Chapter 8: Consultation and Environmental Mitigation

Transcription

1 Chapter 8: Consultation and Environmental Mitigation In order to foster cooperation while promoting communication within Federal, State and local agencies responsible for land use management, natural resources, environmental protection, conservation and historic preservation, the (KATS) initiated a consultation process for the 2045 Transportation Plan. The goal being to eliminate or minimize conflicts with other agencies plans that may impact transportation in the Kalamazoo metropolitan area. Federal legislation, beginning with SAFETEA-LU, requires metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) to seek input under Environmental Mitigation. The legislation requires a discussion of types of potential environmental mitigation activities and potential areas to carry out these activities, including activities that may have the greatest potential to restore and maintain the environmental functions affected by the plan. This discussion shall be developed in consultation with Federal, State and tribal wildlife, land management, and regulatory agencies. KATS compiled a list of Federal, State, Indian Tribes, local, and private agencies to contact in order to open a dialog concerning the 2045 Transportation Plan. The agencies below were contacted by mail: Arcadia Neighborhood Association BC/CAL/KAL Inland Port Development Corp City of Portage Environmental Board City of Portage Parks Department City of Kalamazoo Historic Preservation Consumers Energy Disability Resource Center Downtown Kalamazoo Inc. Eastside Neighborhood Association Edison Neighborhood Association Environmental Concerns Committee Environmental Protection Agency Region 5 Fish and Wildlife Service Gateway Coalition Gun Lake Tribe Historical Preservation Committee Homecrest Circle Neighborhood Association Housing Resources Inc. Interfaith Strategy for Advocacy and Action in the Community (ISAAC) Kalamazoo River Watershed Council Kalamazoo Community Foundation Kalamazoo Environmental Concerns Council Kalamazoo Co. Convention and Visitors Bureau Kalamazoo County Chamber of Commerce Kalamazoo County Farm Service Agency Kalamazoo Neighborhood Association Kalamazoo Battle Creek International Airport Portage Environmental Board Potawatomi RC&D Council Region III Area Agency on Aging Schoolcraft Community Schools Senior Services Inc. Sierra Club Kalamazoo Valley Group South Whites Lake Southwest Michigan First Southwest Michigan Land Conservancy State Representative Stuart Area Restoration Association The Forum for Kalamazoo County USDA Michigan State Office Kalamazoo Valley Walkers Kalamazoo Public Schools Kalamazoo County Drain Commissioner s Office Kalamazoo Regional Education Service Agency Kalamazoo Community College Kalamazoo Conservation District Lakeside Beach Corporation Michigan Department of Agriculture Michigan Economic Development Corporation Michigan Historical Center Michigan Commission for the Blind MI Dept. of Environmental Quality - Kalamazoo Michigan Department of Community Health Michigan State University Extension, Kalamazoo MI Department of Natural Resources - Plainwell Milwood Neighborhood Association Minority Business Alliance MRC Industries Inc. National Trust for Historic Preservation Northside Economic Potential Northside Association for Comm. Development Nottawaseppi Huron Band of Potawatomi ive/winchell Neighborhood Assoc. Oakwood Neighborhood Association Oshtemo Business Association Parker-Duke Neighborhood Association Parkview Neighborhood Association Parkwyn Village Association USGS Lansing District Office Vicksburg Community Schools Vine Neighborhood Association West Douglas Neighborhood Association West Main Hill Neighborhood Association Western Gateway Coalition Western Michigan University WMU Campus Planning Westnedge Hill Association Westwood Neighborhood Association White/Edgemoor/Bronson Neighborhood Assoc. Woods Lake Association

