Environmental Assessment Programmatic Section 4(F) Evaluation
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Coraopolis Bridge Replacement Allegheny County, Pennsylvania US Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration Pennsylvania Department of Transportation and County of Allegheny Environmental Assessment Programmatic Section 4(f) Evaluation DECEMBER 1992 Coraopolis Bridge Replacement Allegheny County, Pennsylvania US Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration Pennsylvania Department of Transportation and County of Allegheny Environmental Assessment Programmatic Section 4(f) Evaluation Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 4332 (2)(C) 49 U.S.C. 1653 Section 4(f) Date Division Administrator Approved Environmental Assessment AR30U-2S- INTRODUCTION - This document is an Environmental Assessment for the proposed replacement of the Coraopclis Bridge in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania. Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1 969 and regulations of the Council of Environmental Quality (CEQ) through 1978, applicable federal actions must consider potential environmental impacts. The analysis is used to determine whether a proposed project will have significant adverse effects which cannot be avoided or mitigated. For this project, significant impacts were determined through a combination of technical analysis and coordination with interested parties and the local community. An Environmental Assessment is prepared when the significance of project-related impacts is not known during project scoping activities. If significant and unavoidable adverse impacts upon the environment are identified, an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) must be prepared. If it is determined that the Proposed Action's impacts are not significant, a formal Rnding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) is prepared by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). Other technical reports associated with this project include the Technical Basis Report; the Design Location Report; Hydrologic and Hydraulic Report; Historical Architectural Engineering Record; and the Determination of Effect Report. The County of Allegheny has undertaken this study to evaluate feasible alternatives for the replacement of the Coraopoiis Bridge. This Environmental Assessment (EA) documents the social, economic, cultural, natural, and physical environmental impacts associated with various alternatives for the replacement of the Coraopoiis Bridge. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Coast Guard are cooperating agencies. Copies of the report are available for public review at: County of Allegheny PADOT FHWA Mr. Herbert C. Higginbotham, II, P.E. Mr. Henry M. Nutbrown, P.E. Mr. Manuel A. Maries, Jr. Director District Engineer Federal Highway Department of Pennsylvania Department Administration Engineering and Construction of Transportation Federal Building County of Allegheny Four Parkway Center 228 Walnut Street 501 County Office Building 875 Greentree Road Harrisburg, PA 17108 Forbes Avenue and Boss Street Pittsburgh, PA 15220 Pittsburgh, PA 15219 Copies will also be available at the Neville Township Municipal Building on Neville Island at Third Street and Grand Avenue and at the Coraopoiis Municipal Building at 1012 Fifth Avenue in Coraopoiis. 3-021 \report«\OB2.«wh 683011*26 TABLE OF CONTENTS • INTRODUCTION .......... ... ................................. i TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................ ii CHAPTER 1 - PROPOSED ACTION .............................. 1 - 1 1.1 Project Description ....... *............................ 1 -1 1.2 Description of Existing Bridge ............................ 1 -1 1.3 Project History ....................................... 1 -1 1.4 Structural Deficiency .................................. 1 - 2 1.5 Project Need ........................................ 1 - 3 CHAPTER 2 - EARLY COORDINATION AND SCOPING ................ 2-1 2.1 Inter-Agency Coordination ............................... 2 -1 2.2 History of Alternatives ................................. 2 -1 CHAPTER 3 - ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED ...................... 3-1 3.1 No Build Alternative ................................... 3 -1 3.2 History of Alternatives Evaluated .......................... 3-1 3.3 Build Alternatives Selected for Detailed Evaluation .............. 3-5 3.3.1 Alternative 1 - New Bridge on Existing Alignment .......... 3-5 3.3.2 Alternative 2 - New Bridge Skewed East from Southern Abutments - 6 CHAPTER 4.0 - ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS AND MITIGATION ......... 4-1 4.1 Socio Economic Environment............................. 4 -1 4.1.1 Regional and Community Growth ..................... 4-1 4.1.2 Community Cohesion ............................. 4 - 2 4.1.3 Displacements of People and Business .................. 