I-10 Twin Peaks Traffic Interchange, Environmental Assessment

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Affected Environment and Environmental Impacts October 2005 View from the Low Flow Channel of the Santa Cruz River The preferred alternative would enhance access to views of the riparian area; however, the loss of native vegetation along the low flow channel would be a visual impact from all views. Depending on the vantage point, views of the Tucson Mountains would be enhanced, but some views to the east may be obstructed by the interchange/bridges. In this area, there would be a moderate adverse change to the existing visual resource and a moderate viewer response; therefore, views from the low flow channel of the Santa Cruz River would be moderately impacted. View from the I-10 Westbound and Eastbound Frontage Roads The preferred alternative would improve the appearance of the existing unattractive frontage roads. The proposed roadways would blend with existing land uses. In this area, there would be a minor adverse change to the existing visual resource and low viewer response to the change; therefore, impacts to views from the I-10 frontage roads would be low. View from I-10 The preferred alternative, in particular the bridge over the interstate, would be a low adverse change to the existing visual quality along I-10; however, the project would enhance the existing visual resource. In this area, there would be a high adverse change to the existing visual resource and a moderate viewer response; therefore, impacts to views from the I-10 frontage roads would be low. View from Linda Vista Boulevard/El Camino de Mañana The preferred alternative would obstruct background views to the west. In addition, a rural road would change to an urban roadway appearance. In this area, there would be a moderate adverse change to the existing visual resource and a moderate viewer response; therefore, impacts to views from Linda Vista Boulevard and El Camino de Mañana would be moderate. Mitigation The goals of visual impact mitigation are to provide the user and the viewer of the roadway with a transportation system that is pleasing to the senses, enhances the aesthetic character of the roadway corridor, assimilates the qualities of the community’s visual resources into its design, and makes the roadway more compatible with the community-at-large. To design a facility that meets the aesthetic needs of the community, the project team would coordinate with the community, state and local agencies, and private interest groups. The Town of Marana would apply the following visual mitigation measures. • Structural elements such as walls, bridges, concrete barriers, and abutments would be constructed of materials with color and texture qualities that blend into the existing landscape. Architectural treatments would be applied to the proposed Twin Peaks Road bridge over I-10 and other Interstate 10 Traffic Interchange at Twin Peaks/Linda Vista 4-44 Project No.: NH-010-D (AIW) TRACS No.: 10 PM 236 H5838 01D
Affected Environment and Environmental Impacts October 2005 visible structures to enhance the driver’s perception of Marana and to be in accordance with similar projects on I-10 in the Tucson area. • During construction, the contractor would follow Arizona Department of Transportation’s Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction, Section 104.09 Prevention of Landscape Defacement; Protection of Streams, Lakes and Reservoirs (2000 Edition) and the Water Quality Standards in Title 18, Chapter 11 of the Arizona Administrative Code as administered by the ADEQ. • Erosion control techniques such as slope rounding would be utilized, as necessary, to minimize impacts to visual quality. • The contractor would reduce visual impacts during construction by screening equipment storage and staging areas and by storing excavated material and debris in areas less visible to the public. • Intersection lighting would be designed to minimize light pollution of night skies and limit glare into neighborhoods. • Methods of reducing headlight impact to residents of Continental Ranch would be considered in final design. Conclusion As a result of the mitigation measures, visual impacts to the project area would be minimized and a visually enhanced traffic interchange would be developed that would blend with the surrounding area. Air Quality The EPA established National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for six criteria pollutants (ground level ozone (O3), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), particulate matter, and lead). Table 4-5 presents the federal and state primary (health based) and secondary (aesthetic/economic based) standards for the pollutants of concern in the study area and the averaging period over which the standard is measured. Existing Conditions The Pima County Department of Environmental Quality (PDEQ) operates air quality monitoring stations at various sites throughout Pima County to monitor the levels of the two major air pollutants of concern in this area: particulates (PM10 and PM2.5), and CO. The closest of these monitoring stations to the study area is 9597 North Coachline Boulevard, approximately 2,000 feet north of Twin Peaks Road. This monitor was established in March of 2001 to determine fine particle concentrations in a residential neighborhood. The most recent reported results from this site is compared to the NAAQS in Table 4-6. Interstate 10 Traffic Interchange at Twin Peaks/Linda Vista 4-45 Project No.: NH-010-D (AIW) TRACS No.: 10 PM 236 H5838 01D
Page 1:
Interstate 10 Traffic Interchange a
Page 4 and 5:
Draft Environmental Assessment Octo
Page 6 and 7:
Page 8 and 9:
Page 10 and 11:
Page 12 and 13:
Mitigation Measures October 2005
Page 14 and 15:
Mitigation Measures October 2005 19
Page 16 and 17:
Mitigation Measures October 2005 St
Page 18 and 19:
Introduction October 2005 CHAPTER 1
Page 20 and 21:
AVRA VALLEY RD MARANA I-10 SCENIC D
Page 22 and 23:
Introduction October 2005 Cortaro R
Page 24 and 25:
Project Purpose and Need October 20
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Alternatives October 2005 CHAPTER 3
Page 36 and 37:
Alternatives October 2005 Figure 3-
Page 38 and 39:
Alternatives October 2005 • Shall
Page 40 and 41:
Alternatives October 2005 Interstat
Page 42 and 43:
Alternatives October 2005 Road). Pr
Page 44 and 45:
Alternatives October 2005 Preferred
Page 46 and 47:
Alternatives October 2005 Twin Peak
Page 48 and 49:
Alternatives October 2005 I-10 Fron
Page 50 and 51:
Alternatives October 2005 Linda Vis
Page 52 and 53: Alternatives October 2005 Twin Peak
Page 54 and 55: Alternatives October 2005 and sidew
Page 56 and 57: Alternatives October 2005 proposed
Page 58 and 59: Alternatives October 2005 Near the
Page 60 and 61: Avra Valley Rd. Twin Peaks Rd. Silv
Page 62 and 63: Affected Environment and Environmen
Page 78 and 79: Interstate 10 Traffic Interchange a
Page 120 and 121: Wall to Protect Rec. ID Affected En
Page 136 and 137: 44.20 Avra Valley Rd Twin Peaks Rd
Page 152 and 153:
Affected Environment and Environmen
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
Page 162 and 163:
Page 164 and 165:
Public Involvement/Project Coordina
Page 166 and 167:
Page 168 and 169:
Page 170 and 171:
Page 172 and 173:
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177:
Conclusion October 2005 Interstate
Page 178 and 179:
Bibliography October 2005 CHAPTER 8
Page 180 and 181:
Bibliography October 2005 Tetra Tec
show all

I-10 Twin Peaks Traffic Interchange, Environmental Assessment

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?