Environmental Assessment Tank s East Side Skate Park A project to construct and new city park using matching funds from a grant under the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act, Public Law 108-198 August 18, 2017 For Information Contact: Eastern Elmore County Recreation District, Attn: Karen Hall, Director P.O. Box 249, Glenns Ferry ID 83623 208-599-2404, 208-366-7779, or 208-366-2404 karen@rtci.net Prepared By: John Stewart, Stewart Consulting 3622 East 3920 North, Kimberly, ID 83341 435-770-7301 Kimberly, Idaho 83341 Jws4jstew@gmai.com Submitted to: Idaho Department of Parks and Recreation Attn: Kathy Muir, State and Federal Grant Manager Box 83720 Boise, ID 83720-0065 208-514-2431 phone Kathy.Muir@idpr.idaho.gov For: The National Park Service Pacific West Regional Office 909 First Avenue Seattle, WA 98104-1060
The Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF), Stateside Assistance grant program, provides funds to states, and through states to local agencies, for the acquisition and development of outdoor recreation resources. The boundary of lands that have received funding through LWCF grants are protected from other uses unless a conversion is approved by the Secretary of the Interior as delegated to the National Park Service.
Table of Contents Summary... 1 1.0 Introduction... 2 2.0 Purpose, Need and Background... 4 3.0 Description of Alternatives... 6 3.1 No Action... 6 3.2 Proposed Action... 6 3.3 Other Alternatives... 9 4.0 Affected Environment... 10 4.1 Geological resources: soils, bedrock, slopes, streambeds, landforms, etc.... 10 4.2 Air quality... 10 4.3 Sound (noise impacts)... 10 4.4 Water quality/quantity... 10 4.5 Stream flow characteristics... 10 4.6 Marine/estuarine... 10 4.7 Floodplains/wetlands... 10 4.8 Land use/ownership patterns; property values; community livability... 10 4.9 Circulation, transportation... 11 4.10 Plant/animal/fish species of special concern and habitat; state/ federal listed or proposed for listing... 11 4.11 Unique ecosystems, such as biosphere reserves, World Heritage sites, old growth forests, etc.... 11 4.12 Unique or important wildlife/wildlife habitat... 11 4.13 Unique or important fish/habitat... 11 4.14 Introduce or promote invasive species (plant or animal)... 11 4.15 Recreation resources, land, parks, open space, conservation areas, rec. trails, facilities, services, opportunities, public access, etc.... 11 4.16 Accessibility for populations with disabilities... 12 4.17 Overall aesthetics, special characteristics/features... 12 4.18 Historical/cultural resources, including landscapes, ethnographic, archeological, structures, etc. Attach SHPO/THPO determination.... 13
4.19 Socioeconomics, including employment, occupation, income changes, tax base, infrastructure... 13 4.20 Minority and low-income populations... 13 4.21 Energy resources (geothermal, fossil fuels, etc.)... 13 4.22 Other agency or tribal land use plans or policies... 13 4.23 Land/structures with history of contamination/hazardous materials even if remediated 13 4.24 Other important environmental resources to address.... 13 5.0 Environmental Impact... 14 5.1 Propose Action... 14 5.1.1 Geological resources: soils, bedrock, slopes, streambeds, landforms, etc.... 14 5.1.2 Air quality... 14 5.1.3 Sound (noise impacts)... 14 5.1.4 Water quality/quantity... 14 5.1.5 Stream flow characteristics... 14 5.1.6 Marine/estuarine... 14 5.1.7 Floodplains/wetlands... 15 5.1.8 Land use/ownership patterns; property values; community livability... 15 5.1.9 Circulation, transportation... 15 5.1.10 Plant/animal/fish species of special concern and habitat; state/ federal listed or proposed for listing... 15 5.1.11 Unique ecosystems, such as biosphere reserves, World Heritage sites, old growth forests, etc.... 15 5.1.12 Unique or important wildlife/ wildlife habitat... 15 5.13 Unique or important fish/habitat... 15 5.1.14 Introduce or promote invasive species (plant or animal)... 15 5.1.15 Recreation resources, land, parks, open space, conservation areas, rec. trails, facilities, services, opportunities, public access, etc.... 16 5.1.16 Accessibility for populations with disabilities... 16 5.1.17 Overall aesthetics, special characteristics/features... 16 5.1.18 Historical/cultural resources, including landscapes, ethnographic, archeological, structures, etc. Attach SHPO/THPO determination.... 16 5.1.19 Socioeconomics, including employment, occupation, income changes, tax base, infrastructure... 16 5.1.20 Minority and low-income populations... 16
5.1.21 Energy resources (geothermal, fossil fuels, etc.)... 17 5.1.22 Other agency or tribal land use plans or policies... 17 5.1.23 Land/structures with history of contamination/hazardous materials even if remediated... 17 5.1.24 Other important environmental resources to address.... 17 5.2 No Action Alternative... 17 6.0 Coordination and Consultation... 18 7.0 Public Comment... 19 Table of Figures Figure 1. Location map for the proposed park site... 3 Figure 2. Existing conditions at the subject property.... 6 Figure 3. Plan view of the proposed skate part.... 8 Figure 4. West-end view of the proposed skate park... 8 Figure 5. Detailed view of the skate park facilities.... 9 Figure 6. Homemade basketball hoop on subject property.... 12 Figure 7. Overflow parking on subject property... 12
