DOCSLIB.ORG

Green Line Extension Project EEA #13886

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Green Line Extension Project EEA #13886 Final Environmental Impact Report Green Line Extension Project EEA #13886 Volume 1 | Text and Figures June 2010 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (FEIR) FOR THE GREEN LINE EXTENSION PROJECT CAMBRIDGE, SOMERVILLE, MEDFORD, MASSACHUSETTS EEA FILE NO. 13886 Prepared Pursuant to the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act M.G.L. CH 30 Sec. 61 through 62H by the COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (MassDOT) Green Line Extension Project Final Environmental Impact Report Table of Contents Acronyms and Abbreviations Secretary’s Certificate on the DEIR Executive Summary 1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 1-1 1.2 Project Background ................................................................................................................ 1-2 1.3 The Proposed Project ............................................................................................................. 1-4 1.4 Public Involvement .................................................................................................................. 1-8 1.5 Requirements of Secretary’s Certificate ............................................................................... 1-13 2 Maintenance Facility Alternatives Analysis .................................................................. 2-1 2.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 2-1 2.2 Requirements of the Secretary’s Certificate ........................................................................... 2-2 2.3 Description of Alternatives ...................................................................................................... 2-3 2.4 Responses to DEIR Comments on the Storage and Maintenance Facility ......................... 2-15 2.5 Environmental Resource Analysis ........................................................................................ 2-19 2.6 Construction Impacts ............................................................................................................ 2-53 2.7 Summary .............................................................................................................................. 2-55 3 Air Quality ........................................................................................................................... 3-1 3.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 3-1 3.2 Background ............................................................................................................................. 3-1 3.3 DEIR Modeling Assumptions .................................................................................................. 3-2 3.4 Consistency with the SIP ........................................................................................................ 3-3 4 College Avenue Station ..................................................................................................... 4-1 4.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 4-1 4.2 Station Description .................................................................................................................. 4-2 4.3 Access and Circulation ........................................................................................................... 4-3 4.4 Construction Impacts .............................................................................................................. 4-6 4.5 Environmental Impacts ........................................................................................................... 4-7 4.6 Mitigation Measures ................................................................................................................ 4-8 5 Lechmere Station ................................................................................................................ 5-1 5.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 5-1 5.2 Revised Station Layout ........................................................................................................... 5-2 5.3 Access and Circulation ........................................................................................................... 5-6 5.4 Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures ................................................................. 5-17 Table of Contents i Green Line Extension Project Final Environmental Impact Report 5.5 Mitigation Measures .............................................................................................................. 5-21 6 Public Involvement Plan ................................................................................................... 6-1 6.1 Requirements of the Secretary’s Certificate ........................................................................... 6-1 6.2 Topics ................................................................................................................................ 6-4 6.3 Public Outreach Strategies ..................................................................................................... 6-9 6.4 Public Outreach During Construction ................................................................................... 6-16 7 Summary of Proposed Project Benefits and Impacts ................................................... 7-1 7.1 Overview ................................................................................................................................ 7-1 7.2 Land Use, Social,and Economic Resources ........................................................................... 7-6 7.3 Environmental Justice ............................................................................................................. 7-9 7.4 Traffic .............................................................................................................................. 7-10 7.5 Air Quality ............................................................................................................................. 7-11 7.6 Noise .............................................................................................................................. 7-13 7.7 Vibration .............................................................................................................................. 7-15 7.8 Visual .............................................................................................................................. 7-16 7.9 Historic Resources ................................................................................................................ 7-18 7.10 Hazardous Materials ............................................................................................................. 7-19 7.11 Indirect and Cumulative Impacts .......................................................................................... 7-20 7.12 Summary ............................................................................................................................. 