I-10 Twin Peaks Traffic Interchange, Environmental Assessment

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Affected Environment and Environmental Impacts October 2005 Invasive Species Existing Conditions Under EO 13112, dated February 3, 1999, projects which occur on federal lands or are federally funded must “subject to the availability of appropriations, and within Administration budgetary limits, use relevant programs and authorities to: 1) prevent the introduction of invasive species; 2) detect and respond rapidly to, and control, populations of such species in a cost-effective and environmentally sound manner; 3) monitor invasive species populations accurately and reliably; and, 4) provide for restoration of native species and habitat conditions in ecosystems that have been invaded.” Highway corridors provide opportunities for the movement of invasive species through the landscape. Invasive species can move on vehicles and in the loads they carry. Invasive plants can be moved from site to site during spraying and mowing operations. Weed seed can be inadvertently introduced into the corridor during construction on equipment and through the use of mulch, imported soil or gravel, and sod. Some invasive plant species might be deliberately planted in erosion control, landscape, or wildflower projects. Impacts No Build Alternative The no build alternative would not actively contribute to the spread of invasive species. The Town of Marana, ADOT, and Pima County would continue to utilize current management practices for the control of invasive species in the project area. Preferred Alterative Through the use of detailed surveys and the mitigation measures described below, the preferred alternative would not contribute to the spread of invasive species in the project area. Mitigation During final design, invasive species surveys would occur to determine if invasive species are present. The Town of Marana would survey individual construction segments of the project area outside the Arizona Department of Transportation’s right-of-way to determine the invasive species present within the segment, treat these species prior to construction in accordance with the Natural Resources Section of the Intermodal Transportation Division of the Arizona Department of Transportation’s invasive species management plan, and continue any necessary treatments following construction completion. The Natural Resources Section of the Intermodal Transportation Division of the Arizona Department of Transportation would survey individual construction Interstate 10 Traffic Interchange at Twin Peaks/Linda Vista 4-40 Project No.: NH-010-D (AIW) TRACS No.: 10 PM 236 H5838 01D
Affected Environment and Environmental Impacts October 2005 segments of the project area within the Arizona Department of Transportation’s right-of-way to determine the invasive species present within the segment, treat these species prior to construction in accordance with the Section’s invasive species management plan, and continue any necessary treatments following construction completion. The contractor would clean all earth-moving and hauling equipment prior to its entering the construction site to prevent the introduction of invasive species. Additional invasive species mitigation, if needed, would be developed during final design using the invasive species survey. All disturbed soils would be seeded using native species to help prevent the reestablishment of invasive species. Conclusion As a result of the implemented mitigation measures, the preferred alternative would not assist in the spread of invasive species. Visual Resources The complete results of the visual resource investigations are presented in the document Interstate 10 Traffic Interchange at Twin Peaks/Linda Vista Visual Impact Analysis Report, dated February 5, 2004. Readers are referred to this report for the detailed findings; however, the results are summarized below. In a roadway improvement project, visual resources are considered from two perspectives: 1) the view from the roadway to motorists; and, 2) the view of the roadway to the surrounding community. Visual resources and effects to these resources are defined by identifying key views and considering community goals and preferences. Community goals and preferences are established in planning documents that address protection of visual resources. Two Town of Marana planning documents, the Town of Marana General Plan Update (November 2002) and the Park, Trail, and Open-Space System Master Plan (July 2000), address visual resources. The General Plan provides overall direction for future growth and development. While the General Plan does not dictate parcel-level land use decisions, it integrates land use, resource conservation, transportation, economic development, and public facilities and services into a comprehensive and coordinated strategy. Although the General Plan expresses clear goals of protection of significant scenic value viewsheds, no specific policies or strategies to address transportation facilities are included. Marana’s Park Plan was developed to accomplish several goals, one of which was to protect significant natural open space areas. The Park Plan describes open space areas like the Tortolita Mountains, Saguaro National Park (SNP), and unique biological communities such as the Santa Cruz River riparian area and the Tortolita Fan Ironwood Forest as important visual resources valued by the community. Interstate 10 Traffic Interchange at Twin Peaks/Linda Vista 4-41 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 148 and 149:
Affected Environment and Environmen
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?