Summary Eastern Elmore County Recreation District (EECRD) has proposed to build a neighborhood park in Glenns Ferry, Idaho, to provide additional recreation opportunities in the community (the Proposed Action ). Figure 1 shows the location of the proposed park site. There are few recreation resources in the community and the proposed facility would help to meet this need. The proposed park would include a skate park, a half-court basketball court, a play area with playground equipment, and landscaped open areas. Funding for construction of the proposed park would come from EECRD funds and grant funding. An application for a Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) grant has been prepared. A LWCF grant would offer matching funding to EECRD to construct the park. The LWCF grants are administered through the National Park Service and are a federal action that comes under the purview of NEPA. This Environmental Assessment (EA) is required under NEPA to help the National Park Service evaluate the environmental consequences of the proposed action on the human environment and allow the affected public to understand the context for the proposed action. This EA analyzes potential effects of the proposed action on the resource included on the NPS Environmental Screening Form (Appendix A). No important adverse impacts of the Proposed Action were identified, and beneficial impacts to land use, invasive species, recreation resources, accessibility for populations with disabilities, aesthesis, socioeconomics, and minority and low income populations were identified. Based on the effects of the Proposed Action, IDPR is making a recommendation that the National Park Service (NPS) approve the grant application. Page 1
1.0 Introduction EECRD has proposed to build a neighborhood park in Glenns Ferry, Idaho, to provide additional recreation opportunities in the community (the Proposed Action ). Glenns Ferry is located in southwestern Idaho approximately 70 miles east of Boise, Idaho, on Interstate 84 (Figure 1). There are few recreation resources in the community and the proposed facility would help to meet this need. The park site in Glenns Ferry is on the north side of the town, north of the railroad tracks that traverse the town. The proposed park would include a skate park, a halfcourt basketball court, a play area with playground equipment, and landscaped open areas. This Environmental Assessment (EA) was prepared as a requirement for LWCF grant application by EECRD. The grant would help fund the construction of a propose park that would add needed recreation infrastructure for the residents of Glenns Ferry in a neighborhood that does not have a local park facility that can be accessed easily and safely. The decision regarding the grant funding constitutes a federal action which triggers NEPA to assess the environmental effects of the decision. Upon receipt of the LWCF grant funding, the park boundary would be protected from other uses under the requirements of LWCF Act. A park space in the neighborhood of Glenns Ferry would be a long term benefit for the local residents. This EA is available for public review and comment for a period of 30 days, from August 18 to September 18, 2017. The EA is available at http://www.glennsferryidaho.org/city/departments/parks/. The EA may also be reviewed at EECRD office at 79 North Commercial Street, Glenns Ferry, Idaho, between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. Please submit comments to Eastern Elmore County Recreation District, Karen Hall, Karen Hall, Director, P.O. Box 249, Glenns Ferry ID 83623. Comment may also be submitted via email to karen@rtci.net. Please include Tanks Eastside Skate Park in the subject line. Page 2
Figure 1. Location map for the proposed park site. Page 3
2.0 Purpose, Need and Background Glenns Ferry is a rural community in Elmore County, Idaho, with a population of 1,319 at the 2010 census. There are limited recreational opportunities for community residents. Logistically, the town of is split in half by an active branch of the Union Pacific Railroad. Residents who live in the north side of town must cross the railroad track to access any type of outdoor recreation, such as the town s only and very outdated basketball half-court. There are no developed skate park facilities in the community and the nearest skate park is over 30 miles away. The local skating community often utilizes city sidewalks and streets, which is extremely dangerous. EECRD strives to provide high-quality recreation facilities and opportunities to residents of Glenns Ferry. EERCD acquired a vacant parcel of land in 2014 in Glenns Ferry for the purpose of park facility development to address the need for additional recreation opportunities within the community. This parcel is located north of the train tracks and would