7-22 8 Draft Section 61 Findings and Mitigation Commitments ........................................... 8-1 8.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 8-1 8.2 Project Benefits ....................................................................................................................... 8-2 8.3 Overview of Project Mitigation Measures ............................................................................... 8-3 8.4 Section 61 Findings .............................................................................................................. 8-18 9 Distribution List .................................................................................................................. 9-1 9.1 Federal Agencies and Elected Officials .................................................................................. 9-1 9.2 State and Regional Agencies and Elected Officials ................................................................ 9-2 9.3 Municipalities .......................................................................................................................... 9-5 9.4 Libraries .............................................................................................................................. 9-12 9.5 Advisory Group Members ..................................................................................................... 9-13 9.6 Additional DEIR Commenters and Other Interested Parties ................................................. 9-15 Figures Appendix A – Appendix D: .............................................................................................. on CD Appendix A: Responses to Comments on the DEIR/EA (VOLUMES 2 and 3) Appendix B: Environmental Analysis of Additional Maintenance Facilities Technical Memorandum Appendix C: Medford Hillside Neighborhood Included in College Avenue Walk Market Area Memorandum Appendix D: Lechmere Station Transportation Analysis Table of Contents ii Green Line Extension
Load more

Recommended publications
  • CHAPTER 2 Progress Since the Last PMT
    CHAPTER 2 Progress Since the Last PMT The 2003 PMT outlined the actions needed to bring the MBTA transit system into a state of good repair (SGR). It evaluated and prioritized a number of specific enhancement and expansion projects proposed to improve the system and better serve the regional mobility needs of Commonwealth residents. In the inter- vening years, the MBTA has funded and implemented many of the 2003 PMT priorities. The transit improvements highlighted in this chapter have been accomplished in spite of the unsus- tainable condition of the Authority’s present financial structure. A 2009 report issued by the MBTA Advisory Board1 effectively summarized the Authority’s financial dilemma: For the past several years the MBTA has only balanced its budgets by restructuring debt liquidat- ing cash reserves, selling land, and other one-time actions. Today, with credit markets frozen, cash reserves depleted and the real estate market at a stand still, the MBTA has used up these options. This recession has laid bare the fact that the MBTA is mired in a structural, on-going deficit that threatens its viability. In 2000 the MBTA was re-born with the passage of the Forward Funding legislation.This legislation dedicated 20% of all sales taxes collected state-wide to the MBTA. It also transferred over $3.3 billion in Commonwealth debt from the State’s books to the T’s books. In essence, the MBTA was born broke. Throughout the 1990’s the Massachusetts sales tax grew at an average of 6.5% per year. This decade the sales tax has barely averaged 1% annual growth.
    [Show full text]
  • 398 Neponset Ave, Dorchester, MA | (617) 282∙3200 | Membership Is Only $5, Elections in June
    Dorchester Reporter “The News and Values Around the Neighborhood” Volume 29 Issue 21 Thursday, May 24, 2012 50¢ It’s the day when we remember our fallen heroes Talk of long-ago battles and of the conflicts America is engaged in today will fill the air in cemeteries across the nation on Monday as America takes a time-out to remember that from the time when colonists first took up arms against the British crown in the late 18th century to this very week, hundreds of thousands of Americans have given their lives in service to the welfare of the United States. In Dorchester, Memorial Day means a time- honored salute to the neighborhood’s fallen soldiers that begins with a parade from the McKeon Post to Cedar Grove Cemetery, where hundreds are expected to gather for solemn observances begin- ning at 10 a.m. For a roundup of events planned locally for the Dr. Francis Murphy, longtime organizer of Dorchester’s Memorial Day observances, speaks at Cedar Grove Cemetery in 2009. Today’s editorial recognizes his contributions. Page 6. Photo by Bill Forry holiday, please see Page 3. Dot parents: School policy casts our children adrift By gintautaS duMciuS The children of Carl at the O’Bryant School Beth Nagy moved to “We really don’t see part of a system-wide nEwS Editor and Beth Nagy attend of Math and Science Dorchester in 1999, and each other anymore,” she restructuring in 2010. A City Hall hearing on the Thacher Montessori in Roxbury and the she and her husband said, noting exceptions Like the other parents Tuesday put the spotlight School in Milton.
    [Show full text]
  • A History of Oysters in Maine (1600S-1970S) Randy Lackovic University of Maine, [email protected]
    The University of Maine DigitalCommons@UMaine Darling Marine Center Historical Documents Darling Marine Center Historical Collections 3-2019 A History of Oysters in Maine (1600s-1970s) Randy Lackovic University of Maine, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/dmc_documents Part of the Aquaculture and Fisheries Commons, History of Science, Technology, and Medicine Commons, and the United States History Commons Repository Citation Lackovic, Randy, "A History of Oysters in Maine (1600s-1970s)" (2019). Darling Marine Center Historical Documents. 22. https://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/dmc_documents/22 This Newsletter is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@UMaine. It has been accepted for inclusion in Darling Marine Center Historical Documents by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@UMaine. For more information, please contact [email protected]. A History of Oysters in Maine (1600s-1970s) This is a history of oyster abundance in Maine, and the subsequent decline of oyster abundance. It is a history of oystering, oyster fisheries, and oyster commerce in Maine. It is a history of the transplanting of oysters to Maine, and experiments with oysters in Maine, and of oyster culture in Maine. This history takes place from the 1600s to the 1970s. 17th Century {}{}{}{} In early days, oysters were to be found in lavish abundance along all the Atlantic coast, though Ingersoll says it was at least a small number of oysters on the Gulf of Maine coast.86, 87 Champlain wrote that in 1604, "All the harbors, bays, and coasts from Chouacoet (Saco) are filled with every variety of fish.
