Environmental Assessment for the Project to Replace the Failing Visitor Center at the USS Arizona Memorial
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior USS Arizona Memorial Hawai'i Environmental Assessment for the Project to Replace the Failing Visitor Center at the USS Arizona Memorial February 2007 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY SUMMARY The National Park Service (NPS) proposes to construct a new shoreside visitor center for the USS Arizona Memorial. The purpose of this project is to improve and enhance visitor center facilities by replacing the existing visitor center to protect important cultural resources, and to enhance the visitor experience and park operations, in accordance with the park’s legislation, Statement for Management (NPS 1992), and NPS policy. This project covers the park’s shoreside facilities only and will not impact the sunken USS Arizona or the memorial that rests above it. The existing visitor center and Arizona Memorial Museum Association (AMMA) bookstore have an estimated life expectancy of 3 to 8 years (2009 to 2014) due to weakening structural integrity from an unevenly sinking foundation. In addition, the circa-1978 building now receives double the capacity of visitors it was designed to support. As a result, visitor experience has been impacted by long lines and poor visitor flow throughout the visitor center. Collections are exposed to air, humidity, and temperature fluctuations in the open-air museum, and are displayed in inadequate museum cases. Three alternatives are analyzed in this environmental assessment: Alternative A, the No Action Alternative, is the continuation of current management and would leave in place the existing visitor center structures without significant changes to maintenance or operations. No major efforts would be undertaken to stabilize the foundations, improve visitor services, or protect displayed museum collections. Ongoing minor stabilization efforts would continue, although these would not address the critical issues that have reduced the expected lifespan of the structures. Alternative B, the Preferred Alternative, would construct new visitor center buildings adjacent to the east and north of the existing facility, and would relocate the existing boat launch 100 feet west to improve visitor access after leaving the theaters. The visitor center structures would be placed in a linear, campus-based fashion. This alternative would retain use of the existing theaters, with upgrades to improve accessibility and visitor flow. This option provides for greater visitor control within the visitor center and provides a highly consistent interpretive and educational experience. Alternative C, Campus Style with Relocated Boat Launch, would move the visitor center structures to the north of the current location. The museum and exhibit area, theaters, and shared arrival plaza structures would be placed in a clustered fashion while the concessions, administrative offices, restrooms and vending areas would be in a linear north-south trending configuration. The boat launch would be moved to the western shore of the site and would be situated adjacent to the new theaters for easy access. This option would provide for a greater range of choices for the visitor and opportunities to have an individual interpretive and educational experience. None of the alternatives analyzed in this environmental assessment would result in major environmental impacts or impairment to park resources or values. ES-1 PUBLIC COMMENT If you wish to comment on the environmental assessment, you may mail comments to the name and address below or post comments online at http://parkplanning.nps.gov/. Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment – including your personal identifying information – may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. This document will be on review for 30 days. Please address written comments to: USS Arizona Memorial Attn: Visitor Center Environmental Assessment 1 Arizona Memorial Place Honolulu, HI 96818 ES-2 Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS Purpose and Need...................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction............................................................................................................................... 1 Purpose of and Need for the Proposed Action.......................................................................... 1 Objectives.................................................................................................................................. 2 Purpose and Significance of the Park ....................................................................................... 2 Description of the Park ......................................................................................................... 2 Purpose of the Park ............................................................................................................... 3 Significance and Legislation................................................................................................. 3 Project Background................................................................................................................... 4 Related Projects and Plans .................................................................................................... 8 Scoping................................................................................................................................ 11 Issues................................................................................................................................... 12 Impact Topics...................................................................................................................... 12 Derivation of Impact Topics ........................................................................................... 12 Impact Topics Included in this Document ...................................................................... 13 Impact Topics Dismissed From Further Analysis .......................................................... 14 Alternatives Considered.......................................................................................................... 21 Development of the Action Alternatives ................................................................................ 21 Natural or Depletable Resource Requirements and Conservation Potential ...................... 21 Green Basis of Design......................................................................................................... 22 Common Approach to Project Implementation.................................................................. 22 Antiterrorism Criteria.......................................................................................................... 23 Alternative A, The No Action Alternative.............................................................................. 24 Alternative B, The Preferred Alternative ................................................................................ 25 Visitor Center Building Concept ........................................................................................ 25 Foundation System.............................................................................................................. 27 Superstructure ..................................................................................................................... 29 Tensile Structure ................................................................................................................. 29 Alternative C, Campus Style with Relocated Boat Launch.................................................... 30 Visitor Center Building Concept ........................................................................................ 30 -i- TABLE OF CONTENTS Foundation System.............................................................................................................. 31 Superstructure ..................................................................................................................... 31 Tensile Structure ................................................................................................................. 31 Resource Protection Measures of the Action Alternatives ..................................................... 33 Alternatives Considered but Dismissed .................................................................................. 35 The Environmentally Preferred Alternative............................................................................ 36 Comparison of Alternatives .................................................................................................... 38 Summary of Impacts ............................................................................................................... 38 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences ..................................................... 49 Introduction............................................................................................................................. 49 Methodology........................................................................................................................... 49 General Evaluation Methodology....................................................................................... 49