provide neighborhood recreation opportunities in an area that does not have park facilities. The purpose of the proposed project is to provide community members, particularly the youth, with opportunities for education and safety in outdoor recreation, provide a community park in an area where such is currently lacking, and provide an area that encourages residents of all ages to get outside and exercise. The proposed park would be used daily and in all seasons, weather permitting. The proposed project would be consistent with and implement the goals and objectives of Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation and Tourism Plan (SCORTP) in a number of ways, as demonstrated below: Develop recreational opportunities for under-served communities such as senior citizens and ethnic minorities: The community of Glenns Ferry is an under-served community. The community is a rural area of the state and is home to many low-income families, senior citizens, and ethnic minorities. The neighborhood where this project would be located is within walking distance of two low-income housing complexes and a large majority of our community s senior citizen population. The park would create a variety of recreational opportunities that members of these demographics currently do not have access to. Assure that communities have parks within walking distance of every citizen. This project is located in an area of Glenns Ferry that currently does not have a park within walking distance of many of its residents. As noted above, the park would be located neighborhood where residents must leave the area to access a park and must cross the railroad tracks to do so. Page 4
Promote the role of local park and recreation amenities in providing tourism opportunities. During the summer months, tourists come to Glenns Ferry, with a majority of them coming to visit the Three Island State Park. Cost-free recreation opportunities are very limited and could be a drawback for families deciding whether to visit Glenns Ferry. An additional recreation amenity in Glenns Ferry that visitors could access at no cost could encourage tourism. Encourage healthy living when planning and implementing outdoor recreation programs and developing facilities. The proposed park would create opportunities for outdoor recreation and would represent a significant addition to the very small list of facilities in the community. It would allow EECRD to expand the number and type of recreation programs available. Physical activity would contribute to healthy living and would be attractive to young people that might otherwise turn to electronics for recreation. Pursue the acquisition, preservation and development of urban open space, parks, trails and corridors. The proposed park would be located in the heart of Glenns Ferry s urban area. The proposed park site is dry lot has sat vacant for decades, and was sold to EECRD by a family whose intentions where to have this lot developed into an outdoor recreational facility of some kind. This project as a way to create a beautiful, much-needed park, in an area of our community where no such open space currently exists. Encourage community goals that help create close-to-home, everyday recreation opportunities. This neighborhood would encourage residents to create an everyday recreation habit. The proposed skate park would appeal to all residents of all ages and give them a new reason to get outside and get active. Page 5
3.0 Description of Alternatives 3.1 No Action Under the no action alternative, the proposed park site would remain vacant (Figure 2). The site would be minimally maintained (mowed) to control weeds and grass, and to manage the fire risk. EECRD would retain ownership of the property, or could sell it at some point in the future. There would be essentially no recreation use on the property. Figure 2. Existing conditions at the subject property. Image source: Google Earth, image date 5/9/2015. 3.2 Proposed Action The Proposed Action would develop an outdoor recreation park on a vacant lot in Glenns Ferry adjacent to the City offices (Figure 1). The park development would be funded using funds from the EECRD and a matching grant from the LWCF. This proposed park would establish a multiple-use outdoor recreational park that would include a skate park, a basketball court, a playground, and a landscaped, grassy area. All aspects of the proposed park would be compliant with all accessibility requirements under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The skate board park, basketball court, playground, and grassy area would be interlinked via cement pathways, allowing for those will accessibility challenges to easily maneuver. Playground equipment would also be UFAS and ADA compliant. The project would be designed Page 6
