Final Environmental Impact Report - Whittier Bridge/I-95 ...
Final Environmental Impact Report - Whittier Bridge/I-95 ... Final Environmental Impact Report - Whittier Bridge/I-95 ...
EEA#I4427 DEIR Certificate December 30, 2011 In addition, RTN 3-28599 is listed as open and is in the process of Phase II investigations pursuant to the Massachusetts Contingency Plan (310 CMR 40.0000). MassDOT conducted a Phase I Initial Site Investigation for the project corridor identifying seven sites in Newburyport and Salisbury which may require soil sampling or remedial activities during construction of the Preferred Alternative. The DEIR indicates that no adverse impacts resulting from the Preferred Alternative were identified that would require special mitigation measures under the MCP. The No Build and Preferred Alternative will not affect listed hazardous waste sites as regulated under federal law. MassDOT will require the design/build contractor to: • monitor excavated soil during construction to ensure that soils requiring special handling are appropriately identified and managed; • handle and dispose of all hazardous material in accordance with state and federal laws, including the MCP; and • develop and implement a soil and groundwater management plan during construction. To facilitate the selection of soil and groundwater management and disposal options, MassDOT will complete an additional pre-characterization program for areas where construction and/or excavation activities may occur within the project boundaries. Historical and Archaeological Resources According to the DEIR, the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) has concurred in writing with the finding by FHWA and MassDOT that the proposed removal and replacement of the Whittier Bridge will have an unavoidable adverse effect on the National Register of Historic Places-eligible structure under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended. As part of the alternatives analysis, MassDOT examined several bridge rehabilitation or reconstruction alternatives that might avoid, minimize, or mitigate the adverse effect and determined that rehabilitation or reconstruction of the existing bridge is not feasible. Extensive public outreach was conducted in 2010 as part of the Section 106 review process to ensure that the views of the local governments and the public were considered in the resolution of the adverse effect. FHWA and MassDOT have committed to implement mitigation measures in a Section 106 Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with the federal Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (Council) and the SHPO that was fully executed on March 23, 2011. The Chief Executive Officers of the three municipalities have also signed the MOA as concurring parties. The MOA incorporates stipulations that FHWA and MassDOT have agreed to conduct to minimize or mitigate the adverse effect including: • the preparation of archival recordation; 14
EEA#I4427 DEIR Certificate December 30, 2011 • the opportunity for local historical commissions, the WWG, and SHPO to review and comment on structural type, paint color, and sketch plans for the new replacement bridge; • reuse of salvaged ornamental artifacts from the existing bridge on the replacement bridge or all the trailheads of the shared-use path; • the use of interpretive signage along the shared-use path to address significant project area themes; and • the use of reasonable measures to avoid, minimize or mitigate adverse effects to previously unidentified historically, culturally and religiously significant properties and resources. In addition, the new replacement bridge (double-barrel network tied-arch superstructure) will partially mitigate the adverse effect associated with the removal of the existing National Register-eligible bridge because of its similarity in design characteristics, scale and location. The construction of the replacement bridge will have no adverse effects on any of the National Historic Landmark or National Register-eligible properties that are adjacent to or within the Area of Potential Effect (APE). Public Archaeological Laboratory, Inc. (PAL) conducted an intensive level survey in three areas along the project corridor that warranted archaeological testing. In an Intensive (Locational) Archaeological Survey report, PAL concluded that no potentially significant archaeological sites are present within these areas, and recommended that no further survey be conducted in the project area. MassDOT has determined that the project is unlikely to affect any potentially significant pre-contact or historic archaeological sites with the APE. Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions MassDOT conducted air quality, microscale, and mesoscale analyses of the project area. The DEIR provided regional air quality emissions for existing (2007), and 2030 No Build and Build conditions. The DEIR includes a discussion of the Preferred Alternative's conformance to the purpose and requirements of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts State Implementation Plan (SIP). The project has been included in the Merrimack Valley Regional Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) FY 2011-2014 Transportation Improvement Program, and was included in the Merrimack Valley MPO's model used for the conformity analysis. The total emissions from this and other projects, when combined with results from the remainder of the Eastern Massachusetts Nonattainment Area, fell below the budget levels for volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and nitrous oxides (NOx) for all milestone years. Accordingly, the project - combined with all the other regionally significant projects - was found to be consistent with the motor vehicle emissions budget in the Massachusetts SIP, thereby meeting the requirements of the conformity regulations. The DEIR includes a GHG emissions analysis that calculates and compares GHG emissions associated with the existing conditions and future No Build and Build (Preferred) alternatives. The analysis indicates that the GHG emissions will increase in the future, as compared to existing conditions by 38,406 kilograms per day (kg/day) in carbon dioxide (C0 2 ) 15