    [Show full text]
  • The Boston Case: the Story of the Green Line Extension
    The Boston Case: The Story of the Green Line Extension Eric Goldwyn, Alon Levy, and Elif Ensari Background map sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community INTRODUCTION The Issue of Infrastructure The idea of a mass public works program building useful infrastructure is old, and broadly popular. There was a widespread conversation on this topic in the United States during the stimulus debate of the early Obama administration. Subsequently, there have been various proposals for further federal spending on infrastructure, which could take the form of state-level programs, the much- discussed and much-mocked Infrastructure Week initiatives during the Trump administration, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s call for a Green New Deal, and calls for massive federal spending on infrastructure in the 2020 election campaign including a $1.5-2 trillion figure put out by the Biden campaign. This is not purely an American debate, either. The Trudeau cabinet spent considerable money subsidizing infrastructure construction in Canada, including for example helping fund a subway under Broadway in Vancouver, which is the busiest bus corridor in North America today. Within Europe, there is considerable spending on infrastructure as part of the coronavirus recovery program even in countries that practiced fiscal austerity before the crisis, such as Germany. China likewise accelerated the pace of high-speed rail investment 2 during the global financial crisis of 2009 and its aftermath, and is currently looking for major investment of comparable scale due to the economic impact of corona. With such large amounts of money at stake—the $2 trillion figure is about 10% of the United States’ annual economic output—it is critical to ensure the money is spent productively.
    [Show full text]
  • Massachusetts State Research Guide Family History Sources in the Bay State
    Massachusetts State Research Guide Family History Sources in the Bay State Massachusetts History Their original destination was Virginia, but in 1620 the Mayflower arrived in the New World with 120 passengers. Mostly English Puritans and Separatists, more than half of those original settlers were dead before the first winter was over. A year later a second ship arrived with 37 new settlers for Plymouth Colony. A year and half after that another two ships arrived carrying 96 passengers. Several settlements were created over the course of the next few decades in this colony that occupied most of what is now southeastern Boston from Dorchester Heights, circa 1845 (image courtesy of Library of Congress) Massachusetts. The Massachusetts Bay Company, after a failed attempt in 1623, attempted settlement again in 1628 and were successful with about 20,000 people migrating there before 1630. They occupied the area around what is now Boston and Salem. Soon other settlements were created and thriving. Although the colonists initially had decent relations with the Native populations, cultural differences led to friction which eventually led to war – first the Pequot War (1636-1638) and then King Phillip’s War (1675-1678). At that point most of the natives in southern New England had been pacified, killed, or driven away. In those years following the landing of the Mayflower, the majority of colonists arriving in Plymouth and Massachusetts Bay Colony were from England. Unlike the settlement of Virginia, Maryland and New Amsterdam, the majority of New England settlers immigrated for religious reasons rather than economic reasons. Most of them were middle class, skilled craftsman and merchants, rather than nobility.
    [Show full text]
  • Green Line Extension Project EEA #13886
    Final Environmental Impact Report Green Line Extension Project EEA #13886 Executive Summary June 2010 Green Line Extension Project Final Environmental Impact Report Executive Summary Introduction The Green Line Extension Project is an initiative of the Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) and the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) to enhance transit services in order to improve mobility and regional access for residents in the communities of Cambridge, Somerville, and Medford, Massachusetts. The Project is required by the State Implementation Plan (SIP) and fulfills a longstanding commitment of the Central Artery/Tunnel project to increase public transit. The Massachusetts Air Pollution Control Regulations (310 CMR 7.36) require that MassDOT complete this Project by December 31, 2014. On October 15, 2009, MassDOT filed the Green Line Extension Project Draft Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Assessment (DEIR/EA) with the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act (MEPA) Office. The Secretary of the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs (EEA) issued a Certificate on the DEIR on January 15, 2010. The Secretary’s Certificate stated that the DEIR adequately and properly complied with MEPA and with its implementing regulations, and required preparation of a Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) of limited scope for the Proposed Project. MassDOT expects Project funding to come both from the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and from Commonwealth bonding. Because MassDOT is seeking funding through the FTA, the Project also requires review under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). At the request of the FTA, MassDOT is preparing a separate Final EA. The Green Line Extension Project is proposed to be built in two phases, with an initial operating segment (the “Proposed Project”) being constructed to College Avenue in Medford and a spur to Union Square in Somerville, as described and evaluated in the DEIR/EA as Alternative 1 (see FEIR Figure ES-1).