by two licensed engineering firms, Dreamland Skateparks, LLC and Engineered Structures Inc., who would be responsible for meeting ADA standards. Each element of the park is discussed below. Conceptual drawings of the proposed park are shown in Figure 3, Figure 4, and Figure 5. Skate Park- The skate park design was developed based suggestions received from community residents during a town hall-style meeting. The park would include a bowl, half-pipe quarterpipe, hips, fly boxes, landing ramps, rails, and a pyramid. Each of these components could be used by skateboarders, inline skaters, or BMX cyclists and would be designed to allow users to transition from beginner to advanced. Cement used in the skate park area would be specifically formed and coated, allowing it to last for decades. Dreamland Skateparks, LLC, would be responsible for building the skate park area, including the site preparation for the entire project. Basketball Court- The proposed park would include a half-court basketball area. The basketball court would be cement with a smooth finish, and the court s striping would include a highperformance coating specifically made for outdoor courts. Engineered Structures Inc. (ESI) would be responsible for pouring the playing surface, striping the court, and installing the basketball standard. Playground- The playground equipment would include, swings, ladders, ramps, and additional elements. All outdoor playground equipment would made from materials recommended for outdoor installation. Four inches of rubber mulch would be placed in the playground area to reduce the risk of hard-surface fall injuries. A five-foot tall, chain-link fence would be installed between the playground area and the street-side edge, establishing a safe boundary between the two. ESI would be responsible for preparing the playground area, installing the playground equipment, and installing the playground perimeter fence. Landscaped Open Area- The landscaped, open area of the park would also be installed by ESI. This area would include trees, sod, and an irrigation system. This area could be used for a variety of activities, including family picnics, outdoor yoga, and freestyle games. The open space would provide an opportunity where community members could reconnect with the outdoors. Construction of the project would be expected to take 16 weeks, from beginning to completion. The anticipated start date for construction would be March 1, 2018, to avoid potential additional costs that could be incurred by building in winter conditions. EECRD s Director, Karen Hall, would oversee the construction and be the main point of contact. Page 7
Figure 3. Plan view of the proposed skate part. Figure 4. West-end view of the proposed skate park. Page 8
Figure 5. Detailed view of the skate park facilities. 3.3 Other Alternatives No issues were identified during the planning and analysis of the proposed park to drive the development of other alternatives. Page 9
4.0 Affected Environment The affected environment for each resource included on the NPS Environmental Screening Form is described in this section. This section discusses the current condition or situation with respect to these resources. This section establishes a baseline for the assessment of potential affects that could occur under the Proposed Action or no action scenarios. The description of the affected environment is based on the best available information. 4.1 Geological resources: soils, bedrock, slopes, streambeds, landforms, etc. The proposed park site is not geologically significant. The site is a vacant lot surrounded by city streets, residential areas, and the City Offices for Glenns Ferry. The site is nearly level and supports annual weedy species. There are no streambeds or unique landforms on the site. 4.2 Air quality The proposed park site is located in a rural farming community in Elmore County. Air quality is high and typical for a rural airshed. 4.3 Sound (noise impacts) The proposed park site has ambient noise levels are characteristic of a rural small town environment. Important sources of noise include Interstate 84, approximately 0.25 miles north of the proposed park site, local traffic noise, and the rail road, approximately 800 feet south of the site. 4.4 Water quality/quantity The proposed park site has no sources of onsite water. 4.5 Stream flow characteristics No streams are present on or near the proposed park site. 4.6 Marine/estuarine There are no marine or estuarine resources on or near the proposed park site. 4.7 Floodplains/wetlands The proposed park site is not located in or near a floodplain and has no wetlands associated with it. 4.8 Land use/ownership patterns; property values; community livability The proposed park site is currently a vacant lot. A dilapidated home-made basketball hoop suggests past attempts by neighborhood residents to meet recreation needs. The site receives Page 10