2 KATS recorded all comments while consulting with these agencies. It is KATS intent to maintain this dialog into the future in order to facilitate the planning process. The following summarizes the responses received by each agency. Copies of each agency s response are contained tin the appendices. At this time, no comments have been received. Additionally, KATS discussed the development of the 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan and invited participation at public meetings for the following agencies and stakeholders: City of Kalamazoo Greenway Committee Southwest Michigan Safety Committee Kalamazoo County Metropolitan Planning Commission Kalamazoo Metro Transit Ten Year Vision Service Plan Stakeholders Meeting Bike Friendly Kalamazoo Downtown Kalamazoo Transportation, Parking, and Mobility Committee Environmental Mitigation Transportation projects can have a significant impact on the surrounding landscape. The intent of the Environmental Mitigation process is to assure decision makers take into account potential environmental impacts when adopting the transportation plan, so that consideration is given to how such impacts might be mitigated. KATS will also inform and educate road agencies regarding the potential environmental factors. Road agencies will also be given best practices on how to properly mitigate environmental issues at the project level. The chose to analyze the projects within the 2045 Transportation Plan at a system wide level. Each of the proposed capacity and preservation projects were entered into a Geographic Information System (GIS), where they could then be compared to available Environmentally Sensitive Resources. Six Environmentally Sensitive Resources were identified and available in a digital format. Environmentally Sensitive Resources Well Heads Wetlands (Lakes, Rivers, Streams, and Wetlands) Parks and Recreation Areas Cemeteries Schools Probability of Rare Species or High Quality Natural Communities Using these six resources, KATS analyzed the likely impacts of proposed projects. Using GIS, projects were mapped and then buffered in order to display an area around the projects that might be affected. The buffer sized were used varied by environmental resource. Project Buffers by Resource Type Environmental Resource Buffer Size Well Heads... 2,500 feet Wetlands (Lakes, Rivers, Streams, and Wetlands... ¼ mile (1,20 feet) Parks and Recreation Areas... ¼ mile (1,20 feet) Cemeteries... ¼ mile (1,20 feet) Schools... ¼ mile (1,20 feet) Probability of Rare Species or High Quality Natural Communities... ¼ mile (1,20 feet) With these buffers in place, KATS was able to show which projects intersect an environmentally sensitive resource. While these intersections do not guarantee the project will impact an environmentally sensitive area, they were able to show policy makers the impact the projects may have. It is also possible that a project showing no intersections with any of the environmental resources may have an environmental impact or that an impact may occur outside the buffer area. This potential of possible impacts from planned transportation projects should not be used to justify the elimination of a project. It is simply intended to show the range of possible impacts while noting the importance of the environment in all phases of the project planning, design, construction and maintenance. KATS will inform the

3 road agencies of the noted potential environmental impacts so that they may investigate, identify, and mitigate potential environmental impacts appropriately during project design and construction. For more information on the data and terms used on the following maps, please visit these websites: Michigan Geographic Data Library: Michigan Natural Feature Inventory: Best Practices Guidelines 5 Regardless of the type of project or the resource that may be impacted, these guidelines deserve consideration during the planning, design, construction, and maintenance of transportation projects. These best practices guidelines will help to ensure good planning practice that will assist in the overall environmental mitigation objectives. Planning and Design Guidelines Employ the Context Sensitive Solutions (CSS) process. CSS identifies the physical, visual, and social context in which a project is situated while involving all stakeholders in a collaborative effort. A project using CSS is highly responsive to the environmental conditions, both cultural and natural, in which it occurs. Identify an area of potential impact related to each transportation project, regardless of project type or scope. Catalog areas of environmental sensitivity that may be impacted by proposed projects. Use the areas Hazard Mitigation Plan in coordination with the transportation plan to mitigate project impacts. Identify historic properties prior to construction. A historic property is a district, site, building, structure or object included or eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. Historic buildings and archaeological sites are the best-known kinds of historic properties, but expansive urban and rural districts, landscapes, roads and trials, natural areas of traditional cultural importance, and even highways themselves may be eligible for the Register. If impacts cannot be avoided, mitigate them as much as possible. Coordinate the evaluation of impacts, alternatives, and mitigation strategies with the required federal, state, and local authorities. Design projects to accommodate wildlife, habitat connectivity and safe crossings. Wildlife related concerns include habitat fragmentation and connectivity for wildlife, loss of habitat, increasing numbers of threatened and endangered species, and secondary and cumulative impacts. The federal Endangered Species Act prohibits harm to any listed species or adverse modification of designated critical habitat. Maintenance and construction staffs are responsible for ensuring that no threatened or endangered species within areas they are working are injured or destroyed or their habitat impacted without proper permits. Design projects to minimize air quality issues. Air quality and pollution have been concerns in the United States for many years, especially in metropolitan areas. Integrate storm water and erosion management into the design of the project. Design for sustainability and energy conservation. These decisions can be a factor in mode choice decisions made in Planning, as part of Major Investment Studies, or in Project Development as part of an alternatives analysis for projects. Conduct pre-construction meetings with local community officials, contractors, and subcontractors to discuss environmental protection. Construction and Maintenance Guidelines 1. Include all special requirements that address environmentally sensitive resources into plans and estimates provided to construction contractors. Bring to attention the kinds of activities that are not appropriate in sensitive areas. 2. Limit the size of construction and staging areas to the smallest necessary. Clearly mark are boundaries.. Use fencing or flagging around sensitive areas where appropriate. 4. Avoid disturbing the site as much as possible. 5 SEMCOG. Integrating Environmental Issues in the Transportation Planning Process: Guidelines for Road and Transit Agencies. January, 2007.