4-3 4.1.4 Public Facilities and Services ........................ 4-4 4.2 Natural Environment ................................... 4 - 6 4.2.1 Geological Resources ............................. 4 - 6 4.2.2 Productive Agricultural Land/Farming ................... 4-7 4.2.3 Wetlands ...................................... 4 - 7 4.2.4 Soil Erosion and Sedimentation ....................... 4-8 4.2.5 Floodplains .................................... 4 - 8 4.2.6 Navigable Waterways .............................4-9 4.2.7 Surface and Groundwater Resources .................. 4-10 4.2.8 Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat. .................... 4-10 4.2.9 Wildlife and Threatened and Endangered Species ......... 4-11 4.2.10Historic and Archeological Resources ................. 4-11 4.2.11 Parks and Recreational Facilities ................... 4-13 4.2.12Energy Conservation ............................. 4 -13 4.3 Physical Environment ................................. 4 -14 4.3.1 Noise Levels .................................. 4 -14 4.3.2 Air Quality .................................... 4 -15 AR30U27 4.3.3 Hazardous Waste ............................... 4 -16 4.3.4 Aesthetics and Other Values ....................... 4-18 CHAPTER 5.0 - COMMENTS AND COORDINATION ................. 5-1 CHAPTER 6 - SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS .................... 6 - 1 6.1 SUMMARY ......................................... 6 - 1 6.2 CONCLUSIONS ...................................... 6 - 1 LIST OF REFERENCES LIST OF PREPARERS PROGRAMMATIC SECTION 4(F) EVALUATION APPENDICES A. Pertinent Correspondence and Minutes of Meetings B. Early Coordination Form and Agency Listing C. Section 106 Coordination D. Existing Bridge Plan, Elevation and Section E. Build Alternatives Profiles F. Floodway Boundary Map ' " • ' .•'••'• LISTOFRGURES Follows Page Rgure 1-1 Regional Location Map .............................. 1-1- Figure 1-2 Project Study Area ................................. 1-1 Figure 1-3 Project Area ..................................... 1-1 Rgure 3-1 Alternatives Considered During Phases 1 and 2 ............. 3-1 Rgure 3-2 Comparison of Alternatives ........................... 3-1 Rgure 3-3 Alternative 1 - 25MPH Alignment ....................... 3-3 Figure 3-4 Alternative 1 - 35MPH Alignment ....................... 3-3 Figure 3-5 Alternative 2 - 25MPH Alignment .;..................... 3-3 Figure 3-6 Alternative 2 - 35MPH Alignment ....................... 3-3 Figure 4-1 Bridge Terminus Area ............................... 4-1 Figure 6-1 Summary of Impacts ................................ 6-1 LIST OF PHOTOGRAPHS Follows Page Photograph 1 Truss Configuration .............................. 1-1 Photograph 2 Truss Ornamentation and Pony Truss Spans ............. 1-1 Photograph 3 Ornamental Railing ............................... 1-1 Photograph 4 View toward Existing Bridge ....................... 4-19 Photograph 5 View from Fourth Avenue/Ferree Street ............... 4-19 flR30U28 CHAPTER 1 - PROPOSED ACTION • • - 1.1 Project Description The proposed action involves replacing the existing Coraopoiis Bridge, which spans the Ohio River Back Channel in a north-south direction between the Borough of Coraopoiis and Neville Island (Rgure 1-1 and Figure 1-2). The bridge currently connects SR 51 (Fourth Avenue) and Ferree Street in Coraopoiis with Grand Avenue on Neville Island (Rgure 1-3). The project would replace the existing structure and roadway approaches with facilities designed to current standards for an urban arterial highway. Various bridge replacement alignments were studied. Of these, two were selected for detailed study. Both of the Alternatives would include three 12-foot travel lanes and two, three-foot watertables (shoulders). Two lanes would serve southbound traffic and one lane would serve northbound traffic. A six-foot sidewalk would be provided and separated from the shoulder by a concrete barrier. For both alternatives, the existing bridge superstructure would be dismantled and removed and the abutments and piers removed. Detailed descriptions of the proposed alternatives are contained in Chapter 3. 1.2 Description of Existing Bridge -» The current Coraopoiis Bridge is located in Allegheny County, 10 miles northwest of downtown Pittsburgh. The Bridge is approximately 1,160 feet in length and consists of 2 through truss spans at 444 feet each and two pony truss spans at 137 feet each (See Appendix D). It carries two 12 foot lanes with 4.5-feet wide water tables and a 5 foot sidewalk on the eastern (upstream) side. The sidewalk is separated from the travel lanes by a concrete barrier (Photos 1-3). Connecting sidewalks are located at each end of the bridge. The north bridge approach from Grand Avenue contains a 30 degree curve to the south. Situated at the western end of Neville Island, there is little development within the immediate vicinity of the bridge. Within Coraopoiis