some use as a parking area by neighborhood residents. The weedy, abandon condition of the site makes the property somewhat of a liability in its current state. 4.9 Circulation, transportation City streets occur adjacent to the proposed park site on all sides. The site has no developed vehicular access or circulation, although it does receive some use as a parking area. 4.10 Plant/animal/fish species of special concern and habitat; state/ federal listed or proposed for listing There are five species listed under the Endangered Species Act that could occur in Elmore County. These include the Snake River physa snail, Bliss Rapids snail, Bull trout, Canada lynx, and slickspot peppergrass. None of these species occur on the proposed park site. There are no plant, animal, or fish species of special concern or state-listed species on or near the proposed park site. 4.11 Unique ecosystems, such as biosphere reserves, World Heritage sites, old growth forests, etc. There are no unique ecosystems on or near the proposed park site. 4.12 Unique or important wildlife/wildlife habitat There are no unique or important wildlife or wildlife habitat on or near the proposed park site. 4.13 Unique or important fish/habitat There are no unique or important fish or habitat on or near the proposed park site. 4.14 Introduce or promote invasive species (plant or animal) The proposed park site is a vacant lot. Non-native and invasive plant species occur on the subject property and require periodic maintenance, such as mowing. The site in its current state is vulnerable to additional weedy plant establishment because it is a disturbed site occupied primarily by weedy annual species. Weedy species growing on the vacant lot can spread to off-site locations. 4.15 Recreation resources, land, parks, open space, conservation areas, rec. trails, facilities, services, opportunities, public access, etc. The proposed park site currently constitutes open space for in a residential neighborhood. However, a vacant lot in a neighborhood is not necessarily a benefit and it supports weedy vegetation and has limited aesthetic and recreation value. A home-made basketball hoop has been constructed on the subject property in an attempt to provide recreational opportunities for neighborhood youth (Figure 6). The lot is at times used as for overflow parking for vehicles and trailers that don t fit in resident s driveways (Figure 7). Page 11
Figure 6. Homemade basketball hoop on subject property. Image source: Google Earth Street View. Figure 7. Overflow parking on subject property. Image source: Google Earth Street View. 4.16 Accessibility for populations with disabilities The proposed park site is not developed and thus does not accommodate persons with disabilities as determined by the Americans with Disabilities Act. 4.17 Overall aesthetics, special characteristics/features The proposed park site is an undeveloped vacant lot in a residential neighborhood. Aesthetic Page 12
aspects of the property are low. Weeds, dry vegetation, and vehicle parking further detract from the aesthetic values of the subject property. 4.18 Historical/cultural resources, including landscapes, ethnographic, archeological, structures, etc. Attach SHPO/THPO determination. The proposed park site has been cleared and graded in the past. Historical and cultural resources are not present on the subject property. SHPO was consulted and no historical records were encountered for the subject property. 4.19 Socioeconomics, including employment, occupation, income changes, tax base, infrastructure The proposed park site does not provide socioeconomic benefits to the community. 4.20 Minority and low-income populations The proposed park site is located in a community with minority and low-income populations. Members of these groups often have greater challenges accessing recreational and other opportunities, particularly when these resources are not located in their community. 4.21 Energy resources (geothermal, fossil fuels, etc.) There are no energy resources located on or near the proposed park site. 4.22 Other agency or tribal land use plans or policies There are no other agency or tribal land use plans or policies that have jurisdiction over the proposed park site. The park site in not utilized in the pursuit of any tribal rights to hunt and fish. 4.23 Land/structures with history of contamination/hazardous materials even if remediated There is no known history of contamination of the proposed park site. 4.24 Other important environmental resources to address. No other important environmental resources were identified for analysis in this EA. Page 13
5.0 Environmental Impact This section analyzes the environmental impacts of the Proposed Action and the no-action alternative on the resource included on the NPS Environmental Screening Form. The no action scenario provides a comparison for assessing the impacts of the Proposed Action on these resources if the Proposed Action is not implemented. 5.1 Propose Action 5.1.1 Geological resources: soils, bedrock, slopes, streambeds, landforms, etc. Negligible Impact. As noted in Section 3.1, there are no significant geologic resources on the proposed park site. Soils under some of the site would be excavated to construct the skatepark, sidewalk, or basketball court. Soils in other areas would support landscape elements (grass, trees, etc.). Bedrock, slopes, and landforms would not be altered, and stream beds are not present. 