4 5. Protect established vegetation. 6. Implement sediment and erosion control. 7. Protect water quality by preventing direct run off, sweeping streets to reduce sediment, implementing salt management techniques, and controlling storm water drains to prevent construction debris from polluting waterways. 8. Protect culture and historic resources by limiting impact and disturbance near them. 9. Minimize noise and vibration. 10. Provide for proper solid waste disposal. 11. Conduct on-site monitoring during and after construction to ensure environmental resources are protected as planned. 12. Keep equipment in good working condition and free of leaks. Avoid fueling or maintenance near environmentally sensitive areas. 1. Reduce land disturbances by properly organizing construction activities. 14. Use Integrated Pest Management techniques if using pesticides during maintenance operations. Environmental Mitigation Finding The Environmental Mitigation consultation process has identified potential environmental impacts associated with the 2045 Transportation Plan road projects. These potential impacts are just that, potential, not confirmed. The responsible road agencies have been informed of these potential environmental impacts so that they can investigate and determine if there will be actual impacts and evaluate how best to avoid or mitigate impacts. These determinations and evaluations by the responsible road agencies will be made as the projects are scoped, designed, and constructed. No further findings can be made at this time with the information actually known. Preservation projects are in the right-of-way and typically do not impact environmental areas. Would not adversely affect the environment based on the scope of a preservation project.

5 Environmental Factors Near Project ID Wells Schools Parks Cemeteries Wetlands Rare Species 1 Yes Yes High 2 Yes High Yes Yes Yes Low 4 Yes Yes 5 Yes Yes Yes Low 6 Yes Moderate 7 Yes Low/Moderate 8 Yes Yes Yes 9 Yes Yes Low 10 Yes Low 11 Yes Yes Yes Low/High 12 Low/Moderate 1 Yes Yes High 14 Yes Low 15 Yes Low/Moderate 16 Yes High 17 High Yes Yes Yes Low 19 Yes Yes High 20 High 21 Yes Low 22 Yes High 2 Yes Yes Low 24 Yes Yes Low 25 Yes Yes High Yes High 27 Low 28 Yes Low/Moderate 29 Yes Low 0 Yes High 1 Low/High 2 Yes Yes The maps that follow only display the Metropolitan Planning Area where capacity projects are proposed.

6 S 8th St S Van Kal St S 9th St S 12th St Bronson Blvd S 24th St N 2nd St N rd St N th St S th St S Rose St N 5th St S 6th St 21 S 2nd St Fulford St Near Cemeteries Richplain Rd M 4 W Gull Lake Dr 20 Almena Dr Stadium Ave S 6th St S Bus US 11 Solon St N Bus US 11 Nazareth Rd Mount Olivet Rd N 42nd St E Q Ave N Augusta Dr Mercury Dr E Paterson St Humphrey St W North St W Kalamazoo Ave N Rose St N Burdick St E North St 5 S Riverview Dr Capacity and Cemetery Intersection W Lovell St S Park St S Pitcher St E Lovell St E Vine St S Mills St Lake St E Stockbridge Ave Balch St Reed Ave Branch St Non- Cemetery Buffer (1/4 Mile) Source: MIGDL, KATS Whites Rd Denway Dr Inkster Ave E Alcott St W Cork St E Cork St E Miller Rd Moreland St Emerald Dr

7 Draft 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan Revised 02//16 Near Wetlands N 2nd St St N 7th N 5th St N rd St S th St Dr E Mich igan Ave E I Rd M 94 ry cu er Dr N th St a st gu Au ve RA EUV A ve 29 Dr Romence Pkwy 24 Schuring Rd Gla dys Ct 11 Mall E Milham Ave 25 S 2nd St E S h or S 6th St e Dr E Wetlands & Water Bodies Non- W Centre Ave Fo res t 16 Vanderbilt Ave Sh av er R d Wetlands within 1/4 Mile of Project Source: MCGI, KATS Dr Romence Rd sta E Aug usta Dr S 24th St d S 12th St S US 1 1 Sh av er R u gu E Miller NA S 6th St D t ge S Po rta S Burd ick St y s xa Te r w A ve ium Sta d W N Ave Vincen t Dr S 8th St H m Dr Sta diu g M d R et d liv O ll R t u n G ou d St 1 N 4 2n 1 n Ki S St 20 su n So lo r Bu Rd d N er ad en vin Ra Alm n ai pl ch Ri M 4 Dr 15

