Final Environmental Impact Report - Whittier Bridge/I-95 ...

Whittier Bridge/I-95 Improvement Project FEIR
Chapter 2.0: Response to Comments on the Environmental Assessment/Draft Environmental Impact Report
(within the Zone A) complies with 310 CMR 22.20B and C, and with applicable stormwater regulatory standards
specified at 310 CMR 10.05(6)(k)(l10) and 314 CMR 9.06(6)(a)(l-10). MassDOT intends to use the road for
inspection and maintenance of the City of Newburyport's drinking water supply lines from the Bartlett Spring
Treatment Plant.
Response: The existing City of Newburyport drinking water lines would be impacted by the project
and require relocation. The gravel utility road within the RFA will follow the route of the relocated
water supply lines from the water treatment plant at Bartlett Spring Pond and will be used solely by
the water department for maintenance and inspection of the relocated water lines. No public vehicles
will be allowed to use the roadway and very minimal water department traffic is anticipated, on the
order of several trips per month on average.
The provisions of the Drinking Water Regulations at 310 CMR 22.20C(2)(l) prohibit within the Zone A
of Bartlett Springs Pond ―land uses that result in the rendering impervious of more than 15%, or
more than 20% with artificial recharge, or 2500 square feet of any lot, whichever is greater.‖ The
proposed access road will be comprised of either crushed stone or open course gravel and is not
considered to be an impervious surface, thus meeting that standard and applicable stormwater
standards.
EEA-24: I have received a number of comments requesting that MassDOT provide mitigation from noise impacts to
residential receptors. The FEIR should respond to these comments from receptors who will impacted by future noise
conditions.
Response: The traffic-noise mitigation analysis was completed in accordance with updated FHWA
and MassDOT policy. The Traffic Noise Model was used to evaluate the noise reduction
performance and cost-effectiveness of numerous candidate noise barriers. Although a number of
receptors have been identified as impacted by existing and future noise conditions, no noise barriers
can be justified as being ―feasible‖ and ―reasonable‖ in accordance with the MassDOT policy; not
enough receptors benefit from the noise reduction to meet the ―per benefitted receptor‖ cost basis.
Consequently, noise barriers will not be included in the project.
EEA-25: The FEIR should evaluate the feasibility of increasing the height and extending the length of the existing
articulated barrier adjacent to the Laurel Road neighborhood.
Response: Two receptors on Laurel Road were impacted by existing and future traffic noise.
Dozens of alternatives for a noise barrier in the Laurel Road area were evaluated (Noise Barrier No.
2). The optimal barrier height and length for noise reduction resulted in a cost effectiveness index
(CEI) twice the acceptable CEI limit. An inadequate shorter length barrier built on top of the existing
barrier (i.e., less expensive) was also evaluated, but the CEI value still exceeded the limit. Therefore,
in accordance with the MassDOT Noise Policy, a longer and taller noise barrier in this location is not
feasible and reasonable and cannot be constructed for the project. The project will relocate the
existing articulated noise barrier within the limits of the I-95 ROW in order to accommodate the
construction of the Shared-Use Path.
2-9