5.1.2 Air quality No Impact. During construction, the Proposed Action would result in emissions from construction equipment and dust. However, these effects would be very small and would not impact air quality. After the park is completed, there would be no impacts to air quality. 5.1.3 Sound (noise impacts) Negligible Impact. During the construction period, there would be increased noise. Construction would primarily occur during the day time when residents are active and many may be away from their homes. Construction noise would be in the context of background vehicle and railroad noise. After construction is completed, noise could be higher at times as people use the park for its designed activities. Although some noise would be anticipated, it is not anticipated to be inharmonious or disturbing to the neighborhood, and would be subordinate to traffic and railroad noise that is present in the community. 5.1.4 Water quality/quantity No Impact. There is no on-site water resources. Construction and development of hard surfaces within the park would not impact off-site water quality or quantity due to the limited extent of these features. 5.1.5 Stream flow characteristics No Impact. There are no streams on or near the proposed park site, so there would be no impact to stream flow characteristics. 5.1.6 Marine/estuarine No Impact. There are no marine or estuarine resources on or near the proposed park site so there would no impact to these resources. Page 14
5.1.7 Floodplains/wetlands No Impact. The propose park site is not located in or near floodplains or weltlands, so there would be no impact to these resources. 5.1.8 Land use/ownership patterns; property values; community livability Beneficial Impact. The proposed park would be consistent with land use and ownership patterns and would complement the residential nature of the area. The park would increase land values of surrounding homes, particularly compared to the vacant lot that is currently state of the site. The proposed park would increase the livability of the community by providing recreation opportunities within the neighborhood. 5.1.9 Circulation, transportation No Impact. There would be some in additional traffic in the neighborhood during the construction period, but is traffic would represent a minimal increase over the existing conditions. After the park is completed, there would be some additional traffic associated with people using the park, but again, this increase would represent a minimal increase over the existing conditions. Many users may choose to walk to the park, and those that drive would typical come one or two cars at a time. Parking would be along the street. 5.1.10 Plant/animal/fish species of special concern and habitat; state/ federal listed or proposed for listing No Impact - The proposed park would not affect plant, animal, or fish species of special concern or their habitats. There would be no impact to State or federally listed or proposed species. As noted in Section 3, no species in these categories occur on or near the proposed park site. 5.1.11 Unique ecosystems, such as biosphere reserves, World Heritage sites, old growth forests, etc. No Impact. As noted in Section 3, there are not unique ecosystems near the proposed park site. 5.1.12 Unique or important wildlife/ wildlife habitat No Impacts. As noted in Section 3, there are no important wildlife or wildlife habitat on or near the proposed park site. 5.13 Unique or important fish/habitat No Impact. As noted in Section 3, there are no important fish or fish habitats on or near the proposed park site. 5.1.14 Introduce or promote invasive species (plant or animal) Beneficial Impact. The propose park would have a beneficial effect on invasive plant species. Currently, there are weedy species on the site, which can reseed themselves and spread. Completion of the proposed park would reduce the presences of weedy plant species on the site. Much of the park would be hardscape surface associated with the skate park skating surfaces, while the open space areas would be landscaped. Invasive species would be Page 15
controlled as part of the park maintenance program. 5.1.15 Recreation resources, land, parks, open space, conservation areas, rec. trails, facilities, services, opportunities, public access, etc. Beneficial Impacts The proposed park would have beneficial effects on recreation resources in the community. The park would add a much needed park facility in an area of the community that does not have a park. Local residents would be able to easily and safely access this resources given its location within a residential neighborhood. Many users would be able to walk to the park, while others would be able to arrive with a short car ride. The park would meet a spectrum of recreational opportunities and serve a wide age range of residents. The skate park facilities would be very attractive to the youth, while younger children and families would benefit from the playground equipment and open space. 