which would involve the construction and operation of approximately 19.8 miles of natural gas pipeline and associated equipment and facilities. Of this total, 15.0 miles would consist of new 30-inch-diameter pipeline in the Boroughs of Staten Island and Manhattan, New York and the cities of Bayonne, Jersey City, and Hoboken, New Jersey, and 4.8 miles would consist of 42-inch-diameter replacement pipeline in the Borough of Staten Island, New York and the city of Linden, New Jersey. Texas Eastern and Algonquin also propose to abandon 8.95 miles of existing 12-, 20-, and 24-inch-diameter pipeline in the City of Linden, New Jersey and the Borough of Staten Island, New York. The applicants also propose to construct and operate six new metering and regulating stations; modify existing compressor stations; and remove, replace, or install launchers and receivers and pipeline valves at several locations along the pipeline. Major issues raised during scoping include safety and the proximity of the pipelines and construction activities to homes, businesses, and public buildings; alternative routing/siting for the proposed facilities; impacts on residents and businesses during construction; impacts on waterbodies, wetlands, and public parklands; and impacts on community infrastructure and water supplies. In addition to the proposed action, this draft EIS addresses a No Action or Postponed Action Alternative, system alternatives, route alternatives, minor route variations, and aboveground facility site alternatives. Texas Eastern and Algonquin propose to begin construction in 2012 and place the project facilities in service by November of 2013. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide Consolidated Edison Companys (Con Edison) customers with access to diverse natural gas supplies from liquefied natural gas and Canadian gas supplies via Algonquins system; access to supplies from the Gulf Coast, Mid-continent, and Rockies through Texas Easterns system; and access to the growing supply of natural gas from the Marcellus Shale Basin via both pipeline systems. The NJ-NY Project would eliminate a critical capacity constraint, enhance customer choice, and provide additional operational flexibility for Texas Eastern, Algonquin, and Con Edison. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would involve a total of 33 waterbody crossings, including the removal of pipe from one waterbody. Nine of the proposed crossings would involve major waterbodies, the largest of which would be the Arthur Kill, Kill Van Kull, and the Hudson River. A total of 25.5 acres of wetlands would be temporarily impacted and 3.8 acres of permanent wetland impacts would occur within the maintained portion of the proposed permanent right-of-way. Essential fish habitat and habitat associated with a variety of migratory bird species could be affected. Multiple areas of known soil contamination would be crossed by the proposed pipeline. One historic property, and possibly two properties that are on or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717 f(c)), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110311, Draft EIS--449 pages, Appendices--593 pages, September 16, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 15 KW - Energy KW - Agency number: FERC/EIS-0241D KW - Dredging KW - Drilling KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Natural Gas KW - Pipelines KW - Rivers KW - Soils KW - Vegetation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arthur Kill KW - Connecticut KW - Hudson River KW - Kill Van Kull KW - New Jersey KW - New York KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Natural Gas Act, Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/905874032?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.title=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Office of Energy Projects, Washington, District of Columbia; FERC N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 16, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. [Part 10 of 36] T2 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. AN - 905874015; 15069-1_0010 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a certificate of public convenience and necessity to construct, operate, and maintain expansions of existing interstate natural gas pipeline systems in New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut is proposed. Texas Eastern Transmission, LP (Texas Eastern) and Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC (Algonquin), both indirect wholly owned subsidiaries of Spectra Energy Corporation, filed an application on December 20, 2010 for the New Jersey - New York Expansion Project (NJ-NY Project) which would involve the construction and operation of approximately 19.8 miles of natural gas pipeline and associated equipment and facilities. Of this total, 15.0 miles would consist of new 30-inch-diameter pipeline in the Boroughs of Staten Island and Manhattan, New York and the cities of Bayonne, Jersey City, and Hoboken, New Jersey, and 4.8 miles would consist of 42-inch-diameter replacement pipeline in the Borough of Staten Island, New York and the city of Linden, New Jersey. Texas Eastern and Algonquin also propose to abandon 8.95 miles of existing 12-, 20-, and 24-inch-diameter pipeline in the City of Linden, New Jersey and the Borough of Staten Island, New York. The applicants also propose to construct and operate six new metering and regulating stations; modify existing compressor stations; and remove, replace, or install launchers and receivers and pipeline valves at several locations along the pipeline. Major issues raised during scoping include safety and the proximity of the pipelines and construction activities to homes, businesses, and public buildings; alternative routing/siting for the proposed facilities; impacts on residents and businesses during construction; impacts on waterbodies, wetlands, and public parklands; and impacts on community infrastructure and water supplies. In addition to the proposed action, this draft EIS addresses a No Action or Postponed Action Alternative, system alternatives, route alternatives, minor route variations, and aboveground facility site alternatives. Texas Eastern and Algonquin propose to begin construction in 2012 and place the project facilities in service by November of 2013. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide Consolidated Edison Companys (Con Edison) customers with access to diverse natural gas supplies from liquefied natural gas and Canadian gas supplies via Algonquins system; access to supplies from the Gulf Coast, Mid-continent, and Rockies through Texas Easterns system; and access to the growing supply of natural gas from the Marcellus Shale Basin via both pipeline systems. The NJ-NY Project would eliminate a critical capacity constraint, enhance customer choice, and provide additional operational flexibility for Texas Eastern, Algonquin, and Con Edison. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would involve a total of 33 waterbody crossings, including the removal of pipe from one waterbody. Nine of the proposed crossings would involve major waterbodies, the largest of which would be the Arthur Kill, Kill Van Kull, and the Hudson River. A total of 25.5 acres of wetlands would be temporarily impacted and 3.8 acres of permanent wetland impacts would occur within the maintained portion of the proposed permanent right-of-way. Essential fish habitat and habitat associated with a variety of migratory bird species could be affected. Multiple areas of known soil contamination would be crossed by the proposed pipeline. One historic property, and possibly two properties that are on or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717 f(c)), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110311, Draft EIS--449 pages, Appendices--593 pages, September 16, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 10 KW - Energy KW - Agency number: FERC/EIS-0241D KW - Dredging KW - Drilling KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Natural Gas KW - Pipelines KW - Rivers KW - Soils KW - Vegetation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arthur Kill KW - Connecticut KW - Hudson River KW - Kill Van Kull KW - New Jersey KW - New York KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Natural Gas Act, Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/905874015?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.title=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Office of Energy Projects, Washington, District of Columbia; FERC N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 16, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. [Part 9 of 36] T2 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. AN - 905874014; 15069-1_0009 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a certificate of public convenience and necessity to construct, operate, and maintain expansions of existing interstate natural gas pipeline systems in New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut is proposed. Texas Eastern Transmission, LP (Texas Eastern) and Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC (Algonquin), both indirect wholly owned subsidiaries of Spectra Energy Corporation, filed an application on December 20, 2010 for the New Jersey - New York Expansion Project (NJ-NY Project) which would involve the construction and operation of approximately 19.8 miles of natural gas pipeline and associated equipment and facilities. Of this total, 15.0 miles would consist of new 30-inch-diameter pipeline in the Boroughs of Staten Island and Manhattan, New York and the cities of Bayonne, Jersey City, and Hoboken, New Jersey, and 4.8 miles would consist of 42-inch-diameter replacement pipeline in the Borough of Staten Island, New York and the city of Linden, New Jersey. Texas Eastern and Algonquin also propose to abandon 8.95 miles of existing 12-, 20-, and 24-inch-diameter pipeline in the City of Linden, New Jersey and the Borough of Staten Island, New York. The applicants also propose to construct and operate six new metering and regulating stations; modify existing compressor stations; and remove, replace, or install launchers and receivers and pipeline valves at several locations along the pipeline. Major issues raised during scoping include safety and the proximity of the pipelines and construction activities to homes, businesses, and public buildings; alternative routing/siting for the proposed facilities; impacts on residents and businesses during construction; impacts on waterbodies, wetlands, and public parklands; and impacts on community infrastructure and water supplies. In addition to the proposed action, this draft EIS addresses a No Action or Postponed Action Alternative, system alternatives, route alternatives, minor route variations, and aboveground facility site alternatives. Texas Eastern and Algonquin propose to begin construction in 2012 and place the project facilities in service by November of 2013. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide Consolidated Edison Companys (Con Edison) customers with access to diverse natural gas supplies from liquefied natural gas and Canadian gas supplies via Algonquins system; access to supplies from the Gulf Coast, Mid-continent, and Rockies through Texas Easterns system; and access to the growing supply of natural gas from the Marcellus Shale Basin via both pipeline systems. The NJ-NY Project would eliminate a critical capacity constraint, enhance customer choice, and provide additional operational flexibility for Texas Eastern, Algonquin, and Con Edison. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would involve a total of 33 waterbody crossings, including the removal of pipe from one waterbody. Nine of the proposed crossings would involve major waterbodies, the largest of which would be the Arthur Kill, Kill Van Kull, and the Hudson River. A total of 25.5 acres of wetlands would be temporarily impacted and 3.8 acres of permanent wetland impacts would occur within the maintained portion of the proposed permanent right-of-way. Essential fish habitat and habitat associated with a variety of migratory bird species could be affected. Multiple areas of known soil contamination would be crossed by the proposed pipeline. One historic property, and possibly two properties that are on or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717 f(c)), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110311, Draft EIS--449 pages, Appendices--593 pages, September 16, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 9 KW - Energy KW - Agency number: FERC/EIS-0241D KW - Dredging KW - Drilling KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Natural Gas KW - Pipelines KW - Rivers KW - Soils KW - Vegetation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arthur Kill KW - Connecticut KW - Hudson River KW - Kill Van Kull KW - New Jersey KW - New York KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Natural Gas Act, Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/905874014?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.title=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Office of Energy Projects, Washington, District of Columbia; FERC N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 16, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. [Part 8 of 36] T2 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. AN - 905874007; 15069-1_0008 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a certificate of public convenience and necessity to construct, operate, and maintain expansions of existing interstate natural gas pipeline systems in New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut is proposed. Texas Eastern Transmission, LP (Texas Eastern) and Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC (Algonquin), both indirect wholly owned subsidiaries of Spectra Energy Corporation, filed an application on December 20, 2010 for the New Jersey - New York Expansion Project (NJ-NY Project) which would involve the construction and operation of approximately 19.8 miles of natural gas pipeline and associated equipment and facilities. Of this total, 15.0 miles would consist of new 30-inch-diameter pipeline in the Boroughs of Staten Island and Manhattan, New York and the cities of Bayonne, Jersey City, and Hoboken, New Jersey, and 4.8 miles would consist of 42-inch-diameter replacement pipeline in the Borough of Staten Island, New York and the city of Linden, New Jersey. Texas Eastern and Algonquin also propose to abandon 8.95 miles of existing 12-, 20-, and 24-inch-diameter pipeline in the City of Linden, New Jersey and the Borough of Staten Island, New York. The applicants also propose to construct and operate six new metering and regulating stations; modify existing compressor stations; and remove, replace, or install launchers and receivers and pipeline valves at several locations along the pipeline. Major issues raised during scoping include safety and the proximity of the pipelines and construction activities to homes, businesses, and public buildings; alternative routing/siting for the proposed facilities; impacts on residents and businesses during construction; impacts on waterbodies, wetlands, and public parklands; and impacts on community infrastructure and water supplies. In addition to the proposed action, this draft EIS addresses a No Action or Postponed Action Alternative, system alternatives, route alternatives, minor route variations, and aboveground facility site alternatives. Texas Eastern and Algonquin propose to begin construction in 2012 and place the project facilities in service by November of 2013. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide Consolidated Edison Companys (Con Edison) customers with access to diverse natural gas supplies from liquefied natural gas and Canadian gas supplies via Algonquins system; access to supplies from the Gulf Coast, Mid-continent, and Rockies through Texas Easterns system; and access to the growing supply of natural gas from the Marcellus Shale Basin via both pipeline systems. The NJ-NY Project would eliminate a critical capacity constraint, enhance customer choice, and provide additional operational flexibility for Texas Eastern, Algonquin, and Con Edison. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would involve a total of 33 waterbody crossings, including the removal of pipe from one waterbody. Nine of the proposed crossings would involve major waterbodies, the largest of which would be the Arthur Kill, Kill Van Kull, and the Hudson River. A total of 25.5 acres of wetlands would be temporarily impacted and 3.8 acres of permanent wetland impacts would occur within the maintained portion of the proposed permanent right-of-way. Essential fish habitat and habitat associated with a variety of migratory bird species could be affected. Multiple areas of known soil contamination would be crossed by the proposed pipeline. One historic property, and possibly two properties that are on or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717 f(c)), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110311, Draft EIS--449 pages, Appendices--593 pages, September 16, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 8 KW - Energy KW - Agency number: FERC/EIS-0241D KW - Dredging KW - Drilling KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Natural Gas KW - Pipelines KW - Rivers KW - Soils KW - Vegetation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arthur Kill KW - Connecticut KW - Hudson River KW - Kill Van Kull KW - New Jersey KW - New York KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Natural Gas Act, Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/905874007?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.title=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Office of Energy Projects, Washington, District of Columbia; FERC N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 16, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. [Part 7 of 36] T2 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. AN - 905874005; 15069-1_0007 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a certificate of public convenience and necessity to construct, operate, and maintain expansions of existing interstate natural gas pipeline systems in New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut is proposed. Texas Eastern Transmission, LP (Texas Eastern) and Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC (Algonquin), both indirect wholly owned subsidiaries of Spectra Energy Corporation, filed an application on December 20, 2010 for the New Jersey - New York Expansion Project (NJ-NY Project) which would involve the construction and operation of approximately 19.8 miles of natural gas pipeline and associated equipment and facilities. Of this total, 15.0 miles would consist of new 30-inch-diameter pipeline in the Boroughs of Staten Island and Manhattan, New York and the cities of Bayonne, Jersey City, and Hoboken, New Jersey, and 4.8 miles would consist of 42-inch-diameter replacement pipeline in the Borough of Staten Island, New York and the city of Linden, New Jersey. Texas Eastern and Algonquin also propose to abandon 8.95 miles of existing 12-, 20-, and 24-inch-diameter pipeline in the City of Linden, New Jersey and the Borough of Staten Island, New York. The applicants also propose to construct and operate six new metering and regulating stations; modify existing compressor stations; and remove, replace, or install launchers and receivers and pipeline valves at several locations along the pipeline. Major issues raised during scoping include safety and the proximity of the pipelines and construction activities to homes, businesses, and public buildings; alternative routing/siting for the proposed facilities; impacts on residents and businesses during construction; impacts on waterbodies, wetlands, and public parklands; and impacts on community infrastructure and water supplies. In addition to the proposed action, this draft EIS addresses a No Action or Postponed Action Alternative, system alternatives, route alternatives, minor route variations, and aboveground facility site alternatives. Texas Eastern and Algonquin propose to begin construction in 2012 and place the project facilities in service by November of 2013. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide Consolidated Edison Companys (Con Edison) customers with access to diverse natural gas supplies from liquefied natural gas and Canadian gas supplies via Algonquins system; access to supplies from the Gulf Coast, Mid-continent, and Rockies through Texas Easterns system; and access to the growing supply of natural gas from the Marcellus Shale Basin via both pipeline systems. The NJ-NY Project would eliminate a critical capacity constraint, enhance customer choice, and provide additional operational flexibility for Texas Eastern, Algonquin, and Con Edison. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would involve a total of 33 waterbody crossings, including the removal of pipe from one waterbody. Nine of the proposed crossings would involve major waterbodies, the largest of which would be the Arthur Kill, Kill Van Kull, and the Hudson River. A total of 25.5 acres of wetlands would be temporarily impacted and 3.8 acres of permanent wetland impacts would occur within the maintained portion of the proposed permanent right-of-way. Essential fish habitat and habitat associated with a variety of migratory bird species could be affected. Multiple areas of known soil contamination would be crossed by the proposed pipeline. One historic property, and possibly two properties that are on or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717 f(c)), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110311, Draft EIS--449 pages, Appendices--593 pages, September 16, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 7 KW - Energy KW - Agency number: FERC/EIS-0241D KW - Dredging KW - Drilling KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Natural Gas KW - Pipelines KW - Rivers KW - Soils KW - Vegetation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arthur Kill KW - Connecticut KW - Hudson River KW - Kill Van Kull KW - New Jersey KW - New York KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Natural Gas Act, Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/905874005?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.title=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Office of Energy Projects, Washington, District of Columbia; FERC N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 16, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. [Part 6 of 36] T2 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. AN - 905874003; 15069-1_0006 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a certificate of public convenience and necessity to construct, operate, and maintain expansions of existing interstate natural gas pipeline systems in New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut is proposed. Texas Eastern Transmission, LP (Texas Eastern) and Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC (Algonquin), both indirect wholly owned subsidiaries of Spectra Energy Corporation, filed an application on December 20, 2010 for the New Jersey - New York Expansion Project (NJ-NY Project) which would involve the construction and operation of approximately 19.8 miles of natural gas pipeline and associated equipment and facilities. Of this total, 15.0 miles would consist of new 30-inch-diameter pipeline in the Boroughs of Staten Island and Manhattan, New York and the cities of Bayonne, Jersey City, and Hoboken, New Jersey, and 4.8 miles would consist of 42-inch-diameter replacement pipeline in the Borough of Staten Island, New York and the city of Linden, New Jersey. Texas Eastern and Algonquin also propose to abandon 8.95 miles of existing 12-, 20-, and 24-inch-diameter pipeline in the City of Linden, New Jersey and the Borough of Staten Island, New York. The applicants also propose to construct and operate six new metering and regulating stations; modify existing compressor stations; and remove, replace, or install launchers and receivers and pipeline valves at several locations along the pipeline. Major issues raised during scoping include safety and the proximity of the pipelines and construction activities to homes, businesses, and public buildings; alternative routing/siting for the proposed facilities; impacts on residents and businesses during construction; impacts on waterbodies, wetlands, and public parklands; and impacts on community infrastructure and water supplies. In addition to the proposed action, this draft EIS addresses a No Action or Postponed Action Alternative, system alternatives, route alternatives, minor route variations, and aboveground facility site alternatives. Texas Eastern and Algonquin propose to begin construction in 2012 and place the project facilities in service by November of 2013. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide Consolidated Edison Companys (Con Edison) customers with access to diverse natural gas supplies from liquefied natural gas and Canadian gas supplies via Algonquins system; access to supplies from the Gulf Coast, Mid-continent, and Rockies through Texas Easterns system; and access to the growing supply of natural gas from the Marcellus Shale Basin via both pipeline systems. The NJ-NY Project would eliminate a critical capacity constraint, enhance customer choice, and provide additional operational flexibility for Texas Eastern, Algonquin, and Con Edison. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would involve a total of 33 waterbody crossings, including the removal of pipe from one waterbody. Nine of the proposed crossings would involve major waterbodies, the largest of which would be the Arthur Kill, Kill Van Kull, and the Hudson River. A total of 25.5 acres of wetlands would be temporarily impacted and 3.8 acres of permanent wetland impacts would occur within the maintained portion of the proposed permanent right-of-way. Essential fish habitat and habitat associated with a variety of migratory bird species could be affected. Multiple areas of known soil contamination would be crossed by the proposed pipeline. One historic property, and possibly two properties that are on or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717 f(c)), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110311, Draft EIS--449 pages, Appendices--593 pages, September 16, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 6 KW - Energy KW - Agency number: FERC/EIS-0241D KW - Dredging KW - Drilling KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Natural Gas KW - Pipelines KW - Rivers KW - Soils KW - Vegetation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arthur Kill KW - Connecticut KW - Hudson River KW - Kill Van Kull KW - New Jersey KW - New York KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Natural Gas Act, Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/905874003?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.title=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Office of Energy Projects, Washington, District of Columbia; FERC N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 16, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. [Part 5 of 36] T2 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. AN - 905873997; 15069-1_0005 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a certificate of public convenience and necessity to construct, operate, and maintain expansions of existing interstate natural gas pipeline systems in New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut is proposed. Texas Eastern Transmission, LP (Texas Eastern) and Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC (Algonquin), both indirect wholly owned subsidiaries of Spectra Energy Corporation, filed an application on December 20, 2010 for the New Jersey - New York Expansion Project (NJ-NY Project) which would involve the construction and operation of approximately 19.8 miles of natural gas pipeline and associated equipment and facilities. Of this total, 15.0 miles would consist of new 30-inch-diameter pipeline in the Boroughs of Staten Island and Manhattan, New York and the cities of Bayonne, Jersey City, and Hoboken, New Jersey, and 4.8 miles would consist of 42-inch-diameter replacement pipeline in the Borough of Staten Island, New York and the city of Linden, New Jersey. Texas Eastern and Algonquin also propose to abandon 8.95 miles of existing 12-, 20-, and 24-inch-diameter pipeline in the City of Linden, New Jersey and the Borough of Staten Island, New York. The applicants also propose to construct and operate six new metering and regulating stations; modify existing compressor stations; and remove, replace, or install launchers and receivers and pipeline valves at several locations along the pipeline. Major issues raised during scoping include safety and the proximity of the pipelines and construction activities to homes, businesses, and public buildings; alternative routing/siting for the proposed facilities; impacts on residents and businesses during construction; impacts on waterbodies, wetlands, and public parklands; and impacts on community infrastructure and water supplies. In addition to the proposed action, this draft EIS addresses a No Action or Postponed Action Alternative, system alternatives, route alternatives, minor route variations, and aboveground facility site alternatives. Texas Eastern and Algonquin propose to begin construction in 2012 and place the project facilities in service by November of 2013. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide Consolidated Edison Companys (Con Edison) customers with access to diverse natural gas supplies from liquefied natural gas and Canadian gas supplies via Algonquins system; access to supplies from the Gulf Coast, Mid-continent, and Rockies through Texas Easterns system; and access to the growing supply of natural gas from the Marcellus Shale Basin via both pipeline systems. The NJ-NY Project would eliminate a critical capacity constraint, enhance customer choice, and provide additional operational flexibility for Texas Eastern, Algonquin, and Con Edison. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would involve a total of 33 waterbody crossings, including the removal of pipe from one waterbody. Nine of the proposed crossings would involve major waterbodies, the largest of which would be the Arthur Kill, Kill Van Kull, and the Hudson River. A total of 25.5 acres of wetlands would be temporarily impacted and 3.8 acres of permanent wetland impacts would occur within the maintained portion of the proposed permanent right-of-way. Essential fish habitat and habitat associated with a variety of migratory bird species could be affected. Multiple areas of known soil contamination would be crossed by the proposed pipeline. One historic property, and possibly two properties that are on or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717 f(c)), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110311, Draft EIS--449 pages, Appendices--593 pages, September 16, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 5 KW - Energy KW - Agency number: FERC/EIS-0241D KW - Dredging KW - Drilling KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Natural Gas KW - Pipelines KW - Rivers KW - Soils KW - Vegetation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arthur Kill KW - Connecticut KW - Hudson River KW - Kill Van Kull KW - New Jersey KW - New York KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Natural Gas Act, Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/905873997?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.title=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Office of Energy Projects, Washington, District of Columbia; FERC N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 16, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. [Part 3 of 36] T2 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. AN - 905873994; 15069-1_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a certificate of public convenience and necessity to construct, operate, and maintain expansions of existing interstate natural gas pipeline systems in New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut is proposed. Texas Eastern Transmission, LP (Texas Eastern) and Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC (Algonquin), both indirect wholly owned subsidiaries of Spectra Energy Corporation, filed an application on December 20, 2010 for the New Jersey - New York Expansion Project (NJ-NY Project) which would involve the construction and operation of approximately 19.8 miles of natural gas pipeline and associated equipment and facilities. Of this total, 15.0 miles would consist of new 30-inch-diameter pipeline in the Boroughs of Staten Island and Manhattan, New York and the cities of Bayonne, Jersey City, and Hoboken, New Jersey, and 4.8 miles would consist of 42-inch-diameter replacement pipeline in the Borough of Staten Island, New York and the city of Linden, New Jersey. Texas Eastern and Algonquin also propose to abandon 8.95 miles of existing 12-, 20-, and 24-inch-diameter pipeline in the City of Linden, New Jersey and the Borough of Staten Island, New York. The applicants also propose to construct and operate six new metering and regulating stations; modify existing compressor stations; and remove, replace, or install launchers and receivers and pipeline valves at several locations along the pipeline. Major issues raised during scoping include safety and the proximity of the pipelines and construction activities to homes, businesses, and public buildings; alternative routing/siting for the proposed facilities; impacts on residents and businesses during construction; impacts on waterbodies, wetlands, and public parklands; and impacts on community infrastructure and water supplies. In addition to the proposed action, this draft EIS addresses a No Action or Postponed Action Alternative, system alternatives, route alternatives, minor route variations, and aboveground facility site alternatives. Texas Eastern and Algonquin propose to begin construction in 2012 and place the project facilities in service by November of 2013. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide Consolidated Edison Companys (Con Edison) customers with access to diverse natural gas supplies from liquefied natural gas and Canadian gas supplies via Algonquins system; access to supplies from the Gulf Coast, Mid-continent, and Rockies through Texas Easterns system; and access to the growing supply of natural gas from the Marcellus Shale Basin via both pipeline systems. The NJ-NY Project would eliminate a critical capacity constraint, enhance customer choice, and provide additional operational flexibility for Texas Eastern, Algonquin, and Con Edison. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would involve a total of 33 waterbody crossings, including the removal of pipe from one waterbody. Nine of the proposed crossings would involve major waterbodies, the largest of which would be the Arthur Kill, Kill Van Kull, and the Hudson River. A total of 25.5 acres of wetlands would be temporarily impacted and 3.8 acres of permanent wetland impacts would occur within the maintained portion of the proposed permanent right-of-way. Essential fish habitat and habitat associated with a variety of migratory bird species could be affected. Multiple areas of known soil contamination would be crossed by the proposed pipeline. One historic property, and possibly two properties that are on or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717 f(c)), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110311, Draft EIS--449 pages, Appendices--593 pages, September 16, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 3 KW - Energy KW - Agency number: FERC/EIS-0241D KW - Dredging KW - Drilling KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Natural Gas KW - Pipelines KW - Rivers KW - Soils KW - Vegetation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arthur Kill KW - Connecticut KW - Hudson River KW - Kill Van Kull KW - New Jersey KW - New York KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Natural Gas Act, Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/905873994?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.title=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Office of Energy Projects, Washington, District of Columbia; FERC N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 16, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. [Part 2 of 36] T2 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. AN - 905873992; 15069-1_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a certificate of public convenience and necessity to construct, operate, and maintain expansions of existing interstate natural gas pipeline systems in New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut is proposed. Texas Eastern Transmission, LP (Texas Eastern) and Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC (Algonquin), both indirect wholly owned subsidiaries of Spectra Energy Corporation, filed an application on December 20, 2010 for the New Jersey - New York Expansion Project (NJ-NY Project) which would involve the construction and operation of approximately 19.8 miles of natural gas pipeline and associated equipment and facilities. Of this total, 15.0 miles would consist of new 30-inch-diameter pipeline in the Boroughs of Staten Island and Manhattan, New York and the cities of Bayonne, Jersey City, and Hoboken, New Jersey, and 4.8 miles would consist of 42-inch-diameter replacement pipeline in the Borough of Staten Island, New York and the city of Linden, New Jersey. Texas Eastern and Algonquin also propose to abandon 8.95 miles of existing 12-, 20-, and 24-inch-diameter pipeline in the City of Linden, New Jersey and the Borough of Staten Island, New York. The applicants also propose to construct and operate six new metering and regulating stations; modify existing compressor stations; and remove, replace, or install launchers and receivers and pipeline valves at several locations along the pipeline. Major issues raised during scoping include safety and the proximity of the pipelines and construction activities to homes, businesses, and public buildings; alternative routing/siting for the proposed facilities; impacts on residents and businesses during construction; impacts on waterbodies, wetlands, and public parklands; and impacts on community infrastructure and water supplies. In addition to the proposed action, this draft EIS addresses a No Action or Postponed Action Alternative, system alternatives, route alternatives, minor route variations, and aboveground facility site alternatives. Texas Eastern and Algonquin propose to begin construction in 2012 and place the project facilities in service by November of 2013. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide Consolidated Edison Companys (Con Edison) customers with access to diverse natural gas supplies from liquefied natural gas and Canadian gas supplies via Algonquins system; access to supplies from the Gulf Coast, Mid-continent, and Rockies through Texas Easterns system; and access to the growing supply of natural gas from the Marcellus Shale Basin via both pipeline systems. The NJ-NY Project would eliminate a critical capacity constraint, enhance customer choice, and provide additional operational flexibility for Texas Eastern, Algonquin, and Con Edison. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would involve a total of 33 waterbody crossings, including the removal of pipe from one waterbody. Nine of the proposed crossings would involve major waterbodies, the largest of which would be the Arthur Kill, Kill Van Kull, and the Hudson River. A total of 25.5 acres of wetlands would be temporarily impacted and 3.8 acres of permanent wetland impacts would occur within the maintained portion of the proposed permanent right-of-way. Essential fish habitat and habitat associated with a variety of migratory bird species could be affected. Multiple areas of known soil contamination would be crossed by the proposed pipeline. One historic property, and possibly two properties that are on or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717 f(c)), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110311, Draft EIS--449 pages, Appendices--593 pages, September 16, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 2 KW - Energy KW - Agency number: FERC/EIS-0241D KW - Dredging KW - Drilling KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Natural Gas KW - Pipelines KW - Rivers KW - Soils KW - Vegetation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arthur Kill KW - Connecticut KW - Hudson River KW - Kill Van Kull KW - New Jersey KW - New York KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Natural Gas Act, Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/905873992?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.title=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Office of Energy Projects, Washington, District of Columbia; FERC N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 16, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. [Part 1 of 36] T2 - NEW JERSEY - NEW YORK EXPANSION PROJECT, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, AND CONNECTICUT. AN - 905873985; 15069-1_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The issuance of a certificate of public convenience and necessity to construct, operate, and maintain expansions of existing interstate natural gas pipeline systems in New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut is proposed. Texas Eastern Transmission, LP (Texas Eastern) and Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC (Algonquin), both indirect wholly owned subsidiaries of Spectra Energy Corporation, filed an application on December 20, 2010 for the New Jersey - New York Expansion Project (NJ-NY Project) which would involve the construction and operation of approximately 19.8 miles of natural gas pipeline and associated equipment and facilities. Of this total, 15.0 miles would consist of new 30-inch-diameter pipeline in the Boroughs of Staten Island and Manhattan, New York and the cities of Bayonne, Jersey City, and Hoboken, New Jersey, and 4.8 miles would consist of 42-inch-diameter replacement pipeline in the Borough of Staten Island, New York and the city of Linden, New Jersey. Texas Eastern and Algonquin also propose to abandon 8.95 miles of existing 12-, 20-, and 24-inch-diameter pipeline in the City of Linden, New Jersey and the Borough of Staten Island, New York. The applicants also propose to construct and operate six new metering and regulating stations; modify existing compressor stations; and remove, replace, or install launchers and receivers and pipeline valves at several locations along the pipeline. Major issues raised during scoping include safety and the proximity of the pipelines and construction activities to homes, businesses, and public buildings; alternative routing/siting for the proposed facilities; impacts on residents and businesses during construction; impacts on waterbodies, wetlands, and public parklands; and impacts on community infrastructure and water supplies. In addition to the proposed action, this draft EIS addresses a No Action or Postponed Action Alternative, system alternatives, route alternatives, minor route variations, and aboveground facility site alternatives. Texas Eastern and Algonquin propose to begin construction in 2012 and place the project facilities in service by November of 2013. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide Consolidated Edison Companys (Con Edison) customers with access to diverse natural gas supplies from liquefied natural gas and Canadian gas supplies via Algonquins system; access to supplies from the Gulf Coast, Mid-continent, and Rockies through Texas Easterns system; and access to the growing supply of natural gas from the Marcellus Shale Basin via both pipeline systems. The NJ-NY Project would eliminate a critical capacity constraint, enhance customer choice, and provide additional operational flexibility for Texas Eastern, Algonquin, and Con Edison. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would involve a total of 33 waterbody crossings, including the removal of pipe from one waterbody. Nine of the proposed crossings would involve major waterbodies, the largest of which would be the Arthur Kill, Kill Van Kull, and the Hudson River. A total of 25.5 acres of wetlands would be temporarily impacted and 3.8 acres of permanent wetland impacts would occur within the maintained portion of the proposed permanent right-of-way. Essential fish habitat and habitat associated with a variety of migratory bird species could be affected. Multiple areas of known soil contamination would be crossed by the proposed pipeline. One historic property, and possibly two properties that are on or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, would be impacted. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717 f(c)), and River and Harbor Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110311, Draft EIS--449 pages, Appendices--593 pages, September 16, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Energy KW - Agency number: FERC/EIS-0241D KW - Dredging KW - Drilling KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Natural Gas KW - Pipelines KW - Rivers KW - Soils KW - Vegetation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Arthur Kill KW - Connecticut KW - Hudson River KW - Kill Van Kull KW - New Jersey KW - New York KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Natural Gas Act, Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity KW - River and Harbor Act of 1899, Section 10 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/905873985?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-16&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.title=NEW+JERSEY+-+NEW+YORK+EXPANSION+PROJECT%2C+NEW+JERSEY%2C+NEW+YORK%2C+AND+CONNECTICUT.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Office of Energy Projects, Washington, District of Columbia; FERC N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 16, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-12 TO BUSH, LOUISIANA PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT, ST. TAMMANY PARISH, LOUISIANA. [Part 14 of 26] T2 - I-12 TO BUSH, LOUISIANA PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT, ST. TAMMANY PARISH, LOUISIANA. AN - 900616433; 15052-4_0014 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of between 17.4 and 21 miles of high-speed, four-lane arterial highway from the southern terminus of the current, four-lane arterial portion of Louisiana Highway (LA) 21 in Bush, Louisiana, to Interstate 12 (I-12) is proposed. The project area for LA 3241 is entirely within St. Tammany Parish and roughly bounded by LA 21, US 190, I-12, US 11, and LA 41. It encompasses approximately 245 square miles in area and includes the incorporated areas of Abita Springs, Pearl River, and portions of the cities of Slidell and Covington. Unincorporated areas such as Bush, Hickory, Talisheek, and Waldheim are included in the project area. LA 21 is a four-lane divided highway between the city of Bogalusa, in Washington Parish, and Bush, in St. Tammany Parish ending at its intersection with LA 41. The proposed I-12 to Bush highway would extend the four-lane section from that point to an existing interchange on I-12 by expanding an existing highway to four lanes or constructing a new alignment with a maximum right-of-way (ROW) width of 250 feet. The majority of the proposed highway would be designed as a rural arterial road with a design speed of 70 miles per hour. The typical cross section would have two 12-foot travel lanes, an eight- to 10-foot outside shoulder, and a four-foot inside shoulder in each direction. The median width would vary depending on highway design class used ranging between 40 and 60 feet. The exception to that design could be as the proposed project transitions into existing roadways and where alternative alignments follow the existing LA 21. Five alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. The Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development's preferred alignment, Alternative P, would begin at the intersection of LA 41 and LA 40 in Bush and proceed southward for 17.4 miles to LA 1088. The majority of the project would have a typical ROW width requirement of 250 feet. The northern 0.7 mile of the project would also have a ROW width of 250 feet. The exception to that design would be at the southern end of the project area where the last 1.5 miles would be designed as a suburban arterial with a ROW width of approximately 180 feet. The proposed route would use an abandoned railroad corridor from Bush to Talisheek, a distance of approximately 2.5 miles, before turning southwesterly for 13.3 miles on a new alignment to connect with LA 1088 north of I-12. Access for this route would be provided in Bush, at LA 435, at LA 36, and at the intersection with LA 1088. Crossings of existing highways would be at grade. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed highway would provide a four-lane highway connection for Washington and northern St. Tammany Parishes to I-12, with the goal of fulfilling regional transportation needs and stimulating economic growth and activity in the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would replace existing land cover with impervious road surfaces and could result in the loss or degradation of fish and wildlife habitat. Under the preferred alternative, 20 acres of pine flatwoods habitat and 358 acres of wetlands within the ROW would be permanently lost; an additional 208 acres of wetlands outside the ROW could be impacted. Channel and overland flow could be impeded resulting in a change in the vegetative complex and increased duration of ponding and drought conditions. The amount of wetlands throughout the study area could be reduced. A noticeable increase in traffic noise would be expected for all receptors within one mile of the proposed control of access highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110294, Draft EIS-316 pages, Appendices--1,049 pages, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 14 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Hydrology KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Louisiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/900616433?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-12+TO+BUSH%2C+LOUISIANA+PROPOSED+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+ST.+TAMMANY+PARISH%2C+LOUISIANA.&rft.title=I-12+TO+BUSH%2C+LOUISIANA+PROPOSED+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+ST.+TAMMANY+PARISH%2C+LOUISIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, New Orleans, Louisiana; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 32 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900616398; 15061-3_0032 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 32 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900616398?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 31 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900616394; 15061-3_0031 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 31 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900616394?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 30 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900616380; 15061-3_0030 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 30 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900616380?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 29 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900616367; 15061-3_0029 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 29 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900616367?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 28 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900616361; 15061-3_0028 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 28 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900616361?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 54 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900616158; 15061-3_0054 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 54 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900616158?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 53 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900616153; 15061-3_0053 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 53 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900616153?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 52 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900616148; 15061-3_0052 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 52 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900616148?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 51 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900616146; 15061-3_0051 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 51 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900616146?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-12 TO BUSH, LOUISIANA PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT, ST. TAMMANY PARISH, LOUISIANA. [Part 20 of 26] T2 - I-12 TO BUSH, LOUISIANA PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT, ST. TAMMANY PARISH, LOUISIANA. AN - 900616109; 15052-4_0020 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of between 17.4 and 21 miles of high-speed, four-lane arterial highway from the southern terminus of the current, four-lane arterial portion of Louisiana Highway (LA) 21 in Bush, Louisiana, to Interstate 12 (I-12) is proposed. The project area for LA 3241 is entirely within St. Tammany Parish and roughly bounded by LA 21, US 190, I-12, US 11, and LA 41. It encompasses approximately 245 square miles in area and includes the incorporated areas of Abita Springs, Pearl River, and portions of the cities of Slidell and Covington. Unincorporated areas such as Bush, Hickory, Talisheek, and Waldheim are included in the project area. LA 21 is a four-lane divided highway between the city of Bogalusa, in Washington Parish, and Bush, in St. Tammany Parish ending at its intersection with LA 41. The proposed I-12 to Bush highway would extend the four-lane section from that point to an existing interchange on I-12 by expanding an existing highway to four lanes or constructing a new alignment with a maximum right-of-way (ROW) width of 250 feet. The majority of the proposed highway would be designed as a rural arterial road with a design speed of 70 miles per hour. The typical cross section would have two 12-foot travel lanes, an eight- to 10-foot outside shoulder, and a four-foot inside shoulder in each direction. The median width would vary depending on highway design class used ranging between 40 and 60 feet. The exception to that design could be as the proposed project transitions into existing roadways and where alternative alignments follow the existing LA 21. Five alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. The Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development's preferred alignment, Alternative P, would begin at the intersection of LA 41 and LA 40 in Bush and proceed southward for 17.4 miles to LA 1088. The majority of the project would have a typical ROW width requirement of 250 feet. The northern 0.7 mile of the project would also have a ROW width of 250 feet. The exception to that design would be at the southern end of the project area where the last 1.5 miles would be designed as a suburban arterial with a ROW width of approximately 180 feet. The proposed route would use an abandoned railroad corridor from Bush to Talisheek, a distance of approximately 2.5 miles, before turning southwesterly for 13.3 miles on a new alignment to connect with LA 1088 north of I-12. Access for this route would be provided in Bush, at LA 435, at LA 36, and at the intersection with LA 1088. Crossings of existing highways would be at grade. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed highway would provide a four-lane highway connection for Washington and northern St. Tammany Parishes to I-12, with the goal of fulfilling regional transportation needs and stimulating economic growth and activity in the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would replace existing land cover with impervious road surfaces and could result in the loss or degradation of fish and wildlife habitat. Under the preferred alternative, 20 acres of pine flatwoods habitat and 358 acres of wetlands within the ROW would be permanently lost; an additional 208 acres of wetlands outside the ROW could be impacted. Channel and overland flow could be impeded resulting in a change in the vegetative complex and increased duration of ponding and drought conditions. The amount of wetlands throughout the study area could be reduced. A noticeable increase in traffic noise would be expected for all receptors within one mile of the proposed control of access highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110294, Draft EIS-316 pages, Appendices--1,049 pages, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 20 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Hydrology KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Louisiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/900616109?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-12+TO+BUSH%2C+LOUISIANA+PROPOSED+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+ST.+TAMMANY+PARISH%2C+LOUISIANA.&rft.title=I-12+TO+BUSH%2C+LOUISIANA+PROPOSED+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+ST.+TAMMANY+PARISH%2C+LOUISIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, New Orleans, Louisiana; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-12 TO BUSH, LOUISIANA PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT, ST. TAMMANY PARISH, LOUISIANA. [Part 19 of 26] T2 - I-12 TO BUSH, LOUISIANA PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT, ST. TAMMANY PARISH, LOUISIANA. AN - 900616106; 15052-4_0019 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of between 17.4 and 21 miles of high-speed, four-lane arterial highway from the southern terminus of the current, four-lane arterial portion of Louisiana Highway (LA) 21 in Bush, Louisiana, to Interstate 12 (I-12) is proposed. The project area for LA 3241 is entirely within St. Tammany Parish and roughly bounded by LA 21, US 190, I-12, US 11, and LA 41. It encompasses approximately 245 square miles in area and includes the incorporated areas of Abita Springs, Pearl River, and portions of the cities of Slidell and Covington. Unincorporated areas such as Bush, Hickory, Talisheek, and Waldheim are included in the project area. LA 21 is a four-lane divided highway between the city of Bogalusa, in Washington Parish, and Bush, in St. Tammany Parish ending at its intersection with LA 41. The proposed I-12 to Bush highway would extend the four-lane section from that point to an existing interchange on I-12 by expanding an existing highway to four lanes or constructing a new alignment with a maximum right-of-way (ROW) width of 250 feet. The majority of the proposed highway would be designed as a rural arterial road with a design speed of 70 miles per hour. The typical cross section would have two 12-foot travel lanes, an eight- to 10-foot outside shoulder, and a four-foot inside shoulder in each direction. The median width would vary depending on highway design class used ranging between 40 and 60 feet. The exception to that design could be as the proposed project transitions into existing roadways and where alternative alignments follow the existing LA 21. Five alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. The Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development's preferred alignment, Alternative P, would begin at the intersection of LA 41 and LA 40 in Bush and proceed southward for 17.4 miles to LA 1088. The majority of the project would have a typical ROW width requirement of 250 feet. The northern 0.7 mile of the project would also have a ROW width of 250 feet. The exception to that design would be at the southern end of the project area where the last 1.5 miles would be designed as a suburban arterial with a ROW width of approximately 180 feet. The proposed route would use an abandoned railroad corridor from Bush to Talisheek, a distance of approximately 2.5 miles, before turning southwesterly for 13.3 miles on a new alignment to connect with LA 1088 north of I-12. Access for this route would be provided in Bush, at LA 435, at LA 36, and at the intersection with LA 1088. Crossings of existing highways would be at grade. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed highway would provide a four-lane highway connection for Washington and northern St. Tammany Parishes to I-12, with the goal of fulfilling regional transportation needs and stimulating economic growth and activity in the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would replace existing land cover with impervious road surfaces and could result in the loss or degradation of fish and wildlife habitat. Under the preferred alternative, 20 acres of pine flatwoods habitat and 358 acres of wetlands within the ROW would be permanently lost; an additional 208 acres of wetlands outside the ROW could be impacted. Channel and overland flow could be impeded resulting in a change in the vegetative complex and increased duration of ponding and drought conditions. The amount of wetlands throughout the study area could be reduced. A noticeable increase in traffic noise would be expected for all receptors within one mile of the proposed control of access highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110294, Draft EIS-316 pages, Appendices--1,049 pages, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 19 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Hydrology KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Louisiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/900616106?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-12+TO+BUSH%2C+LOUISIANA+PROPOSED+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+ST.+TAMMANY+PARISH%2C+LOUISIANA.&rft.title=I-12+TO+BUSH%2C+LOUISIANA+PROPOSED+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+ST.+TAMMANY+PARISH%2C+LOUISIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, New Orleans, Louisiana; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 23 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900616104; 15061-3_0023 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 23 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900616104?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 22 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900616102; 15061-3_0022 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 22 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900616102?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 18 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900616100; 15061-3_0018 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 18 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900616100?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 17 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900616099; 15061-3_0017 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 17 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900616099?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 10 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900616096; 15061-3_0010 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900616096?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 46 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900616080; 15061-3_0046 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 46 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900616080?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 45 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900616075; 15061-3_0045 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 45 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900616075?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 44 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900616066; 15061-3_0044 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 44 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900616066?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 43 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900616059; 15061-3_0043 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 43 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900616059?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 50 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900616000; 15061-3_0050 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 50 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900616000?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 49 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900615994; 15061-3_0049 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 49 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900615994?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 48 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900615992; 15061-3_0048 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 48 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900615992?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 47 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900615990; 15061-3_0047 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 47 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900615990?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 39 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900615982; 15061-3_0039 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 39 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900615982?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 38 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900615980; 15061-3_0038 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 38 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900615980?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 37 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900615976; 15061-3_0037 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 37 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900615976?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 36 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900615972; 15061-3_0036 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 36 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900615972?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 42 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900615934; 15061-3_0042 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 42 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900615934?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 41 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900615932; 15061-3_0041 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 41 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900615932?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 40 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900615923; 15061-3_0040 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 40 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900615923?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 35 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900615922; 15061-3_0035 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 35 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900615922?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 34 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900615919; 15061-3_0034 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 34 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900615919?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 33 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900615917; 15061-3_0033 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 33 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900615917?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-12 TO BUSH, LOUISIANA PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT, ST. TAMMANY PARISH, LOUISIANA. [Part 25 of 26] T2 - I-12 TO BUSH, LOUISIANA PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT, ST. TAMMANY PARISH, LOUISIANA. AN - 900615903; 15052-4_0025 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of between 17.4 and 21 miles of high-speed, four-lane arterial highway from the southern terminus of the current, four-lane arterial portion of Louisiana Highway (LA) 21 in Bush, Louisiana, to Interstate 12 (I-12) is proposed. The project area for LA 3241 is entirely within St. Tammany Parish and roughly bounded by LA 21, US 190, I-12, US 11, and LA 41. It encompasses approximately 245 square miles in area and includes the incorporated areas of Abita Springs, Pearl River, and portions of the cities of Slidell and Covington. Unincorporated areas such as Bush, Hickory, Talisheek, and Waldheim are included in the project area. LA 21 is a four-lane divided highway between the city of Bogalusa, in Washington Parish, and Bush, in St. Tammany Parish ending at its intersection with LA 41. The proposed I-12 to Bush highway would extend the four-lane section from that point to an existing interchange on I-12 by expanding an existing highway to four lanes or constructing a new alignment with a maximum right-of-way (ROW) width of 250 feet. The majority of the proposed highway would be designed as a rural arterial road with a design speed of 70 miles per hour. The typical cross section would have two 12-foot travel lanes, an eight- to 10-foot outside shoulder, and a four-foot inside shoulder in each direction. The median width would vary depending on highway design class used ranging between 40 and 60 feet. The exception to that design could be as the proposed project transitions into existing roadways and where alternative alignments follow the existing LA 21. Five alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. The Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development's preferred alignment, Alternative P, would begin at the intersection of LA 41 and LA 40 in Bush and proceed southward for 17.4 miles to LA 1088. The majority of the project would have a typical ROW width requirement of 250 feet. The northern 0.7 mile of the project would also have a ROW width of 250 feet. The exception to that design would be at the southern end of the project area where the last 1.5 miles would be designed as a suburban arterial with a ROW width of approximately 180 feet. The proposed route would use an abandoned railroad corridor from Bush to Talisheek, a distance of approximately 2.5 miles, before turning southwesterly for 13.3 miles on a new alignment to connect with LA 1088 north of I-12. Access for this route would be provided in Bush, at LA 435, at LA 36, and at the intersection with LA 1088. Crossings of existing highways would be at grade. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed highway would provide a four-lane highway connection for Washington and northern St. Tammany Parishes to I-12, with the goal of fulfilling regional transportation needs and stimulating economic growth and activity in the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would replace existing land cover with impervious road surfaces and could result in the loss or degradation of fish and wildlife habitat. Under the preferred alternative, 20 acres of pine flatwoods habitat and 358 acres of wetlands within the ROW would be permanently lost; an additional 208 acres of wetlands outside the ROW could be impacted. Channel and overland flow could be impeded resulting in a change in the vegetative complex and increased duration of ponding and drought conditions. The amount of wetlands throughout the study area could be reduced. A noticeable increase in traffic noise would be expected for all receptors within one mile of the proposed control of access highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110294, Draft EIS-316 pages, Appendices--1,049 pages, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 25 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Hydrology KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Louisiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/900615903?