Powerline Plan and Environ. Assessment Jan. 2013 - Flood Control ...

Powerline Flood Retarding Structure
Pinal County, AZ
Draft Supplemental Watershed Plan
and Environmental Assessment
be avoided by project implementation activities. Data recovery studies will be performed to
mitigate impacts to the sites likely to suffer project-related impacts. Based on known sites in the
vicinity, the majority of the cultural resources present would be either prehistoric sites without
evidence of habitation (which might include scatters of artifacts on the surface, or artifacts with
remnants of just one or a few roasting pits, agricultural features, and/or other non-habitation
features) or historical sites (which might include homesteads, farming or ranching features, or
simply scatters of historical artifacts). Most of the remaining sites would be smaller prehistoric
habitation sites, with up to two relatively large prehistoric habitation sites. Based on experience
with recent data recovery efforts in central and southern Arizona, cultural resources mitigation
costs have been estimated for this alternative.
6.1.13 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
Alternative 1 – No Action. This alternative would have a risk of future catastrophic flooding that
would affect the health and safety of minority or disadvantaged populations.
Alternative 2 – Decommissioning. There would be no impoundments with Alternative 2 and
mitigate flooding up to the 100-year event, thus posing a significantly lower risk to minority or
disadvantaged populations. The construction project could generate short-term jobs for local
workers.
6.1.14 PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY
Alternative 1 – No Action. This alternative would have a long-term adverse direct effect by
allowing the continued risk to human health, safety, and loss of life from a catastrophic flood event.
Alternative 2 – Decommissioning. This alternative would have a long-term beneficial direct effect
by reducing the risk to human health and safety from a catastrophic flood event by eliminating
impoundments and providing effective flood control up to the 100-year event.
6.1.15 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The cumulative impacts of the proposed project were considered during planning. The planning
team considered proposed actions as outlined in the adjacent William-Chandler Watershed for the
Vineyard Road FRS and Rittenhouse FRS as well as other known and foreseeable proposed actions
by other state or federal agencies. The team determined that the cumulative impacts of the
proposed actions in this watershed and the William-Chandler Watershed will have an overall
beneficial impact for the people and resources of the area. The team determined that there are no
other proposed actions in the project area that will have potential adverse impacts. The Arizona
Department of Transportation (ADOT) is currently planning potential freeway alignments which
may impact the project area. The project sponsor will continue to coordinate with ADOT to
minimize any adverse impacts as planning proceeds.
6.2 COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVE PLANS
This section describes the extent to which each alternative meets the project purpose of flood
prevention and the Sponsor’s formulation goal to provide for continued flood protection for the
downstream benefitted area while meeting all of the standards set by ADWR and the NRCS for
safety and reliability of the project. Also presented are risks and uncertainty associated with the
alternatives.
USDA- NRCS Page 6-5 January 2013
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.