5.1.16 Accessibility for populations with disabilities Beneficial Impact. The proposed park would be developed to accommodate persons with disabilities in compliance with the ADA. People with disabilities would be able to access the facilities using the sidewalks to participate with and observe others in leisure and recreational activities. 5.1.17 Overall aesthetics, special characteristics/features Beneficial Impact. The Proposed Action would construct a park in a vacant lot and would be an aesthetic enhancement to the community, and particularly the neighborhood where it would be located. It would result in an attractive, well-designed park open space in the neighborhood. The park would offer a combination of well-landscaped open space, skate park areas, and playground equipment appropriate for the visual characteristics of the residential neighborhood where it would be located. 5.1.18 Historical/cultural resources, including landscapes, ethnographic, archeological, structures, etc. Attach SHPO/THPO determination. No Impact. Based on consultation with the Idaho State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) there are no cultural resources on the proposed park site. 5.1.19 Socioeconomics, including employment, occupation, income changes, tax base, infrastructure Beneficial Impact. The proposed park would have a short-term beneficial effect as resources are invested into the site during the construction for the companies and individuals involved the work. After the park is completed, it would provide needed recreation infrastructure to the community and would be beneficial to property values in the neighborhood. 5.1.20 Minority and low-income populations Beneficial Impact. The proposed park would provide easily-accessible recreation opportunities for minority and low-income populations in the community at no cost. There would be no adverse effects to these populations. Page 16
5.1.21 Energy resources (geothermal, fossil fuels, etc.) No impact. There are no energy resources on the proposed park site. 5.1.22 Other agency or tribal land use plans or policies No Impact. There are no agency or tribal land use plans or policies that have jurisdiction over this land parcel. The Proposed Action would not affect any tribal rights to hunt and fish. 5.1.23 Land/structures with history of contamination/hazardous materials even if remediated No Impacts. No known hazardous materials or conditions exist on the proposed park site. 5.1.24 Other important environmental resources to address. No other important environmental resources were identified for analysis in the EA. 5.2 No Action Alternative Under the no action scenario, the proposed park would not be built and the proposed park site would remain a vacant lot. The conditions described in Section 3 for the resources included on the NPS Environmental Screening Form would remain unchanged. Beneficial effects under the Proposed Action, noted in Section 5.1 for land use, invasive species, recreation resources, accessibility for people with disabilities, aesthetics, socioeconomics, and minority and low income populations would not occur. Page 17
6.0 Coordination and Consultation The following people contributed to the development of the environmental assessment. They are listed alphabetically by last name. Also included is the person s title and place of employment. Matt Halitsky, Historic Preservation Review Officer. Idaho State Historic Preservation Office. Karen Hall, Director, Eastern Elmore County Recreation District. Kathy Muir, State and Federal Grant Manager. Idaho Department of Parks and Recreation. John Stewart, NEPA Specialist. Stewart Consulting.
7.0 Public Comment Two public meeting were held to receive comments on the proposed park. The first meeting was held on October 5, 2016. The proposed park was introduced and community members were given an opportunity to comment on they would like to see included in the park. Based on comments and suggestions that were received in the meeting, Dreamland Skateparks, LLC, developed a conceptual plan for the park. A second public meeting was held on November 9, 2016. A conceptual plan for the park was presented to the public. The plan was well received and the consensus was that the comments and suggestions regarding what should be included in the park from the previous meeting had been incorporated in the conceptual plan. Community support for the park was very high and no objections were noted. The plans have been taken to local businesses and school functions so that additional members of the community can have a chance to be involved in the process. Support has been high with most wanting the park to be competed as soon as possible. A petition of support for the proposed park gathered 130 signatures from students and other local residents. A small sampling of comments from the petition include: We so need this for our kids. ~Cheryl Rose What a perfect addition to our community. ~Donna Fain Sweet! My kids have been hoping for this. ~April Parke Yes great for community in all ways. ~Jill Hampton It s needed!! ~Knight C. Duerig This is a positive outlet for our youth. ~ Dawn Miller Good for my boys and their friends ~Kristy Timinsky