- Page 130 and 131: Whittier Bridge/I-95 Improvement Pr
- Page 132 and 133: Whittier Bridge/I-95 Improvement Pr
- Page 134 and 135: Whittier Bridge/I-95 Improvement Pr
- Page 136 and 137: Whittier Bridge/I-95 Improvement Pr
- Page 138 and 139: Whittier Bridge/I-95 Improvement Pr
- Page 140 and 141: Whittier Bridge/I-95 Improvement Pr
- Page 142 and 143: Whittier Bridge/I-95 Improvement Pr
- Page 144 and 145: Whittier Bridge/I-95 Improvement Pr
- Page 146 and 147: Whittier Bridge/I-95 Improvement Pr
- Page 148 and 149: Whittier Bridge/I-95 Improvement Pr
- Page 150 and 151: Whittier Bridge/I-95 Improvement Pr
- Page 152 and 153: Whittier Bridge/I-95 Improvement Pr
- Page 154 and 155: Whittier Bridge/I-95 Improvement Pr
- Page 156 and 157: Whittier Bridge/I-95 Improvement Pr
- Page 158 and 159: Whittier Bridge/I-95 Improvement Pr
- Page 160 and 161: Whittier Bridge/I-95 Improvement Pr
- Page 162 and 163: Whittier Bridge/I-95 Improvement Pr
- Page 164 and 165: Whittier Bridge/I-95 Improvement Pr
- Page 167 and 168: Deval L. Patrick GOVERNOR rJJie Com
- Page 169 and 170: EEA#14427 DEIR Certificate December
- Page 171 and 172: EEA#14427 DEIR Certificate December
- Page 173 and 174: EEA#I4427 DEIR Certificate December
- Page 175 and 176: EEA#I4427 DEIR Certificate December
- Page 177 and 178: EEA#14427 DEIR Certificate December
- Page 179: EEA#I4427 DEIR Certificate December
- Page 183 and 184: EEA#I4427 DEIR Certificate December
- Page 185 and 186: EEA#14427 DEIR Certificate December
- Page 187 and 188: EEA#I4427 DEIR Certificate December
- Page 189: EEA#I4427 DEIR Certificate December
- Page 192 and 193: Thank you for the opportunity to co
- Page 194 and 195: Thank you for the opportunity to co
- Page 196 and 197: ESSEX NATIONAL HERITAGE COMMISSION
- Page 198 and 199: In the period leading up to the sub
- Page 200 and 201: construction is not adequate to ens
- Page 202 and 203: to limit turbidity impact from dewa
- Page 204 and 205: For infiltration basin and trench s
- Page 206 and 207: not acceptable to meet regulatory r
- Page 208 and 209: ide lot that is also being expanded
- Page 210 and 211: MassWi/d/ile December 20, 2011 Comm
- Page 212 and 213: Patel, Purvi {_E_EA .... } _ From:
- Page 214 and 215: process. Ifthe project avoids simul
- Page 216 and 217: THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS E
- Page 218: imack Valley ning Commission plan *
- Page 227 and 228: Mayor Thatcher w. Kezer III Town Ha
- Page 229 and 230: are connected are there any other p
EEA#I4427 DEIR Certificate December 30, 2011<br />
In addition, RTN 3-28599 is listed as open and is in the process of Phase II investigations<br />
pursuant to the Massachusetts Contingency Plan (310 CMR 40.0000).<br />
MassDOT conducted a Phase I Initial Site Investigation for the project corridor<br />
identifying seven sites in Newburyport and Salisbury which may require soil sampling or<br />
remedial activities during construction of the Preferred Alternative. The DEIR indicates that no<br />
adverse impacts resulting from the Preferred Alternative were identified that would require<br />
special mitigation measures under the MCP. The No Build and Preferred Alternative will not<br />
affect listed hazardous waste sites as regulated under federal law.<br />
MassDOT will require the design/build contractor to:<br />
• monitor excavated soil during construction to ensure that soils requiring special<br />
handling are appropriately identified and managed;<br />
• handle and dispose of all hazardous material in accordance with state and federal<br />
laws, including the MCP; and<br />
• develop and implement a soil and groundwater management plan during<br />
construction.<br />
To facilitate the selection of soil and groundwater management and disposal options,<br />
MassDOT will complete an additional pre-characterization program for areas where construction<br />
and/or excavation activities may occur within the project boundaries.<br />
Historical and Archaeological Resources<br />
According to the DEIR, the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) has concurred in<br />
writing with the finding by FHWA and MassDOT that the proposed removal and replacement of<br />
the <strong>Whittier</strong> <strong>Bridge</strong> will have an unavoidable adverse effect on the National Register of Historic<br />
Places-eligible structure under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as<br />
amended. As part of the alternatives analysis, MassDOT examined several bridge rehabilitation<br />
or reconstruction alternatives that might avoid, minimize, or mitigate the adverse effect and<br />
determined that rehabilitation or reconstruction of the existing bridge is not feasible.<br />
Extensive public outreach was conducted in 2010 as part of the Section 106 review<br />
process to ensure that the views of the local governments and the public were considered in the<br />
resolution of the adverse effect. FHWA and MassDOT have committed to implement mitigation<br />
measures in a Section 106 Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with the federal Advisory<br />
Council on Historic Preservation (Council) and the SHPO that was fully executed on March 23,<br />
2011. The Chief Executive Officers of the three municipalities have also signed the MOA as<br />
concurring parties. The MOA incorporates stipulations that FHWA and MassDOT have agreed<br />
to conduct to minimize or mitigate the adverse effect including:<br />
• the preparation of archival recordation;<br />
14