8 S 8th St S Van Kal St S 9th St S 12th St S 24th St N 2nd St N rd St N th St S th St S 6th St S 2nd St N 5th St Near Wells Richplain Rd M 4 W Gull Lake Dr Almena Dr Stadium Ave W N Ave S Bus US 11 Solon St N Bus US 11 Nazareth Rd Mount Olivet Rd River St N 42nd St N Augusta Dr Mercury Dr 20 S 6th St E Q Ave Capacity and Well Intersection Bronson Blvd Whites Rd W Kilgore Rd Inkster Ave 2 E Miller Rd E Cork St Emerald Dr 4 Millcork St E Kilgore Rd Covington Rd Non- Well Buffer (2500 ft.) Romence Rd Mall Dr Gladys Ct 25 E Milham Ave Romence Rd E Schuring Rd W Centre Ave E Centre Ave Data Source: MCGI, KATS Forest Dr

9 Near Schools M 4 20 S Van Kal St Almena Dr Stadium Ave S 6th St S 8th St W N Ave S 9th St S 12th St S Bus US 11 Solon St N Bus US 11 Nazareth Rd Mount Olivet Rd 15 River St Richplain Rd N th St S th St N 2nd St N rd St N 5th St W Gull Lake Dr S 6th St N 42nd St E Q Ave N Augusta Dr Mercury Dr Buffer of Schools (1/4 Mile) Non- Intersection of Capacity & Schools Data Source: MGDL, KATS S 24th St Romence Rd W Centre Ave 6 Winchell Ave 12 Vanderbilt Ave 16 Bronson Blvd S 2nd St Whites Rd W Kilgore Rd Schuring Rd W Osterhout Ave Mall Dr Inkster Ave 25 E Stockbridge Ave Reed Ave E Alcott St Lake St E Cork St E Centre Ave Fulford St E Milham Ave 14 E Miller Rd 4 E Kilgore Rd Romence Rd E Lake St Millcork St E Shore Dr

10 S 8th St S Van Kal St S 9th St S 12th St S 24th St N 2nd St N rd St N th St S th St S 6th St S 2nd St N 5th St S th St S Park St S Mills St Fulford St Near Parks Richplain Rd M 4 W Gull Lake Dr 20 Almena Dr Stadium Ave S 6th St W N Ave S Bus US 11 Solon St N Bus US 11 Nazareth Rd Mount Olivet Rd River St N 42nd St E Q Ave N Augusta Dr Mercury Dr Porter St Nazareth Rd N th St Intersection of Capacity and Parks Park Buffer (1/4 Mile) Bronson Blvd W Kilgore Rd W Lovell St Whites Rd Inkster Ave E Vine St E Stockbridge Ave Reed Ave E Alcott St 2 E Cork St E Milham Ave E Miller Rd Lake St 4 E Kilgore Rd Covington Rd Comstock Ave E M L Ave E Cork St River St Mall Dr Romence Rd 25 Romence Rd E Source: MIGDL, KATS Schuring Rd W Centre Ave E Centre Ave Forest Dr

11 S 12th St S 12th St N th St N 2nd St S 2nd St S 6th St N rd St N 5th St E Shore Dr Probability of Rare Species Community within 1/4 Mile of Richplain Rd M 4 Almena Dr Stadium Ave W N Ave W O Ave S 8th St N Bus US 11 Alamo Ave Vincent Dr Mount Olivet Rd S th St E U V Ave N Augusta Dr Mercury Dr Non- High Low Moderate W O N Ave Romence Rd Vanderbilt Ave 16 Whites Rd Bronson Blvd W Kilgore Rd Schuring Rd W Centre Ave E Centre Ave Mall Dr 25 2 E Milham Ave 14 E Cork St 4 E Kilgore Rd Romence Rd E W Osterhout Ave Source: MIGDL, KATS, MI Natural Features Inventory