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-12+TO+BUSH%2C+LOUISIANA+PROPOSED+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+ST.+TAMMANY+PARISH%2C+LOUISIANA.&rft.title=I-12+TO+BUSH%2C+LOUISIANA+PROPOSED+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+ST.+TAMMANY+PARISH%2C+LOUISIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, New Orleans, Louisiana; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 56 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900615902; 15061-3_0056 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 56 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900615902?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 55 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900615900; 15061-3_0055 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 55 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900615900?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 72 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900615899; 15061-3_0072 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 72 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900615899?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 71 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900615898; 15061-3_0071 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 71 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900615898?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 70 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900615897; 15061-3_0070 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 70 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900615897?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 69 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900615896; 15061-3_0069 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 69 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900615896?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 16 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900615895; 15061-3_0016 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 16 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900615895?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 9 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900615893; 15061-3_0009 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 9 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900615893?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 8 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900615891; 15061-3_0008 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900615891?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DICKSON SOUTHWEST BYPASS FROM SR-1 (US 70) WEST OF DICKSON, TO SR-46 AND/OR I-40 SOUTH OF DICKSON, DICKSON COUNTY, TENNESSEE. [Part 1 of 1] T2 - DICKSON SOUTHWEST BYPASS FROM SR-1 (US 70) WEST OF DICKSON, TO SR-46 AND/OR I-40 SOUTH OF DICKSON, DICKSON COUNTY, TENNESSEE. AN - 900615885; 15050-2_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a bypass on new location around the city of Dickson, Tennessee is proposed. The bypass would begin on the west side of Dickson on US 70 and terminate on Interstate 40 (I-40), State Route 46 (SR-46), or both I-40 and SR-46 south of Dickson. Currently, US-70 to SR-46 is the only primary route connecting the western and southern areas of Dickson and travel speeds through the urban center are low. The SR-46/I-40 interchange, which is the primary access point to Dickson from I-40, is expected to reach operational failure in 2023. The next closest interchange linking Dickson to I-40 is approximately 10 miles away. Therefore, an additional access point between Dickson and I-40 is currently under consideration for the project. Five build alternatives, transportation system management improvements to existing SR-46, and a No Build alternative are considered in this draft EIS. The bypass alternatives vary from 6.4 to 11.0 miles in length and all begin on SR-1 (US 70) between South Eno Road and Pond Switch Road. Alternative 1 has a terminus point at the southern end of the project on I-40. Alternatives 2A and 2C terminate on SR-46. Alternative 1 is proposed as a two-lane roadway with future expansion to four lanes with a depressed median. Alternatives 2A and 2C are proposed to have the same typical section as Alternative 1 from SR-1 (US 70) to SR-48. Then from SR-48 to SR-46, a five-lane section is proposed. Two possible combination alternatives, Alternative 1&2A and Alternative 1&2C, would involve construction of a facility with project termini on both SR-46 and I-40 and would increase accessibility to Dicksons airport. Total project costs are estimated at $50.5 to $60.6 million for the non-combination alternatives and $87.7 to $89.8 million for the combination alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The bypass would provide a transportation facility that improves mobility around the city of Dickson, relieves traffic congestion in Dicksons urban core, improves accessibility to undeveloped land west and south of the city, and supports economic development. Construction would be expected to generate 1,000 full- or part-time jobs and $110 to $132 million into the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a bypass alternative would result in impacts to 120 to 165 acres of forested and old field habitats and up to 33 streams. The acquisition of some vacant property and as many as five rural residences would be required. The trend of conversion of farmland to other uses would likely be accelerated, especially near SR-46 and I-40. The bypass alternatives could directly impact two privately owned recreational resources: the Dickson Saddle and Bridle Club and Robins Park. The Dickson County Saddle and Bridle Club would be acquired for right-of-way if Alternative 2A is selected. Some local businesses would see a decrease in opportunity sales due to removal of traffic on SR-46. However, those losses would likely be recovered by an overall stimulation of the local economy. 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). JF - EPA number: 110292, 321 pages and maps, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Land Use KW - Noise KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Tennessee 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/900615885?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DICKSON+SOUTHWEST+BYPASS+FROM+SR-1+%28US+70%29+WEST+OF+DICKSON%2C+TO+SR-46+AND%2FOR+I-40+SOUTH+OF+DICKSON%2C+DICKSON+COUNTY%2C+TENNESSEE.&rft.title=DICKSON+SOUTHWEST+BYPASS+FROM+SR-1+%28US+70%29+WEST+OF+DICKSON%2C+TO+SR-46+AND%2FOR+I-40+SOUTH+OF+DICKSON%2C+DICKSON+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 - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-12 TO BUSH, LOUISIANA PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT, ST. TAMMANY PARISH, LOUISIANA. [Part 23 of 26] T2 - I-12 TO BUSH, LOUISIANA PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT, ST. TAMMANY PARISH, LOUISIANA. AN - 900615856; 15052-4_0023 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of between 17.4 and 21 miles of high-speed, four-lane arterial highway from the southern terminus of the current, four-lane arterial portion of Louisiana Highway (LA) 21 in Bush, Louisiana, to Interstate 12 (I-12) is proposed. The project area for LA 3241 is entirely within St. Tammany Parish and roughly bounded by LA 21, US 190, I-12, US 11, and LA 41. It encompasses approximately 245 square miles in area and includes the incorporated areas of Abita Springs, Pearl River, and portions of the cities of Slidell and Covington. Unincorporated areas such as Bush, Hickory, Talisheek, and Waldheim are included in the project area. LA 21 is a four-lane divided highway between the city of Bogalusa, in Washington Parish, and Bush, in St. Tammany Parish ending at its intersection with LA 41. The proposed I-12 to Bush highway would extend the four-lane section from that point to an existing interchange on I-12 by expanding an existing highway to four lanes or constructing a new alignment with a maximum right-of-way (ROW) width of 250 feet. The majority of the proposed highway would be designed as a rural arterial road with a design speed of 70 miles per hour. The typical cross section would have two 12-foot travel lanes, an eight- to 10-foot outside shoulder, and a four-foot inside shoulder in each direction. The median width would vary depending on highway design class used ranging between 40 and 60 feet. The exception to that design could be as the proposed project transitions into existing roadways and where alternative alignments follow the existing LA 21. Five alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. The Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development's preferred alignment, Alternative P, would begin at the intersection of LA 41 and LA 40 in Bush and proceed southward for 17.4 miles to LA 1088. The majority of the project would have a typical ROW width requirement of 250 feet. The northern 0.7 mile of the project would also have a ROW width of 250 feet. The exception to that design would be at the southern end of the project area where the last 1.5 miles would be designed as a suburban arterial with a ROW width of approximately 180 feet. The proposed route would use an abandoned railroad corridor from Bush to Talisheek, a distance of approximately 2.5 miles, before turning southwesterly for 13.3 miles on a new alignment to connect with LA 1088 north of I-12. Access for this route would be provided in Bush, at LA 435, at LA 36, and at the intersection with LA 1088. Crossings of existing highways would be at grade. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed highway would provide a four-lane highway connection for Washington and northern St. Tammany Parishes to I-12, with the goal of fulfilling regional transportation needs and stimulating economic growth and activity in the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would replace existing land cover with impervious road surfaces and could result in the loss or degradation of fish and wildlife habitat. Under the preferred alternative, 20 acres of pine flatwoods habitat and 358 acres of wetlands within the ROW would be permanently lost; an additional 208 acres of wetlands outside the ROW could be impacted. Channel and overland flow could be impeded resulting in a change in the vegetative complex and increased duration of ponding and drought conditions. The amount of wetlands throughout the study area could be reduced. A noticeable increase in traffic noise would be expected for all receptors within one mile of the proposed control of access highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110294, Draft EIS-316 pages, Appendices--1,049 pages, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 23 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Hydrology KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Louisiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/900615856?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-12+TO+BUSH%2C+LOUISIANA+PROPOSED+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+ST.+TAMMANY+PARISH%2C+LOUISIANA.&rft.title=I-12+TO+BUSH%2C+LOUISIANA+PROPOSED+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+ST.+TAMMANY+PARISH%2C+LOUISIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, New Orleans, Louisiana; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-12 TO BUSH, LOUISIANA PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT, ST. TAMMANY PARISH, LOUISIANA. [Part 21 of 26] T2 - I-12 TO BUSH, LOUISIANA PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT, ST. TAMMANY PARISH, LOUISIANA. AN - 900615851; 15052-4_0021 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of between 17.4 and 21 miles of high-speed, four-lane arterial highway from the southern terminus of the current, four-lane arterial portion of Louisiana Highway (LA) 21 in Bush, Louisiana, to Interstate 12 (I-12) is proposed. The project area for LA 3241 is entirely within St. Tammany Parish and roughly bounded by LA 21, US 190, I-12, US 11, and LA 41. It encompasses approximately 245 square miles in area and includes the incorporated areas of Abita Springs, Pearl River, and portions of the cities of Slidell and Covington. Unincorporated areas such as Bush, Hickory, Talisheek, and Waldheim are included in the project area. LA 21 is a four-lane divided highway between the city of Bogalusa, in Washington Parish, and Bush, in St. Tammany Parish ending at its intersection with LA 41. The proposed I-12 to Bush highway would extend the four-lane section from that point to an existing interchange on I-12 by expanding an existing highway to four lanes or constructing a new alignment with a maximum right-of-way (ROW) width of 250 feet. The majority of the proposed highway would be designed as a rural arterial road with a design speed of 70 miles per hour. The typical cross section would have two 12-foot travel lanes, an eight- to 10-foot outside shoulder, and a four-foot inside shoulder in each direction. The median width would vary depending on highway design class used ranging between 40 and 60 feet. The exception to that design could be as the proposed project transitions into existing roadways and where alternative alignments follow the existing LA 21. Five alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. The Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development's preferred alignment, Alternative P, would begin at the intersection of LA 41 and LA 40 in Bush and proceed southward for 17.4 miles to LA 1088. The majority of the project would have a typical ROW width requirement of 250 feet. The northern 0.7 mile of the project would also have a ROW width of 250 feet. The exception to that design would be at the southern end of the project area where the last 1.5 miles would be designed as a suburban arterial with a ROW width of approximately 180 feet. The proposed route would use an abandoned railroad corridor from Bush to Talisheek, a distance of approximately 2.5 miles, before turning southwesterly for 13.3 miles on a new alignment to connect with LA 1088 north of I-12. Access for this route would be provided in Bush, at LA 435, at LA 36, and at the intersection with LA 1088. Crossings of existing highways would be at grade. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed highway would provide a four-lane highway connection for Washington and northern St. Tammany Parishes to I-12, with the goal of fulfilling regional transportation needs and stimulating economic growth and activity in the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would replace existing land cover with impervious road surfaces and could result in the loss or degradation of fish and wildlife habitat. Under the preferred alternative, 20 acres of pine flatwoods habitat and 358 acres of wetlands within the ROW would be permanently lost; an additional 208 acres of wetlands outside the ROW could be impacted. Channel and overland flow could be impeded resulting in a change in the vegetative complex and increased duration of ponding and drought conditions. The amount of wetlands throughout the study area could be reduced. A noticeable increase in traffic noise would be expected for all receptors within one mile of the proposed control of access highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110294, Draft EIS-316 pages, Appendices--1,049 pages, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 21 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Hydrology KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Louisiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/900615851?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-12+TO+BUSH%2C+LOUISIANA+PROPOSED+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+ST.+TAMMANY+PARISH%2C+LOUISIANA.&rft.title=I-12+TO+BUSH%2C+LOUISIANA+PROPOSED+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+ST.+TAMMANY+PARISH%2C+LOUISIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, New Orleans, Louisiana; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-12 TO BUSH, LOUISIANA PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT, ST. TAMMANY PARISH, LOUISIANA. [Part 7 of 26] T2 - I-12 TO BUSH, LOUISIANA PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT, ST. TAMMANY PARISH, LOUISIANA. AN - 900615849; 15052-4_0007 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of between 17.4 and 21 miles of high-speed, four-lane arterial highway from the southern terminus of the current, four-lane arterial portion of Louisiana Highway (LA) 21 in Bush, Louisiana, to Interstate 12 (I-12) is proposed. The project area for LA 3241 is entirely within St. Tammany Parish and roughly bounded by LA 21, US 190, I-12, US 11, and LA 41. It encompasses approximately 245 square miles in area and includes the incorporated areas of Abita Springs, Pearl River, and portions of the cities of Slidell and Covington. Unincorporated areas such as Bush, Hickory, Talisheek, and Waldheim are included in the project area. LA 21 is a four-lane divided highway between the city of Bogalusa, in Washington Parish, and Bush, in St. Tammany Parish ending at its intersection with LA 41. The proposed I-12 to Bush highway would extend the four-lane section from that point to an existing interchange on I-12 by expanding an existing highway to four lanes or constructing a new alignment with a maximum right-of-way (ROW) width of 250 feet. The majority of the proposed highway would be designed as a rural arterial road with a design speed of 70 miles per hour. The typical cross section would have two 12-foot travel lanes, an eight- to 10-foot outside shoulder, and a four-foot inside shoulder in each direction. The median width would vary depending on highway design class used ranging between 40 and 60 feet. The exception to that design could be as the proposed project transitions into existing roadways and where alternative alignments follow the existing LA 21. Five alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. The Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development's preferred alignment, Alternative P, would begin at the intersection of LA 41 and LA 40 in Bush and proceed southward for 17.4 miles to LA 1088. The majority of the project would have a typical ROW width requirement of 250 feet. The northern 0.7 mile of the project would also have a ROW width of 250 feet. The exception to that design would be at the southern end of the project area where the last 1.5 miles would be designed as a suburban arterial with a ROW width of approximately 180 feet. The proposed route would use an abandoned railroad corridor from Bush to Talisheek, a distance of approximately 2.5 miles, before turning southwesterly for 13.3 miles on a new alignment to connect with LA 1088 north of I-12. Access for this route would be provided in Bush, at LA 435, at LA 36, and at the intersection with LA 1088. Crossings of existing highways would be at grade. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed highway would provide a four-lane highway connection for Washington and northern St. Tammany Parishes to I-12, with the goal of fulfilling regional transportation needs and stimulating economic growth and activity in the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would replace existing land cover with impervious road surfaces and could result in the loss or degradation of fish and wildlife habitat. Under the preferred alternative, 20 acres of pine flatwoods habitat and 358 acres of wetlands within the ROW would be permanently lost; an additional 208 acres of wetlands outside the ROW could be impacted. Channel and overland flow could be impeded resulting in a change in the vegetative complex and increased duration of ponding and drought conditions. The amount of wetlands throughout the study area could be reduced. A noticeable increase in traffic noise would be expected for all receptors within one mile of the proposed control of access highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110294, Draft EIS-316 pages, Appendices--1,049 pages, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Hydrology KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Louisiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/900615849?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-12+TO+BUSH%2C+LOUISIANA+PROPOSED+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+ST.+TAMMANY+PARISH%2C+LOUISIANA.&rft.title=I-12+TO+BUSH%2C+LOUISIANA+PROPOSED+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+ST.+TAMMANY+PARISH%2C+LOUISIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, New Orleans, Louisiana; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 25 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900615846; 15061-3_0025 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 25 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900615846?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 24 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900615843; 15061-3_0024 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 24 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900615843?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-12 TO BUSH, LOUISIANA PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT, ST. TAMMANY PARISH, LOUISIANA. [Part 6 of 26] T2 - I-12 TO BUSH, LOUISIANA PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT, ST. TAMMANY PARISH, LOUISIANA. AN - 900615700; 15052-4_0006 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of between 17.4 and 21 miles of high-speed, four-lane arterial highway from the southern terminus of the current, four-lane arterial portion of Louisiana Highway (LA) 21 in Bush, Louisiana, to Interstate 12 (I-12) is proposed. The project area for LA 3241 is entirely within St. Tammany Parish and roughly bounded by LA 21, US 190, I-12, US 11, and LA 41. It encompasses approximately 245 square miles in area and includes the incorporated areas of Abita Springs, Pearl River, and portions of the cities of Slidell and Covington. Unincorporated areas such as Bush, Hickory, Talisheek, and Waldheim are included in the project area. LA 21 is a four-lane divided highway between the city of Bogalusa, in Washington Parish, and Bush, in St. Tammany Parish ending at its intersection with LA 41. The proposed I-12 to Bush highway would extend the four-lane section from that point to an existing interchange on I-12 by expanding an existing highway to four lanes or constructing a new alignment with a maximum right-of-way (ROW) width of 250 feet. The majority of the proposed highway would be designed as a rural arterial road with a design speed of 70 miles per hour. The typical cross section would have two 12-foot travel lanes, an eight- to 10-foot outside shoulder, and a four-foot inside shoulder in each direction. The median width would vary depending on highway design class used ranging between 40 and 60 feet. The exception to that design could be as the proposed project transitions into existing roadways and where alternative alignments follow the existing LA 21. Five alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. The Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development's preferred alignment, Alternative P, would begin at the intersection of LA 41 and LA 40 in Bush and proceed southward for 17.4 miles to LA 1088. The majority of the project would have a typical ROW width requirement of 250 feet. The northern 0.7 mile of the project would also have a ROW width of 250 feet. The exception to that design would be at the southern end of the project area where the last 1.5 miles would be designed as a suburban arterial with a ROW width of approximately 180 feet. The proposed route would use an abandoned railroad corridor from Bush to Talisheek, a distance of approximately 2.5 miles, before turning southwesterly for 13.3 miles on a new alignment to connect with LA 1088 north of I-12. Access for this route would be provided in Bush, at LA 435, at LA 36, and at the intersection with LA 1088. Crossings of existing highways would be at grade. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed highway would provide a four-lane highway connection for Washington and northern St. Tammany Parishes to I-12, with the goal of fulfilling regional transportation needs and stimulating economic growth and activity in the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would replace existing land cover with impervious road surfaces and could result in the loss or degradation of fish and wildlife habitat. Under the preferred alternative, 20 acres of pine flatwoods habitat and 358 acres of wetlands within the ROW would be permanently lost; an additional 208 acres of wetlands outside the ROW could be impacted. Channel and overland flow could be impeded resulting in a change in the vegetative complex and increased duration of ponding and drought conditions. The amount of wetlands throughout the study area could be reduced. A noticeable increase in traffic noise would be expected for all receptors within one mile of the proposed control of access highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110294, Draft EIS-316 pages, Appendices--1,049 pages, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Hydrology KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Louisiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/900615700?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-12+TO+BUSH%2C+LOUISIANA+PROPOSED+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+ST.+TAMMANY+PARISH%2C+LOUISIANA.&rft.title=I-12+TO+BUSH%2C+LOUISIANA+PROPOSED+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+ST.+TAMMANY+PARISH%2C+LOUISIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, New Orleans, Louisiana; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-12 TO BUSH, LOUISIANA PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT, ST. TAMMANY PARISH, LOUISIANA. [Part 18 of 26] T2 - I-12 TO BUSH, LOUISIANA PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT, ST. TAMMANY PARISH, LOUISIANA. AN - 900615696; 15052-4_0018 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of between 17.4 and 21 miles of high-speed, four-lane arterial highway from the southern terminus of the current, four-lane arterial portion of Louisiana Highway (LA) 21 in Bush, Louisiana, to Interstate 12 (I-12) is proposed. The project area for LA 3241 is entirely within St. Tammany Parish and roughly bounded by LA 21, US 190, I-12, US 11, and LA 41. It encompasses approximately 245 square miles in area and includes the incorporated areas of Abita Springs, Pearl River, and portions of the cities of Slidell and Covington. Unincorporated areas such as Bush, Hickory, Talisheek, and Waldheim are included in the project area. LA 21 is a four-lane divided highway between the city of Bogalusa, in Washington Parish, and Bush, in St. Tammany Parish ending at its intersection with LA 41. The proposed I-12 to Bush highway would extend the four-lane section from that point to an existing interchange on I-12 by expanding an existing highway to four lanes or constructing a new alignment with a maximum right-of-way (ROW) width of 250 feet. The majority of the proposed highway would be designed as a rural arterial road with a design speed of 70 miles per hour. The typical cross section would have two 12-foot travel lanes, an eight- to 10-foot outside shoulder, and a four-foot inside shoulder in each direction. The median width would vary depending on highway design class used ranging between 40 and 60 feet. The exception to that design could be as the proposed project transitions into existing roadways and where alternative alignments follow the existing LA 21. Five alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. The Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development's preferred alignment, Alternative P, would begin at the intersection of LA 41 and LA 40 in Bush and proceed southward for 17.4 miles to LA 1088. The majority of the project would have a typical ROW width requirement of 250 feet. The northern 0.7 mile of the project would also have a ROW width of 250 feet. The exception to that design would be at the southern end of the project area where the last 1.5 miles would be designed as a suburban arterial with a ROW width of approximately 180 feet. The proposed route would use an abandoned railroad corridor from Bush to Talisheek, a distance of approximately 2.5 miles, before turning southwesterly for 13.3 miles on a new alignment to connect with LA 1088 north of I-12. Access for this route would be provided in Bush, at LA 435, at LA 36, and at the intersection with LA 1088. Crossings of existing highways would be at grade. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed highway would provide a four-lane highway connection for Washington and northern St. Tammany Parishes to I-12, with the goal of fulfilling regional transportation needs and stimulating economic growth and activity in the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would replace existing land cover with impervious road surfaces and could result in the loss or degradation of fish and wildlife habitat. Under the preferred alternative, 20 acres of pine flatwoods habitat and 358 acres of wetlands within the ROW would be permanently lost; an additional 208 acres of wetlands outside the ROW could be impacted. Channel and overland flow could be impeded resulting in a change in the vegetative complex and increased duration of ponding and drought conditions. The amount of wetlands throughout the study area could be reduced. A noticeable increase in traffic noise would be expected for all receptors within one mile of the proposed control of access highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110294, Draft EIS-316 pages, Appendices--1,049 pages, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 18 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Hydrology KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Louisiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/900615696?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-12+TO+BUSH%2C+LOUISIANA+PROPOSED+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+ST.+TAMMANY+PARISH%2C+LOUISIANA.&rft.title=I-12+TO+BUSH%2C+LOUISIANA+PROPOSED+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+ST.+TAMMANY+PARISH%2C+LOUISIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, New Orleans, Louisiana; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-12 TO BUSH, LOUISIANA PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT, ST. TAMMANY PARISH, LOUISIANA. [Part 5 of 26] T2 - I-12 TO BUSH, LOUISIANA PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT, ST. TAMMANY PARISH, LOUISIANA. AN - 900615694; 15052-4_0005 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of between 17.4 and 21 miles of high-speed, four-lane arterial highway from the southern terminus of the current, four-lane arterial portion of Louisiana Highway (LA) 21 in Bush, Louisiana, to Interstate 12 (I-12) is proposed. The project area for LA 3241 is entirely within St. Tammany Parish and roughly bounded by LA 21, US 190, I-12, US 11, and LA 41. It encompasses approximately 245 square miles in area and includes the incorporated areas of Abita Springs, Pearl River, and portions of the cities of Slidell and Covington. Unincorporated areas such as Bush, Hickory, Talisheek, and Waldheim are included in the project area. LA 21 is a four-lane divided highway between the city of Bogalusa, in Washington Parish, and Bush, in St. Tammany Parish ending at its intersection with LA 41. The proposed I-12 to Bush highway would extend the four-lane section from that point to an existing interchange on I-12 by expanding an existing highway to four lanes or constructing a new alignment with a maximum right-of-way (ROW) width of 250 feet. The majority of the proposed highway would be designed as a rural arterial road with a design speed of 70 miles per hour. The typical cross section would have two 12-foot travel lanes, an eight- to 10-foot outside shoulder, and a four-foot inside shoulder in each direction. The median width would vary depending on highway design class used ranging between 40 and 60 feet. The exception to that design could be as the proposed project transitions into existing roadways and where alternative alignments follow the existing LA 21. Five alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. The Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development's preferred alignment, Alternative P, would begin at the intersection of LA 41 and LA 40 in Bush and proceed southward for 17.4 miles to LA 1088. The majority of the project would have a typical ROW width requirement of 250 feet. The northern 0.7 mile of the project would also have a ROW width of 250 feet. The exception to that design would be at the southern end of the project area where the last 1.5 miles would be designed as a suburban arterial with a ROW width of approximately 180 feet. The proposed route would use an abandoned railroad corridor from Bush to Talisheek, a distance of approximately 2.5 miles, before turning southwesterly for 13.3 miles on a new alignment to connect with LA 1088 north of I-12. Access for this route would be provided in Bush, at LA 435, at LA 36, and at the intersection with LA 1088. Crossings of existing highways would be at grade. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed highway would provide a four-lane highway connection for Washington and northern St. Tammany Parishes to I-12, with the goal of fulfilling regional transportation needs and stimulating economic growth and activity in the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would replace existing land cover with impervious road surfaces and could result in the loss or degradation of fish and wildlife habitat. Under the preferred alternative, 20 acres of pine flatwoods habitat and 358 acres of wetlands within the ROW would be permanently lost; an additional 208 acres of wetlands outside the ROW could be impacted. Channel and overland flow could be impeded resulting in a change in the vegetative complex and increased duration of ponding and drought conditions. The amount of wetlands throughout the study area could be reduced. A noticeable increase in traffic noise would be expected for all receptors within one mile of the proposed control of access highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110294, Draft EIS-316 pages, Appendices--1,049 pages, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Hydrology KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Louisiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/900615694?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-12+TO+BUSH%2C+LOUISIANA+PROPOSED+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+ST.+TAMMANY+PARISH%2C+LOUISIANA.&rft.title=I-12+TO+BUSH%2C+LOUISIANA+PROPOSED+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+ST.+TAMMANY+PARISH%2C+LOUISIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, New Orleans, Louisiana; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-12 TO BUSH, LOUISIANA PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT, ST. TAMMANY PARISH, LOUISIANA. [Part 17 of 26] T2 - I-12 TO BUSH, LOUISIANA PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT, ST. TAMMANY PARISH, LOUISIANA. AN - 900615691; 15052-4_0017 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of between 17.4 and 21 miles of high-speed, four-lane arterial highway from the southern terminus of the current, four-lane arterial portion of Louisiana Highway (LA) 21 in Bush, Louisiana, to Interstate 12 (I-12) is proposed. The project area for LA 3241 is entirely within St. Tammany Parish and roughly bounded by LA 21, US 190, I-12, US 11, and LA 41. It encompasses approximately 245 square miles in area and includes the incorporated areas of Abita Springs, Pearl River, and portions of the cities of Slidell and Covington. Unincorporated areas such as Bush, Hickory, Talisheek, and Waldheim are included in the project area. LA 21 is a four-lane divided highway between the city of Bogalusa, in Washington Parish, and Bush, in St. Tammany Parish ending at its intersection with LA 41. The proposed I-12 to Bush highway would extend the four-lane section from that point to an existing interchange on I-12 by expanding an existing highway to four lanes or constructing a new alignment with a maximum right-of-way (ROW) width of 250 feet. The majority of the proposed highway would be designed as a rural arterial road with a design speed of 70 miles per hour. The typical cross section would have two 12-foot travel lanes, an eight- to 10-foot outside shoulder, and a four-foot inside shoulder in each direction. The median width would vary depending on highway design class used ranging between 40 and 60 feet. The exception to that design could be as the proposed project transitions into existing roadways and where alternative alignments follow the existing LA 21. Five alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. The Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development's preferred alignment, Alternative P, would begin at the intersection of LA 41 and LA 40 in Bush and proceed southward for 17.4 miles to LA 1088. The majority of the project would have a typical ROW width requirement of 250 feet. The northern 0.7 mile of the project would also have a ROW width of 250 feet. The exception to that design would be at the southern end of the project area where the last 1.5 miles would be designed as a suburban arterial with a ROW width of approximately 180 feet. The proposed route would use an abandoned railroad corridor from Bush to Talisheek, a distance of approximately 2.5 miles, before turning southwesterly for 13.3 miles on a new alignment to connect with LA 1088 north of I-12. Access for this route would be provided in Bush, at LA 435, at LA 36, and at the intersection with LA 1088. Crossings of existing highways would be at grade. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed highway would provide a four-lane highway connection for Washington and northern St. Tammany Parishes to I-12, with the goal of fulfilling regional transportation needs and stimulating economic growth and activity in the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would replace existing land cover with impervious road surfaces and could result in the loss or degradation of fish and wildlife habitat. Under the preferred alternative, 20 acres of pine flatwoods habitat and 358 acres of wetlands within the ROW would be permanently lost; an additional 208 acres of wetlands outside the ROW could be impacted. Channel and overland flow could be impeded resulting in a change in the vegetative complex and increased duration of ponding and drought conditions. The amount of wetlands throughout the study area could be reduced. A noticeable increase in traffic noise would be expected for all receptors within one mile of the proposed control of access highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110294, Draft EIS-316 pages, Appendices--1,049 pages, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 17 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Hydrology KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Louisiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/900615691?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-12+TO+BUSH%2C+LOUISIANA+PROPOSED+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+ST.+TAMMANY+PARISH%2C+LOUISIANA.&rft.title=I-12+TO+BUSH%2C+LOUISIANA+PROPOSED+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+ST.+TAMMANY+PARISH%2C+LOUISIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, New Orleans, Louisiana; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-12 TO BUSH, LOUISIANA PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT, ST. TAMMANY PARISH, LOUISIANA. [Part 3 of 26] T2 - I-12 TO BUSH, LOUISIANA PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT, ST. TAMMANY PARISH, LOUISIANA. AN - 900615684; 15052-4_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of between 17.4 and 21 miles of high-speed, four-lane arterial highway from the southern terminus of the current, four-lane arterial portion of Louisiana Highway (LA) 21 in Bush, Louisiana, to Interstate 12 (I-12) is proposed. The project area for LA 3241 is entirely within St. Tammany Parish and roughly bounded by LA 21, US 190, I-12, US 11, and LA 41. It encompasses approximately 245 square miles in area and includes the incorporated areas of Abita Springs, Pearl River, and portions of the cities of Slidell and Covington. Unincorporated areas such as Bush, Hickory, Talisheek, and Waldheim are included in the project area. LA 21 is a four-lane divided highway between the city of Bogalusa, in Washington Parish, and Bush, in St. Tammany Parish ending at its intersection with LA 41. The proposed I-12 to Bush highway would extend the four-lane section from that point to an existing interchange on I-12 by expanding an existing highway to four lanes or constructing a new alignment with a maximum right-of-way (ROW) width of 250 feet. The majority of the proposed highway would be designed as a rural arterial road with a design speed of 70 miles per hour. The typical cross section would have two 12-foot travel lanes, an eight- to 10-foot outside shoulder, and a four-foot inside shoulder in each direction. The median width would vary depending on highway design class used ranging between 40 and 60 feet. The exception to that design could be as the proposed project transitions into existing roadways and where alternative alignments follow the existing LA 21. Five alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. The Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development's preferred alignment, Alternative P, would begin at the intersection of LA 41 and LA 40 in Bush and proceed southward for 17.4 miles to LA 1088. The majority of the project would have a typical ROW width requirement of 250 feet. The northern 0.7 mile of the project would also have a ROW width of 250 feet. The exception to that design would be at the southern end of the project area where the last 1.5 miles would be designed as a suburban arterial with a ROW width of approximately 180 feet. The proposed route would use an abandoned railroad corridor from Bush to Talisheek, a distance of approximately 2.5 miles, before turning southwesterly for 13.3 miles on a new alignment to connect with LA 1088 north of I-12. Access for this route would be provided in Bush, at LA 435, at LA 36, and at the intersection with LA 1088. Crossings of existing highways would be at grade. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed highway would provide a four-lane highway connection for Washington and northern St. Tammany Parishes to I-12, with the goal of fulfilling regional transportation needs and stimulating economic growth and activity in the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would replace existing land cover with impervious road surfaces and could result in the loss or degradation of fish and wildlife habitat. Under the preferred alternative, 20 acres of pine flatwoods habitat and 358 acres of wetlands within the ROW would be permanently lost; an additional 208 acres of wetlands outside the ROW could be impacted. Channel and overland flow could be impeded resulting in a change in the vegetative complex and increased duration of ponding and drought conditions. The amount of wetlands throughout the study area could be reduced. A noticeable increase in traffic noise would be expected for all receptors within one mile of the proposed control of access highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110294, Draft EIS-316 pages, Appendices--1,049 pages, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Hydrology KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Louisiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/900615684?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-12+TO+BUSH%2C+LOUISIANA+PROPOSED+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+ST.+TAMMANY+PARISH%2C+LOUISIANA.&rft.title=I-12+TO+BUSH%2C+LOUISIANA+PROPOSED+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+ST.+TAMMANY+PARISH%2C+LOUISIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, New Orleans, Louisiana; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-12 TO BUSH, LOUISIANA PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT, ST. TAMMANY PARISH, LOUISIANA. [Part 2 of 26] T2 - I-12 TO BUSH, LOUISIANA PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT, ST. TAMMANY PARISH, LOUISIANA. AN - 900615681; 15052-4_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of between 17.4 and 21 miles of high-speed, four-lane arterial highway from the southern terminus of the current, four-lane arterial portion of Louisiana Highway (LA) 21 in Bush, Louisiana, to Interstate 12 (I-12) is proposed. The project area for LA 3241 is entirely within St. Tammany Parish and roughly bounded by LA 21, US 190, I-12, US 11, and LA 41. It encompasses approximately 245 square miles in area and includes the incorporated areas of Abita Springs, Pearl River, and portions of the cities of Slidell and Covington. Unincorporated areas such as Bush, Hickory, Talisheek, and Waldheim are included in the project area. LA 21 is a four-lane divided highway between the city of Bogalusa, in Washington Parish, and Bush, in St. Tammany Parish ending at its intersection with LA 41. The proposed I-12 to Bush highway would extend the four-lane section from that point to an existing interchange on I-12 by expanding an existing highway to four lanes or constructing a new alignment with a maximum right-of-way (ROW) width of 250 feet. The majority of the proposed highway would be designed as a rural arterial road with a design speed of 70 miles per hour. The typical cross section would have two 12-foot travel lanes, an eight- to 10-foot outside shoulder, and a four-foot inside shoulder in each direction. The median width would vary depending on highway design class used ranging between 40 and 60 feet. The exception to that design could be as the proposed project transitions into existing roadways and where alternative alignments follow the existing LA 21. Five alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. The Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development's preferred alignment, Alternative P, would begin at the intersection of LA 41 and LA 40 in Bush and proceed southward for 17.4 miles to LA 1088. The majority of the project would have a typical ROW width requirement of 250 feet. The northern 0.7 mile of the project would also have a ROW width of 250 feet. The exception to that design would be at the southern end of the project area where the last 1.5 miles would be designed as a suburban arterial with a ROW width of approximately 180 feet. The proposed route would use an abandoned railroad corridor from Bush to Talisheek, a distance of approximately 2.5 miles, before turning southwesterly for 13.3 miles on a new alignment to connect with LA 1088 north of I-12. Access for this route would be provided in Bush, at LA 435, at LA 36, and at the intersection with LA 1088. Crossings of existing highways would be at grade. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed highway would provide a four-lane highway connection for Washington and northern St. Tammany Parishes to I-12, with the goal of fulfilling regional transportation needs and stimulating economic growth and activity in the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would replace existing land cover with impervious road surfaces and could result in the loss or degradation of fish and wildlife habitat. Under the preferred alternative, 20 acres of pine flatwoods habitat and 358 acres of wetlands within the ROW would be permanently lost; an additional 208 acres of wetlands outside the ROW could be impacted. Channel and overland flow could be impeded resulting in a change in the vegetative complex and increased duration of ponding and drought conditions. The amount of wetlands throughout the study area could be reduced. A noticeable increase in traffic noise would be expected for all receptors within one mile of the proposed control of access highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110294, Draft EIS-316 pages, Appendices--1,049 pages, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Hydrology KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Louisiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/900615681?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-12+TO+BUSH%2C+LOUISIANA+PROPOSED+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+ST.+TAMMANY+PARISH%2C+LOUISIANA.&rft.title=I-12+TO+BUSH%2C+LOUISIANA+PROPOSED+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+ST.+TAMMANY+PARISH%2C+LOUISIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, New Orleans, Louisiana; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 21 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900615678; 15061-3_0021 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 21 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900615678?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-12 TO BUSH, LOUISIANA PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT, ST. TAMMANY PARISH, LOUISIANA. [Part 1 of 26] T2 - I-12 TO BUSH, LOUISIANA PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT, ST. TAMMANY PARISH, LOUISIANA. AN - 900615677; 15052-4_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of between 17.4 and 21 miles of high-speed, four-lane arterial highway from the southern terminus of the current, four-lane arterial portion of Louisiana Highway (LA) 21 in Bush, Louisiana, to Interstate 12 (I-12) is proposed. The project area for LA 3241 is entirely within St. Tammany Parish and roughly bounded by LA 21, US 190, I-12, US 11, and LA 41. It encompasses approximately 245 square miles in area and includes the incorporated areas of Abita Springs, Pearl River, and portions of the cities of Slidell and Covington. Unincorporated areas such as Bush, Hickory, Talisheek, and Waldheim are included in the project area. LA 21 is a four-lane divided highway between the city of Bogalusa, in Washington Parish, and Bush, in St. Tammany Parish ending at its intersection with LA 41. The proposed I-12 to Bush highway would extend the four-lane section from that point to an existing interchange on I-12 by expanding an existing highway to four lanes or constructing a new alignment with a maximum right-of-way (ROW) width of 250 feet. The majority of the proposed highway would be designed as a rural arterial road with a design speed of 70 miles per hour. The typical cross section would have two 12-foot travel lanes, an eight- to 10-foot outside shoulder, and a four-foot inside shoulder in each direction. The median width would vary depending on highway design class used ranging between 40 and 60 feet. The exception to that design could be as the proposed project transitions into existing roadways and where alternative alignments follow the existing LA 21. Five alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. The Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development's preferred alignment, Alternative P, would begin at the intersection of LA 41 and LA 40 in Bush and proceed southward for 17.4 miles to LA 1088. The majority of the project would have a typical ROW width requirement of 250 feet. The northern 0.7 mile of the project would also have a ROW width of 250 feet. The exception to that design would be at the southern end of the project area where the last 1.5 miles would be designed as a suburban arterial with a ROW width of approximately 180 feet. The proposed route would use an abandoned railroad corridor from Bush to Talisheek, a distance of approximately 2.5 miles, before turning southwesterly for 13.3 miles on a new alignment to connect with LA 1088 north of I-12. Access for this route would be provided in Bush, at LA 435, at LA 36, and at the intersection with LA 1088. Crossings of existing highways would be at grade. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed highway would provide a four-lane highway connection for Washington and northern St. Tammany Parishes to I-12, with the goal of fulfilling regional transportation needs and stimulating economic growth and activity in the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would replace existing land cover with impervious road surfaces and could result in the loss or degradation of fish and wildlife habitat. Under the preferred alternative, 20 acres of pine flatwoods habitat and 358 acres of wetlands within the ROW would be permanently lost; an additional 208 acres of wetlands outside the ROW could be impacted. Channel and overland flow could be impeded resulting in a change in the vegetative complex and increased duration of ponding and drought conditions. The amount of wetlands throughout the study area could be reduced. A noticeable increase in traffic noise would be expected for all receptors within one mile of the proposed control of access highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110294, Draft EIS-316 pages, Appendices--1,049 pages, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Hydrology KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Louisiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/900615677?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-12+TO+BUSH%2C+LOUISIANA+PROPOSED+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+ST.+TAMMANY+PARISH%2C+LOUISIANA.&rft.title=I-12+TO+BUSH%2C+LOUISIANA+PROPOSED+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+ST.+TAMMANY+PARISH%2C+LOUISIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, New Orleans, Louisiana; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 20 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900615667; 15061-3_0020 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 20 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900615667?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 82 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900615659; 15061-3_0082 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 82 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900615659?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 81 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900615651; 15061-3_0081 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 81 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900615651?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 12 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900615639; 15061-3_0012 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 12 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900615639?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 11 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900615632; 15061-3_0011 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 11 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900615632?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 3 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900615618; 15061-3_0003 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900615618?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-12 TO BUSH, LOUISIANA PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT, ST. TAMMANY PARISH, LOUISIANA. [Part 12 of 26] T2 - I-12 TO BUSH, LOUISIANA PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT, ST. TAMMANY PARISH, LOUISIANA. AN - 900615616; 15052-4_0012 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of between 17.4 and 21 miles of high-speed, four-lane arterial highway from the southern terminus of the current, four-lane arterial portion of Louisiana Highway (LA) 21 in Bush, Louisiana, to Interstate 12 (I-12) is proposed. The project area for LA 3241 is entirely within St. Tammany Parish and roughly bounded by LA 21, US 190, I-12, US 11, and LA 41. It encompasses approximately 245 square miles in area and includes the incorporated areas of Abita Springs, Pearl River, and portions of the cities of Slidell and Covington. Unincorporated areas such as Bush, Hickory, Talisheek, and Waldheim are included in the project area. LA 21 is a four-lane divided highway between the city of Bogalusa, in Washington Parish, and Bush, in St. Tammany Parish ending at its intersection with LA 41. The proposed I-12 to Bush highway would extend the four-lane section from that point to an existing interchange on I-12 by expanding an existing highway to four lanes or constructing a new alignment with a maximum right-of-way (ROW) width of 250 feet. The majority of the proposed highway would be designed as a rural arterial road with a design speed of 70 miles per hour. The typical cross section would have two 12-foot travel lanes, an eight- to 10-foot outside shoulder, and a four-foot inside shoulder in each direction. The median width would vary depending on highway design class used ranging between 40 and 60 feet. The exception to that design could be as the proposed project transitions into existing roadways and where alternative alignments follow the existing LA 21. Five alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. The Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development's preferred alignment, Alternative P, would begin at the intersection of LA 41 and LA 40 in Bush and proceed southward for 17.4 miles to LA 1088. The majority of the project would have a typical ROW width requirement of 250 feet. The northern 0.7 mile of the project would also have a ROW width of 250 feet. The exception to that design would be at the southern end of the project area where the last 1.5 miles would be designed as a suburban arterial with a ROW width of approximately 180 feet. The proposed route would use an abandoned railroad corridor from Bush to Talisheek, a distance of approximately 2.5 miles, before turning southwesterly for 13.3 miles on a new alignment to connect with LA 1088 north of I-12. Access for this route would be provided in Bush, at LA 435, at LA 36, and at the intersection with LA 1088. Crossings of existing highways would be at grade. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed highway would provide a four-lane highway connection for Washington and northern St. Tammany Parishes to I-12, with the goal of fulfilling regional transportation needs and stimulating economic growth and activity in the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would replace existing land cover with impervious road surfaces and could result in the loss or degradation of fish and wildlife habitat. Under the preferred alternative, 20 acres of pine flatwoods habitat and 358 acres of wetlands within the ROW would be permanently lost; an additional 208 acres of wetlands outside the ROW could be impacted. Channel and overland flow could be impeded resulting in a change in the vegetative complex and increased duration of ponding and drought conditions. The amount of wetlands throughout the study area could be reduced. A noticeable increase in traffic noise would be expected for all receptors within one mile of the proposed control of access highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110294, Draft EIS-316 pages, Appendices--1,049 pages, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 12 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Hydrology KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Louisiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/900615616?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-12+TO+BUSH%2C+LOUISIANA+PROPOSED+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+ST.+TAMMANY+PARISH%2C+LOUISIANA.&rft.title=I-12+TO+BUSH%2C+LOUISIANA+PROPOSED+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+ST.+TAMMANY+PARISH%2C+LOUISIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, New Orleans, Louisiana; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 2 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900615612; 15061-3_0002 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900615612?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-12 TO BUSH, LOUISIANA PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT, ST. TAMMANY PARISH, LOUISIANA. [Part 11 of 26] T2 - I-12 TO BUSH, LOUISIANA PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT, ST. TAMMANY PARISH, LOUISIANA. AN - 900615611; 15052-4_0011 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of between 17.4 and 21 miles of high-speed, four-lane arterial highway from the southern terminus of the current, four-lane arterial portion of Louisiana Highway (LA) 21 in Bush, Louisiana, to Interstate 12 (I-12) is proposed. The project area for LA 3241 is entirely within St. Tammany Parish and roughly bounded by LA 21, US 190, I-12, US 11, and LA 41. It encompasses approximately 245 square miles in area and includes the incorporated areas of Abita Springs, Pearl River, and portions of the cities of Slidell and Covington. Unincorporated areas such as Bush, Hickory, Talisheek, and Waldheim are included in the project area. LA 21 is a four-lane divided highway between the city of Bogalusa, in Washington Parish, and Bush, in St. Tammany Parish ending at its intersection with LA 41. The proposed I-12 to Bush highway would extend the four-lane section from that point to an existing interchange on I-12 by expanding an existing highway to four lanes or constructing a new alignment with a maximum right-of-way (ROW) width of 250 feet. The majority of the proposed highway would be designed as a rural arterial road with a design speed of 70 miles per hour. The typical cross section would have two 12-foot travel lanes, an eight- to 10-foot outside shoulder, and a four-foot inside shoulder in each direction. The median width would vary depending on highway design class used ranging between 40 and 60 feet. The exception to that design could be as the proposed project transitions into existing roadways and where alternative alignments follow the existing LA 21. Five alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. The Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development's preferred alignment, Alternative P, would begin at the intersection of LA 41 and LA 40 in Bush and proceed southward for 17.4 miles to LA 1088. The majority of the project would have a typical ROW width requirement of 250 feet. The northern 0.7 mile of the project would also have a ROW width of 250 feet. The exception to that design would be at the southern end of the project area where the last 1.5 miles would be designed as a suburban arterial with a ROW width of approximately 180 feet. The proposed route would use an abandoned railroad corridor from Bush to Talisheek, a distance of approximately 2.5 miles, before turning southwesterly for 13.3 miles on a new alignment to connect with LA 1088 north of I-12. Access for this route would be provided in Bush, at LA 435, at LA 36, and at the intersection with LA 1088. Crossings of existing highways would be at grade. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed highway would provide a four-lane highway connection for Washington and northern St. Tammany Parishes to I-12, with the goal of fulfilling regional transportation needs and stimulating economic growth and activity in the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would replace existing land cover with impervious road surfaces and could result in the loss or degradation of fish and wildlife habitat. Under the preferred alternative, 20 acres of pine flatwoods habitat and 358 acres of wetlands within the ROW would be permanently lost; an additional 208 acres of wetlands outside the ROW could be impacted. Channel and overland flow could be impeded resulting in a change in the vegetative complex and increased duration of ponding and drought conditions. The amount of wetlands throughout the study area could be reduced. A noticeable increase in traffic noise would be expected for all receptors within one mile of the proposed control of access highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110294, Draft EIS-316 pages, Appendices--1,049 pages, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 11 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Hydrology KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Louisiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/900615611?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-12+TO+BUSH%2C+LOUISIANA+PROPOSED+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+ST.+TAMMANY+PARISH%2C+LOUISIANA.&rft.title=I-12+TO+BUSH%2C+LOUISIANA+PROPOSED+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+ST.+TAMMANY+PARISH%2C+LOUISIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, New Orleans, Louisiana; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-12 TO BUSH, LOUISIANA PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT, ST. TAMMANY PARISH, LOUISIANA. [Part 10 of 26] T2 - I-12 TO BUSH, LOUISIANA PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT, ST. TAMMANY PARISH, LOUISIANA. AN - 900615607; 15052-4_0010 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of between 17.4 and 21 miles of high-speed, four-lane arterial highway from the southern terminus of the current, four-lane arterial portion of Louisiana Highway (LA) 21 in Bush, Louisiana, to Interstate 12 (I-12) is proposed. The project area for LA 3241 is entirely within St. Tammany Parish and roughly bounded by LA 21, US 190, I-12, US 11, and LA 41. It encompasses approximately 245 square miles in area and includes the incorporated areas of Abita Springs, Pearl River, and portions of the cities of Slidell and Covington. Unincorporated areas such as Bush, Hickory, Talisheek, and Waldheim are included in the project area. LA 21 is a four-lane divided highway between the city of Bogalusa, in Washington Parish, and Bush, in St. Tammany Parish ending at its intersection with LA 41. The proposed I-12 to Bush highway would extend the four-lane section from that point to an existing interchange on I-12 by expanding an existing highway to four lanes or constructing a new alignment with a maximum right-of-way (ROW) width of 250 feet. The majority of the proposed highway would be designed as a rural arterial road with a design speed of 70 miles per hour. The typical cross section would have two 12-foot travel lanes, an eight- to 10-foot outside shoulder, and a four-foot inside shoulder in each direction. The median width would vary depending on highway design class used ranging between 40 and 60 feet. The exception to that design could be as the proposed project transitions into existing roadways and where alternative alignments follow the existing LA 21. Five alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. The Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development's preferred alignment, Alternative P, would begin at the intersection of LA 41 and LA 40 in Bush and proceed southward for 17.4 miles to LA 1088. The majority of the project would have a typical ROW width requirement of 250 feet. The northern 0.7 mile of the project would also have a ROW width of 250 feet. The exception to that design would be at the southern end of the project area where the last 1.5 miles would be designed as a suburban arterial with a ROW width of approximately 180 feet. The proposed route would use an abandoned railroad corridor from Bush to Talisheek, a distance of approximately 2.5 miles, before turning southwesterly for 13.3 miles on a new alignment to connect with LA 1088 north of I-12. Access for this route would be provided in Bush, at LA 435, at LA 36, and at the intersection with LA 1088. Crossings of existing highways would be at grade. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed highway would provide a four-lane highway connection for Washington and northern St. Tammany Parishes to I-12, with the goal of fulfilling regional transportation needs and stimulating economic growth and activity in the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would replace existing land cover with impervious road surfaces and could result in the loss or degradation of fish and wildlife habitat. Under the preferred alternative, 20 acres of pine flatwoods habitat and 358 acres of wetlands within the ROW would be permanently lost; an additional 208 acres of wetlands outside the ROW could be impacted. Channel and overland flow could be impeded resulting in a change in the vegetative complex and increased duration of ponding and drought conditions. The amount of wetlands throughout the study area could be reduced. A noticeable increase in traffic noise would be expected for all receptors within one mile of the proposed control of access highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110294, Draft EIS-316 pages, Appendices--1,049 pages, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Hydrology KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Louisiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/900615607?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-12+TO+BUSH%2C+LOUISIANA+PROPOSED+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+ST.+TAMMANY+PARISH%2C+LOUISIANA.&rft.title=I-12+TO+BUSH%2C+LOUISIANA+PROPOSED+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+ST.+TAMMANY+PARISH%2C+LOUISIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, New Orleans, Louisiana; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-12 TO BUSH, LOUISIANA PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT, ST. TAMMANY PARISH, LOUISIANA. [Part 9 of 26] T2 - I-12 TO BUSH, LOUISIANA PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT, ST. TAMMANY PARISH, LOUISIANA. AN - 900615602; 15052-4_0009 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of between 17.4 and 21 miles of high-speed, four-lane arterial highway from the southern terminus of the current, four-lane arterial portion of Louisiana Highway (LA) 21 in Bush, Louisiana, to Interstate 12 (I-12) is proposed. The project area for LA 3241 is entirely within St. Tammany Parish and roughly bounded by LA 21, US 190, I-12, US 11, and LA 41. It encompasses approximately 245 square miles in area and includes the incorporated areas of Abita Springs, Pearl River, and portions of the cities of Slidell and Covington. Unincorporated areas such as Bush, Hickory, Talisheek, and Waldheim are included in the project area. LA 21 is a four-lane divided highway between the city of Bogalusa, in Washington Parish, and Bush, in St. Tammany Parish ending at its intersection with LA 41. The proposed I-12 to Bush highway would extend the four-lane section from that point to an existing interchange on I-12 by expanding an existing highway to four lanes or constructing a new alignment with a maximum right-of-way (ROW) width of 250 feet. The majority of the proposed highway would be designed as a rural arterial road with a design speed of 70 miles per hour. The typical cross section would have two 12-foot travel lanes, an eight- to 10-foot outside shoulder, and a four-foot inside shoulder in each direction. The median width would vary depending on highway design class used ranging between 40 and 60 feet. The exception to that design could be as the proposed project transitions into existing roadways and where alternative alignments follow the existing LA 21. Five alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. The Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development's preferred alignment, Alternative P, would begin at the intersection of LA 41 and LA 40 in Bush and proceed southward for 17.4 miles to LA 1088. The majority of the project would have a typical ROW width requirement of 250 feet. The northern 0.7 mile of the project would also have a ROW width of 250 feet. The exception to that design would be at the southern end of the project area where the last 1.5 miles would be designed as a suburban arterial with a ROW width of approximately 180 feet. The proposed route would use an abandoned railroad corridor from Bush to Talisheek, a distance of approximately 2.5 miles, before turning southwesterly for 13.3 miles on a new alignment to connect with LA 1088 north of I-12. Access for this route would be provided in Bush, at LA 435, at LA 36, and at the intersection with LA 1088. Crossings of existing highways would be at grade. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed highway would provide a four-lane highway connection for Washington and northern St. Tammany Parishes to I-12, with the goal of fulfilling regional transportation needs and stimulating economic growth and activity in the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would replace existing land cover with impervious road surfaces and could result in the loss or degradation of fish and wildlife habitat. Under the preferred alternative, 20 acres of pine flatwoods habitat and 358 acres of wetlands within the ROW would be permanently lost; an additional 208 acres of wetlands outside the ROW could be impacted. Channel and overland flow could be impeded resulting in a change in the vegetative complex and increased duration of ponding and drought conditions. The amount of wetlands throughout the study area could be reduced. A noticeable increase in traffic noise would be expected for all receptors within one mile of the proposed control of access highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110294, Draft EIS-316 pages, Appendices--1,049 pages, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 9 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Hydrology KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Louisiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/900615602?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-12+TO+BUSH%2C+LOUISIANA+PROPOSED+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+ST.+TAMMANY+PARISH%2C+LOUISIANA.&rft.title=I-12+TO+BUSH%2C+LOUISIANA+PROPOSED+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+ST.+TAMMANY+PARISH%2C+LOUISIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, New Orleans, Louisiana; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 1 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900615599; 15061-3_0001 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900615599?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 19 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900615541; 15061-3_0019 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 19 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900615541?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 7 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900615531; 15061-3_0007 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900615531?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 15 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900615503; 15061-3_0015 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 15 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900615503?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 14 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900615496; 15061-3_0014 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 14 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900615496?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 13 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900615487; 15061-3_0013 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 13 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900615487?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 6 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900615484; 15061-3_0006 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900615484?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 5 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900615481; 15061-3_0005 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900615481?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 4 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900615476; 15061-3_0004 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900615476?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 27 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900615460; 15061-3_0027 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 27 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900615460?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 26 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900615456; 15061-3_0026 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 26 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900615456?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-12 TO BUSH, LOUISIANA PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT, ST. TAMMANY PARISH, LOUISIANA. [Part 16 of 26] T2 - I-12 TO BUSH, LOUISIANA PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT, ST. TAMMANY PARISH, LOUISIANA. AN - 900615358; 15052-4_0016 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of between 17.4 and 21 miles of high-speed, four-lane arterial highway from the southern terminus of the current, four-lane arterial portion of Louisiana Highway (LA) 21 in Bush, Louisiana, to Interstate 12 (I-12) is proposed. The project area for LA 3241 is entirely within St. Tammany Parish and roughly bounded by LA 21, US 190, I-12, US 11, and LA 41. It encompasses approximately 245 square miles in area and includes the incorporated areas of Abita Springs, Pearl River, and portions of the cities of Slidell and Covington. Unincorporated areas such as Bush, Hickory, Talisheek, and Waldheim are included in the project area. LA 21 is a four-lane divided highway between the city of Bogalusa, in Washington Parish, and Bush, in St. Tammany Parish ending at its intersection with LA 41. The proposed I-12 to Bush highway would extend the four-lane section from that point to an existing interchange on I-12 by expanding an existing highway to four lanes or constructing a new alignment with a maximum right-of-way (ROW) width of 250 feet. The majority of the proposed highway would be designed as a rural arterial road with a design speed of 70 miles per hour. The typical cross section would have two 12-foot travel lanes, an eight- to 10-foot outside shoulder, and a four-foot inside shoulder in each direction. The median width would vary depending on highway design class used ranging between 40 and 60 feet. The exception to that design could be as the proposed project transitions into existing roadways and where alternative alignments follow the existing LA 21. Five alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. The Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development's preferred alignment, Alternative P, would begin at the intersection of LA 41 and LA 40 in Bush and proceed southward for 17.4 miles to LA 1088. The majority of the project would have a typical ROW width requirement of 250 feet. The northern 0.7 mile of the project would also have a ROW width of 250 feet. The exception to that design would be at the southern end of the project area where the last 1.5 miles would be designed as a suburban arterial with a ROW width of approximately 180 feet. The proposed route would use an abandoned railroad corridor from Bush to Talisheek, a distance of approximately 2.5 miles, before turning southwesterly for 13.3 miles on a new alignment to connect with LA 1088 north of I-12. Access for this route would be provided in Bush, at LA 435, at LA 36, and at the intersection with LA 1088. Crossings of existing highways would be at grade. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed highway would provide a four-lane highway connection for Washington and northern St. Tammany Parishes to I-12, with the goal of fulfilling regional transportation needs and stimulating economic growth and activity in the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would replace existing land cover with impervious road surfaces and could result in the loss or degradation of fish and wildlife habitat. Under the preferred alternative, 20 acres of pine flatwoods habitat and 358 acres of wetlands within the ROW would be permanently lost; an additional 208 acres of wetlands outside the ROW could be impacted. Channel and overland flow could be impeded resulting in a change in the vegetative complex and increased duration of ponding and drought conditions. The amount of wetlands throughout the study area could be reduced. A noticeable increase in traffic noise would be expected for all receptors within one mile of the proposed control of access highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110294, Draft EIS-316 pages, Appendices--1,049 pages, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 16 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Hydrology KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Louisiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/900615358?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-12+TO+BUSH%2C+LOUISIANA+PROPOSED+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+ST.+TAMMANY+PARISH%2C+LOUISIANA.&rft.title=I-12+TO+BUSH%2C+LOUISIANA+PROPOSED+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+ST.+TAMMANY+PARISH%2C+LOUISIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, New Orleans, Louisiana; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-12 TO BUSH, LOUISIANA PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT, ST. TAMMANY PARISH, LOUISIANA. [Part 15 of 26] T2 - I-12 TO BUSH, LOUISIANA PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT, ST. TAMMANY PARISH, LOUISIANA. AN - 900615353; 15052-4_0015 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of between 17.4 and 21 miles of high-speed, four-lane arterial highway from the southern terminus of the current, four-lane arterial portion of Louisiana Highway (LA) 21 in Bush, Louisiana, to Interstate 12 (I-12) is proposed. The project area for LA 3241 is entirely within St. Tammany Parish and roughly bounded by LA 21, US 190, I-12, US 11, and LA 41. It encompasses approximately 245 square miles in area and includes the incorporated areas of Abita Springs, Pearl River, and portions of the cities of Slidell and Covington. Unincorporated areas such as Bush, Hickory, Talisheek, and Waldheim are included in the project area. LA 21 is a four-lane divided highway between the city of Bogalusa, in Washington Parish, and Bush, in St. Tammany Parish ending at its intersection with LA 41. The proposed I-12 to Bush highway would extend the four-lane section from that point to an existing interchange on I-12 by expanding an existing highway to four lanes or constructing a new alignment with a maximum right-of-way (ROW) width of 250 feet. The majority of the proposed highway would be designed as a rural arterial road with a design speed of 70 miles per hour. The typical cross section would have two 12-foot travel lanes, an eight- to 10-foot outside shoulder, and a four-foot inside shoulder in each direction. The median width would vary depending on highway design class used ranging between 40 and 60 feet. The exception to that design could be as the proposed project transitions into existing roadways and where alternative alignments follow the existing LA 21. Five alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. The Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development's preferred alignment, Alternative P, would begin at the intersection of LA 41 and LA 40 in Bush and proceed southward for 17.4 miles to LA 1088. The majority of the project would have a typical ROW width requirement of 250 feet. The northern 0.7 mile of the project would also have a ROW width of 250 feet. The exception to that design would be at the southern end of the project area where the last 1.5 miles would be designed as a suburban arterial with a ROW width of approximately 180 feet. The proposed route would use an abandoned railroad corridor from Bush to Talisheek, a distance of approximately 2.5 miles, before turning southwesterly for 13.3 miles on a new alignment to connect with LA 1088 north of I-12. Access for this route would be provided in Bush, at LA 435, at LA 36, and at the intersection with LA 1088. Crossings of existing highways would be at grade. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed highway would provide a four-lane highway connection for Washington and northern St. Tammany Parishes to I-12, with the goal of fulfilling regional transportation needs and stimulating economic growth and activity in the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would replace existing land cover with impervious road surfaces and could result in the loss or degradation of fish and wildlife habitat. Under the preferred alternative, 20 acres of pine flatwoods habitat and 358 acres of wetlands within the ROW would be permanently lost; an additional 208 acres of wetlands outside the ROW could be impacted. Channel and overland flow could be impeded resulting in a change in the vegetative complex and increased duration of ponding and drought conditions. The amount of wetlands throughout the study area could be reduced. A noticeable increase in traffic noise would be expected for all receptors within one mile of the proposed control of access highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110294, Draft EIS-316 pages, Appendices--1,049 pages, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 15 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Hydrology KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Louisiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/900615353?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-12+TO+BUSH%2C+LOUISIANA+PROPOSED+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+ST.+TAMMANY+PARISH%2C+LOUISIANA.&rft.title=I-12+TO+BUSH%2C+LOUISIANA+PROPOSED+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+ST.+TAMMANY+PARISH%2C+LOUISIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, New Orleans, Louisiana; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 76 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900614732; 15061-3_0076 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 76 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900614732?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 75 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900614729; 15061-3_0075 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 75 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900614729?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 74 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900614725; 15061-3_0074 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 74 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900614725?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 80 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900614722; 15061-3_0080 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 80 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900614722?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 73 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900614719; 15061-3_0073 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 73 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900614719?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 79 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900614715; 15061-3_0079 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 79 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900614715?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 64 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900614711; 15061-3_0064 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 64 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900614711?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 78 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900614708; 15061-3_0078 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 78 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900614708?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 63 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900614705; 15061-3_0063 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 63 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900614705?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 77 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900614703; 15061-3_0077 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 77 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900614703?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 62 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900614697; 15061-3_0062 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 62 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900614697?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 68 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900614693; 15061-3_0068 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 68 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900614693?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 61 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900614690; 15061-3_0061 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 61 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900614690?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 67 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900614687; 15061-3_0067 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 67 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900614687?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 60 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900614683; 15061-3_0060 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 60 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900614683?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 66 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900614682; 15061-3_0066 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 66 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900614682?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 59 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900614677; 15061-3_0059 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 59 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900614677?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 65 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900614676; 15061-3_0065 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 65 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900614676?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 58 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900614671; 15061-3_0058 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 58 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900614671?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. [Part 57 of 82] T2 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 900614502; 15061-3_0057 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 57 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/900614502?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-12 TO BUSH, LOUISIANA PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT, ST. TAMMANY PARISH, LOUISIANA. AN - 899127855; 15052 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of between 17.4 and 21 miles of high-speed, four-lane arterial highway from the southern terminus of the current, four-lane arterial portion of Louisiana Highway (LA) 21 in Bush, Louisiana, to Interstate 12 (I-12) is proposed. The project area for LA 3241 is entirely within St. Tammany Parish and roughly bounded by LA 21, US 190, I-12, US 11, and LA 41. It encompasses approximately 245 square miles in area and includes the incorporated areas of Abita Springs, Pearl River, and portions of the cities of Slidell and Covington. Unincorporated areas such as Bush, Hickory, Talisheek, and Waldheim are included in the project area. LA 21 is a four-lane divided highway between the city of Bogalusa, in Washington Parish, and Bush, in St. Tammany Parish ending at its intersection with LA 41. The proposed I-12 to Bush highway would extend the four-lane section from that point to an existing interchange on I-12 by expanding an existing highway to four lanes or constructing a new alignment with a maximum right-of-way (ROW) width of 250 feet. The majority of the proposed highway would be designed as a rural arterial road with a design speed of 70 miles per hour. The typical cross section would have two 12-foot travel lanes, an eight- to 10-foot outside shoulder, and a four-foot inside shoulder in each direction. The median width would vary depending on highway design class used ranging between 40 and 60 feet. The exception to that design could be as the proposed project transitions into existing roadways and where alternative alignments follow the existing LA 21. Five alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are analyzed in this draft EIS. The Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development's preferred alignment, Alternative P, would begin at the intersection of LA 41 and LA 40 in Bush and proceed southward for 17.4 miles to LA 1088. The majority of the project would have a typical ROW width requirement of 250 feet. The northern 0.7 mile of the project would also have a ROW width of 250 feet. The exception to that design would be at the southern end of the project area where the last 1.5 miles would be designed as a suburban arterial with a ROW width of approximately 180 feet. The proposed route would use an abandoned railroad corridor from Bush to Talisheek, a distance of approximately 2.5 miles, before turning southwesterly for 13.3 miles on a new alignment to connect with LA 1088 north of I-12. Access for this route would be provided in Bush, at LA 435, at LA 36, and at the intersection with LA 1088. Crossings of existing highways would be at grade. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed highway would provide a four-lane highway connection for Washington and northern St. Tammany Parishes to I-12, with the goal of fulfilling regional transportation needs and stimulating economic growth and activity in the region. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction would replace existing land cover with impervious road surfaces and could result in the loss or degradation of fish and wildlife habitat. Under the preferred alternative, 20 acres of pine flatwoods habitat and 358 acres of wetlands within the ROW would be permanently lost; an additional 208 acres of wetlands outside the ROW could be impacted. Channel and overland flow could be impeded resulting in a change in the vegetative complex and increased duration of ponding and drought conditions. The amount of wetlands throughout the study area could be reduced. A noticeable increase in traffic noise would be expected for all receptors within one mile of the proposed control of access highways. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110294, Draft EIS-316 pages, Appendices--1,049 pages, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Hydrology KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Louisiana KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/899127855?accountid=14244 L2 - http://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=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-12+TO+BUSH%2C+LOUISIANA+PROPOSED+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+ST.+TAMMANY+PARISH%2C+LOUISIANA.&rft.title=I-12+TO+BUSH%2C+LOUISIANA+PROPOSED+HIGHWAY+PROJECT%2C+ST.+TAMMANY+PARISH%2C+LOUISIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, New Orleans, Louisiana; ARMY N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - DICKSON SOUTHWEST BYPASS FROM SR-1 (US 70) WEST OF DICKSON, TO SR-46 AND/OR I-40 SOUTH OF DICKSON, DICKSON COUNTY, TENNESSEE. AN - 899127832; 15050 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of a bypass on new location around the city of Dickson, Tennessee is proposed. The bypass would begin on the west side of Dickson on US 70 and terminate on Interstate 40 (I-40), State Route 46 (SR-46), or both I-40 and SR-46 south of Dickson. Currently, US-70 to SR-46 is the only primary route connecting the western and southern areas of Dickson and travel speeds through the urban center are low. The SR-46/I-40 interchange, which is the primary access point to Dickson from I-40, is expected to reach operational failure in 2023. The next closest interchange linking Dickson to I-40 is approximately 10 miles away. Therefore, an additional access point between Dickson and I-40 is currently under consideration for the project. Five build alternatives, transportation system management improvements to existing SR-46, and a No Build alternative are considered in this draft EIS. The bypass alternatives vary from 6.4 to 11.0 miles in length and all begin on SR-1 (US 70) between South Eno Road and Pond Switch Road. Alternative 1 has a terminus point at the southern end of the project on I-40. Alternatives 2A and 2C terminate on SR-46. Alternative 1 is proposed as a two-lane roadway with future expansion to four lanes with a depressed median. Alternatives 2A and 2C are proposed to have the same typical section as Alternative 1 from SR-1 (US 70) to SR-48. Then from SR-48 to SR-46, a five-lane section is proposed. Two possible combination alternatives, Alternative 1&2A and Alternative 1&2C, would involve construction of a facility with project termini on both SR-46 and I-40 and would increase accessibility to Dicksons airport. Total project costs are estimated at $50.5 to $60.6 million for the non-combination alternatives and $87.7 to $89.8 million for the combination alternatives. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The bypass would provide a transportation facility that improves mobility around the city of Dickson, relieves traffic congestion in Dicksons urban core, improves accessibility to undeveloped land west and south of the city, and supports economic development. Construction would be expected to generate 1,000 full- or part-time jobs and $110 to $132 million into the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of a bypass alternative would result in impacts to 120 to 165 acres of forested and old field habitats and up to 33 streams. The acquisition of some vacant property and as many as five rural residences would be required. The trend of conversion of farmland to other uses would likely be accelerated, especially near SR-46 and I-40. The bypass alternatives could directly impact two privately owned recreational resources: the Dickson Saddle and Bridle Club and Robins Park. The Dickson County Saddle and Bridle Club would be acquired for right-of-way if Alternative 2A is selected. Some local businesses would see a decrease in opportunity sales due to removal of traffic on SR-46. However, those losses would likely be recovered by an overall stimulation of the local economy. 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). JF - EPA number: 110292, 321 pages and maps, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Land Use KW - Noise KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Tennessee 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/899127832?accountid=14244 L2 - http://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=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=DICKSON+SOUTHWEST+BYPASS+FROM+SR-1+%28US+70%29+WEST+OF+DICKSON%2C+TO+SR-46+AND%2FOR+I-40+SOUTH+OF+DICKSON%2C+DICKSON+COUNTY%2C+TENNESSEE.&rft.title=DICKSON+SOUTHWEST+BYPASS+FROM+SR-1+%28US+70%29+WEST+OF+DICKSON%2C+TO+SR-46+AND%2FOR+I-40+SOUTH+OF+DICKSON%2C+DICKSON+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 - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CRENSHAW/LAX TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. AN - 899127794; 15061 AB - PURPOSE: Transit improvements in the Crenshaw/Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) Transit Corridor, a north-south corridor that extends approximately 10 miles in length through much of central Los Angeles, 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 alternatives and, in December 2009, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the preferred mode in the corridor. The locally preferred alternative (LPA) would involve constructing a LRT alignment that would extend 8.5 miles from the Metro Green Line Aviation/LAX Station to the Exposition LRT line 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. From its southern terminus at the Metro Green Line, the alignment would follow the Harbor Subdivision Railroad right-of-way (ROW), adjacent to Aviation Boulevard/Florence Avenue and continue northeast to Crenshaw Boulevard where it would travel north within the middle of the Crenshaw Boulevard ROW to the Exposition/Crenshaw Station, adjacent to the Metro Exposition Line currently under construction. The LPA would include six stations for passenger access and three park-and-ride facilities. Stations would be located at: Aviation/Century (aerial), Florence/La Brea (at grade), Florence/West (at grade), Crenshaw/Slauson (at grade), Crenshaw/Martin Luther King Jr. (below grade), and Crenshaw/Exposition(below grade). Construction would include installing trackwork, an overhead contact system distributing electricity to light rail vehicles, traction power substations located about one mile apart, signaling and communication systems, and a vehicle maintenance and operations facility which would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Four alternative maintenance facility sites were evaluated in the February 2011 supplemental draft EIS and this final EIS identifies Site 14 (the Arbor Vitae/Bellanca Alternative), a 17.6-acre industrial use site located in the city of Los Angeles as the preferred location. The estimated cost in 2010 dollars for the LPA is $1.6 billion. Additional costs for design options range from $20.6 to $106.3 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An effective north-south rapid transit system within the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor would alleviate current and projected connectivity and mobility problems by providing essential linkages from residential areas to commercial, activity, employment, and institutional centers. The proposed maintenance site would not displace any housing or populations. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The LPA would require acquisition of up to 97 parcels, including 59 parcels that would be acquired in full, 31 parcels would be acquired in part, four parcels that would require permanent underground easements, and three parcels that would be used as temporary construction laydown areas. Two single-family residential properties would be acquired to accommodate the at-grade LRT guideway. There would be potential for significant impacts to airport-dependent businesses if they are relocated at a substantial distance from LAX. The LPA would exceed vibration criteria at 16 locations, but with implementation of mitigation, no adverse effects are anticipated. 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: 110303, Executive Summary--62 pages, Final EIS--783 pages, Appendices--on CD-ROM, September 9, 2011 PY - 2011 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Buildings KW - Cost Assessments KW - Easements KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise KW - Parking 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/899127794?accountid=14244 L2 - http://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=2011-09-09&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+TRANSIT+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+LOS+ANGELES+COUNTY%2C+CALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CRENSHAW%2FLAX+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, San Francisco, California; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-10-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: September 9, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Modeling Structural Performance of Ultrahigh Performance Concrete I-Girders AN - 1855081574; PQ0003948038 AB - Ultrahigh performance concrete (UHPC) is an advanced cementitious composite material that has been developed in recent decades. When compared with more conventional cement-based concrete materials, UHPC tends to exhibit superior properties such as increased durability, strength, and long-term stability. This computational investigation focused on modeling the structural behaviors of UHPC components including prestressed UHPC AASHTO Type II girders. The concrete damaged plasticity model was tailored to model UHPC within a commercially available finite-element analysis package. This manuscript focuses on modeling three UHPC I-girders tested under flexural or shear loading configurations. The concrete damaged plasticity model was demonstrated to replicate both linear and nonlinear structural responses of I-girders reasonably well. A set of UHPC constitutive properties were developed that facilitate the model replication of the local and global responses observed in the series of physical tests. JF - Journal of Bridge Engineering AU - Chen, Linfeng AU - Graybeal, Benjamin A AD - Project Engineer, Professional Service Industries, Inc., FHWA Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center, 6300 Georgetown Pike, McLean, VA 22101., linfeng.chen@gmail.com Y1 - 2011/09/07/ PY - 2011 DA - 2011 Sep 07 SP - 754 EP - 764 PB - American Society of Civil Engineers, 345 E. 47th St. New York NY 10017-2398 United States VL - 17 IS - 5 SN - 1084-0702, 1084-0702 KW - Water Resources Abstracts; ASFA 2: Ocean Technology Policy & Non-Living Resources KW - Technical Papers KW - Girders KW - Concrete KW - Finite element method KW - Damage KW - Plasticity KW - Composite materials KW - I-girder KW - Ultra-high performance concrete KW - UHPC KW - Finite-element method KW - FEM KW - Concrete damaged plasticity model KW - Concrete smeared cracking model KW - ABAQUS KW - Structural Behavior KW - Durability KW - Bridges KW - Replication KW - Engineering KW - Strength KW - Toughness KW - Modelling KW - Q2 09282:Materials technology, corrosion, fouling and boring KW - SW 0810:General UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1855081574?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%3Awaterresources&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.jtitle=Journal+of+Bridge+Engineering&rft.atitle=Modeling+Structural+Performance+of+Ultrahigh+Performance+Concrete+I-Girders&rft.au=Chen%2C+Linfeng%3BGraybeal%2C+Benjamin+A&rft.aulast=Chen&rft.aufirst=Linfeng&rft.date=2011-09-07&rft.volume=17&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=754&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Journal+of+Bridge+Engineering&rft.issn=10840702&rft_id=info:doi/10.1061%2F%28ASCE%29BE.1943-5592.0000305 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2017-01-01 N1 - Last updated - 2017-02-01 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Composite materials; Replication; Toughness; Plasticity; Modelling; Structural Behavior; Durability; Strength; Engineering; Bridges; Concrete DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0000305 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Thirty-year performance evaluation of two-layer concrete pavement system AN - 920792335; 16174456 AB - In 1978, an experimental two-layer concrete pavement was opened to traffic on SR-45 near Fort Myers, Florida. The experimental pavement included a series of two-layer concrete pavement sections with various design features placed over either a granular or a cement-treated subbase. These sections consisted of a 3-in. (7.5-cm) Portland cement concrete (PCC) surface over a 9-in. (23-cm) lean concrete (commonly referred to as econocrete) layer. The control section consisted of a standard PCC 9 in. (23 cm) thick with joints spaced at 20 ft (6 m) on a cement-treated subbase. After 30 years of service, the sections constructed over a granular base performed better than those placed over a cement-treated subbase. The distresses on the two-layer concrete pavement sections built on the granular subbase were minimal, regardless of their slab lengths. In contrast, the control section experienced greater cracking, greater corner deflections, and moderate-to-severe spalling. The findings validate several features of Florida's current design policies, such as limiting joint spacing to 15 ft and prohibiting cement-treated sub-bases directly below concrete pavements. Furthermore, this project has demonstrated that a two-layer concrete system consisting of a relatively thin high-quality PCC surface over a lower-quality econocrete layer and a granular subbase can be a sustainable and long-lasting pavement design alternative. JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Greene, James AU - Nazef, Abdenour AU - Choubane, Bouzid AD - Florida Department of Transportation, Materials Research Park, 5007 Northeast 39th Avenue, Gainesville, FL 32609, jamiegreene@gmail.com Y1 - 2011/09// PY - 2011 DA - Sep 2011 SP - 21 EP - 29 PB - Transportation Research Board VL - 2 IS - 2226 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Sustainability Science Abstracts KW - traffic KW - Transportation KW - USA, Florida KW - Cement KW - Sustainable development KW - ASW, Atlantic, Florida Current KW - Concrete KW - Traffic KW - M3 1010:Issues in Sustainable Development UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/920792335?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=Thirty-year+performance+evaluation+of+two-layer+concrete+pavement+system&rft.au=Greene%2C+James%3BNazef%2C+Abdenour%3BChoubane%2C+Bouzid&rft.aulast=Greene&rft.aufirst=James&rft.date=2011-09-01&rft.volume=2&rft.issue=2226&rft.spage=21&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2226-03 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2012-02-01 N1 - Last updated - 2015-03-19 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Transportation; traffic; Cement; Sustainable development; Concrete; Traffic; USA, Florida; ASW, Atlantic, Florida Current DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2226-03 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - The effects of rational and habitual factors on mode choice behaviors in a motorcycle-dependent region: Evidence from Taiwan AN - 901752278; 2011-123273 AB - This paper aims to explore the effects of rational and habitual factors on mode choice behaviors in a motorcycle-dependent region. Both a discrete choice model and theory of planned behavior (TPB) are employed to examine mode choice behaviors. A sample was obtained from two major cities in Taiwan to examine the contextual effect of public transport development. The empirical results reveal that psychological (rational and habitual) factors have stronger influences on mode choice behaviors than socio-economic factors, and furthermore that habitual factors explain traveler mode choice behaviors better than rational ones. The contextual effect with regard to public transport development is found to be significant for motorcyclists' mode choice behaviors. The practical implications of the results of this study are discussed. [Copyright Elsevier B.V.] JF - Transport Policy AU - Chen, Ching-Fu AU - Lai, Wen-Tai AD - Department of Transportation and Communication Management Science, National Cheng Kung University, 1, Ta-Hsueh Road, Tainan 701, Taiwan cfchen99@mail.ncku.edu.tw Y1 - 2011/09// PY - 2011 DA - September 2011 SP - 711 EP - 718 PB - Elsevier Ltd, The Netherlands VL - 18 IS - 5 SN - 0967-070X, 0967-070X KW - Transportation and transportation policy - Transportation KW - Transportation and transportation policy - Roads and land transport KW - Motorcycle-dependent region Rational factors Habit Context effect Mode choice behaviors KW - Taiwan KW - Transportation policy KW - Motorcycles KW - Motor transport KW - article UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/901752278?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=Transport+Policy&rft.atitle=The+effects+of+rational+and+habitual+factors+on+mode+choice+behaviors+in+a+motorcycle-dependent+region%3A+Evidence+from+Taiwan&rft.au=Chen%2C+Ching-Fu%3BLai%2C+Wen-Tai&rft.aulast=Chen&rft.aufirst=Ching-Fu&rft.date=2011-09-01&rft.volume=18&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=711&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transport+Policy&rft.issn=0967070X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016%2Fj.tranpol.2011.01.006 LA - English DB - PAIS Index N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-02 N1 - Last updated - 2016-09-28 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Transportation policy; Motorcycles; Taiwan; Motor transport DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2011.01.006 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Detection of gullies in roughly textured terrain using airborne laser scanning data AN - 1800393006; 2016-054575 AB - Airborne laser scanning data contain information about surface features, some of which are of subtle form. These features are usually embedded within the terrain, and rarely form distinct shape-transition to their surroundings. While some efforts have been made in extracting linear elements from laser scanning data, attention was mostly turned to dominant elements that are very clear and distinct. We present in this paper a detection model for gullies of various dimensions using airborne laser scanning data. Gullies are regarded as one of the main landform-reshaping agents, having a pejorative effect on the environment and on regional development. They are commonly observed along receding lakes as a common response to water-level drop. The paper demonstrates how a multi-scale approach enables the extraction of various gully forms, from well developed to subtle. It then proposes an optimization driven model for handling fragmentation in the detection. Results show that using the proposed model, gully networks can be reconstructed and approximately 30 cm deep features can be identified and separated from their surroundings using moderate point density data. Abstract Copyright (2011) Elsevier, B.V. JF - ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing AU - Baruch, Amit AU - Filin, Sagi Y1 - 2011/09// PY - 2011 DA - September 2011 SP - 564 EP - 578 PB - Elsevier, Amsterdam VL - 66 IS - 5 SN - 0924-2716, 0924-2716 KW - lake-level changes KW - degradation KW - laser methods KW - mapping KW - erosion features KW - laser scanning KW - relief KW - thalwegs KW - shaded relief KW - applications KW - gullies KW - Asia KW - Ze'elim Israel KW - Middle East KW - digitization KW - textures KW - landform description KW - drainage patterns KW - equations KW - Hever Israel KW - detection KW - lidar methods KW - alluvial fans KW - Dead Sea KW - geomorphology KW - remote sensing KW - airborne methods KW - 23:Geomorphology KW - 20:Applied geophysics UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1800393006?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=ISPRS+Journal+of+Photogrammetry+and+Remote+Sensing&rft.atitle=Detection+of+gullies+in+roughly+textured+terrain+using+airborne+laser+scanning+data&rft.au=Baruch%2C+Amit%3BFilin%2C+Sagi&rft.aulast=Baruch&rft.aufirst=Amit&rft.date=2011-09-01&rft.volume=66&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=564&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=ISPRS+Journal+of+Photogrammetry+and+Remote+Sensing&rft.issn=09242716&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016%2Fj.isprsjprs.2011.03.001 L2 - http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/09242716 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 - 42 N1 - Document feature - illus. incl. 2 tables, sketch map N1 - SuppNotes - Includes appendix N1 - Last updated - 2016-11-17 N1 - CODEN - PTGMAQ N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - airborne methods; alluvial fans; applications; Asia; Dead Sea; degradation; detection; digitization; drainage patterns; equations; erosion features; geomorphology; gullies; Hever Israel; lake-level changes; landform description; laser methods; laser scanning; lidar methods; mapping; Middle East; relief; remote sensing; shaded relief; textures; thalwegs; Ze'elim Israel DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2011.03.001 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - A new method for estimating driven pile static skin friction with instrumentation at the top and bottom of the pile AN - 1784734845; 2016-034998 AB - A numerical technique is presented to estimate ultimate skin friction of a driven pile using instrumentation installed at the top and bottom of a pile. The scheme is based on an analytical solution of the 1D wave equation with static skin friction and damping along with a genetic algorithm for solution. Specifically, acceleration and strains measured at both the top and bottom of the pile are used to develop an observed Green's function, which is matched to an analytical Green's function, which is a function of secant stiffness and viscous damping. Requiring 1-3s of analysis time per blow, the algorithm provides a real time assessment of average skin friction along the pile. The technique was applied to four driven piles having ultimate skin frictions varying from 700 to 2000 kN, with the predicted skin frictions generally consistent with measured static load test results. Abstract Copyright (2011) Elsevier, B.V. JF - Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering (1984) AU - Tran, Khiem T AU - McVay, Michael AU - Herrera, Rodrigo AU - Lai, Peter Y1 - 2011/09// PY - 2011 DA - September 2011 SP - 1285 EP - 1295 PB - Elsevier, Southampton VL - 31 IS - 9 SN - 0267-7261, 0267-7261 KW - soil mechanics KW - numerical models KW - genetic algorithms KW - engineering properties KW - loading KW - stiffness KW - stability KW - friction KW - Green function KW - attenuation KW - foundations KW - soil-structure interface KW - piles KW - algorithms KW - 30:Engineering geology UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1784734845?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=A+new+method+for+estimating+driven+pile+static+skin+friction+with+instrumentation+at+the+top+and+bottom+of+the+pile&rft.au=Tran%2C+Khiem+T%3BMcVay%2C+Michael%3BHerrera%2C+Rodrigo%3BLai%2C+Peter&rft.aulast=Tran&rft.aufirst=Khiem&rft.date=2011-09-01&rft.volume=31&rft.issue=9&rft.spage=1285&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Soil+Dynamics+and+Earthquake+Engineering+%281984%29&rft.issn=02677261&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016%2Fj.soildyn.2011.05.007 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 - 30 N1 - Document feature - illus. N1 - Last updated - 2016-04-28 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - algorithms; attenuation; engineering properties; foundations; friction; genetic algorithms; Green function; loading; numerical models; piles; soil mechanics; soil-structure interface; stability; stiffness DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2011.05.007 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. [Part 20 of 28] T2 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. AN - 894159349; 15018-9_0020 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Crosstown Parkway by approximately two miles, from Manth Lane on the west, across the North Fork St. Lucie River (NFSLR) to US 1 on the east, in Port St. Lucie, St. Lucie County, Florida is proposed. The study area is bordered on the north by Fallon Drive, on the south by Thornhill Drive, on the west by Manth Lane, and on the east by US 1. The two existing crossings of the NFSLR at Port St. Lucie Boulevard and Prima Vista Boulevard are experiencing delays and will not be able to meet the projected travel demand across the NFSLR in the future. Forecasts indicate that the combined traffic volume crossing the NFSLR will increase from 104,680 vehicles in 2008 to 156,000 in 2037. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation systems management alternative, a multimodal alternative, and six build alternatives which include a bridge over the NFSLR. Alternative 2A would connect Crosstown Parkway via Walters Terrace west of the NFSLR to Veterans Memorial Parkway (formerly known as Midport Road) east of the NFSLR, and ultimately connect with US 1 at the existing signalized intersection with Veterans Memorial Parkway/Walton Road. Alternative 2D would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, then connect to Walters Terrace via Floresta Drive. Traffic would be required to make a right turn and a left turn at the two intersections along Floresta Drive to make the connection to US 1. Alternative 1C would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive west of the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Village Green Drive. Alternative 1F would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive, then curve northeast to connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6B is similar to Alternative 1F, and would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, but would then curve northeast and cross the NFSLR north of Alternative 1F. It would connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6A would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive and curve north and then east across the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Savanna Club Boulevard. Total costs of constructing the build alternatives are estimated in 2009 dollars at $118.9 to $167.8 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed extension would address severe traffic congestion within the City of Port St. Lucie, particularly at the two existing bridges over the NFSLR which already exceed their capacity and operate below acceptable levels at critical times of the day. The project would also benefit public safety by providing an additional evacuation route. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The project area is within the boundaries of the NFSLR Aquatic Preserve and the Savannas Preserve State Park. Construction would impact eight to 10.9 acres of wetlands, 140 to 231 residences, and zero to 14 commercial properties. Six listed species (mangrove rivulus, smalltooth sawfish, opossum pipefish, eastern indigo snake, wood stork, and the West Indian manatee) may be affected, but are not likely to be adversely affected. All build alternatives could affect wildlife passage and would introduce light trespass, noise, and colonization by invasive species. 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). JF - EPA number: 110259, Draft EIS--557 pages and maps, Appendices--724 pages, Technical Support Documents--on DVD, August 19, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 20 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Fish KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parks KW - Preserves KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Florida KW - North Fork St. Lucie River 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/894159349?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.title=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Tallahassee, Florida; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 19, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. [Part 19 of 28] T2 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. AN - 894159338; 15018-9_0019 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Crosstown Parkway by approximately two miles, from Manth Lane on the west, across the North Fork St. Lucie River (NFSLR) to US 1 on the east, in Port St. Lucie, St. Lucie County, Florida is proposed. The study area is bordered on the north by Fallon Drive, on the south by Thornhill Drive, on the west by Manth Lane, and on the east by US 1. The two existing crossings of the NFSLR at Port St. Lucie Boulevard and Prima Vista Boulevard are experiencing delays and will not be able to meet the projected travel demand across the NFSLR in the future. Forecasts indicate that the combined traffic volume crossing the NFSLR will increase from 104,680 vehicles in 2008 to 156,000 in 2037. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation systems management alternative, a multimodal alternative, and six build alternatives which include a bridge over the NFSLR. Alternative 2A would connect Crosstown Parkway via Walters Terrace west of the NFSLR to Veterans Memorial Parkway (formerly known as Midport Road) east of the NFSLR, and ultimately connect with US 1 at the existing signalized intersection with Veterans Memorial Parkway/Walton Road. Alternative 2D would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, then connect to Walters Terrace via Floresta Drive. Traffic would be required to make a right turn and a left turn at the two intersections along Floresta Drive to make the connection to US 1. Alternative 1C would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive west of the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Village Green Drive. Alternative 1F would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive, then curve northeast to connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6B is similar to Alternative 1F, and would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, but would then curve northeast and cross the NFSLR north of Alternative 1F. It would connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6A would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive and curve north and then east across the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Savanna Club Boulevard. Total costs of constructing the build alternatives are estimated in 2009 dollars at $118.9 to $167.8 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed extension would address severe traffic congestion within the City of Port St. Lucie, particularly at the two existing bridges over the NFSLR which already exceed their capacity and operate below acceptable levels at critical times of the day. The project would also benefit public safety by providing an additional evacuation route. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The project area is within the boundaries of the NFSLR Aquatic Preserve and the Savannas Preserve State Park. Construction would impact eight to 10.9 acres of wetlands, 140 to 231 residences, and zero to 14 commercial properties. Six listed species (mangrove rivulus, smalltooth sawfish, opossum pipefish, eastern indigo snake, wood stork, and the West Indian manatee) may be affected, but are not likely to be adversely affected. All build alternatives could affect wildlife passage and would introduce light trespass, noise, and colonization by invasive species. 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). JF - EPA number: 110259, Draft EIS--557 pages and maps, Appendices--724 pages, Technical Support Documents--on DVD, August 19, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 19 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Fish KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parks KW - Preserves KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Florida KW - North Fork St. Lucie River 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/894159338?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.title=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Tallahassee, Florida; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 19, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. [Part 18 of 28] T2 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. AN - 894159326; 15018-9_0018 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Crosstown Parkway by approximately two miles, from Manth Lane on the west, across the North Fork St. Lucie River (NFSLR) to US 1 on the east, in Port St. Lucie, St. Lucie County, Florida is proposed. The study area is bordered on the north by Fallon Drive, on the south by Thornhill Drive, on the west by Manth Lane, and on the east by US 1. The two existing crossings of the NFSLR at Port St. Lucie Boulevard and Prima Vista Boulevard are experiencing delays and will not be able to meet the projected travel demand across the NFSLR in the future. Forecasts indicate that the combined traffic volume crossing the NFSLR will increase from 104,680 vehicles in 2008 to 156,000 in 2037. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation systems management alternative, a multimodal alternative, and six build alternatives which include a bridge over the NFSLR. Alternative 2A would connect Crosstown Parkway via Walters Terrace west of the NFSLR to Veterans Memorial Parkway (formerly known as Midport Road) east of the NFSLR, and ultimately connect with US 1 at the existing signalized intersection with Veterans Memorial Parkway/Walton Road. Alternative 2D would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, then connect to Walters Terrace via Floresta Drive. Traffic would be required to make a right turn and a left turn at the two intersections along Floresta Drive to make the connection to US 1. Alternative 1C would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive west of the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Village Green Drive. Alternative 1F would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive, then curve northeast to connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6B is similar to Alternative 1F, and would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, but would then curve northeast and cross the NFSLR north of Alternative 1F. It would connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6A would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive and curve north and then east across the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Savanna Club Boulevard. Total costs of constructing the build alternatives are estimated in 2009 dollars at $118.9 to $167.8 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed extension would address severe traffic congestion within the City of Port St. Lucie, particularly at the two existing bridges over the NFSLR which already exceed their capacity and operate below acceptable levels at critical times of the day. The project would also benefit public safety by providing an additional evacuation route. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The project area is within the boundaries of the NFSLR Aquatic Preserve and the Savannas Preserve State Park. Construction would impact eight to 10.9 acres of wetlands, 140 to 231 residences, and zero to 14 commercial properties. Six listed species (mangrove rivulus, smalltooth sawfish, opossum pipefish, eastern indigo snake, wood stork, and the West Indian manatee) may be affected, but are not likely to be adversely affected. All build alternatives could affect wildlife passage and would introduce light trespass, noise, and colonization by invasive species. 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). JF - EPA number: 110259, Draft EIS--557 pages and maps, Appendices--724 pages, Technical Support Documents--on DVD, August 19, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 18 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Fish KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parks KW - Preserves KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Florida KW - North Fork St. Lucie River 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/894159326?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.title=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Tallahassee, Florida; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 19, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. [Part 17 of 28] T2 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. AN - 894159313; 15018-9_0017 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Crosstown Parkway by approximately two miles, from Manth Lane on the west, across the North Fork St. Lucie River (NFSLR) to US 1 on the east, in Port St. Lucie, St. Lucie County, Florida is proposed. The study area is bordered on the north by Fallon Drive, on the south by Thornhill Drive, on the west by Manth Lane, and on the east by US 1. The two existing crossings of the NFSLR at Port St. Lucie Boulevard and Prima Vista Boulevard are experiencing delays and will not be able to meet the projected travel demand across the NFSLR in the future. Forecasts indicate that the combined traffic volume crossing the NFSLR will increase from 104,680 vehicles in 2008 to 156,000 in 2037. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation systems management alternative, a multimodal alternative, and six build alternatives which include a bridge over the NFSLR. Alternative 2A would connect Crosstown Parkway via Walters Terrace west of the NFSLR to Veterans Memorial Parkway (formerly known as Midport Road) east of the NFSLR, and ultimately connect with US 1 at the existing signalized intersection with Veterans Memorial Parkway/Walton Road. Alternative 2D would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, then connect to Walters Terrace via Floresta Drive. Traffic would be required to make a right turn and a left turn at the two intersections along Floresta Drive to make the connection to US 1. Alternative 1C would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive west of the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Village Green Drive. Alternative 1F would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive, then curve northeast to connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6B is similar to Alternative 1F, and would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, but would then curve northeast and cross the NFSLR north of Alternative 1F. It would connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6A would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive and curve north and then east across the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Savanna Club Boulevard. Total costs of constructing the build alternatives are estimated in 2009 dollars at $118.9 to $167.8 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed extension would address severe traffic congestion within the City of Port St. Lucie, particularly at the two existing bridges over the NFSLR which already exceed their capacity and operate below acceptable levels at critical times of the day. The project would also benefit public safety by providing an additional evacuation route. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The project area is within the boundaries of the NFSLR Aquatic Preserve and the Savannas Preserve State Park. Construction would impact eight to 10.9 acres of wetlands, 140 to 231 residences, and zero to 14 commercial properties. Six listed species (mangrove rivulus, smalltooth sawfish, opossum pipefish, eastern indigo snake, wood stork, and the West Indian manatee) may be affected, but are not likely to be adversely affected. All build alternatives could affect wildlife passage and would introduce light trespass, noise, and colonization by invasive species. 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). JF - EPA number: 110259, Draft EIS--557 pages and maps, Appendices--724 pages, Technical Support Documents--on DVD, August 19, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 17 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Fish KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parks KW - Preserves KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Florida KW - North Fork St. Lucie River 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/894159313?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.title=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Tallahassee, Florida; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 19, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. [Part 10 of 28] T2 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. AN - 894158803; 15018-9_0010 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Crosstown Parkway by approximately two miles, from Manth Lane on the west, across the North Fork St. Lucie River (NFSLR) to US 1 on the east, in Port St. Lucie, St. Lucie County, Florida is proposed. The study area is bordered on the north by Fallon Drive, on the south by Thornhill Drive, on the west by Manth Lane, and on the east by US 1. The two existing crossings of the NFSLR at Port St. Lucie Boulevard and Prima Vista Boulevard are experiencing delays and will not be able to meet the projected travel demand across the NFSLR in the future. Forecasts indicate that the combined traffic volume crossing the NFSLR will increase from 104,680 vehicles in 2008 to 156,000 in 2037. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation systems management alternative, a multimodal alternative, and six build alternatives which include a bridge over the NFSLR. Alternative 2A would connect Crosstown Parkway via Walters Terrace west of the NFSLR to Veterans Memorial Parkway (formerly known as Midport Road) east of the NFSLR, and ultimately connect with US 1 at the existing signalized intersection with Veterans Memorial Parkway/Walton Road. Alternative 2D would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, then connect to Walters Terrace via Floresta Drive. Traffic would be required to make a right turn and a left turn at the two intersections along Floresta Drive to make the connection to US 1. Alternative 1C would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive west of the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Village Green Drive. Alternative 1F would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive, then curve northeast to connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6B is similar to Alternative 1F, and would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, but would then curve northeast and cross the NFSLR north of Alternative 1F. It would connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6A would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive and curve north and then east across the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Savanna Club Boulevard. Total costs of constructing the build alternatives are estimated in 2009 dollars at $118.9 to $167.8 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed extension would address severe traffic congestion within the City of Port St. Lucie, particularly at the two existing bridges over the NFSLR which already exceed their capacity and operate below acceptable levels at critical times of the day. The project would also benefit public safety by providing an additional evacuation route. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The project area is within the boundaries of the NFSLR Aquatic Preserve and the Savannas Preserve State Park. Construction would impact eight to 10.9 acres of wetlands, 140 to 231 residences, and zero to 14 commercial properties. Six listed species (mangrove rivulus, smalltooth sawfish, opossum pipefish, eastern indigo snake, wood stork, and the West Indian manatee) may be affected, but are not likely to be adversely affected. All build alternatives could affect wildlife passage and would introduce light trespass, noise, and colonization by invasive species. 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). JF - EPA number: 110259, Draft EIS--557 pages and maps, Appendices--724 pages, Technical Support Documents--on DVD, August 19, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Fish KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parks KW - Preserves KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Florida KW - North Fork St. Lucie River 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/894158803?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.title=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Tallahassee, Florida; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 19, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. [Part 9 of 28] T2 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. AN - 894158794; 15018-9_0009 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Crosstown Parkway by approximately two miles, from Manth Lane on the west, across the North Fork St. Lucie River (NFSLR) to US 1 on the east, in Port St. Lucie, St. Lucie County, Florida is proposed. The study area is bordered on the north by Fallon Drive, on the south by Thornhill Drive, on the west by Manth Lane, and on the east by US 1. The two existing crossings of the NFSLR at Port St. Lucie Boulevard and Prima Vista Boulevard are experiencing delays and will not be able to meet the projected travel demand across the NFSLR in the future. Forecasts indicate that the combined traffic volume crossing the NFSLR will increase from 104,680 vehicles in 2008 to 156,000 in 2037. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation systems management alternative, a multimodal alternative, and six build alternatives which include a bridge over the NFSLR. Alternative 2A would connect Crosstown Parkway via Walters Terrace west of the NFSLR to Veterans Memorial Parkway (formerly known as Midport Road) east of the NFSLR, and ultimately connect with US 1 at the existing signalized intersection with Veterans Memorial Parkway/Walton Road. Alternative 2D would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, then connect to Walters Terrace via Floresta Drive. Traffic would be required to make a right turn and a left turn at the two intersections along Floresta Drive to make the connection to US 1. Alternative 1C would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive west of the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Village Green Drive. Alternative 1F would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive, then curve northeast to connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6B is similar to Alternative 1F, and would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, but would then curve northeast and cross the NFSLR north of Alternative 1F. It would connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6A would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive and curve north and then east across the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Savanna Club Boulevard. Total costs of constructing the build alternatives are estimated in 2009 dollars at $118.9 to $167.8 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed extension would address severe traffic congestion within the City of Port St. Lucie, particularly at the two existing bridges over the NFSLR which already exceed their capacity and operate below acceptable levels at critical times of the day. The project would also benefit public safety by providing an additional evacuation route. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The project area is within the boundaries of the NFSLR Aquatic Preserve and the Savannas Preserve State Park. Construction would impact eight to 10.9 acres of wetlands, 140 to 231 residences, and zero to 14 commercial properties. Six listed species (mangrove rivulus, smalltooth sawfish, opossum pipefish, eastern indigo snake, wood stork, and the West Indian manatee) may be affected, but are not likely to be adversely affected. All build alternatives could affect wildlife passage and would introduce light trespass, noise, and colonization by invasive species. 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). JF - EPA number: 110259, Draft EIS--557 pages and maps, Appendices--724 pages, Technical Support Documents--on DVD, August 19, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 9 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Fish KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parks KW - Preserves KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Florida KW - North Fork St. Lucie River 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/894158794?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.title=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Tallahassee, Florida; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 19, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. [Part 8 of 28] T2 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. AN - 894158774; 15018-9_0008 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Crosstown Parkway by approximately two miles, from Manth Lane on the west, across the North Fork St. Lucie River (NFSLR) to US 1 on the east, in Port St. Lucie, St. Lucie County, Florida is proposed. The study area is bordered on the north by Fallon Drive, on the south by Thornhill Drive, on the west by Manth Lane, and on the east by US 1. The two existing crossings of the NFSLR at Port St. Lucie Boulevard and Prima Vista Boulevard are experiencing delays and will not be able to meet the projected travel demand across the NFSLR in the future. Forecasts indicate that the combined traffic volume crossing the NFSLR will increase from 104,680 vehicles in 2008 to 156,000 in 2037. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation systems management alternative, a multimodal alternative, and six build alternatives which include a bridge over the NFSLR. Alternative 2A would connect Crosstown Parkway via Walters Terrace west of the NFSLR to Veterans Memorial Parkway (formerly known as Midport Road) east of the NFSLR, and ultimately connect with US 1 at the existing signalized intersection with Veterans Memorial Parkway/Walton Road. Alternative 2D would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, then connect to Walters Terrace via Floresta Drive. Traffic would be required to make a right turn and a left turn at the two intersections along Floresta Drive to make the connection to US 1. Alternative 1C would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive west of the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Village Green Drive. Alternative 1F would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive, then curve northeast to connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6B is similar to Alternative 1F, and would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, but would then curve northeast and cross the NFSLR north of Alternative 1F. It would connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6A would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive and curve north and then east across the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Savanna Club Boulevard. Total costs of constructing the build alternatives are estimated in 2009 dollars at $118.9 to $167.8 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed extension would address severe traffic congestion within the City of Port St. Lucie, particularly at the two existing bridges over the NFSLR which already exceed their capacity and operate below acceptable levels at critical times of the day. The project would also benefit public safety by providing an additional evacuation route. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The project area is within the boundaries of the NFSLR Aquatic Preserve and the Savannas Preserve State Park. Construction would impact eight to 10.9 acres of wetlands, 140 to 231 residences, and zero to 14 commercial properties. Six listed species (mangrove rivulus, smalltooth sawfish, opossum pipefish, eastern indigo snake, wood stork, and the West Indian manatee) may be affected, but are not likely to be adversely affected. All build alternatives could affect wildlife passage and would introduce light trespass, noise, and colonization by invasive species. 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). JF - EPA number: 110259, Draft EIS--557 pages and maps, Appendices--724 pages, Technical Support Documents--on DVD, August 19, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Fish KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parks KW - Preserves KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Florida KW - North Fork St. Lucie River 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/894158774?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.title=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Tallahassee, Florida; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 19, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. [Part 7 of 28] T2 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. AN - 894158764; 15018-9_0007 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Crosstown Parkway by approximately two miles, from Manth Lane on the west, across the North Fork St. Lucie River (NFSLR) to US 1 on the east, in Port St. Lucie, St. Lucie County, Florida is proposed. The study area is bordered on the north by Fallon Drive, on the south by Thornhill Drive, on the west by Manth Lane, and on the east by US 1. The two existing crossings of the NFSLR at Port St. Lucie Boulevard and Prima Vista Boulevard are experiencing delays and will not be able to meet the projected travel demand across the NFSLR in the future. Forecasts indicate that the combined traffic volume crossing the NFSLR will increase from 104,680 vehicles in 2008 to 156,000 in 2037. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation systems management alternative, a multimodal alternative, and six build alternatives which include a bridge over the NFSLR. Alternative 2A would connect Crosstown Parkway via Walters Terrace west of the NFSLR to Veterans Memorial Parkway (formerly known as Midport Road) east of the NFSLR, and ultimately connect with US 1 at the existing signalized intersection with Veterans Memorial Parkway/Walton Road. Alternative 2D would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, then connect to Walters Terrace via Floresta Drive. Traffic would be required to make a right turn and a left turn at the two intersections along Floresta Drive to make the connection to US 1. Alternative 1C would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive west of the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Village Green Drive. Alternative 1F would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive, then curve northeast to connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6B is similar to Alternative 1F, and would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, but would then curve northeast and cross the NFSLR north of Alternative 1F. It would connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6A would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive and curve north and then east across the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Savanna Club Boulevard. Total costs of constructing the build alternatives are estimated in 2009 dollars at $118.9 to $167.8 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed extension would address severe traffic congestion within the City of Port St. Lucie, particularly at the two existing bridges over the NFSLR which already exceed their capacity and operate below acceptable levels at critical times of the day. The project would also benefit public safety by providing an additional evacuation route. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The project area is within the boundaries of the NFSLR Aquatic Preserve and the Savannas Preserve State Park. Construction would impact eight to 10.9 acres of wetlands, 140 to 231 residences, and zero to 14 commercial properties. Six listed species (mangrove rivulus, smalltooth sawfish, opossum pipefish, eastern indigo snake, wood stork, and the West Indian manatee) may be affected, but are not likely to be adversely affected. All build alternatives could affect wildlife passage and would introduce light trespass, noise, and colonization by invasive species. 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). JF - EPA number: 110259, Draft EIS--557 pages and maps, Appendices--724 pages, Technical Support Documents--on DVD, August 19, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Fish KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parks KW - Preserves KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Florida KW - North Fork St. Lucie River 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/894158764?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.title=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Tallahassee, Florida; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 19, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. [Part 16 of 28] T2 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. AN - 894158752; 15018-9_0016 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Crosstown Parkway by approximately two miles, from Manth Lane on the west, across the North Fork St. Lucie River (NFSLR) to US 1 on the east, in Port St. Lucie, St. Lucie County, Florida is proposed. The study area is bordered on the north by Fallon Drive, on the south by Thornhill Drive, on the west by Manth Lane, and on the east by US 1. The two existing crossings of the NFSLR at Port St. Lucie Boulevard and Prima Vista Boulevard are experiencing delays and will not be able to meet the projected travel demand across the NFSLR in the future. Forecasts indicate that the combined traffic volume crossing the NFSLR will increase from 104,680 vehicles in 2008 to 156,000 in 2037. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation systems management alternative, a multimodal alternative, and six build alternatives which include a bridge over the NFSLR. Alternative 2A would connect Crosstown Parkway via Walters Terrace west of the NFSLR to Veterans Memorial Parkway (formerly known as Midport Road) east of the NFSLR, and ultimately connect with US 1 at the existing signalized intersection with Veterans Memorial Parkway/Walton Road. Alternative 2D would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, then connect to Walters Terrace via Floresta Drive. Traffic would be required to make a right turn and a left turn at the two intersections along Floresta Drive to make the connection to US 1. Alternative 1C would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive west of the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Village Green Drive. Alternative 1F would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive, then curve northeast to connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6B is similar to Alternative 1F, and would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, but would then curve northeast and cross the NFSLR north of Alternative 1F. It would connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6A would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive and curve north and then east across the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Savanna Club Boulevard. Total costs of constructing the build alternatives are estimated in 2009 dollars at $118.9 to $167.8 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed extension would address severe traffic congestion within the City of Port St. Lucie, particularly at the two existing bridges over the NFSLR which already exceed their capacity and operate below acceptable levels at critical times of the day. The project would also benefit public safety by providing an additional evacuation route. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The project area is within the boundaries of the NFSLR Aquatic Preserve and the Savannas Preserve State Park. Construction would impact eight to 10.9 acres of wetlands, 140 to 231 residences, and zero to 14 commercial properties. Six listed species (mangrove rivulus, smalltooth sawfish, opossum pipefish, eastern indigo snake, wood stork, and the West Indian manatee) may be affected, but are not likely to be adversely affected. All build alternatives could affect wildlife passage and would introduce light trespass, noise, and colonization by invasive species. 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). JF - EPA number: 110259, Draft EIS--557 pages and maps, Appendices--724 pages, Technical Support Documents--on DVD, August 19, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 16 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Fish KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parks KW - Preserves KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Florida KW - North Fork St. Lucie River 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/894158752?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.title=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Tallahassee, Florida; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 19, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. [Part 6 of 28] T2 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. AN - 894158737; 15018-9_0006 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Crosstown Parkway by approximately two miles, from Manth Lane on the west, across the North Fork St. Lucie River (NFSLR) to US 1 on the east, in Port St. Lucie, St. Lucie County, Florida is proposed. The study area is bordered on the north by Fallon Drive, on the south by Thornhill Drive, on the west by Manth Lane, and on the east by US 1. The two existing crossings of the NFSLR at Port St. Lucie Boulevard and Prima Vista Boulevard are experiencing delays and will not be able to meet the projected travel demand across the NFSLR in the future. Forecasts indicate that the combined traffic volume crossing the NFSLR will increase from 104,680 vehicles in 2008 to 156,000 in 2037. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation systems management alternative, a multimodal alternative, and six build alternatives which include a bridge over the NFSLR. Alternative 2A would connect Crosstown Parkway via Walters Terrace west of the NFSLR to Veterans Memorial Parkway (formerly known as Midport Road) east of the NFSLR, and ultimately connect with US 1 at the existing signalized intersection with Veterans Memorial Parkway/Walton Road. Alternative 2D would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, then connect to Walters Terrace via Floresta Drive. Traffic would be required to make a right turn and a left turn at the two intersections along Floresta Drive to make the connection to US 1. Alternative 1C would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive west of the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Village Green Drive. Alternative 1F would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive, then curve northeast to connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6B is similar to Alternative 1F, and would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, but would then curve northeast and cross the NFSLR north of Alternative 1F. It would connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6A would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive and curve north and then east across the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Savanna Club Boulevard. Total costs of constructing the build alternatives are estimated in 2009 dollars at $118.9 to $167.8 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed extension would address severe traffic congestion within the City of Port St. Lucie, particularly at the two existing bridges over the NFSLR which already exceed their capacity and operate below acceptable levels at critical times of the day. The project would also benefit public safety by providing an additional evacuation route. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The project area is within the boundaries of the NFSLR Aquatic Preserve and the Savannas Preserve State Park. Construction would impact eight to 10.9 acres of wetlands, 140 to 231 residences, and zero to 14 commercial properties. Six listed species (mangrove rivulus, smalltooth sawfish, opossum pipefish, eastern indigo snake, wood stork, and the West Indian manatee) may be affected, but are not likely to be adversely affected. All build alternatives could affect wildlife passage and would introduce light trespass, noise, and colonization by invasive species. 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). JF - EPA number: 110259, Draft EIS--557 pages and maps, Appendices--724 pages, Technical Support Documents--on DVD, August 19, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Fish KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parks KW - Preserves KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Florida KW - North Fork St. Lucie River 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/894158737?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.title=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Tallahassee, Florida; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 19, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. [Part 15 of 28] T2 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. AN - 894158733; 15018-9_0015 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Crosstown Parkway by approximately two miles, from Manth Lane on the west, across the North Fork St. Lucie River (NFSLR) to US 1 on the east, in Port St. Lucie, St. Lucie County, Florida is proposed. The study area is bordered on the north by Fallon Drive, on the south by Thornhill Drive, on the west by Manth Lane, and on the east by US 1. The two existing crossings of the NFSLR at Port St. Lucie Boulevard and Prima Vista Boulevard are experiencing delays and will not be able to meet the projected travel demand across the NFSLR in the future. Forecasts indicate that the combined traffic volume crossing the NFSLR will increase from 104,680 vehicles in 2008 to 156,000 in 2037. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation systems management alternative, a multimodal alternative, and six build alternatives which include a bridge over the NFSLR. Alternative 2A would connect Crosstown Parkway via Walters Terrace west of the NFSLR to Veterans Memorial Parkway (formerly known as Midport Road) east of the NFSLR, and ultimately connect with US 1 at the existing signalized intersection with Veterans Memorial Parkway/Walton Road. Alternative 2D would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, then connect to Walters Terrace via Floresta Drive. Traffic would be required to make a right turn and a left turn at the two intersections along Floresta Drive to make the connection to US 1. Alternative 1C would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive west of the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Village Green Drive. Alternative 1F would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive, then curve northeast to connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6B is similar to Alternative 1F, and would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, but would then curve northeast and cross the NFSLR north of Alternative 1F. It would connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6A would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive and curve north and then east across the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Savanna Club Boulevard. Total costs of constructing the build alternatives are estimated in 2009 dollars at $118.9 to $167.8 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed extension would address severe traffic congestion within the City of Port St. Lucie, particularly at the two existing bridges over the NFSLR which already exceed their capacity and operate below acceptable levels at critical times of the day. The project would also benefit public safety by providing an additional evacuation route. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The project area is within the boundaries of the NFSLR Aquatic Preserve and the Savannas Preserve State Park. Construction would impact eight to 10.9 acres of wetlands, 140 to 231 residences, and zero to 14 commercial properties. Six listed species (mangrove rivulus, smalltooth sawfish, opossum pipefish, eastern indigo snake, wood stork, and the West Indian manatee) may be affected, but are not likely to be adversely affected. All build alternatives could affect wildlife passage and would introduce light trespass, noise, and colonization by invasive species. 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). JF - EPA number: 110259, Draft EIS--557 pages and maps, Appendices--724 pages, Technical Support Documents--on DVD, August 19, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 15 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Fish KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parks KW - Preserves KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Florida KW - North Fork St. Lucie River 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/894158733?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.title=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Tallahassee, Florida; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 19, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. [Part 25 of 28] T2 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. AN - 894158729; 15018-9_0025 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Crosstown Parkway by approximately two miles, from Manth Lane on the west, across the North Fork St. Lucie River (NFSLR) to US 1 on the east, in Port St. Lucie, St. Lucie County, Florida is proposed. The study area is bordered on the north by Fallon Drive, on the south by Thornhill Drive, on the west by Manth Lane, and on the east by US 1. The two existing crossings of the NFSLR at Port St. Lucie Boulevard and Prima Vista Boulevard are experiencing delays and will not be able to meet the projected travel demand across the NFSLR in the future. Forecasts indicate that the combined traffic volume crossing the NFSLR will increase from 104,680 vehicles in 2008 to 156,000 in 2037. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation systems management alternative, a multimodal alternative, and six build alternatives which include a bridge over the NFSLR. Alternative 2A would connect Crosstown Parkway via Walters Terrace west of the NFSLR to Veterans Memorial Parkway (formerly known as Midport Road) east of the NFSLR, and ultimately connect with US 1 at the existing signalized intersection with Veterans Memorial Parkway/Walton Road. Alternative 2D would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, then connect to Walters Terrace via Floresta Drive. Traffic would be required to make a right turn and a left turn at the two intersections along Floresta Drive to make the connection to US 1. Alternative 1C would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive west of the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Village Green Drive. Alternative 1F would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive, then curve northeast to connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6B is similar to Alternative 1F, and would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, but would then curve northeast and cross the NFSLR north of Alternative 1F. It would connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6A would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive and curve north and then east across the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Savanna Club Boulevard. Total costs of constructing the build alternatives are estimated in 2009 dollars at $118.9 to $167.8 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed extension would address severe traffic congestion within the City of Port St. Lucie, particularly at the two existing bridges over the NFSLR which already exceed their capacity and operate below acceptable levels at critical times of the day. The project would also benefit public safety by providing an additional evacuation route. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The project area is within the boundaries of the NFSLR Aquatic Preserve and the Savannas Preserve State Park. Construction would impact eight to 10.9 acres of wetlands, 140 to 231 residences, and zero to 14 commercial properties. Six listed species (mangrove rivulus, smalltooth sawfish, opossum pipefish, eastern indigo snake, wood stork, and the West Indian manatee) may be affected, but are not likely to be adversely affected. All build alternatives could affect wildlife passage and would introduce light trespass, noise, and colonization by invasive species. 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). JF - EPA number: 110259, Draft EIS--557 pages and maps, Appendices--724 pages, Technical Support Documents--on DVD, August 19, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 25 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Fish KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parks KW - Preserves KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Florida KW - North Fork St. Lucie River 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/894158729?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.title=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Tallahassee, Florida; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 19, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. [Part 14 of 28] T2 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. AN - 894158720; 15018-9_0014 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Crosstown Parkway by approximately two miles, from Manth Lane on the west, across the North Fork St. Lucie River (NFSLR) to US 1 on the east, in Port St. Lucie, St. Lucie County, Florida is proposed. The study area is bordered on the north by Fallon Drive, on the south by Thornhill Drive, on the west by Manth Lane, and on the east by US 1. The two existing crossings of the NFSLR at Port St. Lucie Boulevard and Prima Vista Boulevard are experiencing delays and will not be able to meet the projected travel demand across the NFSLR in the future. Forecasts indicate that the combined traffic volume crossing the NFSLR will increase from 104,680 vehicles in 2008 to 156,000 in 2037. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation systems management alternative, a multimodal alternative, and six build alternatives which include a bridge over the NFSLR. Alternative 2A would connect Crosstown Parkway via Walters Terrace west of the NFSLR to Veterans Memorial Parkway (formerly known as Midport Road) east of the NFSLR, and ultimately connect with US 1 at the existing signalized intersection with Veterans Memorial Parkway/Walton Road. Alternative 2D would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, then connect to Walters Terrace via Floresta Drive. Traffic would be required to make a right turn and a left turn at the two intersections along Floresta Drive to make the connection to US 1. Alternative 1C would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive west of the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Village Green Drive. Alternative 1F would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive, then curve northeast to connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6B is similar to Alternative 1F, and would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, but would then curve northeast and cross the NFSLR north of Alternative 1F. It would connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6A would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive and curve north and then east across the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Savanna Club Boulevard. Total costs of constructing the build alternatives are estimated in 2009 dollars at $118.9 to $167.8 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed extension would address severe traffic congestion within the City of Port St. Lucie, particularly at the two existing bridges over the NFSLR which already exceed their capacity and operate below acceptable levels at critical times of the day. The project would also benefit public safety by providing an additional evacuation route. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The project area is within the boundaries of the NFSLR Aquatic Preserve and the Savannas Preserve State Park. Construction would impact eight to 10.9 acres of wetlands, 140 to 231 residences, and zero to 14 commercial properties. Six listed species (mangrove rivulus, smalltooth sawfish, opossum pipefish, eastern indigo snake, wood stork, and the West Indian manatee) may be affected, but are not likely to be adversely affected. All build alternatives could affect wildlife passage and would introduce light trespass, noise, and colonization by invasive species. 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). JF - EPA number: 110259, Draft EIS--557 pages and maps, Appendices--724 pages, Technical Support Documents--on DVD, August 19, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 14 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Fish KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parks KW - Preserves KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Florida KW - North Fork St. Lucie River 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/894158720?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.title=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Tallahassee, Florida; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 19, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. [Part 5 of 28] T2 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. AN - 894158711; 15018-9_0005 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Crosstown Parkway by approximately two miles, from Manth Lane on the west, across the North Fork St. Lucie River (NFSLR) to US 1 on the east, in Port St. Lucie, St. Lucie County, Florida is proposed. The study area is bordered on the north by Fallon Drive, on the south by Thornhill Drive, on the west by Manth Lane, and on the east by US 1. The two existing crossings of the NFSLR at Port St. Lucie Boulevard and Prima Vista Boulevard are experiencing delays and will not be able to meet the projected travel demand across the NFSLR in the future. Forecasts indicate that the combined traffic volume crossing the NFSLR will increase from 104,680 vehicles in 2008 to 156,000 in 2037. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation systems management alternative, a multimodal alternative, and six build alternatives which include a bridge over the NFSLR. Alternative 2A would connect Crosstown Parkway via Walters Terrace west of the NFSLR to Veterans Memorial Parkway (formerly known as Midport Road) east of the NFSLR, and ultimately connect with US 1 at the existing signalized intersection with Veterans Memorial Parkway/Walton Road. Alternative 2D would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, then connect to Walters Terrace via Floresta Drive. Traffic would be required to make a right turn and a left turn at the two intersections along Floresta Drive to make the connection to US 1. Alternative 1C would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive west of the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Village Green Drive. Alternative 1F would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive, then curve northeast to connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6B is similar to Alternative 1F, and would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, but would then curve northeast and cross the NFSLR north of Alternative 1F. It would connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6A would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive and curve north and then east across the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Savanna Club Boulevard. Total costs of constructing the build alternatives are estimated in 2009 dollars at $118.9 to $167.8 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed extension would address severe traffic congestion within the City of Port St. Lucie, particularly at the two existing bridges over the NFSLR which already exceed their capacity and operate below acceptable levels at critical times of the day. The project would also benefit public safety by providing an additional evacuation route. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The project area is within the boundaries of the NFSLR Aquatic Preserve and the Savannas Preserve State Park. Construction would impact eight to 10.9 acres of wetlands, 140 to 231 residences, and zero to 14 commercial properties. Six listed species (mangrove rivulus, smalltooth sawfish, opossum pipefish, eastern indigo snake, wood stork, and the West Indian manatee) may be affected, but are not likely to be adversely affected. All build alternatives could affect wildlife passage and would introduce light trespass, noise, and colonization by invasive species. 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). JF - EPA number: 110259, Draft EIS--557 pages and maps, Appendices--724 pages, Technical Support Documents--on DVD, August 19, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Fish KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parks KW - Preserves KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Florida KW - North Fork St. Lucie River 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/894158711?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.title=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Tallahassee, Florida; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 19, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. [Part 24 of 28] T2 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. AN - 894158708; 15018-9_0024 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Crosstown Parkway by approximately two miles, from Manth Lane on the west, across the North Fork St. Lucie River (NFSLR) to US 1 on the east, in Port St. Lucie, St. Lucie County, Florida is proposed. The study area is bordered on the north by Fallon Drive, on the south by Thornhill Drive, on the west by Manth Lane, and on the east by US 1. The two existing crossings of the NFSLR at Port St. Lucie Boulevard and Prima Vista Boulevard are experiencing delays and will not be able to meet the projected travel demand across the NFSLR in the future. Forecasts indicate that the combined traffic volume crossing the NFSLR will increase from 104,680 vehicles in 2008 to 156,000 in 2037. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation systems management alternative, a multimodal alternative, and six build alternatives which include a bridge over the NFSLR. Alternative 2A would connect Crosstown Parkway via Walters Terrace west of the NFSLR to Veterans Memorial Parkway (formerly known as Midport Road) east of the NFSLR, and ultimately connect with US 1 at the existing signalized intersection with Veterans Memorial Parkway/Walton Road. Alternative 2D would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, then connect to Walters Terrace via Floresta Drive. Traffic would be required to make a right turn and a left turn at the two intersections along Floresta Drive to make the connection to US 1. Alternative 1C would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive west of the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Village Green Drive. Alternative 1F would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive, then curve northeast to connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6B is similar to Alternative 1F, and would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, but would then curve northeast and cross the NFSLR north of Alternative 1F. It would connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6A would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive and curve north and then east across the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Savanna Club Boulevard. Total costs of constructing the build alternatives are estimated in 2009 dollars at $118.9 to $167.8 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed extension would address severe traffic congestion within the City of Port St. Lucie, particularly at the two existing bridges over the NFSLR which already exceed their capacity and operate below acceptable levels at critical times of the day. The project would also benefit public safety by providing an additional evacuation route. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The project area is within the boundaries of the NFSLR Aquatic Preserve and the Savannas Preserve State Park. Construction would impact eight to 10.9 acres of wetlands, 140 to 231 residences, and zero to 14 commercial properties. Six listed species (mangrove rivulus, smalltooth sawfish, opossum pipefish, eastern indigo snake, wood stork, and the West Indian manatee) may be affected, but are not likely to be adversely affected. All build alternatives could affect wildlife passage and would introduce light trespass, noise, and colonization by invasive species. 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). JF - EPA number: 110259, Draft EIS--557 pages and maps, Appendices--724 pages, Technical Support Documents--on DVD, August 19, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 24 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Fish KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parks KW - Preserves KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Florida KW - North Fork St. Lucie River 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/894158708?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.title=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Tallahassee, Florida; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 19, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. [Part 13 of 28] T2 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. AN - 894158700; 15018-9_0013 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Crosstown Parkway by approximately two miles, from Manth Lane on the west, across the North Fork St. Lucie River (NFSLR) to US 1 on the east, in Port St. Lucie, St. Lucie County, Florida is proposed. The study area is bordered on the north by Fallon Drive, on the south by Thornhill Drive, on the west by Manth Lane, and on the east by US 1. The two existing crossings of the NFSLR at Port St. Lucie Boulevard and Prima Vista Boulevard are experiencing delays and will not be able to meet the projected travel demand across the NFSLR in the future. Forecasts indicate that the combined traffic volume crossing the NFSLR will increase from 104,680 vehicles in 2008 to 156,000 in 2037. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation systems management alternative, a multimodal alternative, and six build alternatives which include a bridge over the NFSLR. Alternative 2A would connect Crosstown Parkway via Walters Terrace west of the NFSLR to Veterans Memorial Parkway (formerly known as Midport Road) east of the NFSLR, and ultimately connect with US 1 at the existing signalized intersection with Veterans Memorial Parkway/Walton Road. Alternative 2D would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, then connect to Walters Terrace via Floresta Drive. Traffic would be required to make a right turn and a left turn at the two intersections along Floresta Drive to make the connection to US 1. Alternative 1C would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive west of the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Village Green Drive. Alternative 1F would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive, then curve northeast to connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6B is similar to Alternative 1F, and would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, but would then curve northeast and cross the NFSLR north of Alternative 1F. It would connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6A would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive and curve north and then east across the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Savanna Club Boulevard. Total costs of constructing the build alternatives are estimated in 2009 dollars at $118.9 to $167.8 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed extension would address severe traffic congestion within the City of Port St. Lucie, particularly at the two existing bridges over the NFSLR which already exceed their capacity and operate below acceptable levels at critical times of the day. The project would also benefit public safety by providing an additional evacuation route. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The project area is within the boundaries of the NFSLR Aquatic Preserve and the Savannas Preserve State Park. Construction would impact eight to 10.9 acres of wetlands, 140 to 231 residences, and zero to 14 commercial properties. Six listed species (mangrove rivulus, smalltooth sawfish, opossum pipefish, eastern indigo snake, wood stork, and the West Indian manatee) may be affected, but are not likely to be adversely affected. All build alternatives could affect wildlife passage and would introduce light trespass, noise, and colonization by invasive species. 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). JF - EPA number: 110259, Draft EIS--557 pages and maps, Appendices--724 pages, Technical Support Documents--on DVD, August 19, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 13 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Fish KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parks KW - Preserves KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Florida KW - North Fork St. Lucie River 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/894158700?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.title=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Tallahassee, Florida; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 19, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. [Part 4 of 28] T2 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. AN - 894158684; 15018-9_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Crosstown Parkway by approximately two miles, from Manth Lane on the west, across the North Fork St. Lucie River (NFSLR) to US 1 on the east, in Port St. Lucie, St. Lucie County, Florida is proposed. The study area is bordered on the north by Fallon Drive, on the south by Thornhill Drive, on the west by Manth Lane, and on the east by US 1. The two existing crossings of the NFSLR at Port St. Lucie Boulevard and Prima Vista Boulevard are experiencing delays and will not be able to meet the projected travel demand across the NFSLR in the future. Forecasts indicate that the combined traffic volume crossing the NFSLR will increase from 104,680 vehicles in 2008 to 156,000 in 2037. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation systems management alternative, a multimodal alternative, and six build alternatives which include a bridge over the NFSLR. Alternative 2A would connect Crosstown Parkway via Walters Terrace west of the NFSLR to Veterans Memorial Parkway (formerly known as Midport Road) east of the NFSLR, and ultimately connect with US 1 at the existing signalized intersection with Veterans Memorial Parkway/Walton Road. Alternative 2D would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, then connect to Walters Terrace via Floresta Drive. Traffic would be required to make a right turn and a left turn at the two intersections along Floresta Drive to make the connection to US 1. Alternative 1C would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive west of the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Village Green Drive. Alternative 1F would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive, then curve northeast to connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6B is similar to Alternative 1F, and would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, but would then curve northeast and cross the NFSLR north of Alternative 1F. It would connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6A would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive and curve north and then east across the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Savanna Club Boulevard. Total costs of constructing the build alternatives are estimated in 2009 dollars at $118.9 to $167.8 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed extension would address severe traffic congestion within the City of Port St. Lucie, particularly at the two existing bridges over the NFSLR which already exceed their capacity and operate below acceptable levels at critical times of the day. The project would also benefit public safety by providing an additional evacuation route. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The project area is within the boundaries of the NFSLR Aquatic Preserve and the Savannas Preserve State Park. Construction would impact eight to 10.9 acres of wetlands, 140 to 231 residences, and zero to 14 commercial properties. Six listed species (mangrove rivulus, smalltooth sawfish, opossum pipefish, eastern indigo snake, wood stork, and the West Indian manatee) may be affected, but are not likely to be adversely affected. All build alternatives could affect wildlife passage and would introduce light trespass, noise, and colonization by invasive species. 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). JF - EPA number: 110259, Draft EIS--557 pages and maps, Appendices--724 pages, Technical Support Documents--on DVD, August 19, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Fish KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parks KW - Preserves KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Florida KW - North Fork St. Lucie River 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/894158684?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.title=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Tallahassee, Florida; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 19, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. [Part 23 of 28] T2 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. AN - 894158683; 15018-9_0023 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Crosstown Parkway by approximately two miles, from Manth Lane on the west, across the North Fork St. Lucie River (NFSLR) to US 1 on the east, in Port St. Lucie, St. Lucie County, Florida is proposed. The study area is bordered on the north by Fallon Drive, on the south by Thornhill Drive, on the west by Manth Lane, and on the east by US 1. The two existing crossings of the NFSLR at Port St. Lucie Boulevard and Prima Vista Boulevard are experiencing delays and will not be able to meet the projected travel demand across the NFSLR in the future. Forecasts indicate that the combined traffic volume crossing the NFSLR will increase from 104,680 vehicles in 2008 to 156,000 in 2037. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation systems management alternative, a multimodal alternative, and six build alternatives which include a bridge over the NFSLR. Alternative 2A would connect Crosstown Parkway via Walters Terrace west of the NFSLR to Veterans Memorial Parkway (formerly known as Midport Road) east of the NFSLR, and ultimately connect with US 1 at the existing signalized intersection with Veterans Memorial Parkway/Walton Road. Alternative 2D would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, then connect to Walters Terrace via Floresta Drive. Traffic would be required to make a right turn and a left turn at the two intersections along Floresta Drive to make the connection to US 1. Alternative 1C would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive west of the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Village Green Drive. Alternative 1F would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive, then curve northeast to connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6B is similar to Alternative 1F, and would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, but would then curve northeast and cross the NFSLR north of Alternative 1F. It would connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6A would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive and curve north and then east across the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Savanna Club Boulevard. Total costs of constructing the build alternatives are estimated in 2009 dollars at $118.9 to $167.8 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed extension would address severe traffic congestion within the City of Port St. Lucie, particularly at the two existing bridges over the NFSLR which already exceed their capacity and operate below acceptable levels at critical times of the day. The project would also benefit public safety by providing an additional evacuation route. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The project area is within the boundaries of the NFSLR Aquatic Preserve and the Savannas Preserve State Park. Construction would impact eight to 10.9 acres of wetlands, 140 to 231 residences, and zero to 14 commercial properties. Six listed species (mangrove rivulus, smalltooth sawfish, opossum pipefish, eastern indigo snake, wood stork, and the West Indian manatee) may be affected, but are not likely to be adversely affected. All build alternatives could affect wildlife passage and would introduce light trespass, noise, and colonization by invasive species. 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). JF - EPA number: 110259, Draft EIS--557 pages and maps, Appendices--724 pages, Technical Support Documents--on DVD, August 19, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 23 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Fish KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parks KW - Preserves KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Florida KW - North Fork St. Lucie River 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/894158683?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.title=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Tallahassee, Florida; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 19, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. [Part 12 of 28] T2 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. AN - 894158681; 15018-9_0012 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Crosstown Parkway by approximately two miles, from Manth Lane on the west, across the North Fork St. Lucie River (NFSLR) to US 1 on the east, in Port St. Lucie, St. Lucie County, Florida is proposed. The study area is bordered on the north by Fallon Drive, on the south by Thornhill Drive, on the west by Manth Lane, and on the east by US 1. The two existing crossings of the NFSLR at Port St. Lucie Boulevard and Prima Vista Boulevard are experiencing delays and will not be able to meet the projected travel demand across the NFSLR in the future. Forecasts indicate that the combined traffic volume crossing the NFSLR will increase from 104,680 vehicles in 2008 to 156,000 in 2037. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation systems management alternative, a multimodal alternative, and six build alternatives which include a bridge over the NFSLR. Alternative 2A would connect Crosstown Parkway via Walters Terrace west of the NFSLR to Veterans Memorial Parkway (formerly known as Midport Road) east of the NFSLR, and ultimately connect with US 1 at the existing signalized intersection with Veterans Memorial Parkway/Walton Road. Alternative 2D would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, then connect to Walters Terrace via Floresta Drive. Traffic would be required to make a right turn and a left turn at the two intersections along Floresta Drive to make the connection to US 1. Alternative 1C would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive west of the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Village Green Drive. Alternative 1F would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive, then curve northeast to connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6B is similar to Alternative 1F, and would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, but would then curve northeast and cross the NFSLR north of Alternative 1F. It would connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6A would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive and curve north and then east across the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Savanna Club Boulevard. Total costs of constructing the build alternatives are estimated in 2009 dollars at $118.9 to $167.8 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed extension would address severe traffic congestion within the City of Port St. Lucie, particularly at the two existing bridges over the NFSLR which already exceed their capacity and operate below acceptable levels at critical times of the day. The project would also benefit public safety by providing an additional evacuation route. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The project area is within the boundaries of the NFSLR Aquatic Preserve and the Savannas Preserve State Park. Construction would impact eight to 10.9 acres of wetlands, 140 to 231 residences, and zero to 14 commercial properties. Six listed species (mangrove rivulus, smalltooth sawfish, opossum pipefish, eastern indigo snake, wood stork, and the West Indian manatee) may be affected, but are not likely to be adversely affected. All build alternatives could affect wildlife passage and would introduce light trespass, noise, and colonization by invasive species. 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). JF - EPA number: 110259, Draft EIS--557 pages and maps, Appendices--724 pages, Technical Support Documents--on DVD, August 19, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 12 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Fish KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parks KW - Preserves KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Florida KW - North Fork St. Lucie River 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/894158681?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.title=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Tallahassee, Florida; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 19, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. [Part 3 of 28] T2 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. AN - 894158677; 15018-9_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Crosstown Parkway by approximately two miles, from Manth Lane on the west, across the North Fork St. Lucie River (NFSLR) to US 1 on the east, in Port St. Lucie, St. Lucie County, Florida is proposed. The study area is bordered on the north by Fallon Drive, on the south by Thornhill Drive, on the west by Manth Lane, and on the east by US 1. The two existing crossings of the NFSLR at Port St. Lucie Boulevard and Prima Vista Boulevard are experiencing delays and will not be able to meet the projected travel demand across the NFSLR in the future. Forecasts indicate that the combined traffic volume crossing the NFSLR will increase from 104,680 vehicles in 2008 to 156,000 in 2037. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation systems management alternative, a multimodal alternative, and six build alternatives which include a bridge over the NFSLR. Alternative 2A would connect Crosstown Parkway via Walters Terrace west of the NFSLR to Veterans Memorial Parkway (formerly known as Midport Road) east of the NFSLR, and ultimately connect with US 1 at the existing signalized intersection with Veterans Memorial Parkway/Walton Road. Alternative 2D would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, then connect to Walters Terrace via Floresta Drive. Traffic would be required to make a right turn and a left turn at the two intersections along Floresta Drive to make the connection to US 1. Alternative 1C would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive west of the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Village Green Drive. Alternative 1F would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive, then curve northeast to connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6B is similar to Alternative 1F, and would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, but would then curve northeast and cross the NFSLR north of Alternative 1F. It would connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6A would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive and curve north and then east across the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Savanna Club Boulevard. Total costs of constructing the build alternatives are estimated in 2009 dollars at $118.9 to $167.8 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed extension would address severe traffic congestion within the City of Port St. Lucie, particularly at the two existing bridges over the NFSLR which already exceed their capacity and operate below acceptable levels at critical times of the day. The project would also benefit public safety by providing an additional evacuation route. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The project area is within the boundaries of the NFSLR Aquatic Preserve and the Savannas Preserve State Park. Construction would impact eight to 10.9 acres of wetlands, 140 to 231 residences, and zero to 14 commercial properties. Six listed species (mangrove rivulus, smalltooth sawfish, opossum pipefish, eastern indigo snake, wood stork, and the West Indian manatee) may be affected, but are not likely to be adversely affected. All build alternatives could affect wildlife passage and would introduce light trespass, noise, and colonization by invasive species. 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). JF - EPA number: 110259, Draft EIS--557 pages and maps, Appendices--724 pages, Technical Support Documents--on DVD, August 19, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Fish KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parks KW - Preserves KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Florida KW - North Fork St. Lucie River 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/894158677?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.title=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Tallahassee, Florida; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 19, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. [Part 22 of 28] T2 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. AN - 894158672; 15018-9_0022 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Crosstown Parkway by approximately two miles, from Manth Lane on the west, across the North Fork St. Lucie River (NFSLR) to US 1 on the east, in Port St. Lucie, St. Lucie County, Florida is proposed. The study area is bordered on the north by Fallon Drive, on the south by Thornhill Drive, on the west by Manth Lane, and on the east by US 1. The two existing crossings of the NFSLR at Port St. Lucie Boulevard and Prima Vista Boulevard are experiencing delays and will not be able to meet the projected travel demand across the NFSLR in the future. Forecasts indicate that the combined traffic volume crossing the NFSLR will increase from 104,680 vehicles in 2008 to 156,000 in 2037. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation systems management alternative, a multimodal alternative, and six build alternatives which include a bridge over the NFSLR. Alternative 2A would connect Crosstown Parkway via Walters Terrace west of the NFSLR to Veterans Memorial Parkway (formerly known as Midport Road) east of the NFSLR, and ultimately connect with US 1 at the existing signalized intersection with Veterans Memorial Parkway/Walton Road. Alternative 2D would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, then connect to Walters Terrace via Floresta Drive. Traffic would be required to make a right turn and a left turn at the two intersections along Floresta Drive to make the connection to US 1. Alternative 1C would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive west of the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Village Green Drive. Alternative 1F would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive, then curve northeast to connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6B is similar to Alternative 1F, and would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, but would then curve northeast and cross the NFSLR north of Alternative 1F. It would connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6A would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive and curve north and then east across the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Savanna Club Boulevard. Total costs of constructing the build alternatives are estimated in 2009 dollars at $118.9 to $167.8 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed extension would address severe traffic congestion within the City of Port St. Lucie, particularly at the two existing bridges over the NFSLR which already exceed their capacity and operate below acceptable levels at critical times of the day. The project would also benefit public safety by providing an additional evacuation route. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The project area is within the boundaries of the NFSLR Aquatic Preserve and the Savannas Preserve State Park. Construction would impact eight to 10.9 acres of wetlands, 140 to 231 residences, and zero to 14 commercial properties. Six listed species (mangrove rivulus, smalltooth sawfish, opossum pipefish, eastern indigo snake, wood stork, and the West Indian manatee) may be affected, but are not likely to be adversely affected. All build alternatives could affect wildlife passage and would introduce light trespass, noise, and colonization by invasive species. 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). JF - EPA number: 110259, Draft EIS--557 pages and maps, Appendices--724 pages, Technical Support Documents--on DVD, August 19, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 22 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Fish KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parks KW - Preserves KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Florida KW - North Fork St. Lucie River 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/894158672?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.title=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Tallahassee, Florida; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 19, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. [Part 2 of 28] T2 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. AN - 894158661; 15018-9_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Crosstown Parkway by approximately two miles, from Manth Lane on the west, across the North Fork St. Lucie River (NFSLR) to US 1 on the east, in Port St. Lucie, St. Lucie County, Florida is proposed. The study area is bordered on the north by Fallon Drive, on the south by Thornhill Drive, on the west by Manth Lane, and on the east by US 1. The two existing crossings of the NFSLR at Port St. Lucie Boulevard and Prima Vista Boulevard are experiencing delays and will not be able to meet the projected travel demand across the NFSLR in the future. Forecasts indicate that the combined traffic volume crossing the NFSLR will increase from 104,680 vehicles in 2008 to 156,000 in 2037. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation systems management alternative, a multimodal alternative, and six build alternatives which include a bridge over the NFSLR. Alternative 2A would connect Crosstown Parkway via Walters Terrace west of the NFSLR to Veterans Memorial Parkway (formerly known as Midport Road) east of the NFSLR, and ultimately connect with US 1 at the existing signalized intersection with Veterans Memorial Parkway/Walton Road. Alternative 2D would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, then connect to Walters Terrace via Floresta Drive. Traffic would be required to make a right turn and a left turn at the two intersections along Floresta Drive to make the connection to US 1. Alternative 1C would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive west of the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Village Green Drive. Alternative 1F would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive, then curve northeast to connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6B is similar to Alternative 1F, and would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, but would then curve northeast and cross the NFSLR north of Alternative 1F. It would connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6A would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive and curve north and then east across the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Savanna Club Boulevard. Total costs of constructing the build alternatives are estimated in 2009 dollars at $118.9 to $167.8 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed extension would address severe traffic congestion within the City of Port St. Lucie, particularly at the two existing bridges over the NFSLR which already exceed their capacity and operate below acceptable levels at critical times of the day. The project would also benefit public safety by providing an additional evacuation route. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The project area is within the boundaries of the NFSLR Aquatic Preserve and the Savannas Preserve State Park. Construction would impact eight to 10.9 acres of wetlands, 140 to 231 residences, and zero to 14 commercial properties. Six listed species (mangrove rivulus, smalltooth sawfish, opossum pipefish, eastern indigo snake, wood stork, and the West Indian manatee) may be affected, but are not likely to be adversely affected. All build alternatives could affect wildlife passage and would introduce light trespass, noise, and colonization by invasive species. 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). JF - EPA number: 110259, Draft EIS--557 pages and maps, Appendices--724 pages, Technical Support Documents--on DVD, August 19, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Fish KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parks KW - Preserves KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Florida KW - North Fork St. Lucie River 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/894158661?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.title=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Tallahassee, Florida; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 19, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. [Part 28 of 28] T2 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. AN - 894158658; 15018-9_0028 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Crosstown Parkway by approximately two miles, from Manth Lane on the west, across the North Fork St. Lucie River (NFSLR) to US 1 on the east, in Port St. Lucie, St. Lucie County, Florida is proposed. The study area is bordered on the north by Fallon Drive, on the south by Thornhill Drive, on the west by Manth Lane, and on the east by US 1. The two existing crossings of the NFSLR at Port St. Lucie Boulevard and Prima Vista Boulevard are experiencing delays and will not be able to meet the projected travel demand across the NFSLR in the future. Forecasts indicate that the combined traffic volume crossing the NFSLR will increase from 104,680 vehicles in 2008 to 156,000 in 2037. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation systems management alternative, a multimodal alternative, and six build alternatives which include a bridge over the NFSLR. Alternative 2A would connect Crosstown Parkway via Walters Terrace west of the NFSLR to Veterans Memorial Parkway (formerly known as Midport Road) east of the NFSLR, and ultimately connect with US 1 at the existing signalized intersection with Veterans Memorial Parkway/Walton Road. Alternative 2D would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, then connect to Walters Terrace via Floresta Drive. Traffic would be required to make a right turn and a left turn at the two intersections along Floresta Drive to make the connection to US 1. Alternative 1C would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive west of the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Village Green Drive. Alternative 1F would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive, then curve northeast to connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6B is similar to Alternative 1F, and would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, but would then curve northeast and cross the NFSLR north of Alternative 1F. It would connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6A would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive and curve north and then east across the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Savanna Club Boulevard. Total costs of constructing the build alternatives are estimated in 2009 dollars at $118.9 to $167.8 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed extension would address severe traffic congestion within the City of Port St. Lucie, particularly at the two existing bridges over the NFSLR which already exceed their capacity and operate below acceptable levels at critical times of the day. The project would also benefit public safety by providing an additional evacuation route. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The project area is within the boundaries of the NFSLR Aquatic Preserve and the Savannas Preserve State Park. Construction would impact eight to 10.9 acres of wetlands, 140 to 231 residences, and zero to 14 commercial properties. Six listed species (mangrove rivulus, smalltooth sawfish, opossum pipefish, eastern indigo snake, wood stork, and the West Indian manatee) may be affected, but are not likely to be adversely affected. All build alternatives could affect wildlife passage and would introduce light trespass, noise, and colonization by invasive species. 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). JF - EPA number: 110259, Draft EIS--557 pages and maps, Appendices--724 pages, Technical Support Documents--on DVD, August 19, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 28 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Fish KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parks KW - Preserves KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Florida KW - North Fork St. Lucie River 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/894158658?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.title=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Tallahassee, Florida; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 19, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. [Part 21 of 28] T2 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. AN - 894158655; 15018-9_0021 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Crosstown Parkway by approximately two miles, from Manth Lane on the west, across the North Fork St. Lucie River (NFSLR) to US 1 on the east, in Port St. Lucie, St. Lucie County, Florida is proposed. The study area is bordered on the north by Fallon Drive, on the south by Thornhill Drive, on the west by Manth Lane, and on the east by US 1. The two existing crossings of the NFSLR at Port St. Lucie Boulevard and Prima Vista Boulevard are experiencing delays and will not be able to meet the projected travel demand across the NFSLR in the future. Forecasts indicate that the combined traffic volume crossing the NFSLR will increase from 104,680 vehicles in 2008 to 156,000 in 2037. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation systems management alternative, a multimodal alternative, and six build alternatives which include a bridge over the NFSLR. Alternative 2A would connect Crosstown Parkway via Walters Terrace west of the NFSLR to Veterans Memorial Parkway (formerly known as Midport Road) east of the NFSLR, and ultimately connect with US 1 at the existing signalized intersection with Veterans Memorial Parkway/Walton Road. Alternative 2D would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, then connect to Walters Terrace via Floresta Drive. Traffic would be required to make a right turn and a left turn at the two intersections along Floresta Drive to make the connection to US 1. Alternative 1C would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive west of the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Village Green Drive. Alternative 1F would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive, then curve northeast to connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6B is similar to Alternative 1F, and would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, but would then curve northeast and cross the NFSLR north of Alternative 1F. It would connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6A would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive and curve north and then east across the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Savanna Club Boulevard. Total costs of constructing the build alternatives are estimated in 2009 dollars at $118.9 to $167.8 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed extension would address severe traffic congestion within the City of Port St. Lucie, particularly at the two existing bridges over the NFSLR which already exceed their capacity and operate below acceptable levels at critical times of the day. The project would also benefit public safety by providing an additional evacuation route. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The project area is within the boundaries of the NFSLR Aquatic Preserve and the Savannas Preserve State Park. Construction would impact eight to 10.9 acres of wetlands, 140 to 231 residences, and zero to 14 commercial properties. Six listed species (mangrove rivulus, smalltooth sawfish, opossum pipefish, eastern indigo snake, wood stork, and the West Indian manatee) may be affected, but are not likely to be adversely affected. All build alternatives could affect wildlife passage and would introduce light trespass, noise, and colonization by invasive species. 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). JF - EPA number: 110259, Draft EIS--557 pages and maps, Appendices--724 pages, Technical Support Documents--on DVD, August 19, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 21 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Fish KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parks KW - Preserves KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Florida KW - North Fork St. Lucie River 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/894158655?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.title=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Tallahassee, Florida; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 19, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. [Part 11 of 28] T2 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. AN - 894158654; 15018-9_0011 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Crosstown Parkway by approximately two miles, from Manth Lane on the west, across the North Fork St. Lucie River (NFSLR) to US 1 on the east, in Port St. Lucie, St. Lucie County, Florida is proposed. The study area is bordered on the north by Fallon Drive, on the south by Thornhill Drive, on the west by Manth Lane, and on the east by US 1. The two existing crossings of the NFSLR at Port St. Lucie Boulevard and Prima Vista Boulevard are experiencing delays and will not be able to meet the projected travel demand across the NFSLR in the future. Forecasts indicate that the combined traffic volume crossing the NFSLR will increase from 104,680 vehicles in 2008 to 156,000 in 2037. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation systems management alternative, a multimodal alternative, and six build alternatives which include a bridge over the NFSLR. Alternative 2A would connect Crosstown Parkway via Walters Terrace west of the NFSLR to Veterans Memorial Parkway (formerly known as Midport Road) east of the NFSLR, and ultimately connect with US 1 at the existing signalized intersection with Veterans Memorial Parkway/Walton Road. Alternative 2D would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, then connect to Walters Terrace via Floresta Drive. Traffic would be required to make a right turn and a left turn at the two intersections along Floresta Drive to make the connection to US 1. Alternative 1C would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive west of the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Village Green Drive. Alternative 1F would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive, then curve northeast to connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6B is similar to Alternative 1F, and would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, but would then curve northeast and cross the NFSLR north of Alternative 1F. It would connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6A would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive and curve north and then east across the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Savanna Club Boulevard. Total costs of constructing the build alternatives are estimated in 2009 dollars at $118.9 to $167.8 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed extension would address severe traffic congestion within the City of Port St. Lucie, particularly at the two existing bridges over the NFSLR which already exceed their capacity and operate below acceptable levels at critical times of the day. The project would also benefit public safety by providing an additional evacuation route. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The project area is within the boundaries of the NFSLR Aquatic Preserve and the Savannas Preserve State Park. Construction would impact eight to 10.9 acres of wetlands, 140 to 231 residences, and zero to 14 commercial properties. Six listed species (mangrove rivulus, smalltooth sawfish, opossum pipefish, eastern indigo snake, wood stork, and the West Indian manatee) may be affected, but are not likely to be adversely affected. All build alternatives could affect wildlife passage and would introduce light trespass, noise, and colonization by invasive species. 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). JF - EPA number: 110259, Draft EIS--557 pages and maps, Appendices--724 pages, Technical Support Documents--on DVD, August 19, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 11 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Fish KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parks KW - Preserves KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Florida KW - North Fork St. Lucie River 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/894158654?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.title=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Tallahassee, Florida; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 19, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. [Part 27 of 28] T2 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. AN - 894158645; 15018-9_0027 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Crosstown Parkway by approximately two miles, from Manth Lane on the west, across the North Fork St. Lucie River (NFSLR) to US 1 on the east, in Port St. Lucie, St. Lucie County, Florida is proposed. The study area is bordered on the north by Fallon Drive, on the south by Thornhill Drive, on the west by Manth Lane, and on the east by US 1. The two existing crossings of the NFSLR at Port St. Lucie Boulevard and Prima Vista Boulevard are experiencing delays and will not be able to meet the projected travel demand across the NFSLR in the future. Forecasts indicate that the combined traffic volume crossing the NFSLR will increase from 104,680 vehicles in 2008 to 156,000 in 2037. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation systems management alternative, a multimodal alternative, and six build alternatives which include a bridge over the NFSLR. Alternative 2A would connect Crosstown Parkway via Walters Terrace west of the NFSLR to Veterans Memorial Parkway (formerly known as Midport Road) east of the NFSLR, and ultimately connect with US 1 at the existing signalized intersection with Veterans Memorial Parkway/Walton Road. Alternative 2D would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, then connect to Walters Terrace via Floresta Drive. Traffic would be required to make a right turn and a left turn at the two intersections along Floresta Drive to make the connection to US 1. Alternative 1C would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive west of the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Village Green Drive. Alternative 1F would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive, then curve northeast to connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6B is similar to Alternative 1F, and would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, but would then curve northeast and cross the NFSLR north of Alternative 1F. It would connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6A would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive and curve north and then east across the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Savanna Club Boulevard. Total costs of constructing the build alternatives are estimated in 2009 dollars at $118.9 to $167.8 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed extension would address severe traffic congestion within the City of Port St. Lucie, particularly at the two existing bridges over the NFSLR which already exceed their capacity and operate below acceptable levels at critical times of the day. The project would also benefit public safety by providing an additional evacuation route. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The project area is within the boundaries of the NFSLR Aquatic Preserve and the Savannas Preserve State Park. Construction would impact eight to 10.9 acres of wetlands, 140 to 231 residences, and zero to 14 commercial properties. Six listed species (mangrove rivulus, smalltooth sawfish, opossum pipefish, eastern indigo snake, wood stork, and the West Indian manatee) may be affected, but are not likely to be adversely affected. All build alternatives could affect wildlife passage and would introduce light trespass, noise, and colonization by invasive species. 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). JF - EPA number: 110259, Draft EIS--557 pages and maps, Appendices--724 pages, Technical Support Documents--on DVD, August 19, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 27 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Fish KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parks KW - Preserves KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Florida KW - North Fork St. Lucie River 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/894158645?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.title=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Tallahassee, Florida; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 19, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. [Part 1 of 28] T2 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. AN - 894158641; 15018-9_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Crosstown Parkway by approximately two miles, from Manth Lane on the west, across the North Fork St. Lucie River (NFSLR) to US 1 on the east, in Port St. Lucie, St. Lucie County, Florida is proposed. The study area is bordered on the north by Fallon Drive, on the south by Thornhill Drive, on the west by Manth Lane, and on the east by US 1. The two existing crossings of the NFSLR at Port St. Lucie Boulevard and Prima Vista Boulevard are experiencing delays and will not be able to meet the projected travel demand across the NFSLR in the future. Forecasts indicate that the combined traffic volume crossing the NFSLR will increase from 104,680 vehicles in 2008 to 156,000 in 2037. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation systems management alternative, a multimodal alternative, and six build alternatives which include a bridge over the NFSLR. Alternative 2A would connect Crosstown Parkway via Walters Terrace west of the NFSLR to Veterans Memorial Parkway (formerly known as Midport Road) east of the NFSLR, and ultimately connect with US 1 at the existing signalized intersection with Veterans Memorial Parkway/Walton Road. Alternative 2D would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, then connect to Walters Terrace via Floresta Drive. Traffic would be required to make a right turn and a left turn at the two intersections along Floresta Drive to make the connection to US 1. Alternative 1C would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive west of the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Village Green Drive. Alternative 1F would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive, then curve northeast to connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6B is similar to Alternative 1F, and would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, but would then curve northeast and cross the NFSLR north of Alternative 1F. It would connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6A would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive and curve north and then east across the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Savanna Club Boulevard. Total costs of constructing the build alternatives are estimated in 2009 dollars at $118.9 to $167.8 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed extension would address severe traffic congestion within the City of Port St. Lucie, particularly at the two existing bridges over the NFSLR which already exceed their capacity and operate below acceptable levels at critical times of the day. The project would also benefit public safety by providing an additional evacuation route. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The project area is within the boundaries of the NFSLR Aquatic Preserve and the Savannas Preserve State Park. Construction would impact eight to 10.9 acres of wetlands, 140 to 231 residences, and zero to 14 commercial properties. Six listed species (mangrove rivulus, smalltooth sawfish, opossum pipefish, eastern indigo snake, wood stork, and the West Indian manatee) may be affected, but are not likely to be adversely affected. All build alternatives could affect wildlife passage and would introduce light trespass, noise, and colonization by invasive species. 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). JF - EPA number: 110259, Draft EIS--557 pages and maps, Appendices--724 pages, Technical Support Documents--on DVD, August 19, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Fish KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parks KW - Preserves KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Florida KW - North Fork St. Lucie River 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/894158641?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.title=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Tallahassee, Florida; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 19, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. [Part 26 of 28] T2 - CROSSTOWN PARKWAY EXTENSION, NEW BRIDGE CROSSING OF THE NORTH FORK ST. LUCIE RIVER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. AN - 894158596; 15018-9_0026 AB - PURPOSE: The extension of the existing Crosstown Parkway by approximately two miles, from Manth Lane on the west, across the North Fork St. Lucie River (NFSLR) to US 1 on the east, in Port St. Lucie, St. Lucie County, Florida is proposed. The study area is bordered on the north by Fallon Drive, on the south by Thornhill Drive, on the west by Manth Lane, and on the east by US 1. The two existing crossings of the NFSLR at Port St. Lucie Boulevard and Prima Vista Boulevard are experiencing delays and will not be able to meet the projected travel demand across the NFSLR in the future. Forecasts indicate that the combined traffic volume crossing the NFSLR will increase from 104,680 vehicles in 2008 to 156,000 in 2037. This draft EIS considers a No Build Alternative, a transportation systems management alternative, a multimodal alternative, and six build alternatives which include a bridge over the NFSLR. Alternative 2A would connect Crosstown Parkway via Walters Terrace west of the NFSLR to Veterans Memorial Parkway (formerly known as Midport Road) east of the NFSLR, and ultimately connect with US 1 at the existing signalized intersection with Veterans Memorial Parkway/Walton Road. Alternative 2D would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, then connect to Walters Terrace via Floresta Drive. Traffic would be required to make a right turn and a left turn at the two intersections along Floresta Drive to make the connection to US 1. Alternative 1C would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive west of the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Village Green Drive. Alternative 1F would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive, then curve northeast to connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6B is similar to Alternative 1F, and would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive, but would then curve northeast and cross the NFSLR north of Alternative 1F. It would connect with US 1 at a new intersection between Village Green Drive and Savanna Club Boulevard. Alternative 6A would extend Crosstown Parkway along West Virginia Drive to Floresta Drive and curve north and then east across the NFSLR to the existing intersection of US 1 and Savanna Club Boulevard. Total costs of constructing the build alternatives are estimated in 2009 dollars at $118.9 to $167.8 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The proposed extension would address severe traffic congestion within the City of Port St. Lucie, particularly at the two existing bridges over the NFSLR which already exceed their capacity and operate below acceptable levels at critical times of the day. The project would also benefit public safety by providing an additional evacuation route. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The project area is within the boundaries of the NFSLR Aquatic Preserve and the Savannas Preserve State Park. Construction would impact eight to 10.9 acres of wetlands, 140 to 231 residences, and zero to 14 commercial properties. Six listed species (mangrove rivulus, smalltooth sawfish, opossum pipefish, eastern indigo snake, wood stork, and the West Indian manatee) may be affected, but are not likely to be adversely affected. All build alternatives could affect wildlife passage and would introduce light trespass, noise, and colonization by invasive species. 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). JF - EPA number: 110259, Draft EIS--557 pages and maps, Appendices--724 pages, Technical Support Documents--on DVD, August 19, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 26 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Bridges KW - Cultural Resources Assessments KW - Floodplains KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Hydraulic Assessments KW - Fish KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Parks KW - Preserves KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Rivers KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Water Quality Assessments KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Florida KW - North Fork St. Lucie River 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/894158596?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.title=CROSSTOWN+PARKWAY+EXTENSION%2C+NEW+BRIDGE+CROSSING+OF+THE+NORTH+FORK+ST.+LUCIE+RIVER%2C+ST.+LUCIE+COUNTY%2C+FLORIDA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Tallahassee, Florida; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 19, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - NORTH I-25 FROM DENVER TO WELLINGTON, COLORADO. AN - 893260199; 15030 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to 61 miles of the Interstate 25 (I-25) corridor from Denver to the Fort Collins/Wellington area in Adams, Boulder, Broomfield, Denver, Jefferson, Larimer, and Weld counties, Colorado are proposed. I-25 serves as the primary north-south spine of the regional transportation system and constitutes a major link in the Western Transportation Trade Network, a system of highway and rail routes through 14 western states. Major population centers in the study area include Fort Collins, Greeley, Loveland, and communities in the northern portion of the Denver metropolitan area. Four alternatives, including a No Action Alternative, are evaluated in this final EIS. The three multi-modal build packages (Package A, Package B, and the preferred alternative) consist of highway and transit improvements. The preferred alternative would combine elements presented in Packages A and B and would include multimodal improvements on multiple corridors. I-25 would be widened with general purpose lanes and tolled express lanes (TELs) and substandard interchanges would be reconstructed or upgraded to accommodate future travel needs. The preferred alternative also includes commuter rail transit service from Fort Collins to the anticipated FasTracks North Metro end-of-line. Service to Denver would travel through Longmont and along the FasTracks North Metro Corridor. A connection to Boulder would also be made with a transfer to Northwest Rail at the Sugar Mill Station in Longmont. Nine commuter rail stations and a commuter transit maintenance facility would be included. The commuter rail would consist of a single track with occasional passing tracks at four locations and the design includes a maintenance road where existing BNSF railroad track would be used between Longmont and Fort Collins. Express bus service would operate in the TEL to connect northern Colorado communities to downtown Denver and Denver International Airport and would serve 13 stations along Harmony Road, US 34, and I-25. Commuter bus service along US 85 would connect Greeley with downtown Denver with five stops at the communities along the route. A bus maintenance facility would be constructed to accommodate both express buses and commuter buses. Capital costs for implementation of the preferred alternative are estimated in 2009 dollars at $2.18 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide modal alternatives to travelers, correct geometric deficiencies, and improve safety, mobility, and accessibility by replacing aging and obsolete infrastructure. Travel times would be shortened by 39 to 63 minutes, depending on the mode of transportation. Traffic volumes would be reduced on regional arterial streets by 5,000 to 25,000 vehicles per day. Air pollutant and noise emissions within the corridor would be kept in check or decline. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Right-of-way requirements for the preferred alternative would displace 51 residences and 23 businesses. Construction would impact 18.2 acres of wetlands, 13 acres of floodplain, 1.9 acres of terrestrial habitat, and 1.5 acres of aquatic habitat. Listed species would be affected across 341 acres; most of these impacts would involve bald eagle foraging habitat and black-tailed prairie dog colonies. Traffic-generated noise would exceed federal standards in the vicinity of 840 sensitive receptors; mitigation could be achieved in seven areas. Transit-generated noise would result in impacts to 697 residences and operational vibration would affect 40 residences. Four archaeological and historic properties and six parks or recreational properties would be affected. Hazardous materials could be encountered at up to 87 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 draft EIS, see 10-0456D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 1100271, Volume 1--1,442 pages, Volume 2 (Appendices)-- 1,188 pages, Volume 3 (Appendices)--1,240 pages, August 19, 2011 PY - 2011 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-CO-EIS-08-01-F KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Birds KW - Endangered Species (Animals) KW - Floodplains KW - Hazardous Wastes KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Historic Sites KW - Historic Sites Surveys KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Control KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Parks KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Recreation Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Colorado KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits 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/893260199?accountid=14244 L2 - http://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=2011-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=NORTH+I-25+FROM+DENVER+TO+WELLINGTON%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=NORTH+I-25+FROM+DENVER+TO+WELLINGTON%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Boulder, Colorado; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - RUSSELL STREET / SOUTH THIRD STREET, MISSOULA COUNTY, MONTANA. AN - 16386506; 15023 AB - PURPOSE: The reconstruction of 1.5 miles of Russell Street and one mile of South 3rd Street in Missoula, Montana is proposed. The project area includes Russell Street from the intersection at West Broadway Street south to Mount Avenue/South 14th Street, and South 3rd Street from Reserve Street east to Russell Street. Currently, Russell Street varies in width from two to four lanes, including turn lanes at some intersections, and includes a two-lane bridge over the Clark Fork River. South 3rd Street varies in width but generally includes one travel lane in each direction and turn lanes at intersections. Four Russell Street alternatives and five South 3rd Street alternatives, including No Build Alternatives, are considered in this final EIS. The preferred alternative for Russell Street (Alternative 4) would provide for four travel lanes and a center turn lane or median. On South 3rd Street, the preferred alternative (Alternative E) would provide two travel lanes and a center turn lane. Major intersections on Russell Street and South 3rd Street would be signalized. The existing Russell Street Bridge would be demolished and replaced at the same general location. The project would also include restriction of River Road and Harlem, Kern, and Longstaff streets to right-in and right-out only connections to Russell Street; realignment of Lawrence and Addison streets to right-angle intersections with Russell Street; and realignment of Knowles Street slightly to the north to match South 11th Street on the west. The Bitterroot Branch and Milwaukee Corridor trail crossings would be placed under Russell Street. The bridge reconstruction would extend the Shady Grove Trail westward under the north end of the bridge and include connections to the sidewalks on both sides of Russell Street. The alternatives include sidewalks, bike lanes, boulevard landscaping, curb-and-gutter drainage systems, and bus pullouts. Costs of the preferred alternatives for Russell Street and South 3rd Street are estimated in 2009 dollars at $45 million and $11.4 million, respectively. POSITIVE IMPACTS: In addition to providing safety and mobility improvements, the project would significantly improve the cityscape's visual aesthetics and reduce vehicle emissions due to smoother operations. Bicycle and pedestrian access would be improved. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Under the preferred alternative for Russell Street, 4.6 acres of new rights-of-way development would result in the displacement 11 residences, 10 commercial buildings, and six historic properties. Kern Park and Hart Park would also be impacted. Under the preferred alternative for South 3rd Street, 2.6 acres of new rights-of-way development would result in the displacement three commercial buildings. 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 08-0461D, Volume 32, Number 4. JF - EPA number: 110264, 835 pages and maps, August 19, 2011 PY - 2011 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-MT-011-01-F KW - Bridges KW - Demolition KW - Historic Sites KW - Parks KW - Recreation Facilities KW - Recreation Resources KW - Roads KW - Visual Resources KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Montana KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Recreation Facilities 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/16386506?accountid=14244 L2 - http://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=2011-08-19&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=RUSSELL+STREET+%2F+SOUTH+THIRD+STREET%2C+MISSOULA+COUNTY%2C+MONTANA.&rft.title=RUSSELL+STREET+%2F+SOUTH+THIRD+STREET%2C+MISSOULA+COUNTY%2C+MONTANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Helena, Montana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: August 19, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 38 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894160068; 15016-7_0038 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 38 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894160068?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 37 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894160062; 15016-7_0037 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 37 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894160062?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 36 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894160049; 15016-7_0036 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 36 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894160049?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 35 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894160031; 15016-7_0035 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 35 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894160031?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 34 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894160024; 15016-7_0034 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 34 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894160024?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 33 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894160016; 15016-7_0033 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 33 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894160016?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 32 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894160005; 15016-7_0032 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 32 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894160005?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 31 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894160000; 15016-7_0031 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 31 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894160000?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 30 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159995; 15016-7_0030 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 30 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159995?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 29 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159989; 15016-7_0029 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 29 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159989?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 28 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159979; 15016-7_0028 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 28 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159979?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 27 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159972; 15016-7_0027 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 27 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159972?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 26 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159961; 15016-7_0026 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 26 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159961?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 24 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159948; 15016-7_0024 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 24 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159948?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 23 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159926; 15016-7_0023 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 23 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159926?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 22 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159921; 15016-7_0022 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 22 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159921?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 20 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159905; 15016-7_0020 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 20 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159905?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 19 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159888; 15016-7_0019 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 19 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159888?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 18 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159880; 15016-7_0018 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 18 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159880?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 17 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159858; 15016-7_0017 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 17 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159858?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 15 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159796; 15016-7_0015 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 15 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159796?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 14 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159773; 15016-7_0014 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 14 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159773?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 11 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159739; 15016-7_0011 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 11 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159739?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 10 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159727; 15016-7_0010 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159727?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 8 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159699; 15016-7_0008 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159699?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 7 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159694; 15016-7_0007 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159694?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 6 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159677; 15016-7_0006 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159677?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 5 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159670; 15016-7_0005 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159670?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 55 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159580; 15016-7_0055 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 55 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159580?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 59 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159575; 15015-6_0059 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 59 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159575?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 54 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159573; 15016-7_0054 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 54 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159573?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 58 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159543; 15015-6_0058 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 58 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159543?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 52 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159534; 15015-6_0052 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 52 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159534?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 57 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159533; 15015-6_0057 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 57 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159533?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 51 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159510; 15015-6_0051 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 51 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159510?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 56 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159507; 15015-6_0056 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 56 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159507?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 50 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159500; 15015-6_0050 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 50 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159500?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 49 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159485; 15015-6_0049 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 49 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159485?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 55 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159476; 15015-6_0055 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 55 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159476?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 48 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159468; 15015-6_0048 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 48 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159468?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 47 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159450; 15015-6_0047 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 47 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159450?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 46 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159430; 15015-6_0046 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 46 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159430?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 45 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159414; 15015-6_0045 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 45 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159414?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 44 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159391; 15015-6_0044 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 44 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159391?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 43 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159375; 15015-6_0043 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 43 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159375?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 42 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159342; 15015-6_0042 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 42 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159342?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 41 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159323; 15015-6_0041 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 41 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159323?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 40 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159302; 15015-6_0040 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 40 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159302?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 5 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159296; 15015-6_0005 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159296?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 4 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159285; 15015-6_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159285?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 39 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159284; 15015-6_0039 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 39 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159284?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 38 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159274; 15015-6_0038 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 38 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159274?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 3 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159267; 15015-6_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159267?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 37 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159257; 15015-6_0037 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 37 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159257?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 36 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159243; 15015-6_0036 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 36 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159243?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 2 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159211; 15015-6_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159211?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 35 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159205; 15015-6_0035 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 35 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159205?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 1 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159195; 15015-6_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159195?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 34 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159166; 15015-6_0034 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 34 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159166?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 33 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159156; 15015-6_0033 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 33 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159156?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 32 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159134; 15015-6_0032 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 32 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159134?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 31 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159099; 15015-6_0031 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 31 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159099?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 30 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159082; 15015-6_0030 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 30 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159082?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 29 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159068; 15015-6_0029 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 29 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159068?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 28 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159066; 15015-6_0028 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 28 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159066?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 27 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159045; 15015-6_0027 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 27 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159045?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 62 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159038; 15016-7_0062 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 62 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159038?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 26 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894159020; 15015-6_0026 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 26 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894159020?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 25 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894158991; 15015-6_0025 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 25 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894158991?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 49 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894158987; 15016-7_0049 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 49 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894158987?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 24 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894158983; 15015-6_0024 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 24 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894158983?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 48 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894158978; 15016-7_0048 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 48 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894158978?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 23 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894158969; 15015-6_0023 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 23 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894158969?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 65 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894158964; 15016-7_0065 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 65 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894158964?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 47 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894158963; 15016-7_0047 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 47 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894158963?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 22 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894158951; 15015-6_0022 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 22 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894158951?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 46 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894158950; 15016-7_0046 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 46 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894158950?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 19 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894158945; 15015-6_0019 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 19 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894158945?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 45 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894158942; 15016-7_0045 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 45 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894158942?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 18 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894158938; 15015-6_0018 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 18 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894158938?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 44 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894158930; 15016-7_0044 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 44 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894158930?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 17 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894158929; 15015-6_0017 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 17 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894158929?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 43 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894158928; 15016-7_0043 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 43 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894158928?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 12 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894158912; 15015-6_0012 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 12 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894158912?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 42 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894158911; 15016-7_0042 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 42 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894158911?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 41 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894158903; 15016-7_0041 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 41 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894158903?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 11 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894158899; 15015-6_0011 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 11 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894158899?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 40 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894158889; 15016-7_0040 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 40 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894158889?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 10 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894158881; 15015-6_0010 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894158881?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 39 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894158876; 15016-7_0039 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 39 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894158876?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 9 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894158869; 15015-6_0009 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 9 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894158869?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 8 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894158853; 15015-6_0008 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894158853?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 7 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894158828; 15015-6_0007 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894158828?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 3 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894158824; 15016-7_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894158824?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 53 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894158823; 15016-7_0053 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 53 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894158823?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 64 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894158813; 15016-7_0064 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 64 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894158813?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 54 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894158807; 15015-6_0054 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 54 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894158807?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 2 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894158805; 15016-7_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894158805?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 6 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894158797; 15015-6_0006 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894158797?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 63 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894158790; 15016-7_0063 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 63 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894158790?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 51 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894158783; 15016-7_0051 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 51 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894158783?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 53 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894158757; 15015-6_0053 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 53 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894158757?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 1 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894158755; 15016-7_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894158755?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 56 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894158746; 15016-7_0056 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 56 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894158746?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 21 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894158728; 15015-6_0021 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 21 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894158728?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 59 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894158717; 15016-7_0059 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 59 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894158717?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 58 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894158699; 15016-7_0058 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 58 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894158699?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 20 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894158695; 15015-6_0020 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 20 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894158695?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 57 of 65] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894158678; 15016-7_0057 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 57 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894158678?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 16 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894158673; 15015-6_0016 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 16 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894158673?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 15 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894158646; 15015-6_0015 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 15 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894158646?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 14 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894158605; 15015-6_0014 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 14 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894158605?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. [Part 13 of 59] T2 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: FRESNO TO BAKERSFIELD SECTION, FRESNO, KINGS, TULARE AND KERN COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 894158556; 15015-6_0013 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of a 114-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Fresno to Bakersfield is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Fresno to Bakersfield section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting to the Merced to Fresno and Bay Area HST sections to the north and the Bakersfield to Palmdale and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections to the south. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include impacts on special-status plants and wildlife, corridor communities, and farmlands. Seven alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. Each of the six HST alternatives would include one station in Fresno, one station in Bakersfield, and a potential Kings/Tulare Regional Station east of Hanford. The estimated trip time between the Fresno and Bakersfield stations would be approximately 40 minutes. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at each of the three stations in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. The BNSF Alternative alignment begins in downtown Fresno on the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks, proceeds south adjacent to the UPRR tracks, crossing under East Jensen Avenue and then over Golden State Boulevard and State Route 99 as it curves south to join the BNSF Railway. The alignment diverges from the BNSF Railway north of the Kings River and travels east of the city of Hanford before rejoining the BNSF Railway on its western side, north of the city of Corcoran. From there, the BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF Railway south through Corcoran, Wasco, and Shafter into Bakersfield where it generally follows the BNSF Railway corridor to the Bakersfield Station. The additional five alternative alignments diverge from the BNSF Alternative at various locations. The Corcoran Elevated Alternative would pass through Corcoran on the eastern side of the BNSF Railway right-of-way on an elevated structure. The Corcoran Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at approximately Nevada Avenue and swing east of Corcoran, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 136 south of Corcoran. The Allensworth Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative at Avenue 84 in Tulare County and swing west of Allensworth State Historic Park, rejoining the BNSF Alternative at Elmo Highway in Kern County. The Wasco-Shafter Bypass Alternative would diverge from the BNSF Alternative between Sherwood Avenue and Fresno Avenue, bypassing Wasco and Shafter to the east, and rejoin the BNSF Alternative at 7th Standard Road. The Bakersfield South Alternative parallels the BNSF Alternative from Rosedale Highway to Chester Avenue at varying distances to the north. The alternative then curves south, and parallels California Avenue to its terminus at the southern end of the Bakersfield station tracks. The project may include a heavy maintenance facility (HMF) centrally located on the main north-south line of the HST system to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $6.2 to $7.2 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF at either the Fresno or Wasco sites could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert 2,192 to 2,397 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties including 104 to 192 housing units in environmental justice areas. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical habitat of vernal pool fairy shrimp, recovery plans for threatened or endangered species, wildlife movement corridors, and the Allensworth Ecological Reserve. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110256, Volume I--1,532 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--800 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--940 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 13 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/894158556?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+FRESNO+TO+BAKERSFIELD+SECTION%2C+FRESNO%2C+KINGS%2C+TULARE+AND+KERN+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN: MERCED TO FRESNO SECTION, MERCED, MADERA AND FRESNO COUNTIES,CALIFORNIA. AN - 889170138; 15016 AB - PURPOSE: The construction and operation of an 80-mile portion of the California High-Speed Train System (HST system) from Merced to Fresno is proposed. The HST system would provide intercity service on more than 800 miles of tracks throughout California, connecting the major population centers of Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego. The Merced to Fresno section is a critical Phase 1 link connecting the Bay Area HST Section to the Fresno to Bakersfield, Bakersfield to Palmdale, and Palmdale to Los Angeles HST sections. The system would use state-of-the-art, electrically powered, steel-wheel-on-steel-rail technology, including contemporary safety, signaling, and automated train-control systems, with trains capable of operating up to 220 miles per hour over a fully grade-separated, dedicated track alignment. Key issues include potential impacts on special-status plants and wildlife and corridor communities. Four alternatives, including a No Project Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The three HST alternatives would include one station in Merced and one station in Fresno with an estimated trip time of 25 minutes between the stations. In 2035 for a high ridership scenario, the full system would see four trains per hour stop at Fresno in each direction at the peak, and six trains run through the city without stopping. At the off-peak, the same number of stops would be made, but the through trains would decrease to three per hour. At Merced, three trains would stop each hour per direction at the peak, with two running through. At the off-peak, both of the hourly trains would stop at Merced. The Union Pacific Railroad/State Route 99 (UPRR/SR 99) Alternative, the BNSF Alternative, and the Hybrid Alternative are identical in the Merced and Fresno vicinities. The main difference between the initial UPRR/SR 99 and BNSF alternatives is that the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative generally follows the UPRR and SR 99 transportation corridor, which connects the cities of Merced, Chowchilla, Madera, and Fresno. The BNSF Alternative follows the BNSF corridor, which travels east from Merced through Planada, Le Grand, and Madera Acres, and then veers back west to reconnect with the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative again before entering the city of Fresno. The Hybrid Alternative follows the UPRR/SR 99 Alternative alignment near Merced and the BNSF Alternative alignment near Madera Acres. Five alternative sites on the main north-south line of the HST system are considered for a potential heavy maintenance facility (HMF) to support delivery, testing, and commissioning on the networks first completed segment. The HMF concept plan indicates that the site should encompass 150 acres to accommodate guideways, maintenance shops, parking, administrative offices, roadways, power substation, and storage areas. Project costs for the Merced to Fresno HST system segment are estimated in 2010 dollars at $3.8 to $6.7 billion. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would provide the public with electric-powered high-speed rail service with predictable and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and connect the Northern and Southern portions of the California HST system. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide would exceed significance thresholds during construction. Operation of the HMF could expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations. Right-of-way requirements would convert up to 1,481 acres of farmland and displace commercial, residential, and agricultural properties. Project operation would impact habitat for special-status plant and animal species, sensitive plant communities and jurisdictional waters, critical vernal pool habitat, wildlife movement corridors, and several preserves including the Great Valley Conservation Bank. All HST alternatives have the potential to cause impacts on historic properties and would result in increased traffic congestion, displacement impacts of community facilities, significant operational noise and vibration impacts, and visual impacts. LEGAL MANDATES: Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-432), and Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the final Tier 1 EISs for the California High-Speed Train System and the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train System, see 06-0125F, Volume 30, Number 1 and 08-0332F, Volume 32, Number 3, respectively. JF - EPA number: 110257, Volume I--1,440 pages, Volume II (Appendices)--652 pages, Volume III (Alignment Plans)--4,130 pages, August 12, 2011 PY - 2011 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality KW - Air Quality Standards Violations KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Cultural Resources KW - Energy Consumption Assessments KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Historic Sites KW - Noise KW - Noise Assessments KW - Noise Standards Violations KW - Railroads KW - Railroad Structures KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Vegetation KW - Vegetation Surveys KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Wildlife Surveys KW - California KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits KW - Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, 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/889170138?accountid=14244 L2 - http://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=2011-08-12&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&rft.title=CALIFORNIA+HIGH-SPEED+TRAIN%3A+MERCED+TO+FRESNO+SECTION%2C+MERCED%2C+MADERA+AND+FRESNO+COUNTIES%2CCALIFORNIA.&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 - 2011-09-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: August 12, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Recycled materials as substitutes for virgin aggregates in road construction; II, Inorganic contaminant leaching AN - 916837760; 2012-013886 AB - Construction and maintenance of roads requires large volume of aggregates for use in base or subbase layers. Because of the expense of buying virgin aggregates, federal and state agencies are encouraging the recycling of waste materials in road construction. A study was under taken to evaluate the suitability of fly ash (FA), reclaimed asphalt pavement (RAP), recycled cement material (RCM), and foundry sand (FS) mixed in with virgin aggregates as base and subbase materials. In this paper we report the results on inorganic contaminants leaching from six mixtures of FA-RAP aggregates under batch and flow through conditions. The concentrations of most inorganic chemicals in both batch and flow through modes from all six mixtures were either below the detection limit of the instrument or less than the EPA drinking water standard. The exceptions were Al and Cr. Aluminum concentrations were higher than the EPA secondary drinking water standard in both batch and flow-through tests whereas Cr concentration exceeded the primary EPA drinking water standard in the flow through tests only. Aluminum concentrations in the leachate increased with a decrease in the proportion of FA whereas Cr concentration in the leachate increased with an increase in the proportion of FA in the mixtures. The mixtures had lower pH compared to 100% FA, due to dilution of Ca(HO) (sub 2) in the FA, which resulted in higher Al concentrations. Addition of up to 5% FA and 75% RAP to virgin aggregates does not lead to any substantial leaching of various inorganic chemicals. At 15% FA, there is a slight risk for transport of some dissolved inorganic chemicals at a concentration higher than the EPA primary drinking water standards. JF - Soil Science Society of America Journal AU - Kang, Dong-Hee AU - Gupta, Satish C AU - Bloom, P R AU - Ranaivoson, Andry Z AU - Roberson, Ruth AU - Siekmeier, John Y1 - 2011/08// PY - 2011 DA - August 2011 SP - 1276 EP - 1284 PB - Soil Science Society of America, Madison, WI VL - 75 IS - 4 SN - 0361-5995, 0361-5995 KW - United States KW - Minnesota KW - aggregate KW - pollutants KW - pollution KW - Jordan Minnesota KW - drinking water KW - inorganic materials KW - Scott County Minnesota KW - metals KW - aluminum KW - southern Minnesota KW - leachate KW - hydraulic conductivity KW - leaching KW - water pollution KW - construction KW - roads KW - pH KW - chromium KW - 22:Environmental geology UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/916837760?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+Science+Society+of+America+Journal&rft.atitle=Recycled+materials+as+substitutes+for+virgin+aggregates+in+road+construction%3B+II%2C+Inorganic+contaminant+leaching&rft.au=Kang%2C+Dong-Hee%3BGupta%2C+Satish+C%3BBloom%2C+P+R%3BRanaivoson%2C+Andry+Z%3BRoberson%2C+Ruth%3BSiekmeier%2C+John&rft.aulast=Kang&rft.aufirst=Dong-Hee&rft.date=2011-08-01&rft.volume=75&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=1276&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Soil+Science+Society+of+America+Journal&rft.issn=03615995&rft_id=info:doi/10.2136%2Fsssaj2010.0296 L2 - http://soil.scijournals.org/ LA - English DB - GeoRef N1 - Copyright - GeoRef, Copyright 2012, American Geosciences Institute. N1 - Date revised - 2012-01-01 N1 - Number of references - 35 N1 - PubXState - WI N1 - Document feature - illus. incl. 5 tables N1 - Last updated - 2012-06-07 N1 - CODEN - SSSJD4 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - aggregate; aluminum; chromium; construction; drinking water; hydraulic conductivity; inorganic materials; Jordan Minnesota; leachate; leaching; metals; Minnesota; pH; pollutants; pollution; roads; Scott County Minnesota; southern Minnesota; United States; water pollution DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2010.0296 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Operating Speed Model for Low-Speed Rural Two-Lane Highways Design Consistency Module for Interactive Highway Safety Design Model AN - 912919686; 16087777 AB - Operating speed, with its deviations along tangent and curve segments of highways, is one of the most common measures to evaluate the consistency of rural two-lane highways. Several models, including the Design Consistency Module (DCM) of FHWA's Interactive Highway Safety Design Model, estimate operating speeds on higher-speed rural two-lane highways. The DCM includes operating speed models for evaluating design consistency on rural two-lane highways. Through 2009 the DCM was limited to higher-speed highways (posted speeds of 45 mph and higher). The goal of the research presented in this paper was to extend the capabilities of the DCM by developing an operating speed model for lower-speed rural two-lane highways (i.e., those with posted speeds of 25 to 40 mph) using data collected by FHWA for that purpose. To determine the operating speed profile along a highway, models to estimate the 85th percentile speeds on tangents and curves were developed, and existing DCM models for acceleration and deceleration rates for transitions between preferred speeds on horizontal design elements were expanded to apply to lower-speed highways. This paper documents the model development process and provides a case study to illustrate application of the model. JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Banihashemi, Mohamadreza AU - Dimaiuta, Michael AU - Wang, Hui AD - GENEX Systems, c/o FHWA, Geometric Design Laboratory, Mail Stop HRDS-05, 6300 Georgetown Pike, McLean, VA 22101, mohamadreza.banihashemi.ctr@dot.gov Y1 - 2011/08// PY - 2011 DA - Aug 2011 SP - 63 EP - 71 PB - Transportation Research Board IS - 2223 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Health & Safety Science Abstracts KW - case studies KW - safety engineering KW - Transportation KW - Highways KW - Rural areas KW - Design KW - H 2000:Transportation UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/912919686?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=Operating+Speed+Model+for+Low-Speed+Rural+Two-Lane+Highways+Design+Consistency+Module+for+Interactive+Highway+Safety+Design+Model&rft.au=Banihashemi%2C+Mohamadreza%3BDimaiuta%2C+Michael%3BWang%2C+Hui&rft.aulast=Banihashemi&rft.aufirst=Mohamadreza&rft.date=2011-08-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=2223&rft.spage=63&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2223-08 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2011-12-01 N1 - Last updated - 2015-03-19 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - case studies; Transportation; safety engineering; Highways; Design; Rural areas DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2223-08 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Use of a head component tester to evaluate the injury potential of an aircraft head-up display AN - 902383982; 15766648 AB - Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 25, 25.785 requires that seats and adjacent parts of the airplane be designed so that occupants will not suffer serious injury during an emergency landing as a result of expected inertial forces. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) guidance material cites several component impact test methods for use in determining whether an item or surface is potentially injurious. A head component tester (HCT) developed at the National Institute for Aviation Research of the Wichita State University was selected to assess the injury potential of a new cockpit-installed head-up display (HUD)'s combiner glass. A test procedure complying with the intent of the FAA guidance material was developed and validated by the Civil Aerospace Medical Institute (CAMI), Oklahoma City, OK. Subsequently, a computer model of the HCT impact into the HUD was developed by The Engineering Institute, Farmington, AR, and was correlated with CAMI test data. This model is useful for evaluating the effect of design parameters on HUD injury potential. JF - International Journal of Crashworthiness AU - DeWeese, Richard AU - Moorcroft, David AU - Thorbole, Chandrashekhar K AU - Lankarani, Hamid M AD - Civil Aerospace Medical Institute, Federal Aviation Administration, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, USA Y1 - 2011/08// PY - 2011 DA - Aug 2011 SP - 385 EP - 395 PB - Taylor & Francis Group Ltd., 2 Park Square Oxford OX14 4RN United Kingdom VL - 16 IS - 4 SN - 1358-8265, 1358-8265 KW - Health & Safety Science Abstracts KW - component tester KW - head injury KW - head-up display KW - impact KW - computer model KW - contact force KW - crashworthiness KW - Federal regulations KW - Injuries KW - Aircraft KW - USA, Kansas, Wichita KW - computer models KW - USA, Oklahoma, Oklahoma City KW - Urban areas KW - H 2000:Transportation UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/902383982?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=International+Journal+of+Crashworthiness&rft.atitle=Use+of+a+head+component+tester+to+evaluate+the+injury+potential+of+an+aircraft+head-up+display&rft.au=DeWeese%2C+Richard%3BMoorcroft%2C+David%3BThorbole%2C+Chandrashekhar+K%3BLankarani%2C+Hamid+M&rft.aulast=DeWeese&rft.aufirst=Richard&rft.date=2011-08-01&rft.volume=16&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=385&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=International+Journal+of+Crashworthiness&rft.issn=13588265&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080%2F13588265.2011.593980 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2011-11-01 N1 - Last updated - 2015-03-19 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - crashworthiness; Federal regulations; Aircraft; Injuries; computer models; Urban areas; USA, Kansas, Wichita; USA, Oklahoma, Oklahoma City DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13588265.2011.593980 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Differences in observed speed patterns between crash-involved and crash-not-involved drivers: Application of in-vehicle monitoring technology AN - 867740850; 14604085 AB - Due to the lack of data collection systems in previous studies, it is not clear whether driving speed patterns in everyday conditions of crash-involved drivers were really different from those of crash-not-involved drivers. This study evaluated these differences through various potential speed metrics created from longitudinally-measured GPS speed data of light-duty vehicles. As a result, this study found that at most times (spatially and temporally), drivers who had crash experiences tended to drive at higher speeds than crash-not-involved drivers except in freeway travels during a.m. peak hours. Crash-involved drivers also showed higher tendencies of non-compliance with the posted speed limit. In addition, this study confirmed that the speed difference might or might not be obtained, depending on which speed metrics are applied, so researchers needed to select specified speed metrics based on roadway types and trip start times to better understand the speed patterns of drivers. Finally, the result suggests that there is a real potential to identify at-risk drivers based on data obtained from in-vehicle data collection technologies for driver education, re-training programs, or pay-as-you-drive insurance programs. Much effort needs to be devoted to this application in future research. An observational study with more samples in the future would provide better interpretations about the speed patterns of individual drivers. JF - Transportation Research, Part C AU - Jun, Jungwook AU - Guensler, Randall AU - Ogle, Jennifer AD - Traffic Engineering Division, Virginia Department of Transportation, 1401 East Broad Street, Richmond, VA 23219-2052, USA Y1 - 2011/08// PY - 2011 DA - Aug 2011 SP - 569 EP - 578 PB - Elsevier Science, 660 White Plains Rd., Floor 2 Tarrytown NY 10591-5153 USA VL - 19 IS - 4 SN - 0968-090X, 0968-090X KW - Environment Abstracts; Health & Safety Science Abstracts KW - Driving speeds KW - GPS KW - Crashes KW - In-vehicle data collection systems KW - Non-compliance rates KW - Travel KW - Data collection KW - Education KW - Transportation KW - driving ability KW - Highways KW - Insurance KW - Technology KW - H 2000:Transportation KW - ENA 04:Environmental Education UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/867740850?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%2C+Part+C&rft.atitle=Differences+in+observed+speed+patterns+between+crash-involved+and+crash-not-involved+drivers%3A+Application+of+in-vehicle+monitoring+technology&rft.au=Jun%2C+Jungwook%3BGuensler%2C+Randall%3BOgle%2C+Jennifer&rft.aulast=Jun&rft.aufirst=Jungwook&rft.date=2011-08-01&rft.volume=19&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=569&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research%2C+Part+C&rft.issn=0968090X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016%2Fj.trc.2010.09.005 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2011-05-01 N1 - Last updated - 2015-04-09 N1 - SubjectsTermNotLitGenreText - Travel; Education; Data collection; Transportation; driving ability; Insurance; Highways; Technology DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2010.09.005 ER - TY - JOUR T1 - Development and Validation of Speed Kidney, a New Traffic-Calming Device AN - 1777117967; 16087775 AB - Traffic calming has been widely applied to urban areas in recent decades to moderate speed and traffic volume. Because most measures used are physical, a vehicle must modify its path and speed. A benefit of traffic calming is improved safety from speed reduction and traffic volume reduction. However, traffic calming has disadvantages, such as emergency response delays, traffic diversion, noise, vibrations, damage to vehicles, and discomfort Common traffic-calming devices do not consider discomfort for drivers who achieve an appropriate calmed and safe speed. Consequently, it was necessary to develop a new traffic-calming device to moderate speed and to minimize the disadvantages of the previous devices. The Highway Engineering Research Group of the Polytechnic University of Valencia, Spain, has invented, designed, and developed a new traffic-calming device, Speed Kidney. This paper provides the objectives of the Speed Kidney, a description of the new traffic-calming device, and its geometric design. The technological development of the device is described, as are the main results from preliminary tests, implementation on a campus street, and implementation on a controlled test track. Implementation criteria are also given. The Speed Kidney is a functional, feasible, sustainable, and safe solution for traffic calming. JF - Transportation Research Record AU - Garcia, Alfredo AU - Moreno, Ana Tsui AU - Romero, Mario Alfonso AD - Department of Transportation, Universidad Polittaiica de Valencia, Camino de Vera, s/n, 46022, Valencia, Spain agarciag@tra.upv.es Y1 - 2011/08// PY - 2011 DA - August 2011 SP - 43 EP - 53 PB - Transportation Research Board IS - 2223 SN - 0361-1981, 0361-1981 KW - Environmental Engineering Abstracts (EN); CSA / ASCE Civil Engineering Abstracts (CE) KW - Reduction KW - Traffic calming KW - Traffic flow KW - Devices KW - Vehicles KW - Discomfort KW - Traffic engineering KW - Kidneys UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1777117967?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=Development+and+Validation+of+Speed+Kidney%2C+a+New+Traffic-Calming+Device&rft.au=Garcia%2C+Alfredo%3BMoreno%2C+Ana+Tsui%3BRomero%2C+Mario+Alfonso&rft.aulast=Garcia&rft.aufirst=Alfredo&rft.date=2011-08-01&rft.volume=&rft.issue=2223&rft.spage=43&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=Transportation+Research+Record&rft.issn=03611981&rft_id=info:doi/10.3141%2F2223-06 LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2012-04-01 N1 - Last updated - 2016-05-18 DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2223-06 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 97 BEND NORTH CORRIDOR PROJECT, DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 12 of 12] T2 - US 97 BEND NORTH CORRIDOR PROJECT, DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 888700559; 15004-4_0012 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to address congestion, traffic flow, and safety on a six-mile segment of US 97 in Deschutes County, Oregon are proposed. The project area consists of a corridor between the Deschutes Market Road/Tumalo Junction interchange and the Empire Avenue interchange. US 97 is classified as a statewide facility and freight route on the National Highway System along its entire length, and as an expressway from the City of Redmond through Bend and in many other sections of the highway. In the Bend area, US 97 is used as a route for local residents to travel to and from home and work, and it is a connection to area shopping, dining, businesses, schools and recreation. Bends population growth, in combination with US 97 also serving to move freight and traffic through the region, has led to an increase in traffic congestion and delay, disruptions in traffic flow, and an increase in the severity of vehicular crashes. Three alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The East DS1 and East DS2 Alternatives would reroute US 97, from just north of Cooley Road to approximately Empire Avenue, east of its current alignment, adjacent to the existing railroad tracks. Where US 97 is realigned, the current US 97 roadway would be used as a portion of the extension of 3rd Street. A new interchange would be constructed in the northern portion of the corridor, near Bowery Lane. For the East DS1 Alternative, US 97 would have two northbound and two southbound travel lanes, separated by median barrier. Between Cooley Road and the City of Bend's urban growth boundary (UGB), 3rd Street would have two northbound lanes and two southbound lanes. North of the UGB, 3rd Street would have one northbound travel lane and one southbound travel lane. US 97 would have a full diamond interchange with 3rd Street just north of Bowery Lane. The interchange would allow all northbound and southbound movements on to and off of US 97. From Cooley Road, travelers would travel 1.4 miles on northbound 3rd Street to access US 97 via the full diamond interchange. At the interchange, 3rd Street would be elevated above US 97 and would have one eastbound and one westbound travel lane. Access to properties east of US 97 would be provided by new roads which would be connected to 3rd Street. Under the East DS2 Alternative, the new extension of 3rd Street would connect with US 97 through a directional interchange on the southeast side of the Deschutes Memorial Gardens and Chapel. The directional interchange would allow southbound US 97 traffic to flow freely via an off-ramp to southbound 3rd Street and would also allow northbound 3rd Street traffic to cross over US 97 and flow freely via an on-ramp to northbound US 97. The estimated costs for the build alternatives include right-of-way (ROW) acquisition and construction costs and range from $170 to $220 million. The project would likely be funded in increments, which would necessitate either build alternative being constructed in multiple phases. Construction is planned to begin in 2014. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Incremental improvements would reduce delay, congestion, and the number and severity of crashes at the US 97/Cooley Road and US 97/Robal Road intersections within the medium-term planning period. In the long-term, reduced traffic congestion, improved traffic flow, and enhanced public safety would support economic development. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New ROW would require: conversion of 131 to 180 acres of land to highway use; displacement of 43 to 51 businesses and 13 to 19 residences; removal of one historic resource; and creation of 84 to 93 acres of new impervious surfaces. 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: 110244, 582 pages, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 12 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-11-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation 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/888700559?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+97+BEND+NORTH+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DESCHUTES+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=US+97+BEND+NORTH+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DESCHUTES+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 - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 97 BEND NORTH CORRIDOR PROJECT, DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 11 of 12] T2 - US 97 BEND NORTH CORRIDOR PROJECT, DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 888700556; 15004-4_0011 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to address congestion, traffic flow, and safety on a six-mile segment of US 97 in Deschutes County, Oregon are proposed. The project area consists of a corridor between the Deschutes Market Road/Tumalo Junction interchange and the Empire Avenue interchange. US 97 is classified as a statewide facility and freight route on the National Highway System along its entire length, and as an expressway from the City of Redmond through Bend and in many other sections of the highway. In the Bend area, US 97 is used as a route for local residents to travel to and from home and work, and it is a connection to area shopping, dining, businesses, schools and recreation. Bends population growth, in combination with US 97 also serving to move freight and traffic through the region, has led to an increase in traffic congestion and delay, disruptions in traffic flow, and an increase in the severity of vehicular crashes. Three alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The East DS1 and East DS2 Alternatives would reroute US 97, from just north of Cooley Road to approximately Empire Avenue, east of its current alignment, adjacent to the existing railroad tracks. Where US 97 is realigned, the current US 97 roadway would be used as a portion of the extension of 3rd Street. A new interchange would be constructed in the northern portion of the corridor, near Bowery Lane. For the East DS1 Alternative, US 97 would have two northbound and two southbound travel lanes, separated by median barrier. Between Cooley Road and the City of Bend's urban growth boundary (UGB), 3rd Street would have two northbound lanes and two southbound lanes. North of the UGB, 3rd Street would have one northbound travel lane and one southbound travel lane. US 97 would have a full diamond interchange with 3rd Street just north of Bowery Lane. The interchange would allow all northbound and southbound movements on to and off of US 97. From Cooley Road, travelers would travel 1.4 miles on northbound 3rd Street to access US 97 via the full diamond interchange. At the interchange, 3rd Street would be elevated above US 97 and would have one eastbound and one westbound travel lane. Access to properties east of US 97 would be provided by new roads which would be connected to 3rd Street. Under the East DS2 Alternative, the new extension of 3rd Street would connect with US 97 through a directional interchange on the southeast side of the Deschutes Memorial Gardens and Chapel. The directional interchange would allow southbound US 97 traffic to flow freely via an off-ramp to southbound 3rd Street and would also allow northbound 3rd Street traffic to cross over US 97 and flow freely via an on-ramp to northbound US 97. The estimated costs for the build alternatives include right-of-way (ROW) acquisition and construction costs and range from $170 to $220 million. The project would likely be funded in increments, which would necessitate either build alternative being constructed in multiple phases. Construction is planned to begin in 2014. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Incremental improvements would reduce delay, congestion, and the number and severity of crashes at the US 97/Cooley Road and US 97/Robal Road intersections within the medium-term planning period. In the long-term, reduced traffic congestion, improved traffic flow, and enhanced public safety would support economic development. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New ROW would require: conversion of 131 to 180 acres of land to highway use; displacement of 43 to 51 businesses and 13 to 19 residences; removal of one historic resource; and creation of 84 to 93 acres of new impervious surfaces. 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: 110244, 582 pages, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 11 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-11-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation 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/888700556?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+97+BEND+NORTH+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DESCHUTES+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=US+97+BEND+NORTH+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DESCHUTES+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 - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 97 BEND NORTH CORRIDOR PROJECT, DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 10 of 12] T2 - US 97 BEND NORTH CORRIDOR PROJECT, DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 888700551; 15004-4_0010 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to address congestion, traffic flow, and safety on a six-mile segment of US 97 in Deschutes County, Oregon are proposed. The project area consists of a corridor between the Deschutes Market Road/Tumalo Junction interchange and the Empire Avenue interchange. US 97 is classified as a statewide facility and freight route on the National Highway System along its entire length, and as an expressway from the City of Redmond through Bend and in many other sections of the highway. In the Bend area, US 97 is used as a route for local residents to travel to and from home and work, and it is a connection to area shopping, dining, businesses, schools and recreation. Bends population growth, in combination with US 97 also serving to move freight and traffic through the region, has led to an increase in traffic congestion and delay, disruptions in traffic flow, and an increase in the severity of vehicular crashes. Three alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The East DS1 and East DS2 Alternatives would reroute US 97, from just north of Cooley Road to approximately Empire Avenue, east of its current alignment, adjacent to the existing railroad tracks. Where US 97 is realigned, the current US 97 roadway would be used as a portion of the extension of 3rd Street. A new interchange would be constructed in the northern portion of the corridor, near Bowery Lane. For the East DS1 Alternative, US 97 would have two northbound and two southbound travel lanes, separated by median barrier. Between Cooley Road and the City of Bend's urban growth boundary (UGB), 3rd Street would have two northbound lanes and two southbound lanes. North of the UGB, 3rd Street would have one northbound travel lane and one southbound travel lane. US 97 would have a full diamond interchange with 3rd Street just north of Bowery Lane. The interchange would allow all northbound and southbound movements on to and off of US 97. From Cooley Road, travelers would travel 1.4 miles on northbound 3rd Street to access US 97 via the full diamond interchange. At the interchange, 3rd Street would be elevated above US 97 and would have one eastbound and one westbound travel lane. Access to properties east of US 97 would be provided by new roads which would be connected to 3rd Street. Under the East DS2 Alternative, the new extension of 3rd Street would connect with US 97 through a directional interchange on the southeast side of the Deschutes Memorial Gardens and Chapel. The directional interchange would allow southbound US 97 traffic to flow freely via an off-ramp to southbound 3rd Street and would also allow northbound 3rd Street traffic to cross over US 97 and flow freely via an on-ramp to northbound US 97. The estimated costs for the build alternatives include right-of-way (ROW) acquisition and construction costs and range from $170 to $220 million. The project would likely be funded in increments, which would necessitate either build alternative being constructed in multiple phases. Construction is planned to begin in 2014. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Incremental improvements would reduce delay, congestion, and the number and severity of crashes at the US 97/Cooley Road and US 97/Robal Road intersections within the medium-term planning period. In the long-term, reduced traffic congestion, improved traffic flow, and enhanced public safety would support economic development. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New ROW would require: conversion of 131 to 180 acres of land to highway use; displacement of 43 to 51 businesses and 13 to 19 residences; removal of one historic resource; and creation of 84 to 93 acres of new impervious surfaces. 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: 110244, 582 pages, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-11-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation 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/888700551?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+97+BEND+NORTH+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DESCHUTES+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=US+97+BEND+NORTH+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DESCHUTES+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 - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 97 BEND NORTH CORRIDOR PROJECT, DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 4 of 12] T2 - US 97 BEND NORTH CORRIDOR PROJECT, DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 888698100; 15004-4_0004 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to address congestion, traffic flow, and safety on a six-mile segment of US 97 in Deschutes County, Oregon are proposed. The project area consists of a corridor between the Deschutes Market Road/Tumalo Junction interchange and the Empire Avenue interchange. US 97 is classified as a statewide facility and freight route on the National Highway System along its entire length, and as an expressway from the City of Redmond through Bend and in many other sections of the highway. In the Bend area, US 97 is used as a route for local residents to travel to and from home and work, and it is a connection to area shopping, dining, businesses, schools and recreation. Bends population growth, in combination with US 97 also serving to move freight and traffic through the region, has led to an increase in traffic congestion and delay, disruptions in traffic flow, and an increase in the severity of vehicular crashes. Three alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The East DS1 and East DS2 Alternatives would reroute US 97, from just north of Cooley Road to approximately Empire Avenue, east of its current alignment, adjacent to the existing railroad tracks. Where US 97 is realigned, the current US 97 roadway would be used as a portion of the extension of 3rd Street. A new interchange would be constructed in the northern portion of the corridor, near Bowery Lane. For the East DS1 Alternative, US 97 would have two northbound and two southbound travel lanes, separated by median barrier. Between Cooley Road and the City of Bend's urban growth boundary (UGB), 3rd Street would have two northbound lanes and two southbound lanes. North of the UGB, 3rd Street would have one northbound travel lane and one southbound travel lane. US 97 would have a full diamond interchange with 3rd Street just north of Bowery Lane. The interchange would allow all northbound and southbound movements on to and off of US 97. From Cooley Road, travelers would travel 1.4 miles on northbound 3rd Street to access US 97 via the full diamond interchange. At the interchange, 3rd Street would be elevated above US 97 and would have one eastbound and one westbound travel lane. Access to properties east of US 97 would be provided by new roads which would be connected to 3rd Street. Under the East DS2 Alternative, the new extension of 3rd Street would connect with US 97 through a directional interchange on the southeast side of the Deschutes Memorial Gardens and Chapel. The directional interchange would allow southbound US 97 traffic to flow freely via an off-ramp to southbound 3rd Street and would also allow northbound 3rd Street traffic to cross over US 97 and flow freely via an on-ramp to northbound US 97. The estimated costs for the build alternatives include right-of-way (ROW) acquisition and construction costs and range from $170 to $220 million. The project would likely be funded in increments, which would necessitate either build alternative being constructed in multiple phases. Construction is planned to begin in 2014. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Incremental improvements would reduce delay, congestion, and the number and severity of crashes at the US 97/Cooley Road and US 97/Robal Road intersections within the medium-term planning period. In the long-term, reduced traffic congestion, improved traffic flow, and enhanced public safety would support economic development. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New ROW would require: conversion of 131 to 180 acres of land to highway use; displacement of 43 to 51 businesses and 13 to 19 residences; removal of one historic resource; and creation of 84 to 93 acres of new impervious surfaces. 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: 110244, 582 pages, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-11-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation 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/888698100?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+97+BEND+NORTH+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DESCHUTES+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=US+97+BEND+NORTH+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DESCHUTES+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 - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 97 BEND NORTH CORRIDOR PROJECT, DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 1 of 12] T2 - US 97 BEND NORTH CORRIDOR PROJECT, DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 888698099; 15004-4_0001 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to address congestion, traffic flow, and safety on a six-mile segment of US 97 in Deschutes County, Oregon are proposed. The project area consists of a corridor between the Deschutes Market Road/Tumalo Junction interchange and the Empire Avenue interchange. US 97 is classified as a statewide facility and freight route on the National Highway System along its entire length, and as an expressway from the City of Redmond through Bend and in many other sections of the highway. In the Bend area, US 97 is used as a route for local residents to travel to and from home and work, and it is a connection to area shopping, dining, businesses, schools and recreation. Bends population growth, in combination with US 97 also serving to move freight and traffic through the region, has led to an increase in traffic congestion and delay, disruptions in traffic flow, and an increase in the severity of vehicular crashes. Three alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The East DS1 and East DS2 Alternatives would reroute US 97, from just north of Cooley Road to approximately Empire Avenue, east of its current alignment, adjacent to the existing railroad tracks. Where US 97 is realigned, the current US 97 roadway would be used as a portion of the extension of 3rd Street. A new interchange would be constructed in the northern portion of the corridor, near Bowery Lane. For the East DS1 Alternative, US 97 would have two northbound and two southbound travel lanes, separated by median barrier. Between Cooley Road and the City of Bend's urban growth boundary (UGB), 3rd Street would have two northbound lanes and two southbound lanes. North of the UGB, 3rd Street would have one northbound travel lane and one southbound travel lane. US 97 would have a full diamond interchange with 3rd Street just north of Bowery Lane. The interchange would allow all northbound and southbound movements on to and off of US 97. From Cooley Road, travelers would travel 1.4 miles on northbound 3rd Street to access US 97 via the full diamond interchange. At the interchange, 3rd Street would be elevated above US 97 and would have one eastbound and one westbound travel lane. Access to properties east of US 97 would be provided by new roads which would be connected to 3rd Street. Under the East DS2 Alternative, the new extension of 3rd Street would connect with US 97 through a directional interchange on the southeast side of the Deschutes Memorial Gardens and Chapel. The directional interchange would allow southbound US 97 traffic to flow freely via an off-ramp to southbound 3rd Street and would also allow northbound 3rd Street traffic to cross over US 97 and flow freely via an on-ramp to northbound US 97. The estimated costs for the build alternatives include right-of-way (ROW) acquisition and construction costs and range from $170 to $220 million. The project would likely be funded in increments, which would necessitate either build alternative being constructed in multiple phases. Construction is planned to begin in 2014. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Incremental improvements would reduce delay, congestion, and the number and severity of crashes at the US 97/Cooley Road and US 97/Robal Road intersections within the medium-term planning period. In the long-term, reduced traffic congestion, improved traffic flow, and enhanced public safety would support economic development. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New ROW would require: conversion of 131 to 180 acres of land to highway use; displacement of 43 to 51 businesses and 13 to 19 residences; removal of one historic resource; and creation of 84 to 93 acres of new impervious surfaces. 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: 110244, 582 pages, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-11-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation 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/888698099?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+97+BEND+NORTH+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DESCHUTES+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=US+97+BEND+NORTH+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DESCHUTES+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 - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 97 BEND NORTH CORRIDOR PROJECT, DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 3 of 12] T2 - US 97 BEND NORTH CORRIDOR PROJECT, DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 888697851; 15004-4_0003 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to address congestion, traffic flow, and safety on a six-mile segment of US 97 in Deschutes County, Oregon are proposed. The project area consists of a corridor between the Deschutes Market Road/Tumalo Junction interchange and the Empire Avenue interchange. US 97 is classified as a statewide facility and freight route on the National Highway System along its entire length, and as an expressway from the City of Redmond through Bend and in many other sections of the highway. In the Bend area, US 97 is used as a route for local residents to travel to and from home and work, and it is a connection to area shopping, dining, businesses, schools and recreation. Bends population growth, in combination with US 97 also serving to move freight and traffic through the region, has led to an increase in traffic congestion and delay, disruptions in traffic flow, and an increase in the severity of vehicular crashes. Three alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The East DS1 and East DS2 Alternatives would reroute US 97, from just north of Cooley Road to approximately Empire Avenue, east of its current alignment, adjacent to the existing railroad tracks. Where US 97 is realigned, the current US 97 roadway would be used as a portion of the extension of 3rd Street. A new interchange would be constructed in the northern portion of the corridor, near Bowery Lane. For the East DS1 Alternative, US 97 would have two northbound and two southbound travel lanes, separated by median barrier. Between Cooley Road and the City of Bend's urban growth boundary (UGB), 3rd Street would have two northbound lanes and two southbound lanes. North of the UGB, 3rd Street would have one northbound travel lane and one southbound travel lane. US 97 would have a full diamond interchange with 3rd Street just north of Bowery Lane. The interchange would allow all northbound and southbound movements on to and off of US 97. From Cooley Road, travelers would travel 1.4 miles on northbound 3rd Street to access US 97 via the full diamond interchange. At the interchange, 3rd Street would be elevated above US 97 and would have one eastbound and one westbound travel lane. Access to properties east of US 97 would be provided by new roads which would be connected to 3rd Street. Under the East DS2 Alternative, the new extension of 3rd Street would connect with US 97 through a directional interchange on the southeast side of the Deschutes Memorial Gardens and Chapel. The directional interchange would allow southbound US 97 traffic to flow freely via an off-ramp to southbound 3rd Street and would also allow northbound 3rd Street traffic to cross over US 97 and flow freely via an on-ramp to northbound US 97. The estimated costs for the build alternatives include right-of-way (ROW) acquisition and construction costs and range from $170 to $220 million. The project would likely be funded in increments, which would necessitate either build alternative being constructed in multiple phases. Construction is planned to begin in 2014. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Incremental improvements would reduce delay, congestion, and the number and severity of crashes at the US 97/Cooley Road and US 97/Robal Road intersections within the medium-term planning period. In the long-term, reduced traffic congestion, improved traffic flow, and enhanced public safety would support economic development. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New ROW would require: conversion of 131 to 180 acres of land to highway use; displacement of 43 to 51 businesses and 13 to 19 residences; removal of one historic resource; and creation of 84 to 93 acres of new impervious surfaces. 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: 110244, 582 pages, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-11-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation 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/888697851?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+97+BEND+NORTH+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DESCHUTES+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=US+97+BEND+NORTH+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DESCHUTES+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 - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 97 BEND NORTH CORRIDOR PROJECT, DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 2 of 12] T2 - US 97 BEND NORTH CORRIDOR PROJECT, DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 888697846; 15004-4_0002 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to address congestion, traffic flow, and safety on a six-mile segment of US 97 in Deschutes County, Oregon are proposed. The project area consists of a corridor between the Deschutes Market Road/Tumalo Junction interchange and the Empire Avenue interchange. US 97 is classified as a statewide facility and freight route on the National Highway System along its entire length, and as an expressway from the City of Redmond through Bend and in many other sections of the highway. In the Bend area, US 97 is used as a route for local residents to travel to and from home and work, and it is a connection to area shopping, dining, businesses, schools and recreation. Bends population growth, in combination with US 97 also serving to move freight and traffic through the region, has led to an increase in traffic congestion and delay, disruptions in traffic flow, and an increase in the severity of vehicular crashes. Three alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The East DS1 and East DS2 Alternatives would reroute US 97, from just north of Cooley Road to approximately Empire Avenue, east of its current alignment, adjacent to the existing railroad tracks. Where US 97 is realigned, the current US 97 roadway would be used as a portion of the extension of 3rd Street. A new interchange would be constructed in the northern portion of the corridor, near Bowery Lane. For the East DS1 Alternative, US 97 would have two northbound and two southbound travel lanes, separated by median barrier. Between Cooley Road and the City of Bend's urban growth boundary (UGB), 3rd Street would have two northbound lanes and two southbound lanes. North of the UGB, 3rd Street would have one northbound travel lane and one southbound travel lane. US 97 would have a full diamond interchange with 3rd Street just north of Bowery Lane. The interchange would allow all northbound and southbound movements on to and off of US 97. From Cooley Road, travelers would travel 1.4 miles on northbound 3rd Street to access US 97 via the full diamond interchange. At the interchange, 3rd Street would be elevated above US 97 and would have one eastbound and one westbound travel lane. Access to properties east of US 97 would be provided by new roads which would be connected to 3rd Street. Under the East DS2 Alternative, the new extension of 3rd Street would connect with US 97 through a directional interchange on the southeast side of the Deschutes Memorial Gardens and Chapel. The directional interchange would allow southbound US 97 traffic to flow freely via an off-ramp to southbound 3rd Street and would also allow northbound 3rd Street traffic to cross over US 97 and flow freely via an on-ramp to northbound US 97. The estimated costs for the build alternatives include right-of-way (ROW) acquisition and construction costs and range from $170 to $220 million. The project would likely be funded in increments, which would necessitate either build alternative being constructed in multiple phases. Construction is planned to begin in 2014. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Incremental improvements would reduce delay, congestion, and the number and severity of crashes at the US 97/Cooley Road and US 97/Robal Road intersections within the medium-term planning period. In the long-term, reduced traffic congestion, improved traffic flow, and enhanced public safety would support economic development. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New ROW would require: conversion of 131 to 180 acres of land to highway use; displacement of 43 to 51 businesses and 13 to 19 residences; removal of one historic resource; and creation of 84 to 93 acres of new impervious surfaces. 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: 110244, 582 pages, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-11-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation 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/888697846?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+97+BEND+NORTH+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DESCHUTES+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=US+97+BEND+NORTH+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DESCHUTES+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 - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ATLANTA BELTLINE, CITY OF ATLANTA, FULTON COUNTY, GEORGIA. [Part 5 of 11] T2 - ATLANTA BELTLINE, CITY OF ATLANTA, FULTON COUNTY, GEORGIA. AN - 888696733; 14996-6_0005 AB - PURPOSE: A fixed guideway transit and multi-use trails system within a 22-mile corridor encircling central Atlanta, Fulton County, Georgia is proposed. The Atlanta BeltLine is part of a comprehensive economic development effort combining greenspace, trails, transit, and new development along historic rail segments. The project study area is defined as the quarter-mile on each side of the five existing or former railroad corridors that, together, encircle central Atlanta: the Decatur Belt, the Atlanta and West Point Railroad BeltLine, the Louisville and Nashville Railroad BeltLine, the CSX Corridor, and the Norfolk Southern Corridor. Collectively, these railroad corridors form a circuit that intersects existing Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA) rail corridors near six stations: Lindbergh Center, Inman Park/Reynoldstown, King Memorial, West End, Bankhead, and Ashby. MARTA is working in partnership with Atlanta BeltLine, Inc., the City of Atlantas implementation agent for the overall BeltLine project, to advance the transit component through this EIS process. Tiering will allow the Federal Transit Administration and MARTA to focus on those decisions that are ready for analysis to support future right-of-way (ROW) preservation including: selection of either modern streetcar or light rail transit technology as the transit mode; selection of a general alignment of new transit and trails; and establishment of the ROW needs. A Tier 2 process will identify and assess trail design elements, transit station locations, vehicle types, storage facilities, site-specific impacts, and mitigation measures for impacts that cannot be avoided. Ten Transit Build Alternatives, formed of five alignments and two technology modes, are considered in this Tier 1 draft EIS. For the most part, the proposed alignments of the Trail Build Alternatives, of which there are three alternatives, are adjacent to and in the same ROW as the Transit Build Alternatives. The No Build Alternative is included for baseline comparison. The Transit Build Alternatives would accommodate approximately 50 proposed station locations with an average spacing of slightly less than a half mile. The proposed alignments are identical through the northeast, southeast, and southwest zones where they are located adjacent to or within the same railroad corridors and have the same points of connection to existing MARTA rail stations. Alignments within the northwest zone would be located adjacent to or within the existing CSX or Norfolk Southern freight rail ROWs. The recommended technology is streetcar due to its generally lower capital cost, greater navigational flexibility, and potential for fewer noise, vibration, and land use impacts. Preliminary cost estimates in 2009 dollars for the Transit Build Alternatives are $1.8 billion for light rail transit technology and $1.6 billion for streetcar technology. Estimates for the Trail Build Alternatives range from $129 million to $135 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve access and mobility for existing and future residents and workers by increasing in-city transit and bicycle/pedestrian options, and providing links in and between those networks. Social and economic opportunity at the individual, community, and city levels would be expanded. Annual ridership of 26.4 million and a daily reduction of 113,000 vehicle miles traveled are anticipated. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The Build Alternatives have the potential to affect active existing and future freight operations and infrastructure. In the northeast, southeast, and southwest zones, the total new ROW requirement for both the Transit and Trails Alternatives is estimated at 72.1 acres. In the northwest zone, the Transit Alternatives would require 23 to 25 acres, while the Trail Build Alternatives would require 13 to 16 acres. The project area contains 180 historic properties and 22 parks that could be impacted. Increases in property values and subsequent increases in property taxes and rents could lead to the displacement of low-income residents within the southeast and southwest zone neighborhoods. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110236, 243 pages, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Community Development KW - Cultural Resources KW - Environmental Justice KW - Parks KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Georgia KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/888696733?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ATLANTA+BELTLINE%2C+CITY+OF+ATLANTA%2C+FULTON+COUNTY%2C+GEORGIA.&rft.title=ATLANTA+BELTLINE%2C+CITY+OF+ATLANTA%2C+FULTON+COUNTY%2C+GEORGIA.&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 - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ATLANTA BELTLINE, CITY OF ATLANTA, FULTON COUNTY, GEORGIA. [Part 4 of 11] T2 - ATLANTA BELTLINE, CITY OF ATLANTA, FULTON COUNTY, GEORGIA. AN - 888696730; 14996-6_0004 AB - PURPOSE: A fixed guideway transit and multi-use trails system within a 22-mile corridor encircling central Atlanta, Fulton County, Georgia is proposed. The Atlanta BeltLine is part of a comprehensive economic development effort combining greenspace, trails, transit, and new development along historic rail segments. The project study area is defined as the quarter-mile on each side of the five existing or former railroad corridors that, together, encircle central Atlanta: the Decatur Belt, the Atlanta and West Point Railroad BeltLine, the Louisville and Nashville Railroad BeltLine, the CSX Corridor, and the Norfolk Southern Corridor. Collectively, these railroad corridors form a circuit that intersects existing Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA) rail corridors near six stations: Lindbergh Center, Inman Park/Reynoldstown, King Memorial, West End, Bankhead, and Ashby. MARTA is working in partnership with Atlanta BeltLine, Inc., the City of Atlantas implementation agent for the overall BeltLine project, to advance the transit component through this EIS process. Tiering will allow the Federal Transit Administration and MARTA to focus on those decisions that are ready for analysis to support future right-of-way (ROW) preservation including: selection of either modern streetcar or light rail transit technology as the transit mode; selection of a general alignment of new transit and trails; and establishment of the ROW needs. A Tier 2 process will identify and assess trail design elements, transit station locations, vehicle types, storage facilities, site-specific impacts, and mitigation measures for impacts that cannot be avoided. Ten Transit Build Alternatives, formed of five alignments and two technology modes, are considered in this Tier 1 draft EIS. For the most part, the proposed alignments of the Trail Build Alternatives, of which there are three alternatives, are adjacent to and in the same ROW as the Transit Build Alternatives. The No Build Alternative is included for baseline comparison. The Transit Build Alternatives would accommodate approximately 50 proposed station locations with an average spacing of slightly less than a half mile. The proposed alignments are identical through the northeast, southeast, and southwest zones where they are located adjacent to or within the same railroad corridors and have the same points of connection to existing MARTA rail stations. Alignments within the northwest zone would be located adjacent to or within the existing CSX or Norfolk Southern freight rail ROWs. The recommended technology is streetcar due to its generally lower capital cost, greater navigational flexibility, and potential for fewer noise, vibration, and land use impacts. Preliminary cost estimates in 2009 dollars for the Transit Build Alternatives are $1.8 billion for light rail transit technology and $1.6 billion for streetcar technology. Estimates for the Trail Build Alternatives range from $129 million to $135 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve access and mobility for existing and future residents and workers by increasing in-city transit and bicycle/pedestrian options, and providing links in and between those networks. Social and economic opportunity at the individual, community, and city levels would be expanded. Annual ridership of 26.4 million and a daily reduction of 113,000 vehicle miles traveled are anticipated. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The Build Alternatives have the potential to affect active existing and future freight operations and infrastructure. In the northeast, southeast, and southwest zones, the total new ROW requirement for both the Transit and Trails Alternatives is estimated at 72.1 acres. In the northwest zone, the Transit Alternatives would require 23 to 25 acres, while the Trail Build Alternatives would require 13 to 16 acres. The project area contains 180 historic properties and 22 parks that could be impacted. Increases in property values and subsequent increases in property taxes and rents could lead to the displacement of low-income residents within the southeast and southwest zone neighborhoods. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110236, 243 pages, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Community Development KW - Cultural Resources KW - Environmental Justice KW - Parks KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Georgia KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/888696730?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ATLANTA+BELTLINE%2C+CITY+OF+ATLANTA%2C+FULTON+COUNTY%2C+GEORGIA.&rft.title=ATLANTA+BELTLINE%2C+CITY+OF+ATLANTA%2C+FULTON+COUNTY%2C+GEORGIA.&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 - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ATLANTA BELTLINE, CITY OF ATLANTA, FULTON COUNTY, GEORGIA. [Part 3 of 11] T2 - ATLANTA BELTLINE, CITY OF ATLANTA, FULTON COUNTY, GEORGIA. AN - 888696725; 14996-6_0003 AB - PURPOSE: A fixed guideway transit and multi-use trails system within a 22-mile corridor encircling central Atlanta, Fulton County, Georgia is proposed. The Atlanta BeltLine is part of a comprehensive economic development effort combining greenspace, trails, transit, and new development along historic rail segments. The project study area is defined as the quarter-mile on each side of the five existing or former railroad corridors that, together, encircle central Atlanta: the Decatur Belt, the Atlanta and West Point Railroad BeltLine, the Louisville and Nashville Railroad BeltLine, the CSX Corridor, and the Norfolk Southern Corridor. Collectively, these railroad corridors form a circuit that intersects existing Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA) rail corridors near six stations: Lindbergh Center, Inman Park/Reynoldstown, King Memorial, West End, Bankhead, and Ashby. MARTA is working in partnership with Atlanta BeltLine, Inc., the City of Atlantas implementation agent for the overall BeltLine project, to advance the transit component through this EIS process. Tiering will allow the Federal Transit Administration and MARTA to focus on those decisions that are ready for analysis to support future right-of-way (ROW) preservation including: selection of either modern streetcar or light rail transit technology as the transit mode; selection of a general alignment of new transit and trails; and establishment of the ROW needs. A Tier 2 process will identify and assess trail design elements, transit station locations, vehicle types, storage facilities, site-specific impacts, and mitigation measures for impacts that cannot be avoided. Ten Transit Build Alternatives, formed of five alignments and two technology modes, are considered in this Tier 1 draft EIS. For the most part, the proposed alignments of the Trail Build Alternatives, of which there are three alternatives, are adjacent to and in the same ROW as the Transit Build Alternatives. The No Build Alternative is included for baseline comparison. The Transit Build Alternatives would accommodate approximately 50 proposed station locations with an average spacing of slightly less than a half mile. The proposed alignments are identical through the northeast, southeast, and southwest zones where they are located adjacent to or within the same railroad corridors and have the same points of connection to existing MARTA rail stations. Alignments within the northwest zone would be located adjacent to or within the existing CSX or Norfolk Southern freight rail ROWs. The recommended technology is streetcar due to its generally lower capital cost, greater navigational flexibility, and potential for fewer noise, vibration, and land use impacts. Preliminary cost estimates in 2009 dollars for the Transit Build Alternatives are $1.8 billion for light rail transit technology and $1.6 billion for streetcar technology. Estimates for the Trail Build Alternatives range from $129 million to $135 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve access and mobility for existing and future residents and workers by increasing in-city transit and bicycle/pedestrian options, and providing links in and between those networks. Social and economic opportunity at the individual, community, and city levels would be expanded. Annual ridership of 26.4 million and a daily reduction of 113,000 vehicle miles traveled are anticipated. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The Build Alternatives have the potential to affect active existing and future freight operations and infrastructure. In the northeast, southeast, and southwest zones, the total new ROW requirement for both the Transit and Trails Alternatives is estimated at 72.1 acres. In the northwest zone, the Transit Alternatives would require 23 to 25 acres, while the Trail Build Alternatives would require 13 to 16 acres. The project area contains 180 historic properties and 22 parks that could be impacted. Increases in property values and subsequent increases in property taxes and rents could lead to the displacement of low-income residents within the southeast and southwest zone neighborhoods. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110236, 243 pages, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Community Development KW - Cultural Resources KW - Environmental Justice KW - Parks KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Georgia KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/888696725?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ATLANTA+BELTLINE%2C+CITY+OF+ATLANTA%2C+FULTON+COUNTY%2C+GEORGIA.&rft.title=ATLANTA+BELTLINE%2C+CITY+OF+ATLANTA%2C+FULTON+COUNTY%2C+GEORGIA.&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 - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ATLANTA BELTLINE, CITY OF ATLANTA, FULTON COUNTY, GEORGIA. [Part 2 of 11] T2 - ATLANTA BELTLINE, CITY OF ATLANTA, FULTON COUNTY, GEORGIA. AN - 888696720; 14996-6_0002 AB - PURPOSE: A fixed guideway transit and multi-use trails system within a 22-mile corridor encircling central Atlanta, Fulton County, Georgia is proposed. The Atlanta BeltLine is part of a comprehensive economic development effort combining greenspace, trails, transit, and new development along historic rail segments. The project study area is defined as the quarter-mile on each side of the five existing or former railroad corridors that, together, encircle central Atlanta: the Decatur Belt, the Atlanta and West Point Railroad BeltLine, the Louisville and Nashville Railroad BeltLine, the CSX Corridor, and the Norfolk Southern Corridor. Collectively, these railroad corridors form a circuit that intersects existing Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA) rail corridors near six stations: Lindbergh Center, Inman Park/Reynoldstown, King Memorial, West End, Bankhead, and Ashby. MARTA is working in partnership with Atlanta BeltLine, Inc., the City of Atlantas implementation agent for the overall BeltLine project, to advance the transit component through this EIS process. Tiering will allow the Federal Transit Administration and MARTA to focus on those decisions that are ready for analysis to support future right-of-way (ROW) preservation including: selection of either modern streetcar or light rail transit technology as the transit mode; selection of a general alignment of new transit and trails; and establishment of the ROW needs. A Tier 2 process will identify and assess trail design elements, transit station locations, vehicle types, storage facilities, site-specific impacts, and mitigation measures for impacts that cannot be avoided. Ten Transit Build Alternatives, formed of five alignments and two technology modes, are considered in this Tier 1 draft EIS. For the most part, the proposed alignments of the Trail Build Alternatives, of which there are three alternatives, are adjacent to and in the same ROW as the Transit Build Alternatives. The No Build Alternative is included for baseline comparison. The Transit Build Alternatives would accommodate approximately 50 proposed station locations with an average spacing of slightly less than a half mile. The proposed alignments are identical through the northeast, southeast, and southwest zones where they are located adjacent to or within the same railroad corridors and have the same points of connection to existing MARTA rail stations. Alignments within the northwest zone would be located adjacent to or within the existing CSX or Norfolk Southern freight rail ROWs. The recommended technology is streetcar due to its generally lower capital cost, greater navigational flexibility, and potential for fewer noise, vibration, and land use impacts. Preliminary cost estimates in 2009 dollars for the Transit Build Alternatives are $1.8 billion for light rail transit technology and $1.6 billion for streetcar technology. Estimates for the Trail Build Alternatives range from $129 million to $135 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve access and mobility for existing and future residents and workers by increasing in-city transit and bicycle/pedestrian options, and providing links in and between those networks. Social and economic opportunity at the individual, community, and city levels would be expanded. Annual ridership of 26.4 million and a daily reduction of 113,000 vehicle miles traveled are anticipated. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The Build Alternatives have the potential to affect active existing and future freight operations and infrastructure. In the northeast, southeast, and southwest zones, the total new ROW requirement for both the Transit and Trails Alternatives is estimated at 72.1 acres. In the northwest zone, the Transit Alternatives would require 23 to 25 acres, while the Trail Build Alternatives would require 13 to 16 acres. The project area contains 180 historic properties and 22 parks that could be impacted. Increases in property values and subsequent increases in property taxes and rents could lead to the displacement of low-income residents within the southeast and southwest zone neighborhoods. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110236, 243 pages, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Community Development KW - Cultural Resources KW - Environmental Justice KW - Parks KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Georgia KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/888696720?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ATLANTA+BELTLINE%2C+CITY+OF+ATLANTA%2C+FULTON+COUNTY%2C+GEORGIA.&rft.title=ATLANTA+BELTLINE%2C+CITY+OF+ATLANTA%2C+FULTON+COUNTY%2C+GEORGIA.&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 - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ATLANTA BELTLINE, CITY OF ATLANTA, FULTON COUNTY, GEORGIA. [Part 11 of 11] T2 - ATLANTA BELTLINE, CITY OF ATLANTA, FULTON COUNTY, GEORGIA. AN - 888696133; 14996-6_0011 AB - PURPOSE: A fixed guideway transit and multi-use trails system within a 22-mile corridor encircling central Atlanta, Fulton County, Georgia is proposed. The Atlanta BeltLine is part of a comprehensive economic development effort combining greenspace, trails, transit, and new development along historic rail segments. The project study area is defined as the quarter-mile on each side of the five existing or former railroad corridors that, together, encircle central Atlanta: the Decatur Belt, the Atlanta and West Point Railroad BeltLine, the Louisville and Nashville Railroad BeltLine, the CSX Corridor, and the Norfolk Southern Corridor. Collectively, these railroad corridors form a circuit that intersects existing Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA) rail corridors near six stations: Lindbergh Center, Inman Park/Reynoldstown, King Memorial, West End, Bankhead, and Ashby. MARTA is working in partnership with Atlanta BeltLine, Inc., the City of Atlantas implementation agent for the overall BeltLine project, to advance the transit component through this EIS process. Tiering will allow the Federal Transit Administration and MARTA to focus on those decisions that are ready for analysis to support future right-of-way (ROW) preservation including: selection of either modern streetcar or light rail transit technology as the transit mode; selection of a general alignment of new transit and trails; and establishment of the ROW needs. A Tier 2 process will identify and assess trail design elements, transit station locations, vehicle types, storage facilities, site-specific impacts, and mitigation measures for impacts that cannot be avoided. Ten Transit Build Alternatives, formed of five alignments and two technology modes, are considered in this Tier 1 draft EIS. For the most part, the proposed alignments of the Trail Build Alternatives, of which there are three alternatives, are adjacent to and in the same ROW as the Transit Build Alternatives. The No Build Alternative is included for baseline comparison. The Transit Build Alternatives would accommodate approximately 50 proposed station locations with an average spacing of slightly less than a half mile. The proposed alignments are identical through the northeast, southeast, and southwest zones where they are located adjacent to or within the same railroad corridors and have the same points of connection to existing MARTA rail stations. Alignments within the northwest zone would be located adjacent to or within the existing CSX or Norfolk Southern freight rail ROWs. The recommended technology is streetcar due to its generally lower capital cost, greater navigational flexibility, and potential for fewer noise, vibration, and land use impacts. Preliminary cost estimates in 2009 dollars for the Transit Build Alternatives are $1.8 billion for light rail transit technology and $1.6 billion for streetcar technology. Estimates for the Trail Build Alternatives range from $129 million to $135 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve access and mobility for existing and future residents and workers by increasing in-city transit and bicycle/pedestrian options, and providing links in and between those networks. Social and economic opportunity at the individual, community, and city levels would be expanded. Annual ridership of 26.4 million and a daily reduction of 113,000 vehicle miles traveled are anticipated. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The Build Alternatives have the potential to affect active existing and future freight operations and infrastructure. In the northeast, southeast, and southwest zones, the total new ROW requirement for both the Transit and Trails Alternatives is estimated at 72.1 acres. In the northwest zone, the Transit Alternatives would require 23 to 25 acres, while the Trail Build Alternatives would require 13 to 16 acres. The project area contains 180 historic properties and 22 parks that could be impacted. Increases in property values and subsequent increases in property taxes and rents could lead to the displacement of low-income residents within the southeast and southwest zone neighborhoods. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110236, 243 pages, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 11 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Community Development KW - Cultural Resources KW - Environmental Justice KW - Parks KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Georgia KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/888696133?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ATLANTA+BELTLINE%2C+CITY+OF+ATLANTA%2C+FULTON+COUNTY%2C+GEORGIA.&rft.title=ATLANTA+BELTLINE%2C+CITY+OF+ATLANTA%2C+FULTON+COUNTY%2C+GEORGIA.&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 - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ATLANTA BELTLINE, CITY OF ATLANTA, FULTON COUNTY, GEORGIA. [Part 10 of 11] T2 - ATLANTA BELTLINE, CITY OF ATLANTA, FULTON COUNTY, GEORGIA. AN - 888696132; 14996-6_0010 AB - PURPOSE: A fixed guideway transit and multi-use trails system within a 22-mile corridor encircling central Atlanta, Fulton County, Georgia is proposed. The Atlanta BeltLine is part of a comprehensive economic development effort combining greenspace, trails, transit, and new development along historic rail segments. The project study area is defined as the quarter-mile on each side of the five existing or former railroad corridors that, together, encircle central Atlanta: the Decatur Belt, the Atlanta and West Point Railroad BeltLine, the Louisville and Nashville Railroad BeltLine, the CSX Corridor, and the Norfolk Southern Corridor. Collectively, these railroad corridors form a circuit that intersects existing Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA) rail corridors near six stations: Lindbergh Center, Inman Park/Reynoldstown, King Memorial, West End, Bankhead, and Ashby. MARTA is working in partnership with Atlanta BeltLine, Inc., the City of Atlantas implementation agent for the overall BeltLine project, to advance the transit component through this EIS process. Tiering will allow the Federal Transit Administration and MARTA to focus on those decisions that are ready for analysis to support future right-of-way (ROW) preservation including: selection of either modern streetcar or light rail transit technology as the transit mode; selection of a general alignment of new transit and trails; and establishment of the ROW needs. A Tier 2 process will identify and assess trail design elements, transit station locations, vehicle types, storage facilities, site-specific impacts, and mitigation measures for impacts that cannot be avoided. Ten Transit Build Alternatives, formed of five alignments and two technology modes, are considered in this Tier 1 draft EIS. For the most part, the proposed alignments of the Trail Build Alternatives, of which there are three alternatives, are adjacent to and in the same ROW as the Transit Build Alternatives. The No Build Alternative is included for baseline comparison. The Transit Build Alternatives would accommodate approximately 50 proposed station locations with an average spacing of slightly less than a half mile. The proposed alignments are identical through the northeast, southeast, and southwest zones where they are located adjacent to or within the same railroad corridors and have the same points of connection to existing MARTA rail stations. Alignments within the northwest zone would be located adjacent to or within the existing CSX or Norfolk Southern freight rail ROWs. The recommended technology is streetcar due to its generally lower capital cost, greater navigational flexibility, and potential for fewer noise, vibration, and land use impacts. Preliminary cost estimates in 2009 dollars for the Transit Build Alternatives are $1.8 billion for light rail transit technology and $1.6 billion for streetcar technology. Estimates for the Trail Build Alternatives range from $129 million to $135 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve access and mobility for existing and future residents and workers by increasing in-city transit and bicycle/pedestrian options, and providing links in and between those networks. Social and economic opportunity at the individual, community, and city levels would be expanded. Annual ridership of 26.4 million and a daily reduction of 113,000 vehicle miles traveled are anticipated. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The Build Alternatives have the potential to affect active existing and future freight operations and infrastructure. In the northeast, southeast, and southwest zones, the total new ROW requirement for both the Transit and Trails Alternatives is estimated at 72.1 acres. In the northwest zone, the Transit Alternatives would require 23 to 25 acres, while the Trail Build Alternatives would require 13 to 16 acres. The project area contains 180 historic properties and 22 parks that could be impacted. Increases in property values and subsequent increases in property taxes and rents could lead to the displacement of low-income residents within the southeast and southwest zone neighborhoods. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110236, 243 pages, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Community Development KW - Cultural Resources KW - Environmental Justice KW - Parks KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Georgia KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/888696132?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ATLANTA+BELTLINE%2C+CITY+OF+ATLANTA%2C+FULTON+COUNTY%2C+GEORGIA.&rft.title=ATLANTA+BELTLINE%2C+CITY+OF+ATLANTA%2C+FULTON+COUNTY%2C+GEORGIA.&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 - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ATLANTA BELTLINE, CITY OF ATLANTA, FULTON COUNTY, GEORGIA. [Part 9 of 11] T2 - ATLANTA BELTLINE, CITY OF ATLANTA, FULTON COUNTY, GEORGIA. AN - 888696130; 14996-6_0009 AB - PURPOSE: A fixed guideway transit and multi-use trails system within a 22-mile corridor encircling central Atlanta, Fulton County, Georgia is proposed. The Atlanta BeltLine is part of a comprehensive economic development effort combining greenspace, trails, transit, and new development along historic rail segments. The project study area is defined as the quarter-mile on each side of the five existing or former railroad corridors that, together, encircle central Atlanta: the Decatur Belt, the Atlanta and West Point Railroad BeltLine, the Louisville and Nashville Railroad BeltLine, the CSX Corridor, and the Norfolk Southern Corridor. Collectively, these railroad corridors form a circuit that intersects existing Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA) rail corridors near six stations: Lindbergh Center, Inman Park/Reynoldstown, King Memorial, West End, Bankhead, and Ashby. MARTA is working in partnership with Atlanta BeltLine, Inc., the City of Atlantas implementation agent for the overall BeltLine project, to advance the transit component through this EIS process. Tiering will allow the Federal Transit Administration and MARTA to focus on those decisions that are ready for analysis to support future right-of-way (ROW) preservation including: selection of either modern streetcar or light rail transit technology as the transit mode; selection of a general alignment of new transit and trails; and establishment of the ROW needs. A Tier 2 process will identify and assess trail design elements, transit station locations, vehicle types, storage facilities, site-specific impacts, and mitigation measures for impacts that cannot be avoided. Ten Transit Build Alternatives, formed of five alignments and two technology modes, are considered in this Tier 1 draft EIS. For the most part, the proposed alignments of the Trail Build Alternatives, of which there are three alternatives, are adjacent to and in the same ROW as the Transit Build Alternatives. The No Build Alternative is included for baseline comparison. The Transit Build Alternatives would accommodate approximately 50 proposed station locations with an average spacing of slightly less than a half mile. The proposed alignments are identical through the northeast, southeast, and southwest zones where they are located adjacent to or within the same railroad corridors and have the same points of connection to existing MARTA rail stations. Alignments within the northwest zone would be located adjacent to or within the existing CSX or Norfolk Southern freight rail ROWs. The recommended technology is streetcar due to its generally lower capital cost, greater navigational flexibility, and potential for fewer noise, vibration, and land use impacts. Preliminary cost estimates in 2009 dollars for the Transit Build Alternatives are $1.8 billion for light rail transit technology and $1.6 billion for streetcar technology. Estimates for the Trail Build Alternatives range from $129 million to $135 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve access and mobility for existing and future residents and workers by increasing in-city transit and bicycle/pedestrian options, and providing links in and between those networks. Social and economic opportunity at the individual, community, and city levels would be expanded. Annual ridership of 26.4 million and a daily reduction of 113,000 vehicle miles traveled are anticipated. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The Build Alternatives have the potential to affect active existing and future freight operations and infrastructure. In the northeast, southeast, and southwest zones, the total new ROW requirement for both the Transit and Trails Alternatives is estimated at 72.1 acres. In the northwest zone, the Transit Alternatives would require 23 to 25 acres, while the Trail Build Alternatives would require 13 to 16 acres. The project area contains 180 historic properties and 22 parks that could be impacted. Increases in property values and subsequent increases in property taxes and rents could lead to the displacement of low-income residents within the southeast and southwest zone neighborhoods. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110236, 243 pages, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 9 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Community Development KW - Cultural Resources KW - Environmental Justice KW - Parks KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Georgia KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/888696130?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ATLANTA+BELTLINE%2C+CITY+OF+ATLANTA%2C+FULTON+COUNTY%2C+GEORGIA.&rft.title=ATLANTA+BELTLINE%2C+CITY+OF+ATLANTA%2C+FULTON+COUNTY%2C+GEORGIA.&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 - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ATLANTA BELTLINE, CITY OF ATLANTA, FULTON COUNTY, GEORGIA. [Part 8 of 11] T2 - ATLANTA BELTLINE, CITY OF ATLANTA, FULTON COUNTY, GEORGIA. AN - 888696128; 14996-6_0008 AB - PURPOSE: A fixed guideway transit and multi-use trails system within a 22-mile corridor encircling central Atlanta, Fulton County, Georgia is proposed. The Atlanta BeltLine is part of a comprehensive economic development effort combining greenspace, trails, transit, and new development along historic rail segments. The project study area is defined as the quarter-mile on each side of the five existing or former railroad corridors that, together, encircle central Atlanta: the Decatur Belt, the Atlanta and West Point Railroad BeltLine, the Louisville and Nashville Railroad BeltLine, the CSX Corridor, and the Norfolk Southern Corridor. Collectively, these railroad corridors form a circuit that intersects existing Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA) rail corridors near six stations: Lindbergh Center, Inman Park/Reynoldstown, King Memorial, West End, Bankhead, and Ashby. MARTA is working in partnership with Atlanta BeltLine, Inc., the City of Atlantas implementation agent for the overall BeltLine project, to advance the transit component through this EIS process. Tiering will allow the Federal Transit Administration and MARTA to focus on those decisions that are ready for analysis to support future right-of-way (ROW) preservation including: selection of either modern streetcar or light rail transit technology as the transit mode; selection of a general alignment of new transit and trails; and establishment of the ROW needs. A Tier 2 process will identify and assess trail design elements, transit station locations, vehicle types, storage facilities, site-specific impacts, and mitigation measures for impacts that cannot be avoided. Ten Transit Build Alternatives, formed of five alignments and two technology modes, are considered in this Tier 1 draft EIS. For the most part, the proposed alignments of the Trail Build Alternatives, of which there are three alternatives, are adjacent to and in the same ROW as the Transit Build Alternatives. The No Build Alternative is included for baseline comparison. The Transit Build Alternatives would accommodate approximately 50 proposed station locations with an average spacing of slightly less than a half mile. The proposed alignments are identical through the northeast, southeast, and southwest zones where they are located adjacent to or within the same railroad corridors and have the same points of connection to existing MARTA rail stations. Alignments within the northwest zone would be located adjacent to or within the existing CSX or Norfolk Southern freight rail ROWs. The recommended technology is streetcar due to its generally lower capital cost, greater navigational flexibility, and potential for fewer noise, vibration, and land use impacts. Preliminary cost estimates in 2009 dollars for the Transit Build Alternatives are $1.8 billion for light rail transit technology and $1.6 billion for streetcar technology. Estimates for the Trail Build Alternatives range from $129 million to $135 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve access and mobility for existing and future residents and workers by increasing in-city transit and bicycle/pedestrian options, and providing links in and between those networks. Social and economic opportunity at the individual, community, and city levels would be expanded. Annual ridership of 26.4 million and a daily reduction of 113,000 vehicle miles traveled are anticipated. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The Build Alternatives have the potential to affect active existing and future freight operations and infrastructure. In the northeast, southeast, and southwest zones, the total new ROW requirement for both the Transit and Trails Alternatives is estimated at 72.1 acres. In the northwest zone, the Transit Alternatives would require 23 to 25 acres, while the Trail Build Alternatives would require 13 to 16 acres. The project area contains 180 historic properties and 22 parks that could be impacted. Increases in property values and subsequent increases in property taxes and rents could lead to the displacement of low-income residents within the southeast and southwest zone neighborhoods. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110236, 243 pages, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Community Development KW - Cultural Resources KW - Environmental Justice KW - Parks KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Georgia KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/888696128?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ATLANTA+BELTLINE%2C+CITY+OF+ATLANTA%2C+FULTON+COUNTY%2C+GEORGIA.&rft.title=ATLANTA+BELTLINE%2C+CITY+OF+ATLANTA%2C+FULTON+COUNTY%2C+GEORGIA.&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 - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ATLANTA BELTLINE, CITY OF ATLANTA, FULTON COUNTY, GEORGIA. [Part 7 of 11] T2 - ATLANTA BELTLINE, CITY OF ATLANTA, FULTON COUNTY, GEORGIA. AN - 888696125; 14996-6_0007 AB - PURPOSE: A fixed guideway transit and multi-use trails system within a 22-mile corridor encircling central Atlanta, Fulton County, Georgia is proposed. The Atlanta BeltLine is part of a comprehensive economic development effort combining greenspace, trails, transit, and new development along historic rail segments. The project study area is defined as the quarter-mile on each side of the five existing or former railroad corridors that, together, encircle central Atlanta: the Decatur Belt, the Atlanta and West Point Railroad BeltLine, the Louisville and Nashville Railroad BeltLine, the CSX Corridor, and the Norfolk Southern Corridor. Collectively, these railroad corridors form a circuit that intersects existing Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA) rail corridors near six stations: Lindbergh Center, Inman Park/Reynoldstown, King Memorial, West End, Bankhead, and Ashby. MARTA is working in partnership with Atlanta BeltLine, Inc., the City of Atlantas implementation agent for the overall BeltLine project, to advance the transit component through this EIS process. Tiering will allow the Federal Transit Administration and MARTA to focus on those decisions that are ready for analysis to support future right-of-way (ROW) preservation including: selection of either modern streetcar or light rail transit technology as the transit mode; selection of a general alignment of new transit and trails; and establishment of the ROW needs. A Tier 2 process will identify and assess trail design elements, transit station locations, vehicle types, storage facilities, site-specific impacts, and mitigation measures for impacts that cannot be avoided. Ten Transit Build Alternatives, formed of five alignments and two technology modes, are considered in this Tier 1 draft EIS. For the most part, the proposed alignments of the Trail Build Alternatives, of which there are three alternatives, are adjacent to and in the same ROW as the Transit Build Alternatives. The No Build Alternative is included for baseline comparison. The Transit Build Alternatives would accommodate approximately 50 proposed station locations with an average spacing of slightly less than a half mile. The proposed alignments are identical through the northeast, southeast, and southwest zones where they are located adjacent to or within the same railroad corridors and have the same points of connection to existing MARTA rail stations. Alignments within the northwest zone would be located adjacent to or within the existing CSX or Norfolk Southern freight rail ROWs. The recommended technology is streetcar due to its generally lower capital cost, greater navigational flexibility, and potential for fewer noise, vibration, and land use impacts. Preliminary cost estimates in 2009 dollars for the Transit Build Alternatives are $1.8 billion for light rail transit technology and $1.6 billion for streetcar technology. Estimates for the Trail Build Alternatives range from $129 million to $135 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve access and mobility for existing and future residents and workers by increasing in-city transit and bicycle/pedestrian options, and providing links in and between those networks. Social and economic opportunity at the individual, community, and city levels would be expanded. Annual ridership of 26.4 million and a daily reduction of 113,000 vehicle miles traveled are anticipated. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The Build Alternatives have the potential to affect active existing and future freight operations and infrastructure. In the northeast, southeast, and southwest zones, the total new ROW requirement for both the Transit and Trails Alternatives is estimated at 72.1 acres. In the northwest zone, the Transit Alternatives would require 23 to 25 acres, while the Trail Build Alternatives would require 13 to 16 acres. The project area contains 180 historic properties and 22 parks that could be impacted. Increases in property values and subsequent increases in property taxes and rents could lead to the displacement of low-income residents within the southeast and southwest zone neighborhoods. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110236, 243 pages, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Community Development KW - Cultural Resources KW - Environmental Justice KW - Parks KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Georgia KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/888696125?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ATLANTA+BELTLINE%2C+CITY+OF+ATLANTA%2C+FULTON+COUNTY%2C+GEORGIA.&rft.title=ATLANTA+BELTLINE%2C+CITY+OF+ATLANTA%2C+FULTON+COUNTY%2C+GEORGIA.&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 - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ATLANTA BELTLINE, CITY OF ATLANTA, FULTON COUNTY, GEORGIA. [Part 6 of 11] T2 - ATLANTA BELTLINE, CITY OF ATLANTA, FULTON COUNTY, GEORGIA. AN - 888696122; 14996-6_0006 AB - PURPOSE: A fixed guideway transit and multi-use trails system within a 22-mile corridor encircling central Atlanta, Fulton County, Georgia is proposed. The Atlanta BeltLine is part of a comprehensive economic development effort combining greenspace, trails, transit, and new development along historic rail segments. The project study area is defined as the quarter-mile on each side of the five existing or former railroad corridors that, together, encircle central Atlanta: the Decatur Belt, the Atlanta and West Point Railroad BeltLine, the Louisville and Nashville Railroad BeltLine, the CSX Corridor, and the Norfolk Southern Corridor. Collectively, these railroad corridors form a circuit that intersects existing Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA) rail corridors near six stations: Lindbergh Center, Inman Park/Reynoldstown, King Memorial, West End, Bankhead, and Ashby. MARTA is working in partnership with Atlanta BeltLine, Inc., the City of Atlantas implementation agent for the overall BeltLine project, to advance the transit component through this EIS process. Tiering will allow the Federal Transit Administration and MARTA to focus on those decisions that are ready for analysis to support future right-of-way (ROW) preservation including: selection of either modern streetcar or light rail transit technology as the transit mode; selection of a general alignment of new transit and trails; and establishment of the ROW needs. A Tier 2 process will identify and assess trail design elements, transit station locations, vehicle types, storage facilities, site-specific impacts, and mitigation measures for impacts that cannot be avoided. Ten Transit Build Alternatives, formed of five alignments and two technology modes, are considered in this Tier 1 draft EIS. For the most part, the proposed alignments of the Trail Build Alternatives, of which there are three alternatives, are adjacent to and in the same ROW as the Transit Build Alternatives. The No Build Alternative is included for baseline comparison. The Transit Build Alternatives would accommodate approximately 50 proposed station locations with an average spacing of slightly less than a half mile. The proposed alignments are identical through the northeast, southeast, and southwest zones where they are located adjacent to or within the same railroad corridors and have the same points of connection to existing MARTA rail stations. Alignments within the northwest zone would be located adjacent to or within the existing CSX or Norfolk Southern freight rail ROWs. The recommended technology is streetcar due to its generally lower capital cost, greater navigational flexibility, and potential for fewer noise, vibration, and land use impacts. Preliminary cost estimates in 2009 dollars for the Transit Build Alternatives are $1.8 billion for light rail transit technology and $1.6 billion for streetcar technology. Estimates for the Trail Build Alternatives range from $129 million to $135 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve access and mobility for existing and future residents and workers by increasing in-city transit and bicycle/pedestrian options, and providing links in and between those networks. Social and economic opportunity at the individual, community, and city levels would be expanded. Annual ridership of 26.4 million and a daily reduction of 113,000 vehicle miles traveled are anticipated. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The Build Alternatives have the potential to affect active existing and future freight operations and infrastructure. In the northeast, southeast, and southwest zones, the total new ROW requirement for both the Transit and Trails Alternatives is estimated at 72.1 acres. In the northwest zone, the Transit Alternatives would require 23 to 25 acres, while the Trail Build Alternatives would require 13 to 16 acres. The project area contains 180 historic properties and 22 parks that could be impacted. Increases in property values and subsequent increases in property taxes and rents could lead to the displacement of low-income residents within the southeast and southwest zone neighborhoods. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110236, 243 pages, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Community Development KW - Cultural Resources KW - Environmental Justice KW - Parks KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Georgia KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/888696122?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ATLANTA+BELTLINE%2C+CITY+OF+ATLANTA%2C+FULTON+COUNTY%2C+GEORGIA.&rft.title=ATLANTA+BELTLINE%2C+CITY+OF+ATLANTA%2C+FULTON+COUNTY%2C+GEORGIA.&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 - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 16 of 23] T2 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 888696121; 15002-2_0016 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the proposed action and preferred alternative (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of semi-transparent fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. A temporary rationing program would be implemented, which would provide for increased boating use during the two-week exhibition period, and the removal of fabric panels immediately following the exhibition period (four to six weeks total). The installation, exhibition, and removal phases are projected to attract 416,000 visitors over an approximately three-year period, including 344,000 visitors during the 2-week exhibition proposed for the first half of August, 2014. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands area of critical environmental concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities including rail traffic and use of heavy equipment and large rock drills would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. It is estimated that US 50 lane closures would occur on 177 days over the 28-month installation period when crews are working on the highway side of the river. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, the expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0521D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110242, Final EIS--948 pages and maps, Appendices--674 pages and maps, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 16 KW - Land Use KW - Agency number: FES 11-15 KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/888696121?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 15 of 23] T2 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 888696119; 15002-2_0015 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the proposed action and preferred alternative (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of semi-transparent fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. A temporary rationing program would be implemented, which would provide for increased boating use during the two-week exhibition period, and the removal of fabric panels immediately following the exhibition period (four to six weeks total). The installation, exhibition, and removal phases are projected to attract 416,000 visitors over an approximately three-year period, including 344,000 visitors during the 2-week exhibition proposed for the first half of August, 2014. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands area of critical environmental concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities including rail traffic and use of heavy equipment and large rock drills would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. It is estimated that US 50 lane closures would occur on 177 days over the 28-month installation period when crews are working on the highway side of the river. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, the expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0521D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110242, Final EIS--948 pages and maps, Appendices--674 pages and maps, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 15 KW - Land Use KW - Agency number: FES 11-15 KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/888696119?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 14 of 23] T2 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 888696118; 15002-2_0014 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the proposed action and preferred alternative (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of semi-transparent fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. A temporary rationing program would be implemented, which would provide for increased boating use during the two-week exhibition period, and the removal of fabric panels immediately following the exhibition period (four to six weeks total). The installation, exhibition, and removal phases are projected to attract 416,000 visitors over an approximately three-year period, including 344,000 visitors during the 2-week exhibition proposed for the first half of August, 2014. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands area of critical environmental concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities including rail traffic and use of heavy equipment and large rock drills would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. It is estimated that US 50 lane closures would occur on 177 days over the 28-month installation period when crews are working on the highway side of the river. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, the expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0521D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110242, Final EIS--948 pages and maps, Appendices--674 pages and maps, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 14 KW - Land Use KW - Agency number: FES 11-15 KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/888696118?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 10 of 23] T2 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 888696113; 15002-2_0010 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the proposed action and preferred alternative (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of semi-transparent fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. A temporary rationing program would be implemented, which would provide for increased boating use during the two-week exhibition period, and the removal of fabric panels immediately following the exhibition period (four to six weeks total). The installation, exhibition, and removal phases are projected to attract 416,000 visitors over an approximately three-year period, including 344,000 visitors during the 2-week exhibition proposed for the first half of August, 2014. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands area of critical environmental concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities including rail traffic and use of heavy equipment and large rock drills would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. It is estimated that US 50 lane closures would occur on 177 days over the 28-month installation period when crews are working on the highway side of the river. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, the expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0521D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110242, Final EIS--948 pages and maps, Appendices--674 pages and maps, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 10 KW - Land Use KW - Agency number: FES 11-15 KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/888696113?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 9 of 23] T2 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 888696109; 15002-2_0009 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the proposed action and preferred alternative (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of semi-transparent fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. A temporary rationing program would be implemented, which would provide for increased boating use during the two-week exhibition period, and the removal of fabric panels immediately following the exhibition period (four to six weeks total). The installation, exhibition, and removal phases are projected to attract 416,000 visitors over an approximately three-year period, including 344,000 visitors during the 2-week exhibition proposed for the first half of August, 2014. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands area of critical environmental concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities including rail traffic and use of heavy equipment and large rock drills would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. It is estimated that US 50 lane closures would occur on 177 days over the 28-month installation period when crews are working on the highway side of the river. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, the expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0521D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110242, Final EIS--948 pages and maps, Appendices--674 pages and maps, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 9 KW - Land Use KW - Agency number: FES 11-15 KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/888696109?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 13 of 23] T2 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 888696044; 15002-2_0013 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the proposed action and preferred alternative (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of semi-transparent fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. A temporary rationing program would be implemented, which would provide for increased boating use during the two-week exhibition period, and the removal of fabric panels immediately following the exhibition period (four to six weeks total). The installation, exhibition, and removal phases are projected to attract 416,000 visitors over an approximately three-year period, including 344,000 visitors during the 2-week exhibition proposed for the first half of August, 2014. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands area of critical environmental concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities including rail traffic and use of heavy equipment and large rock drills would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. It is estimated that US 50 lane closures would occur on 177 days over the 28-month installation period when crews are working on the highway side of the river. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, the expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0521D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110242, Final EIS--948 pages and maps, Appendices--674 pages and maps, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 13 KW - Land Use KW - Agency number: FES 11-15 KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/888696044?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 12 of 23] T2 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 888696043; 15002-2_0012 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the proposed action and preferred alternative (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of semi-transparent fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. A temporary rationing program would be implemented, which would provide for increased boating use during the two-week exhibition period, and the removal of fabric panels immediately following the exhibition period (four to six weeks total). The installation, exhibition, and removal phases are projected to attract 416,000 visitors over an approximately three-year period, including 344,000 visitors during the 2-week exhibition proposed for the first half of August, 2014. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands area of critical environmental concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities including rail traffic and use of heavy equipment and large rock drills would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. It is estimated that US 50 lane closures would occur on 177 days over the 28-month installation period when crews are working on the highway side of the river. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, the expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0521D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110242, Final EIS--948 pages and maps, Appendices--674 pages and maps, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 12 KW - Land Use KW - Agency number: FES 11-15 KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/888696043?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 11 of 23] T2 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 888696042; 15002-2_0011 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the proposed action and preferred alternative (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of semi-transparent fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. A temporary rationing program would be implemented, which would provide for increased boating use during the two-week exhibition period, and the removal of fabric panels immediately following the exhibition period (four to six weeks total). The installation, exhibition, and removal phases are projected to attract 416,000 visitors over an approximately three-year period, including 344,000 visitors during the 2-week exhibition proposed for the first half of August, 2014. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands area of critical environmental concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities including rail traffic and use of heavy equipment and large rock drills would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. It is estimated that US 50 lane closures would occur on 177 days over the 28-month installation period when crews are working on the highway side of the river. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, the expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0521D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110242, Final EIS--948 pages and maps, Appendices--674 pages and maps, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 11 KW - Land Use KW - Agency number: FES 11-15 KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/888696042?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 8 of 23] T2 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 888696040; 15002-2_0008 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the proposed action and preferred alternative (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of semi-transparent fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. A temporary rationing program would be implemented, which would provide for increased boating use during the two-week exhibition period, and the removal of fabric panels immediately following the exhibition period (four to six weeks total). The installation, exhibition, and removal phases are projected to attract 416,000 visitors over an approximately three-year period, including 344,000 visitors during the 2-week exhibition proposed for the first half of August, 2014. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands area of critical environmental concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities including rail traffic and use of heavy equipment and large rock drills would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. It is estimated that US 50 lane closures would occur on 177 days over the 28-month installation period when crews are working on the highway side of the river. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, the expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0521D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110242, Final EIS--948 pages and maps, Appendices--674 pages and maps, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 8 KW - Land Use KW - Agency number: FES 11-15 KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/888696040?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 7 of 23] T2 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 888696039; 15002-2_0007 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the proposed action and preferred alternative (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of semi-transparent fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. A temporary rationing program would be implemented, which would provide for increased boating use during the two-week exhibition period, and the removal of fabric panels immediately following the exhibition period (four to six weeks total). The installation, exhibition, and removal phases are projected to attract 416,000 visitors over an approximately three-year period, including 344,000 visitors during the 2-week exhibition proposed for the first half of August, 2014. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands area of critical environmental concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities including rail traffic and use of heavy equipment and large rock drills would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. It is estimated that US 50 lane closures would occur on 177 days over the 28-month installation period when crews are working on the highway side of the river. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, the expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0521D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110242, Final EIS--948 pages and maps, Appendices--674 pages and maps, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 7 KW - Land Use KW - Agency number: FES 11-15 KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/888696039?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 6 of 23] T2 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 888696038; 15002-2_0006 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the proposed action and preferred alternative (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of semi-transparent fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. A temporary rationing program would be implemented, which would provide for increased boating use during the two-week exhibition period, and the removal of fabric panels immediately following the exhibition period (four to six weeks total). The installation, exhibition, and removal phases are projected to attract 416,000 visitors over an approximately three-year period, including 344,000 visitors during the 2-week exhibition proposed for the first half of August, 2014. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands area of critical environmental concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities including rail traffic and use of heavy equipment and large rock drills would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. It is estimated that US 50 lane closures would occur on 177 days over the 28-month installation period when crews are working on the highway side of the river. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, the expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0521D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110242, Final EIS--948 pages and maps, Appendices--674 pages and maps, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 6 KW - Land Use KW - Agency number: FES 11-15 KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/888696038?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 5 of 23] T2 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 888696037; 15002-2_0005 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the proposed action and preferred alternative (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of semi-transparent fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. A temporary rationing program would be implemented, which would provide for increased boating use during the two-week exhibition period, and the removal of fabric panels immediately following the exhibition period (four to six weeks total). The installation, exhibition, and removal phases are projected to attract 416,000 visitors over an approximately three-year period, including 344,000 visitors during the 2-week exhibition proposed for the first half of August, 2014. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands area of critical environmental concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities including rail traffic and use of heavy equipment and large rock drills would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. It is estimated that US 50 lane closures would occur on 177 days over the 28-month installation period when crews are working on the highway side of the river. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, the expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0521D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110242, Final EIS--948 pages and maps, Appendices--674 pages and maps, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 5 KW - Land Use KW - Agency number: FES 11-15 KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/888696037?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 4 of 23] T2 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 888696035; 15002-2_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the proposed action and preferred alternative (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of semi-transparent fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. A temporary rationing program would be implemented, which would provide for increased boating use during the two-week exhibition period, and the removal of fabric panels immediately following the exhibition period (four to six weeks total). The installation, exhibition, and removal phases are projected to attract 416,000 visitors over an approximately three-year period, including 344,000 visitors during the 2-week exhibition proposed for the first half of August, 2014. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands area of critical environmental concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities including rail traffic and use of heavy equipment and large rock drills would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. It is estimated that US 50 lane closures would occur on 177 days over the 28-month installation period when crews are working on the highway side of the river. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, the expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0521D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110242, Final EIS--948 pages and maps, Appendices--674 pages and maps, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 4 KW - Land Use KW - Agency number: FES 11-15 KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/888696035?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 3 of 23] T2 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 888696033; 15002-2_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the proposed action and preferred alternative (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of semi-transparent fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. A temporary rationing program would be implemented, which would provide for increased boating use during the two-week exhibition period, and the removal of fabric panels immediately following the exhibition period (four to six weeks total). The installation, exhibition, and removal phases are projected to attract 416,000 visitors over an approximately three-year period, including 344,000 visitors during the 2-week exhibition proposed for the first half of August, 2014. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands area of critical environmental concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities including rail traffic and use of heavy equipment and large rock drills would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. It is estimated that US 50 lane closures would occur on 177 days over the 28-month installation period when crews are working on the highway side of the river. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, the expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0521D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110242, Final EIS--948 pages and maps, Appendices--674 pages and maps, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 3 KW - Land Use KW - Agency number: FES 11-15 KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/888696033?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 2 of 23] T2 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 888696030; 15002-2_0002 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the proposed action and preferred alternative (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of semi-transparent fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. A temporary rationing program would be implemented, which would provide for increased boating use during the two-week exhibition period, and the removal of fabric panels immediately following the exhibition period (four to six weeks total). The installation, exhibition, and removal phases are projected to attract 416,000 visitors over an approximately three-year period, including 344,000 visitors during the 2-week exhibition proposed for the first half of August, 2014. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands area of critical environmental concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities including rail traffic and use of heavy equipment and large rock drills would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. It is estimated that US 50 lane closures would occur on 177 days over the 28-month installation period when crews are working on the highway side of the river. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, the expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0521D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110242, Final EIS--948 pages and maps, Appendices--674 pages and maps, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 2 KW - Land Use KW - Agency number: FES 11-15 KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/888696030?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ATLANTA BELTLINE, CITY OF ATLANTA, FULTON COUNTY, GEORGIA. [Part 1 of 11] T2 - ATLANTA BELTLINE, CITY OF ATLANTA, FULTON COUNTY, GEORGIA. AN - 888696016; 14996-6_0001 AB - PURPOSE: A fixed guideway transit and multi-use trails system within a 22-mile corridor encircling central Atlanta, Fulton County, Georgia is proposed. The Atlanta BeltLine is part of a comprehensive economic development effort combining greenspace, trails, transit, and new development along historic rail segments. The project study area is defined as the quarter-mile on each side of the five existing or former railroad corridors that, together, encircle central Atlanta: the Decatur Belt, the Atlanta and West Point Railroad BeltLine, the Louisville and Nashville Railroad BeltLine, the CSX Corridor, and the Norfolk Southern Corridor. Collectively, these railroad corridors form a circuit that intersects existing Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA) rail corridors near six stations: Lindbergh Center, Inman Park/Reynoldstown, King Memorial, West End, Bankhead, and Ashby. MARTA is working in partnership with Atlanta BeltLine, Inc., the City of Atlantas implementation agent for the overall BeltLine project, to advance the transit component through this EIS process. Tiering will allow the Federal Transit Administration and MARTA to focus on those decisions that are ready for analysis to support future right-of-way (ROW) preservation including: selection of either modern streetcar or light rail transit technology as the transit mode; selection of a general alignment of new transit and trails; and establishment of the ROW needs. A Tier 2 process will identify and assess trail design elements, transit station locations, vehicle types, storage facilities, site-specific impacts, and mitigation measures for impacts that cannot be avoided. Ten Transit Build Alternatives, formed of five alignments and two technology modes, are considered in this Tier 1 draft EIS. For the most part, the proposed alignments of the Trail Build Alternatives, of which there are three alternatives, are adjacent to and in the same ROW as the Transit Build Alternatives. The No Build Alternative is included for baseline comparison. The Transit Build Alternatives would accommodate approximately 50 proposed station locations with an average spacing of slightly less than a half mile. The proposed alignments are identical through the northeast, southeast, and southwest zones where they are located adjacent to or within the same railroad corridors and have the same points of connection to existing MARTA rail stations. Alignments within the northwest zone would be located adjacent to or within the existing CSX or Norfolk Southern freight rail ROWs. The recommended technology is streetcar due to its generally lower capital cost, greater navigational flexibility, and potential for fewer noise, vibration, and land use impacts. Preliminary cost estimates in 2009 dollars for the Transit Build Alternatives are $1.8 billion for light rail transit technology and $1.6 billion for streetcar technology. Estimates for the Trail Build Alternatives range from $129 million to $135 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve access and mobility for existing and future residents and workers by increasing in-city transit and bicycle/pedestrian options, and providing links in and between those networks. Social and economic opportunity at the individual, community, and city levels would be expanded. Annual ridership of 26.4 million and a daily reduction of 113,000 vehicle miles traveled are anticipated. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The Build Alternatives have the potential to affect active existing and future freight operations and infrastructure. In the northeast, southeast, and southwest zones, the total new ROW requirement for both the Transit and Trails Alternatives is estimated at 72.1 acres. In the northwest zone, the Transit Alternatives would require 23 to 25 acres, while the Trail Build Alternatives would require 13 to 16 acres. The project area contains 180 historic properties and 22 parks that could be impacted. Increases in property values and subsequent increases in property taxes and rents could lead to the displacement of low-income residents within the southeast and southwest zone neighborhoods. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110236, 243 pages, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Community Development KW - Cultural Resources KW - Environmental Justice KW - Parks KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Georgia KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/888696016?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ATLANTA+BELTLINE%2C+CITY+OF+ATLANTA%2C+FULTON+COUNTY%2C+GEORGIA.&rft.title=ATLANTA+BELTLINE%2C+CITY+OF+ATLANTA%2C+FULTON+COUNTY%2C+GEORGIA.&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 - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 23 of 23] T2 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 888695993; 15002-2_0023 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the proposed action and preferred alternative (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of semi-transparent fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. A temporary rationing program would be implemented, which would provide for increased boating use during the two-week exhibition period, and the removal of fabric panels immediately following the exhibition period (four to six weeks total). The installation, exhibition, and removal phases are projected to attract 416,000 visitors over an approximately three-year period, including 344,000 visitors during the 2-week exhibition proposed for the first half of August, 2014. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands area of critical environmental concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities including rail traffic and use of heavy equipment and large rock drills would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. It is estimated that US 50 lane closures would occur on 177 days over the 28-month installation period when crews are working on the highway side of the river. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, the expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0521D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110242, Final EIS--948 pages and maps, Appendices--674 pages and maps, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 23 KW - Land Use KW - Agency number: FES 11-15 KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/888695993?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 22 of 23] T2 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 888695992; 15002-2_0022 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the proposed action and preferred alternative (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of semi-transparent fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. A temporary rationing program would be implemented, which would provide for increased boating use during the two-week exhibition period, and the removal of fabric panels immediately following the exhibition period (four to six weeks total). The installation, exhibition, and removal phases are projected to attract 416,000 visitors over an approximately three-year period, including 344,000 visitors during the 2-week exhibition proposed for the first half of August, 2014. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands area of critical environmental concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities including rail traffic and use of heavy equipment and large rock drills would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. It is estimated that US 50 lane closures would occur on 177 days over the 28-month installation period when crews are working on the highway side of the river. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, the expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0521D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110242, Final EIS--948 pages and maps, Appendices--674 pages and maps, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 22 KW - Land Use KW - Agency number: FES 11-15 KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/888695992?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 21 of 23] T2 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 888695991; 15002-2_0021 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the proposed action and preferred alternative (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of semi-transparent fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. A temporary rationing program would be implemented, which would provide for increased boating use during the two-week exhibition period, and the removal of fabric panels immediately following the exhibition period (four to six weeks total). The installation, exhibition, and removal phases are projected to attract 416,000 visitors over an approximately three-year period, including 344,000 visitors during the 2-week exhibition proposed for the first half of August, 2014. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands area of critical environmental concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities including rail traffic and use of heavy equipment and large rock drills would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. It is estimated that US 50 lane closures would occur on 177 days over the 28-month installation period when crews are working on the highway side of the river. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, the expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0521D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110242, Final EIS--948 pages and maps, Appendices--674 pages and maps, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 21 KW - Land Use KW - Agency number: FES 11-15 KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/888695991?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 20 of 23] T2 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 888695990; 15002-2_0020 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the proposed action and preferred alternative (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of semi-transparent fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. A temporary rationing program would be implemented, which would provide for increased boating use during the two-week exhibition period, and the removal of fabric panels immediately following the exhibition period (four to six weeks total). The installation, exhibition, and removal phases are projected to attract 416,000 visitors over an approximately three-year period, including 344,000 visitors during the 2-week exhibition proposed for the first half of August, 2014. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands area of critical environmental concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities including rail traffic and use of heavy equipment and large rock drills would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. It is estimated that US 50 lane closures would occur on 177 days over the 28-month installation period when crews are working on the highway side of the river. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, the expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0521D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110242, Final EIS--948 pages and maps, Appendices--674 pages and maps, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 20 KW - Land Use KW - Agency number: FES 11-15 KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/888695990?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 19 of 23] T2 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 888695989; 15002-2_0019 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the proposed action and preferred alternative (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of semi-transparent fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. A temporary rationing program would be implemented, which would provide for increased boating use during the two-week exhibition period, and the removal of fabric panels immediately following the exhibition period (four to six weeks total). The installation, exhibition, and removal phases are projected to attract 416,000 visitors over an approximately three-year period, including 344,000 visitors during the 2-week exhibition proposed for the first half of August, 2014. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands area of critical environmental concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities including rail traffic and use of heavy equipment and large rock drills would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. It is estimated that US 50 lane closures would occur on 177 days over the 28-month installation period when crews are working on the highway side of the river. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, the expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0521D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110242, Final EIS--948 pages and maps, Appendices--674 pages and maps, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 19 KW - Land Use KW - Agency number: FES 11-15 KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/888695989?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 18 of 23] T2 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 888695987; 15002-2_0018 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the proposed action and preferred alternative (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of semi-transparent fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. A temporary rationing program would be implemented, which would provide for increased boating use during the two-week exhibition period, and the removal of fabric panels immediately following the exhibition period (four to six weeks total). The installation, exhibition, and removal phases are projected to attract 416,000 visitors over an approximately three-year period, including 344,000 visitors during the 2-week exhibition proposed for the first half of August, 2014. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands area of critical environmental concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities including rail traffic and use of heavy equipment and large rock drills would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. It is estimated that US 50 lane closures would occur on 177 days over the 28-month installation period when crews are working on the highway side of the river. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, the expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0521D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110242, Final EIS--948 pages and maps, Appendices--674 pages and maps, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 18 KW - Land Use KW - Agency number: FES 11-15 KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/888695987?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 17 of 23] T2 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 888695984; 15002-2_0017 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the proposed action and preferred alternative (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of semi-transparent fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. A temporary rationing program would be implemented, which would provide for increased boating use during the two-week exhibition period, and the removal of fabric panels immediately following the exhibition period (four to six weeks total). The installation, exhibition, and removal phases are projected to attract 416,000 visitors over an approximately three-year period, including 344,000 visitors during the 2-week exhibition proposed for the first half of August, 2014. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands area of critical environmental concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities including rail traffic and use of heavy equipment and large rock drills would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. It is estimated that US 50 lane closures would occur on 177 days over the 28-month installation period when crews are working on the highway side of the river. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, the expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0521D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110242, Final EIS--948 pages and maps, Appendices--674 pages and maps, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 17 KW - Land Use KW - Agency number: FES 11-15 KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/888695984?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. [Part 1 of 23] T2 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 888695983; 15002-2_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the proposed action and preferred alternative (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of semi-transparent fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. A temporary rationing program would be implemented, which would provide for increased boating use during the two-week exhibition period, and the removal of fabric panels immediately following the exhibition period (four to six weeks total). The installation, exhibition, and removal phases are projected to attract 416,000 visitors over an approximately three-year period, including 344,000 visitors during the 2-week exhibition proposed for the first half of August, 2014. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands area of critical environmental concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities including rail traffic and use of heavy equipment and large rock drills would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. It is estimated that US 50 lane closures would occur on 177 days over the 28-month installation period when crews are working on the highway side of the river. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, the expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0521D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110242, Final EIS--948 pages and maps, Appendices--674 pages and maps, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Land Use KW - Agency number: FES 11-15 KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/888695983?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 97 BEND NORTH CORRIDOR PROJECT, DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 9 of 12] T2 - US 97 BEND NORTH CORRIDOR PROJECT, DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 888695812; 15004-4_0009 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to address congestion, traffic flow, and safety on a six-mile segment of US 97 in Deschutes County, Oregon are proposed. The project area consists of a corridor between the Deschutes Market Road/Tumalo Junction interchange and the Empire Avenue interchange. US 97 is classified as a statewide facility and freight route on the National Highway System along its entire length, and as an expressway from the City of Redmond through Bend and in many other sections of the highway. In the Bend area, US 97 is used as a route for local residents to travel to and from home and work, and it is a connection to area shopping, dining, businesses, schools and recreation. Bends population growth, in combination with US 97 also serving to move freight and traffic through the region, has led to an increase in traffic congestion and delay, disruptions in traffic flow, and an increase in the severity of vehicular crashes. Three alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The East DS1 and East DS2 Alternatives would reroute US 97, from just north of Cooley Road to approximately Empire Avenue, east of its current alignment, adjacent to the existing railroad tracks. Where US 97 is realigned, the current US 97 roadway would be used as a portion of the extension of 3rd Street. A new interchange would be constructed in the northern portion of the corridor, near Bowery Lane. For the East DS1 Alternative, US 97 would have two northbound and two southbound travel lanes, separated by median barrier. Between Cooley Road and the City of Bend's urban growth boundary (UGB), 3rd Street would have two northbound lanes and two southbound lanes. North of the UGB, 3rd Street would have one northbound travel lane and one southbound travel lane. US 97 would have a full diamond interchange with 3rd Street just north of Bowery Lane. The interchange would allow all northbound and southbound movements on to and off of US 97. From Cooley Road, travelers would travel 1.4 miles on northbound 3rd Street to access US 97 via the full diamond interchange. At the interchange, 3rd Street would be elevated above US 97 and would have one eastbound and one westbound travel lane. Access to properties east of US 97 would be provided by new roads which would be connected to 3rd Street. Under the East DS2 Alternative, the new extension of 3rd Street would connect with US 97 through a directional interchange on the southeast side of the Deschutes Memorial Gardens and Chapel. The directional interchange would allow southbound US 97 traffic to flow freely via an off-ramp to southbound 3rd Street and would also allow northbound 3rd Street traffic to cross over US 97 and flow freely via an on-ramp to northbound US 97. The estimated costs for the build alternatives include right-of-way (ROW) acquisition and construction costs and range from $170 to $220 million. The project would likely be funded in increments, which would necessitate either build alternative being constructed in multiple phases. Construction is planned to begin in 2014. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Incremental improvements would reduce delay, congestion, and the number and severity of crashes at the US 97/Cooley Road and US 97/Robal Road intersections within the medium-term planning period. In the long-term, reduced traffic congestion, improved traffic flow, and enhanced public safety would support economic development. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New ROW would require: conversion of 131 to 180 acres of land to highway use; displacement of 43 to 51 businesses and 13 to 19 residences; removal of one historic resource; and creation of 84 to 93 acres of new impervious surfaces. 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: 110244, 582 pages, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 9 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-11-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation 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/888695812?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+97+BEND+NORTH+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DESCHUTES+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=US+97+BEND+NORTH+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DESCHUTES+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 - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 97 BEND NORTH CORRIDOR PROJECT, DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 8 of 12] T2 - US 97 BEND NORTH CORRIDOR PROJECT, DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 888695809; 15004-4_0008 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to address congestion, traffic flow, and safety on a six-mile segment of US 97 in Deschutes County, Oregon are proposed. The project area consists of a corridor between the Deschutes Market Road/Tumalo Junction interchange and the Empire Avenue interchange. US 97 is classified as a statewide facility and freight route on the National Highway System along its entire length, and as an expressway from the City of Redmond through Bend and in many other sections of the highway. In the Bend area, US 97 is used as a route for local residents to travel to and from home and work, and it is a connection to area shopping, dining, businesses, schools and recreation. Bends population growth, in combination with US 97 also serving to move freight and traffic through the region, has led to an increase in traffic congestion and delay, disruptions in traffic flow, and an increase in the severity of vehicular crashes. Three alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The East DS1 and East DS2 Alternatives would reroute US 97, from just north of Cooley Road to approximately Empire Avenue, east of its current alignment, adjacent to the existing railroad tracks. Where US 97 is realigned, the current US 97 roadway would be used as a portion of the extension of 3rd Street. A new interchange would be constructed in the northern portion of the corridor, near Bowery Lane. For the East DS1 Alternative, US 97 would have two northbound and two southbound travel lanes, separated by median barrier. Between Cooley Road and the City of Bend's urban growth boundary (UGB), 3rd Street would have two northbound lanes and two southbound lanes. North of the UGB, 3rd Street would have one northbound travel lane and one southbound travel lane. US 97 would have a full diamond interchange with 3rd Street just north of Bowery Lane. The interchange would allow all northbound and southbound movements on to and off of US 97. From Cooley Road, travelers would travel 1.4 miles on northbound 3rd Street to access US 97 via the full diamond interchange. At the interchange, 3rd Street would be elevated above US 97 and would have one eastbound and one westbound travel lane. Access to properties east of US 97 would be provided by new roads which would be connected to 3rd Street. Under the East DS2 Alternative, the new extension of 3rd Street would connect with US 97 through a directional interchange on the southeast side of the Deschutes Memorial Gardens and Chapel. The directional interchange would allow southbound US 97 traffic to flow freely via an off-ramp to southbound 3rd Street and would also allow northbound 3rd Street traffic to cross over US 97 and flow freely via an on-ramp to northbound US 97. The estimated costs for the build alternatives include right-of-way (ROW) acquisition and construction costs and range from $170 to $220 million. The project would likely be funded in increments, which would necessitate either build alternative being constructed in multiple phases. Construction is planned to begin in 2014. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Incremental improvements would reduce delay, congestion, and the number and severity of crashes at the US 97/Cooley Road and US 97/Robal Road intersections within the medium-term planning period. In the long-term, reduced traffic congestion, improved traffic flow, and enhanced public safety would support economic development. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New ROW would require: conversion of 131 to 180 acres of land to highway use; displacement of 43 to 51 businesses and 13 to 19 residences; removal of one historic resource; and creation of 84 to 93 acres of new impervious surfaces. 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: 110244, 582 pages, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 8 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-11-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation 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/888695809?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+97+BEND+NORTH+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DESCHUTES+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=US+97+BEND+NORTH+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DESCHUTES+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 - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 97 BEND NORTH CORRIDOR PROJECT, DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 7 of 12] T2 - US 97 BEND NORTH CORRIDOR PROJECT, DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 888695805; 15004-4_0007 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to address congestion, traffic flow, and safety on a six-mile segment of US 97 in Deschutes County, Oregon are proposed. The project area consists of a corridor between the Deschutes Market Road/Tumalo Junction interchange and the Empire Avenue interchange. US 97 is classified as a statewide facility and freight route on the National Highway System along its entire length, and as an expressway from the City of Redmond through Bend and in many other sections of the highway. In the Bend area, US 97 is used as a route for local residents to travel to and from home and work, and it is a connection to area shopping, dining, businesses, schools and recreation. Bends population growth, in combination with US 97 also serving to move freight and traffic through the region, has led to an increase in traffic congestion and delay, disruptions in traffic flow, and an increase in the severity of vehicular crashes. Three alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The East DS1 and East DS2 Alternatives would reroute US 97, from just north of Cooley Road to approximately Empire Avenue, east of its current alignment, adjacent to the existing railroad tracks. Where US 97 is realigned, the current US 97 roadway would be used as a portion of the extension of 3rd Street. A new interchange would be constructed in the northern portion of the corridor, near Bowery Lane. For the East DS1 Alternative, US 97 would have two northbound and two southbound travel lanes, separated by median barrier. Between Cooley Road and the City of Bend's urban growth boundary (UGB), 3rd Street would have two northbound lanes and two southbound lanes. North of the UGB, 3rd Street would have one northbound travel lane and one southbound travel lane. US 97 would have a full diamond interchange with 3rd Street just north of Bowery Lane. The interchange would allow all northbound and southbound movements on to and off of US 97. From Cooley Road, travelers would travel 1.4 miles on northbound 3rd Street to access US 97 via the full diamond interchange. At the interchange, 3rd Street would be elevated above US 97 and would have one eastbound and one westbound travel lane. Access to properties east of US 97 would be provided by new roads which would be connected to 3rd Street. Under the East DS2 Alternative, the new extension of 3rd Street would connect with US 97 through a directional interchange on the southeast side of the Deschutes Memorial Gardens and Chapel. The directional interchange would allow southbound US 97 traffic to flow freely via an off-ramp to southbound 3rd Street and would also allow northbound 3rd Street traffic to cross over US 97 and flow freely via an on-ramp to northbound US 97. The estimated costs for the build alternatives include right-of-way (ROW) acquisition and construction costs and range from $170 to $220 million. The project would likely be funded in increments, which would necessitate either build alternative being constructed in multiple phases. Construction is planned to begin in 2014. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Incremental improvements would reduce delay, congestion, and the number and severity of crashes at the US 97/Cooley Road and US 97/Robal Road intersections within the medium-term planning period. In the long-term, reduced traffic congestion, improved traffic flow, and enhanced public safety would support economic development. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New ROW would require: conversion of 131 to 180 acres of land to highway use; displacement of 43 to 51 businesses and 13 to 19 residences; removal of one historic resource; and creation of 84 to 93 acres of new impervious surfaces. 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: 110244, 582 pages, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 7 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-11-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation 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/888695805?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+97+BEND+NORTH+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DESCHUTES+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=US+97+BEND+NORTH+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DESCHUTES+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 - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 97 BEND NORTH CORRIDOR PROJECT, DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 6 of 12] T2 - US 97 BEND NORTH CORRIDOR PROJECT, DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 888695802; 15004-4_0006 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to address congestion, traffic flow, and safety on a six-mile segment of US 97 in Deschutes County, Oregon are proposed. The project area consists of a corridor between the Deschutes Market Road/Tumalo Junction interchange and the Empire Avenue interchange. US 97 is classified as a statewide facility and freight route on the National Highway System along its entire length, and as an expressway from the City of Redmond through Bend and in many other sections of the highway. In the Bend area, US 97 is used as a route for local residents to travel to and from home and work, and it is a connection to area shopping, dining, businesses, schools and recreation. Bends population growth, in combination with US 97 also serving to move freight and traffic through the region, has led to an increase in traffic congestion and delay, disruptions in traffic flow, and an increase in the severity of vehicular crashes. Three alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The East DS1 and East DS2 Alternatives would reroute US 97, from just north of Cooley Road to approximately Empire Avenue, east of its current alignment, adjacent to the existing railroad tracks. Where US 97 is realigned, the current US 97 roadway would be used as a portion of the extension of 3rd Street. A new interchange would be constructed in the northern portion of the corridor, near Bowery Lane. For the East DS1 Alternative, US 97 would have two northbound and two southbound travel lanes, separated by median barrier. Between Cooley Road and the City of Bend's urban growth boundary (UGB), 3rd Street would have two northbound lanes and two southbound lanes. North of the UGB, 3rd Street would have one northbound travel lane and one southbound travel lane. US 97 would have a full diamond interchange with 3rd Street just north of Bowery Lane. The interchange would allow all northbound and southbound movements on to and off of US 97. From Cooley Road, travelers would travel 1.4 miles on northbound 3rd Street to access US 97 via the full diamond interchange. At the interchange, 3rd Street would be elevated above US 97 and would have one eastbound and one westbound travel lane. Access to properties east of US 97 would be provided by new roads which would be connected to 3rd Street. Under the East DS2 Alternative, the new extension of 3rd Street would connect with US 97 through a directional interchange on the southeast side of the Deschutes Memorial Gardens and Chapel. The directional interchange would allow southbound US 97 traffic to flow freely via an off-ramp to southbound 3rd Street and would also allow northbound 3rd Street traffic to cross over US 97 and flow freely via an on-ramp to northbound US 97. The estimated costs for the build alternatives include right-of-way (ROW) acquisition and construction costs and range from $170 to $220 million. The project would likely be funded in increments, which would necessitate either build alternative being constructed in multiple phases. Construction is planned to begin in 2014. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Incremental improvements would reduce delay, congestion, and the number and severity of crashes at the US 97/Cooley Road and US 97/Robal Road intersections within the medium-term planning period. In the long-term, reduced traffic congestion, improved traffic flow, and enhanced public safety would support economic development. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New ROW would require: conversion of 131 to 180 acres of land to highway use; displacement of 43 to 51 businesses and 13 to 19 residences; removal of one historic resource; and creation of 84 to 93 acres of new impervious surfaces. 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: 110244, 582 pages, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-11-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation 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/888695802?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+97+BEND+NORTH+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DESCHUTES+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=US+97+BEND+NORTH+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DESCHUTES+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 - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 97 BEND NORTH CORRIDOR PROJECT, DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON. [Part 5 of 12] T2 - US 97 BEND NORTH CORRIDOR PROJECT, DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 888695795; 15004-4_0005 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to address congestion, traffic flow, and safety on a six-mile segment of US 97 in Deschutes County, Oregon are proposed. The project area consists of a corridor between the Deschutes Market Road/Tumalo Junction interchange and the Empire Avenue interchange. US 97 is classified as a statewide facility and freight route on the National Highway System along its entire length, and as an expressway from the City of Redmond through Bend and in many other sections of the highway. In the Bend area, US 97 is used as a route for local residents to travel to and from home and work, and it is a connection to area shopping, dining, businesses, schools and recreation. Bends population growth, in combination with US 97 also serving to move freight and traffic through the region, has led to an increase in traffic congestion and delay, disruptions in traffic flow, and an increase in the severity of vehicular crashes. Three alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The East DS1 and East DS2 Alternatives would reroute US 97, from just north of Cooley Road to approximately Empire Avenue, east of its current alignment, adjacent to the existing railroad tracks. Where US 97 is realigned, the current US 97 roadway would be used as a portion of the extension of 3rd Street. A new interchange would be constructed in the northern portion of the corridor, near Bowery Lane. For the East DS1 Alternative, US 97 would have two northbound and two southbound travel lanes, separated by median barrier. Between Cooley Road and the City of Bend's urban growth boundary (UGB), 3rd Street would have two northbound lanes and two southbound lanes. North of the UGB, 3rd Street would have one northbound travel lane and one southbound travel lane. US 97 would have a full diamond interchange with 3rd Street just north of Bowery Lane. The interchange would allow all northbound and southbound movements on to and off of US 97. From Cooley Road, travelers would travel 1.4 miles on northbound 3rd Street to access US 97 via the full diamond interchange. At the interchange, 3rd Street would be elevated above US 97 and would have one eastbound and one westbound travel lane. Access to properties east of US 97 would be provided by new roads which would be connected to 3rd Street. Under the East DS2 Alternative, the new extension of 3rd Street would connect with US 97 through a directional interchange on the southeast side of the Deschutes Memorial Gardens and Chapel. The directional interchange would allow southbound US 97 traffic to flow freely via an off-ramp to southbound 3rd Street and would also allow northbound 3rd Street traffic to cross over US 97 and flow freely via an on-ramp to northbound US 97. The estimated costs for the build alternatives include right-of-way (ROW) acquisition and construction costs and range from $170 to $220 million. The project would likely be funded in increments, which would necessitate either build alternative being constructed in multiple phases. Construction is planned to begin in 2014. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Incremental improvements would reduce delay, congestion, and the number and severity of crashes at the US 97/Cooley Road and US 97/Robal Road intersections within the medium-term planning period. In the long-term, reduced traffic congestion, improved traffic flow, and enhanced public safety would support economic development. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New ROW would require: conversion of 131 to 180 acres of land to highway use; displacement of 43 to 51 businesses and 13 to 19 residences; removal of one historic resource; and creation of 84 to 93 acres of new impervious surfaces. 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: 110244, 582 pages, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 5 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-11-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation 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/888695795?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+97+BEND+NORTH+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DESCHUTES+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=US+97+BEND+NORTH+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DESCHUTES+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 - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 220 NATIONAL HIGHWAY SYSTEM (NHS) CORRIDOR BETWEEN I-68 AND CORRIDOR H, GRANT, HARDY, HAMPSHIRE, AND MINERAL COUNTIES, WEST VIRGINIA, AND ALLEGANY COUNTY, MARYLAND. [Part 3 of 3] T2 - US 220 NATIONAL HIGHWAY SYSTEM (NHS) CORRIDOR BETWEEN I-68 AND CORRIDOR H, GRANT, HARDY, HAMPSHIRE, AND MINERAL COUNTIES, WEST VIRGINIA, AND ALLEGANY COUNTY, MARYLAND. AN - 888695763; 15003-3_0003 AB - PURPOSE: The development of a north-south transportation corridor along US 220 that would connect Interstate 68 (I-68) in Maryland and Corridor H in West Virginia is proposed. The study area encompasses over 835 square miles and includes portions of southwestern Allegany County, Maryland and all of Mineral County, and portions of Grant, Hampshire, and Hardy counties, West Virginia. Transportation deficiencies include numerous curves, reduced speeds, steep grades, few truck climbing lanes, inadequate shoulders, and substandard geometry. The new corridor could be comprised of roadways on new alignment, an upgrade of existing roadways, or some combination of upgrading existing roads and building new roads. The upgraded roadways would become part of the National Highway System (NHS). Corridor H, which is the southern terminus of the project, is part of the Appalachian Development Highway System (ADHS). This Tier 1 draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and three alternative corridors for the proposed facility. Corridor B begins with an interchange near existing Exits 41 and 42 along I-68 between LaVale and Cumberland, Maryland and extends southwest to Cresaptown crossing MD 53. At this point, it parallels US 220 to the west and Dans Mountain to the east. West of McCoole, Corridor B crosses MD 135, the North Branch of the Potomac River, and WV 46. Entering Mineral County, Corridor B is west of Keyser and continues to parallel US 220 on the western side. At the junction with WV 972, Corridor B continues southwest along US 50 and near Claysville, it begins to parallel WV 93, entering Grant County and extending to a terminus at Corridor H north of Scherr. Corridor C begins with an interchange near existing Exit 46 along I-68 east of Cumberland and extends south through the Willowbrook Road area near the Allegany College of Maryland to Evitts Creek and briefly parallels MD 51. Corridor C then turns west through Mexico Farms and crosses the North Branch of the Potomac River into Mineral County where it parallels WV 28. Continuing southwest, Corridor C parallels County Route 9 west of Short Gap, well east of Keyser. Crossing US 50/220 at Ridgeville and continuing southwest, Corridor C enters Grant County paralleling County Route 3 and connects with Corridor H just north of Maysville. Corridor D begins with an interchange near existing Exit 39 along I-68 near LaVale and closely follows Corridor B between Cresaptown and the US 50/220 coupling just south of Keyser. Corridor D originates on the eastern slope of Dans Mountain and extends south for a short distance on the western side of MD 53. From Cresaptown, Corridor D runs southwest paralleling US 220 to the west and Dans Mountain to the east. West of McCoole, Corridor D crosses MD 135, the North Branch of the Potomac River, and WV 46. Entering Mineral County, Corridor D runs west of Keyser and continues to parallel US 220 on the western side. At the junction with WV 972, Corridor D turns southeast along US 220, continues along US 50/220, County Route 50/4, and County Route 13 crossing into Hampshire County. Rejoining US 220/WV 28, Corridor D turns southward and crosses into Hardy County. Corridor D parallels US 220 until its connection with Corridor H just north of Moorefield. The estimated costs of a new highway facility are $482 to $500 million in Corridor B, $651 million in Corridor C, and $630 to $648 million in Corridor D. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would address inadequate roadway capacity, safety deficiencies, and limited regional mobility. The additional north-south system linkage would complete the regional road network and support economic development in the area. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Corridor development would impact 118 to 152 acres of wetlands, 300,239 to 448,803 feet of streams, 719 to 2,244 acres of floodplains, four to eight flood control dams, 127 to 720 acres of rangeland, 9,890 to 11,409 acres of forests, 1,491 to 3,335 acres of prime farmland, eight to 10 parks and recreation areas, four to 21 historic sites, 5,338 to 7,709 acres with very high or high archaeological potential, and 58 to 70 community facilities. Residential and commercial displacements would result from impacts to built-up land: 4,060 acres in Corridor B; 2,940 acres in Corridor C; and 3,820 acres in Corridor D. Impacts to community cohesion would occur around new interchanges and major side road connections. Construction in any of the corridors could have a disproportionate effect to minority and low-income populations. LEGAL MANDATES: Appalachian Regional Development Act of 1965 (P.L. 89-4), Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110243, Draft EIS--582 pages, Appendices and Maps--CD-ROM, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Appalachian Development Highways KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Historic Sites KW - Parks KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Maryland KW - West Virginia KW - Appalachian Regional Development Act of 1965, Project Authorization KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/888695763?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+220+NATIONAL+HIGHWAY+SYSTEM+%28NHS%29+CORRIDOR+BETWEEN+I-68+AND+CORRIDOR+H%2C+GRANT%2C+HARDY%2C+HAMPSHIRE%2C+AND+MINERAL+COUNTIES%2C+WEST+VIRGINIA%2C+AND+ALLEGANY+COUNTY%2C+MARYLAND.&rft.title=US+220+NATIONAL+HIGHWAY+SYSTEM+%28NHS%29+CORRIDOR+BETWEEN+I-68+AND+CORRIDOR+H%2C+GRANT%2C+HARDY%2C+HAMPSHIRE%2C+AND+MINERAL+COUNTIES%2C+WEST+VIRGINIA%2C+AND+ALLEGANY+COUNTY%2C+MARYLAND.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Charleston, West Virginia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 220 NATIONAL HIGHWAY SYSTEM (NHS) CORRIDOR BETWEEN I-68 AND CORRIDOR H, GRANT, HARDY, HAMPSHIRE, AND MINERAL COUNTIES, WEST VIRGINIA, AND ALLEGANY COUNTY, MARYLAND. [Part 1 of 3] T2 - US 220 NATIONAL HIGHWAY SYSTEM (NHS) CORRIDOR BETWEEN I-68 AND CORRIDOR H, GRANT, HARDY, HAMPSHIRE, AND MINERAL COUNTIES, WEST VIRGINIA, AND ALLEGANY COUNTY, MARYLAND. AN - 888695755; 15003-3_0001 AB - PURPOSE: The development of a north-south transportation corridor along US 220 that would connect Interstate 68 (I-68) in Maryland and Corridor H in West Virginia is proposed. The study area encompasses over 835 square miles and includes portions of southwestern Allegany County, Maryland and all of Mineral County, and portions of Grant, Hampshire, and Hardy counties, West Virginia. Transportation deficiencies include numerous curves, reduced speeds, steep grades, few truck climbing lanes, inadequate shoulders, and substandard geometry. The new corridor could be comprised of roadways on new alignment, an upgrade of existing roadways, or some combination of upgrading existing roads and building new roads. The upgraded roadways would become part of the National Highway System (NHS). Corridor H, which is the southern terminus of the project, is part of the Appalachian Development Highway System (ADHS). This Tier 1 draft EIS evaluates a No Build Alternative and three alternative corridors for the proposed facility. Corridor B begins with an interchange near existing Exits 41 and 42 along I-68 between LaVale and Cumberland, Maryland and extends southwest to Cresaptown crossing MD 53. At this point, it parallels US 220 to the west and Dans Mountain to the east. West of McCoole, Corridor B crosses MD 135, the North Branch of the Potomac River, and WV 46. Entering Mineral County, Corridor B is west of Keyser and continues to parallel US 220 on the western side. At the junction with WV 972, Corridor B continues southwest along US 50 and near Claysville, it begins to parallel WV 93, entering Grant County and extending to a terminus at Corridor H north of Scherr. Corridor C begins with an interchange near existing Exit 46 along I-68 east of Cumberland and extends south through the Willowbrook Road area near the Allegany College of Maryland to Evitts Creek and briefly parallels MD 51. Corridor C then turns west through Mexico Farms and crosses the North Branch of the Potomac River into Mineral County where it parallels WV 28. Continuing southwest, Corridor C parallels County Route 9 west of Short Gap, well east of Keyser. Crossing US 50/220 at Ridgeville and continuing southwest, Corridor C enters Grant County paralleling County Route 3 and connects with Corridor H just north of Maysville. Corridor D begins with an interchange near existing Exit 39 along I-68 near LaVale and closely follows Corridor B between Cresaptown and the US 50/220 coupling just south of Keyser. Corridor D originates on the eastern slope of Dans Mountain and extends south for a short distance on the western side of MD 53. From Cresaptown, Corridor D runs southwest paralleling US 220 to the west and Dans Mountain to the east. West of McCoole, Corridor D crosses MD 135, the North Branch of the Potomac River, and WV 46. Entering Mineral County, Corridor D runs west of Keyser and continues to parallel US 220 on the western side. At the junction with WV 972, Corridor D turns southeast along US 220, continues along US 50/220, County Route 50/4, and County Route 13 crossing into Hampshire County. Rejoining US 220/WV 28, Corridor D turns southward and crosses into Hardy County. Corridor D parallels US 220 until its connection with Corridor H just north of Moorefield. The estimated costs of a new highway facility are $482 to $500 million in Corridor B, $651 million in Corridor C, and $630 to $648 million in Corridor D. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Implementation would address inadequate roadway capacity, safety deficiencies, and limited regional mobility. The additional north-south system linkage would complete the regional road network and support economic development in the area. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Corridor development would impact 118 to 152 acres of wetlands, 300,239 to 448,803 feet of streams, 719 to 2,244 acres of floodplains, four to eight flood control dams, 127 to 720 acres of rangeland, 9,890 to 11,409 acres of forests, 1,491 to 3,335 acres of prime farmland, eight to 10 parks and recreation areas, four to 21 historic sites, 5,338 to 7,709 acres with very high or high archaeological potential, and 58 to 70 community facilities. Residential and commercial displacements would result from impacts to built-up land: 4,060 acres in Corridor B; 2,940 acres in Corridor C; and 3,820 acres in Corridor D. Impacts to community cohesion would occur around new interchanges and major side road connections. Construction in any of the corridors could have a disproportionate effect to minority and low-income populations. LEGAL MANDATES: Appalachian Regional Development Act of 1965 (P.L. 89-4), Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.), and Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110243, Draft EIS--582 pages, Appendices and Maps--CD-ROM, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Appalachian Development Highways KW - Archaeological Sites KW - Community Facilities KW - Cultural Resources KW - Environmental Justice KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Historic Sites KW - Parks KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Wildlife Habitat KW - Maryland KW - West Virginia KW - Appalachian Regional Development Act of 1965, Project Authorization KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance KW - Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, Section 404 Permits UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/888695755?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+220+NATIONAL+HIGHWAY+SYSTEM+%28NHS%29+CORRIDOR+BETWEEN+I-68+AND+CORRIDOR+H%2C+GRANT%2C+HARDY%2C+HAMPSHIRE%2C+AND+MINERAL+COUNTIES%2C+WEST+VIRGINIA%2C+AND+ALLEGANY+COUNTY%2C+MARYLAND.&rft.title=US+220+NATIONAL+HIGHWAY+SYSTEM+%28NHS%29+CORRIDOR+BETWEEN+I-68+AND+CORRIDOR+H%2C+GRANT%2C+HARDY%2C+HAMPSHIRE%2C+AND+MINERAL+COUNTIES%2C+WEST+VIRGINIA%2C+AND+ALLEGANY+COUNTY%2C+MARYLAND.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Charleston, West Virginia; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - OVER THE RIVER PROJECT, FREMONT AND CHAFFEE COUNTIES, COLORADO. AN - 16386593; 15002 AB - PURPOSE: The installation of a temporary work of art consisting of fabric panels suspended horizontally over approximately 5.9 miles of a 42.4-mile stretch of the Arkansas River between Canon City and Salida, Colorado is proposed. The work of art, known as Over the River, would require the use of federal, private and state lands adjacent to the river. Over The River Corporation has applied for a land use authorization for a three-year period to install, exhibit, and remove the work of art, conceived by the artists Christo and Jeanne-Claude, on public lands in western Fremont County and the southeast portion of Chafee County. The Arkansas River is situated in a canyon setting surrounded by hilly, steep terrain. U.S. Highway 50 (US 50) and the Union Pacific Railroad parallel the river through the entire project area. Access to and through the project area is limited to US 50, which is the primary access to all recreation sites and residential areas within the Arkansas River corridor and serves as a major thoroughfare for east-west travel in central Colorado. Six action alternatives and a No Action Alternative are analyzed in this final EIS. Under the proposed action and preferred alternative (Alternative 1a), Over the River would consist of 5.9 miles of semi-transparent fabric panels suspended above the Arkansas River in eight areas. The panels would be supported by a system of cables and anchors. Installation would be scheduled to occur over a 28-month period with an estimated 20 to 30 people working in the project corridor. The exhibit would have a two-week display and viewing period with no admission fees. Visitors would view the art by raft, kayak, or other watercraft from the river, or by automobile from the highway. A temporary rationing program would be implemented, which would provide for increased boating use during the two-week exhibition period, and the removal of fabric panels immediately following the exhibition period (four to six weeks total). The installation, exhibition, and removal phases are projected to attract 416,000 visitors over an approximately three-year period, including 344,000 visitors during the 2-week exhibition proposed for the first half of August, 2014. POSITIVE IMPACTS: An informed decision on land use authorization would determine if the work of art can be accommodated on public land while maintaining resource objectives for the Arkansas Canyonlands area of critical environmental concern. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction activities including rail traffic and use of heavy equipment and large rock drills would disturb six acres spread over 5.9 miles of river. It is estimated that US 50 lane closures would occur on 177 days over the 28-month installation period when crews are working on the highway side of the river. The presence of cable wires and fabric panels spanning the river, the expected increase in visitation, and the removal process would impact bighorn sheep, mule deer, and other wildlife species. PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0521D, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110242, Final EIS--948 pages and maps, Appendices--674 pages and maps, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 KW - Land Use KW - Agency number: FES 11-15 KW - Biologic Assessments KW - Drilling KW - Impact Monitoring Plans KW - Railroads KW - Recreation KW - Recreation Resources Management KW - Rivers KW - Scenic Areas KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wildlife KW - Arkansas River KW - Colorado UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/16386593?accountid=14244 L2 - http://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=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.title=OVER+THE+RIVER+PROJECT%2C+FREMONT+AND+CHAFFEE+COUNTIES%2C+COLORADO.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Canon City, Colorado; DOI N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 97 BEND NORTH CORRIDOR PROJECT, DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON. AN - 16375617; 15004 AB - PURPOSE: Improvements to address congestion, traffic flow, and safety on a six-mile segment of US 97 in Deschutes County, Oregon are proposed. The project area consists of a corridor between the Deschutes Market Road/Tumalo Junction interchange and the Empire Avenue interchange. US 97 is classified as a statewide facility and freight route on the National Highway System along its entire length, and as an expressway from the City of Redmond through Bend and in many other sections of the highway. In the Bend area, US 97 is used as a route for local residents to travel to and from home and work, and it is a connection to area shopping, dining, businesses, schools and recreation. Bends population growth, in combination with US 97 also serving to move freight and traffic through the region, has led to an increase in traffic congestion and delay, disruptions in traffic flow, and an increase in the severity of vehicular crashes. Three alternatives, including a No Build Alternative, are considered in this draft EIS. The East DS1 and East DS2 Alternatives would reroute US 97, from just north of Cooley Road to approximately Empire Avenue, east of its current alignment, adjacent to the existing railroad tracks. Where US 97 is realigned, the current US 97 roadway would be used as a portion of the extension of 3rd Street. A new interchange would be constructed in the northern portion of the corridor, near Bowery Lane. For the East DS1 Alternative, US 97 would have two northbound and two southbound travel lanes, separated by median barrier. Between Cooley Road and the City of Bend's urban growth boundary (UGB), 3rd Street would have two northbound lanes and two southbound lanes. North of the UGB, 3rd Street would have one northbound travel lane and one southbound travel lane. US 97 would have a full diamond interchange with 3rd Street just north of Bowery Lane. The interchange would allow all northbound and southbound movements on to and off of US 97. From Cooley Road, travelers would travel 1.4 miles on northbound 3rd Street to access US 97 via the full diamond interchange. At the interchange, 3rd Street would be elevated above US 97 and would have one eastbound and one westbound travel lane. Access to properties east of US 97 would be provided by new roads which would be connected to 3rd Street. Under the East DS2 Alternative, the new extension of 3rd Street would connect with US 97 through a directional interchange on the southeast side of the Deschutes Memorial Gardens and Chapel. The directional interchange would allow southbound US 97 traffic to flow freely via an off-ramp to southbound 3rd Street and would also allow northbound 3rd Street traffic to cross over US 97 and flow freely via an on-ramp to northbound US 97. The estimated costs for the build alternatives include right-of-way (ROW) acquisition and construction costs and range from $170 to $220 million. The project would likely be funded in increments, which would necessitate either build alternative being constructed in multiple phases. Construction is planned to begin in 2014. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Incremental improvements would reduce delay, congestion, and the number and severity of crashes at the US 97/Cooley Road and US 97/Robal Road intersections within the medium-term planning period. In the long-term, reduced traffic congestion, improved traffic flow, and enhanced public safety would support economic development. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: New ROW would require: conversion of 131 to 180 acres of land to highway use; displacement of 43 to 51 businesses and 13 to 19 residences; removal of one historic resource; and creation of 84 to 93 acres of new impervious surfaces. 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: 110244, 582 pages, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-OR-EIS-11-01-D KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Highway Structures KW - Highways KW - Historic Sites KW - Land Acquisitions KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Safety KW - Section 106 Statements KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Transportation KW - Oregon KW - Department of Transportation 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/16375617?accountid=14244 L2 - http://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=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+97+BEND+NORTH+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DESCHUTES+COUNTY%2C+OREGON.&rft.title=US+97+BEND+NORTH+CORRIDOR+PROJECT%2C+DESCHUTES+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 - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - ATLANTA BELTLINE, CITY OF ATLANTA, FULTON COUNTY, GEORGIA. AN - 16372145; 14996 AB - PURPOSE: A fixed guideway transit and multi-use trails system within a 22-mile corridor encircling central Atlanta, Fulton County, Georgia is proposed. The Atlanta BeltLine is part of a comprehensive economic development effort combining greenspace, trails, transit, and new development along historic rail segments. The project study area is defined as the quarter-mile on each side of the five existing or former railroad corridors that, together, encircle central Atlanta: the Decatur Belt, the Atlanta and West Point Railroad BeltLine, the Louisville and Nashville Railroad BeltLine, the CSX Corridor, and the Norfolk Southern Corridor. Collectively, these railroad corridors form a circuit that intersects existing Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA) rail corridors near six stations: Lindbergh Center, Inman Park/Reynoldstown, King Memorial, West End, Bankhead, and Ashby. MARTA is working in partnership with Atlanta BeltLine, Inc., the City of Atlantas implementation agent for the overall BeltLine project, to advance the transit component through this EIS process. Tiering will allow the Federal Transit Administration and MARTA to focus on those decisions that are ready for analysis to support future right-of-way (ROW) preservation including: selection of either modern streetcar or light rail transit technology as the transit mode; selection of a general alignment of new transit and trails; and establishment of the ROW needs. A Tier 2 process will identify and assess trail design elements, transit station locations, vehicle types, storage facilities, site-specific impacts, and mitigation measures for impacts that cannot be avoided. Ten Transit Build Alternatives, formed of five alignments and two technology modes, are considered in this Tier 1 draft EIS. For the most part, the proposed alignments of the Trail Build Alternatives, of which there are three alternatives, are adjacent to and in the same ROW as the Transit Build Alternatives. The No Build Alternative is included for baseline comparison. The Transit Build Alternatives would accommodate approximately 50 proposed station locations with an average spacing of slightly less than a half mile. The proposed alignments are identical through the northeast, southeast, and southwest zones where they are located adjacent to or within the same railroad corridors and have the same points of connection to existing MARTA rail stations. Alignments within the northwest zone would be located adjacent to or within the existing CSX or Norfolk Southern freight rail ROWs. The recommended technology is streetcar due to its generally lower capital cost, greater navigational flexibility, and potential for fewer noise, vibration, and land use impacts. Preliminary cost estimates in 2009 dollars for the Transit Build Alternatives are $1.8 billion for light rail transit technology and $1.6 billion for streetcar technology. Estimates for the Trail Build Alternatives range from $129 million to $135 million. POSITIVE IMPACTS: Project implementation would improve access and mobility for existing and future residents and workers by increasing in-city transit and bicycle/pedestrian options, and providing links in and between those networks. Social and economic opportunity at the individual, community, and city levels would be expanded. Annual ridership of 26.4 million and a daily reduction of 113,000 vehicle miles traveled are anticipated. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: The Build Alternatives have the potential to affect active existing and future freight operations and infrastructure. In the northeast, southeast, and southwest zones, the total new ROW requirement for both the Transit and Trails Alternatives is estimated at 72.1 acres. In the northwest zone, the Transit Alternatives would require 23 to 25 acres, while the Trail Build Alternatives would require 13 to 16 acres. The project area contains 180 historic properties and 22 parks that could be impacted. Increases in property values and subsequent increases in property taxes and rents could lead to the displacement of low-income residents within the southeast and southwest zone neighborhoods. LEGAL MANDATES: Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1651 et seq.). JF - EPA number: 110236, 243 pages, July 29, 2011 PY - 2011 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Community Development KW - Cultural Resources KW - Environmental Justice KW - Parks KW - Railroad Structures KW - Railroads KW - Rapid Transit Systems KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Trails KW - Transportation KW - Urban Development KW - Georgia KW - Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Compliance UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/16372145?accountid=14244 L2 - http://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=2011-07-29&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=ATLANTA+BELTLINE%2C+CITY+OF+ATLANTA%2C+FULTON+COUNTY%2C+GEORGIA.&rft.title=ATLANTA+BELTLINE%2C+CITY+OF+ATLANTA%2C+FULTON+COUNTY%2C+GEORGIA.&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 - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Draft. Preparation date: July 29, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - CPAPER T1 - Comparing Tire/Pavement Noise Measurements in Washington State T2 - 2011 Annual Conference of the Institute of Noise Control Engineering's (NOISE-CON 2011) AN - 1313019954; 6061089 JF - 2011 Annual Conference of the Institute of Noise Control Engineering's (NOISE-CON 2011) AU - Sexton, Timothy AU - Anderson, Keith AU - Uhlmeyer, Jeff Y1 - 2011/07/25/ PY - 2011 DA - 2011 Jul 25 KW - USA, Washington KW - Tires KW - Noise levels UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1313019954?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%3Acpi&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=conference&rft.jtitle=2011+Annual+Conference+of+the+Institute+of+Noise+Control+Engineering%27s+%28NOISE-CON+2011%29&rft.atitle=Comparing+Tire%2FPavement+Noise+Measurements+in+Washington+State&rft.au=Sexton%2C+Timothy%3BAnderson%2C+Keith%3BUhlmeyer%2C+Jeff&rft.aulast=Sexton&rft.aufirst=Timothy&rft.date=2011-07-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=2011+Annual+Conference+of+the+Institute+of+Noise+Control+Engineering%27s+%28NOISE-CON+2011%29&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://www.inceusa.org/nc11/documents/2011TechnicalSchedule_online_001.pdf LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2013-02-26 N1 - Last updated - 2013-02-28 ER - TY - CPAPER T1 - Ship Canal Bridge Noise Abatement: Results and Lessons Learned T2 - 2011 Annual Conference of the Institute of Noise Control Engineering's (NOISE-CON 2011) AN - 1312985956; 6060946 JF - 2011 Annual Conference of the Institute of Noise Control Engineering's (NOISE-CON 2011) AU - Laughlin, Jim Y1 - 2011/07/25/ PY - 2011 DA - 2011 Jul 25 KW - Ships KW - Canals KW - Noise levels KW - Ship canals UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1312985956?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%3Acpi&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=conference&rft.jtitle=2011+Annual+Conference+of+the+Institute+of+Noise+Control+Engineering%27s+%28NOISE-CON+2011%29&rft.atitle=Ship+Canal+Bridge+Noise+Abatement%3A+Results+and+Lessons+Learned&rft.au=Laughlin%2C+Jim&rft.aulast=Laughlin&rft.aufirst=Jim&rft.date=2011-07-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=2011+Annual+Conference+of+the+Institute+of+Noise+Control+Engineering%27s+%28NOISE-CON+2011%29&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://www.inceusa.org/nc11/Plenaries.asp LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2013-02-26 N1 - Last updated - 2013-02-28 ER - TY - CPAPER T1 - Noise Policy Update: Challenges in Washington State T2 - 2011 Annual Conference of the Institute of Noise Control Engineering's (NOISE-CON 2011) AN - 1312965625; 6061066 JF - 2011 Annual Conference of the Institute of Noise Control Engineering's (NOISE-CON 2011) AU - Sexton, Timothy Y1 - 2011/07/25/ PY - 2011 DA - 2011 Jul 25 KW - USA, Washington KW - Noise levels KW - Policies UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1312965625?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%3Acpi&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=conference&rft.jtitle=2011+Annual+Conference+of+the+Institute+of+Noise+Control+Engineering%27s+%28NOISE-CON+2011%29&rft.atitle=Noise+Policy+Update%3A+Challenges+in+Washington+State&rft.au=Sexton%2C+Timothy&rft.aulast=Sexton&rft.aufirst=Timothy&rft.date=2011-07-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=2011+Annual+Conference+of+the+Institute+of+Noise+Control+Engineering%27s+%28NOISE-CON+2011%29&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://www.inceusa.org/nc11/documents/2011TechnicalSchedule_online_001.pdf LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2013-02-26 N1 - Last updated - 2013-02-28 ER - TY - CPAPER T1 - The Highway Agency Noise Policy Submission and Approval Process: Facts, Fun and Foibles T2 - 2011 Annual Conference of the Institute of Noise Control Engineering's (NOISE-CON 2011) AN - 1312965592; 6061065 JF - 2011 Annual Conference of the Institute of Noise Control Engineering's (NOISE-CON 2011) AU - Alexander, Adam Y1 - 2011/07/25/ PY - 2011 DA - 2011 Jul 25 KW - Highways KW - Noise levels KW - Policies UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1312965592?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%3Acpi&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=conference&rft.jtitle=2011+Annual+Conference+of+the+Institute+of+Noise+Control+Engineering%27s+%28NOISE-CON+2011%29&rft.atitle=The+Highway+Agency+Noise+Policy+Submission+and+Approval+Process%3A+Facts%2C+Fun+and+Foibles&rft.au=Alexander%2C+Adam&rft.aulast=Alexander&rft.aufirst=Adam&rft.date=2011-07-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=2011+Annual+Conference+of+the+Institute+of+Noise+Control+Engineering%27s+%28NOISE-CON+2011%29&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://www.inceusa.org/nc11/documents/2011TechnicalSchedule_online_001.pdf LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2013-02-26 N1 - Last updated - 2013-02-28 ER - TY - CPAPER T1 - Investigation of the Effects Of Underlying Structures on the Noise Performance Of Porous Pavements T2 - 2011 Annual Conference of the Institute of Noise Control Engineering's (NOISE-CON 2011) AN - 1312963529; 6061003 JF - 2011 Annual Conference of the Institute of Noise Control Engineering's (NOISE-CON 2011) AU - Rochat, Judy AU - Read, Dave Y1 - 2011/07/25/ PY - 2011 DA - 2011 Jul 25 KW - Noise levels UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1312963529?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%3Acpi&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=conference&rft.jtitle=2011+Annual+Conference+of+the+Institute+of+Noise+Control+Engineering%27s+%28NOISE-CON+2011%29&rft.atitle=Investigation+of+the+Effects+Of+Underlying+Structures+on+the+Noise+Performance+Of+Porous+Pavements&rft.au=Rochat%2C+Judy%3BRead%2C+Dave&rft.aulast=Rochat&rft.aufirst=Judy&rft.date=2011-07-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=2011+Annual+Conference+of+the+Institute+of+Noise+Control+Engineering%27s+%28NOISE-CON+2011%29&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://www.inceusa.org/nc11/documents/2011TechnicalSchedule_online_001.pdf LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2013-02-26 N1 - Last updated - 2013-02-28 ER - TY - CPAPER T1 - Evaluation of Motorcycle Noise Categories T2 - 2011 Annual Conference of the Institute of Noise Control Engineering's (NOISE-CON 2011) AN - 1312910597; 6061041 JF - 2011 Annual Conference of the Institute of Noise Control Engineering's (NOISE-CON 2011) AU - Rochat, Judy Y1 - 2011/07/25/ PY - 2011 DA - 2011 Jul 25 KW - Motorcycles KW - Noise levels UR - http://libproxy.lib.unc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1312910597?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%3Acpi&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=conference&rft.jtitle=2011+Annual+Conference+of+the+Institute+of+Noise+Control+Engineering%27s+%28NOISE-CON+2011%29&rft.atitle=Evaluation+of+Motorcycle+Noise+Categories&rft.au=Rochat%2C+Judy&rft.aulast=Rochat&rft.aufirst=Judy&rft.date=2011-07-25&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=&rft.title=2011+Annual+Conference+of+the+Institute+of+Noise+Control+Engineering%27s+%28NOISE-CON+2011%29&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ L2 - http://www.inceusa.org/nc11/documents/2011TechnicalSchedule_online_001.pdf LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Date revised - 2013-02-26 N1 - Last updated - 2013-02-28 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 439 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888701323; 14988-8_0439 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 439 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888701323?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 116 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888701239; 14988-8_0116 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 116 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888701239?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 384 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888701137; 14988-8_0384 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 384 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888701137?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 273 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888700962; 14988-8_0273 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 273 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888700962?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 161 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888700877; 14988-8_0161 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 161 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888700877?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 425 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888700843; 14988-8_0425 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 425 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888700843?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 583 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888699602; 14988-8_0583 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 583 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888699602?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 207 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888698178; 14988-8_0207 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 207 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888698178?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 202 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888698131; 14988-8_0202 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 202 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888698131?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 41 IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, MEMORIAL DRIVE TO COUNTY M, BROWN COUNTY, WISCONSIN. [Part 4 of 4] T2 - US 41 IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, MEMORIAL DRIVE TO COUNTY M, BROWN COUNTY, WISCONSIN. AN - 888698115; 14994-4_0004 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 also 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. Proposed improvements include reconstructing the interchanges at US 141/Velp Avenue, I-43, and County Road M, 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 final EIS. Alternative E is the preferred alternative and 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. The construction cost of Alternative E is estimated at $230 million in 2010 dollars. 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 for Alternative E would result in conversion of 37 acres of land, two stream crossings, one stream realignment, and impacts to 54 acres of wetlands. Habitat for Blanding's turtle, wood turtle, common tern, black-crowned night heron, and cattle egret could be affected. Construction would impact 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: 110234, 298 pages and maps, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-11-01-F KW - Birds KW - Creeks KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Parks 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/888698115?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+41+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT%2C+MEMORIAL+DRIVE+TO+COUNTY+M%2C+BROWN+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN.&rft.title=US+41+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT%2C+MEMORIAL+DRIVE+TO+COUNTY+M%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 - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 41 IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, MEMORIAL DRIVE TO COUNTY M, BROWN COUNTY, WISCONSIN. [Part 3 of 4] T2 - US 41 IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, MEMORIAL DRIVE TO COUNTY M, BROWN COUNTY, WISCONSIN. AN - 888698110; 14994-4_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 also 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. Proposed improvements include reconstructing the interchanges at US 141/Velp Avenue, I-43, and County Road M, 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 final EIS. Alternative E is the preferred alternative and 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. The construction cost of Alternative E is estimated at $230 million in 2010 dollars. 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 for Alternative E would result in conversion of 37 acres of land, two stream crossings, one stream realignment, and impacts to 54 acres of wetlands. Habitat for Blanding's turtle, wood turtle, common tern, black-crowned night heron, and cattle egret could be affected. Construction would impact 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: 110234, 298 pages and maps, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 3 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-11-01-F KW - Birds KW - Creeks KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Parks 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/888698110?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+41+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT%2C+MEMORIAL+DRIVE+TO+COUNTY+M%2C+BROWN+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN.&rft.title=US+41+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT%2C+MEMORIAL+DRIVE+TO+COUNTY+M%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 - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 41 IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, MEMORIAL DRIVE TO COUNTY M, BROWN COUNTY, WISCONSIN. [Part 2 of 4] T2 - US 41 IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, MEMORIAL DRIVE TO COUNTY M, BROWN COUNTY, WISCONSIN. AN - 888698109; 14994-4_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 also 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. Proposed improvements include reconstructing the interchanges at US 141/Velp Avenue, I-43, and County Road M, 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 final EIS. Alternative E is the preferred alternative and 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. The construction cost of Alternative E is estimated at $230 million in 2010 dollars. 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 for Alternative E would result in conversion of 37 acres of land, two stream crossings, one stream realignment, and impacts to 54 acres of wetlands. Habitat for Blanding's turtle, wood turtle, common tern, black-crowned night heron, and cattle egret could be affected. Construction would impact 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: 110234, 298 pages and maps, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 2 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-11-01-F KW - Birds KW - Creeks KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Parks 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/888698109?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+41+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT%2C+MEMORIAL+DRIVE+TO+COUNTY+M%2C+BROWN+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN.&rft.title=US+41+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT%2C+MEMORIAL+DRIVE+TO+COUNTY+M%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 - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 41 IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, MEMORIAL DRIVE TO COUNTY M, BROWN COUNTY, WISCONSIN. [Part 1 of 4] T2 - US 41 IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, MEMORIAL DRIVE TO COUNTY M, BROWN COUNTY, WISCONSIN. AN - 888698108; 14994-4_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 also 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. Proposed improvements include reconstructing the interchanges at US 141/Velp Avenue, I-43, and County Road M, 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 final EIS. Alternative E is the preferred alternative and 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. The construction cost of Alternative E is estimated at $230 million in 2010 dollars. 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 for Alternative E would result in conversion of 37 acres of land, two stream crossings, one stream realignment, and impacts to 54 acres of wetlands. Habitat for Blanding's turtle, wood turtle, common tern, black-crowned night heron, and cattle egret could be affected. Construction would impact 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: 110234, 298 pages and maps, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 1 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-11-01-F KW - Birds KW - Creeks KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Parks 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/888698108?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+41+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT%2C+MEMORIAL+DRIVE+TO+COUNTY+M%2C+BROWN+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN.&rft.title=US+41+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT%2C+MEMORIAL+DRIVE+TO+COUNTY+M%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 - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 368 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888698094; 14988-8_0368 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 368 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888698094?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 107 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888698085; 14988-8_0107 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 107 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888698085?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 344 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888698060; 14988-8_0344 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 344 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888698060?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 101 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888698044; 14988-8_0101 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 101 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888698044?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 596 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888698043; 14988-8_0596 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 596 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888698043?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 221 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888698026; 14988-8_0221 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 221 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888698026?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 387 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888697997; 14988-8_0387 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 387 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888697997?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 110 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888697951; 14988-8_0110 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 110 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888697951?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 168 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888697938; 14988-8_0168 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 168 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888697938?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 120 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888697781; 14988-8_0120 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 120 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888697781?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 568 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888697705; 14988-8_0568 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 568 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888697705?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 68 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888697635; 14988-8_0068 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 68 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888697635?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=Age+and+Ageing&rft.issn=00020729&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 243 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888697507; 14988-8_0243 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 243 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888697507?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 242 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888697451; 14988-8_0242 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 242 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888697451?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 230 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888697185; 14988-8_0230 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 230 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888697185?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 448 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888696899; 14988-8_0448 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 448 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888696899?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 195 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888696895; 14988-8_0195 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 195 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888696895?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 328 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888696875; 14988-8_0328 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 328 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888696875?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 44 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888696803; 14988-8_0044 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 44 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888696803?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 247 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888696795; 14988-8_0247 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 247 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888696795?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 397 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888696740; 14988-8_0397 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 397 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888696740?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 445 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888696727; 14988-8_0445 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 445 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888696727?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 595 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888696548; 14988-8_0595 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 595 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888696548?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 594 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888696509; 14988-8_0594 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 594 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888696509?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 241 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888696451; 14988-8_0241 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 241 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888696451?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 262 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888696450; 14988-8_0262 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 262 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888696450?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 518 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888696392; 14988-8_0518 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 518 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888696392?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 141 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888696296; 14988-8_0141 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 141 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888696296?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 138 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888696196; 14988-8_0138 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 138 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888696196?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 136 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888696174; 14988-8_0136 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 136 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888696174?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 70 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888696116; 14988-8_0070 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 70 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888696116?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 270 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888696100; 14988-8_0270 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 270 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888696100?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 162 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888696098; 14988-8_0162 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 162 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888696098?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 64 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888696087; 14988-8_0064 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 64 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888696087?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 295 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888696064; 14988-8_0295 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 295 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888696064?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 277 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888696059; 14988-8_0277 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 277 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888696059?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 10 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888696034; 14988-8_0010 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 10 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888696034?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 553 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888696013; 14988-8_0553 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 553 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888696013?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 34 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888695986; 14988-8_0034 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 34 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888695986?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 38 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888695958; 14988-8_0038 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 38 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888695958?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 4 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888695923; 14988-8_0004 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 4 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888695923?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 6 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888695793; 14988-8_0006 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 6 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888695793?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. [Part 81 of 597] T2 - I-69 EVANSVILLE TO INDIANAPOLIS TIER 2 SECTION 4 PROJECT, CRANE NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER TO BLOOMINGTON, GREENE AND MONROE COUNTIES, INDIANA. AN - 888695734; 14988-8_0081 AB - PURPOSE: The construction of Section 4 of Interstate 69 (I-69) in Indiana, part of the federally-approved I-69 Evansville-to-Indianapolis project, is proposed. The termini of Section 4, as approved in the March 2004 Tier 1 Record of Decision for the I-69 project, are US 231 in Greene County near Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC) and State Road 37 (SR 37) south of Bloomington in Monroe County. The 27-mile project corridor was divided into eight segments for development of alternative alignments and interchange options. This final EIS analyzes four end-to-end alternatives along with three interchange options. Initial design criteria for the preferred alternative, which is a refinement of Alternative 2, specify construction of a new freeway section with two 12-foot wide lanes in each direction separated by a 60-foot wide depressed median. The median would include two five-foot wide usable inside shoulders and to the outside of each pair of travel lanes there would be a minimum 35-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide shoulders. The average right-of-way width using initial design criteria is approximately 500 feet; however, the right-of-way widths would vary from 300 feet to over 850 feet depending on alignment, terrain features, and local access treatments. Low-cost design criteria under consideration would provide a mainline typical cross section similar to the initial design criteria, but would use a 30-foot wide outside clear zone containing 11-foot wide usable shoulders. The low-cost design criteria would also consider alternative length of grade criteria, rock cut slope treatment, fill slope treatments, and different pavement materials. The average right-of-way width for the low-cost design criteria is approximately 380 feet; but the right-of-way widths would vary from about 270 feet to 700 feet. Section 4 would have interchanges at SR 45, the South Connector Road at the Greene/Monroe county line, and SR 37. Project cost in 2010 dollars is estimated at $532 million using low-cost design criteria and at $733 million using initial design criteria. POSITIVE IMPACTS: The new section of freeway would improve accessibility, reduce congestion, and enhance safety in the study area with consequent benefits to the local economy. NEGATIVE IMPACTS: Construction of the preferred alternative would require 1,456 to 1,809 acres of new right-of-way and would impact 356 to 461 acres of farmland, 874 to 1,091 acres of forest, 93,196 to 111,247 linear feet of streams, 5.3 to 9.6 acres of wetlands, and 36 to 51 acres of floodplain. Indiana bat may be adversely affected, but construction would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Displacements would include 71 to 75 residences and four businesses. Noise impacts would affect 88 to 90 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). PRIOR REFERENCES: For the abstracts of the Tier 1 draft and final EISs on the overall project, see 02-0443D, Volume 26, Number 4 and 04-0223F, Volume 28, Number 2, respectively. For the abstract of the draft EIS, see 10-0483, Volume 34, Number 2. JF - EPA number: 110228, Final EIS--1,830 pages and maps, Appendices and Comments/Responses--on DVD, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 VL - 81 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Air Quality Assessments KW - Creeks KW - Farmlands KW - Floodplains KW - Forests KW - Health Hazard Analyses KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Noise Assessments KW - Relocations-Property Acquisitions KW - Roads KW - Section 4(f) Statements KW - Traffic Analyses KW - Transportation KW - Wetlands KW - Indiana 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/888695734?accountid=14244 L2 - http://vb3lk7eb4t.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/Environmental+Impact+Statements%3A+Full+Text&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=report&rft.jtitle=&rft.atitle=&rft.au=&rft.aulast=&rft.aufirst=&rft.date=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.title=I-69+EVANSVILLE+TO+INDIANAPOLIS+TIER+2+SECTION+4+PROJECT%2C+CRANE+NAVAL+SURFACE+WARFARE+CENTER+TO+BLOOMINGTON%2C+GREENE+AND+MONROE+COUNTIES%2C+INDIANA.&rft.issn=&rft_id=info:doi/ LA - English DB - ProQuest Environmental Science Collection N1 - Name - Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indianapolis, Indiana; DOT N1 - Date revised - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER - TY - RPRT T1 - US 41 IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, MEMORIAL DRIVE TO COUNTY M, BROWN COUNTY, WISCONSIN. AN - 16386438; 14994 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 also 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. Proposed improvements include reconstructing the interchanges at US 141/Velp Avenue, I-43, and County Road M, 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 final EIS. Alternative E is the preferred alternative and 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. The construction cost of Alternative E is estimated at $230 million in 2010 dollars. 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 for Alternative E would result in conversion of 37 acres of land, two stream crossings, one stream realignment, and impacts to 54 acres of wetlands. Habitat for Blanding's turtle, wood turtle, common tern, black-crowned night heron, and cattle egret could be affected. Construction would impact 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: 110234, 298 pages and maps, July 22, 2011 PY - 2011 KW - Roads and Railroads KW - Agency number: FHWA-WISC-EIS-11-01-F KW - Birds KW - Creeks KW - Highways KW - Highway Structures KW - Parks 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/16386438?accountid=14244 L2 - http://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=2011-07-22&rft.volume=&rft.issue=&rft.spage=&rft.isbn=&rft.btitle=US+41+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT%2C+MEMORIAL+DRIVE+TO+COUNTY+M%2C+BROWN+COUNTY%2C+WISCONSIN.&rft.title=US+41+IMPROVEMENT+PROJECT%2C+MEMORIAL+DRIVE+TO+COUNTY+M%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 - 2011-08-01 N1 - SuppNotes - Final. Preparation date: July 22, 2011 N1 - Last updated - 2011-12-16 ER -