    [Show full text]
  • Spring Meeting: Meeting Program April 30, 1994 Mount Holyoke College
    Spring Meeting: Meeting Program April 30, 1994 Mount Holyoke College 8:30- 9:30: Registration and Coffee 9:30 -11:15: Concurrent Morning Sessions 1. FREEDOM OF INFORMATION AND PRIVACY: Federal, State, and Local Speakers: Mary Ronan, National Archives and Records Administration, Washington, D.C.; Mitchell Pearlman, Freedom of Information Commission, Hartford, CT; Motile Keller, Municipal Archives, Bridgeport, Connecticut Chair: James K. Owens, National Archives, New England Region The right to know us the right to privacy. The right et the American people to know what its government is doing is essential to the maintenance of our democracy. At the same time, our citizens have the right to expect the government to maintain the privacy of personal information it has accumulated about Them. Are these concepts contradictory, and - if so - can they be reconciled? The Federal, as well as some state and local governments have passed legislation and developed policies governing these concepts. Representatives from the National Archives, the Slate of Connecticut and the city of Bridgeport, CT, will discuss how their governments deal with these issues. 2. CRIMES AGAINST THE SYSTEMS: Legal and Ethical issues of Electronic Records Speakers: Christopher Beam, Edmund S. Muskie Archives; James Estrada, University of Connecticut; Donald Ghostlaw, Caruso, Murry, & Ghostlaw; Ronald Patkus, Boston College Chair: Paul Lasewicz, Aetna Life and Casualty The legal and ethical environment- surrounding the electronic archives is to a large degree a blank slate, evolving daily in sometimes surprising directions. This panel will define some of those directions as they exist today, and as they may come to be. One speaker, formerly with the National Archives, will discuss the controversy surrounding the disposition of the National Security Council electronic records during the Bush, Administration.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020–2024 CAPITAL INVESTMENT PLAN UPDATE Text-Only Version
    2020–2024 CAPITAL INVESTMENT PLAN UPDATE Text-Only Version This page intentionally left blank 2020–2024 CAPITAL INVESTMENT PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents Table of Contents ......................................................................................................................... i Letter from Secretary Pollack ...................................................................................................... ii Non-Discrimination Protections .................................................................................................. iv Translation Availability ............................................................................................................. v Glossary of Terms ..................................................................................................................... vii Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1 What’s New ................................................................................................................................ 6 Program Changes .................................................................................................................. 7 Funding .....................................................................................................................................12 State Funding ........................................................................................................................12 Federal
    [Show full text]
  • Changes to Transit Service in the MBTA District 1964-Present
    Changes to Transit Service in the MBTA district 1964-2021 By Jonathan Belcher with thanks to Richard Barber and Thomas J. Humphrey Compilation of this data would not have been possible without the information and input provided by Mr. Barber and Mr. Humphrey. Sources of data used in compiling this information include public timetables, maps, newspaper articles, MBTA press releases, Department of Public Utilities records, and MBTA records. Thanks also to Tadd Anderson, Charles Bahne, Alan Castaline, George Chiasson, Bradley Clarke, Robert Hussey, Scott Moore, Edward Ramsdell, George Sanborn, David Sindel, James Teed, and George Zeiba for additional comments and information. Thomas J. Humphrey’s original 1974 research on the origin and development of the MBTA bus network is now available here and has been updated through August 2020: http://www.transithistory.org/roster/MBTABUSDEV.pdf August 29, 2021 Version Discussion of changes is broken down into seven sections: 1) MBTA bus routes inherited from the MTA 2) MBTA bus routes inherited from the Eastern Mass. St. Ry. Co. Norwood Area Quincy Area Lynn Area Melrose Area Lowell Area Lawrence Area Brockton Area 3) MBTA bus routes inherited from the Middlesex and Boston St. Ry. Co 4) MBTA bus routes inherited from Service Bus Lines and Brush Hill Transportation 5) MBTA bus routes initiated by the MBTA 1964-present ROLLSIGN 3 5b) Silver Line bus rapid transit service 6) Private carrier transit and commuter bus routes within or to the MBTA district 7) The Suburban Transportation (mini-bus) Program 8) Rail routes 4 ROLLSIGN Changes in MBTA Bus Routes 1964-present Section 1) MBTA bus routes inherited from the MTA The Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) succeeded the Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA) on August 3, 1964.
    [Show full text]
  • Maximizing the Benefits of Mass Transit Services
    Maximizing the Benefits of Mass Transit Stations: Amenities, Services, and the Improvement of Urban Space within Stations by Carlos Javier Montafiez B.A. Political Science Yale University, 1997 SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF URBAN STUDIES AND PLANNING IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER IN CITY PLANNING AT THE MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY JUNE 2004 Q Carlos Javier Montafiez. All rights reserved. The author hereby grants to MIT permission to reproduce and to distribute publicly paper and electronic copies of this thesis document in whole or in part. Signature of Author: / 'N Dep tment of Urban Studies and Plav ning Jvtay/, 2004 Certified by: J. Mai Schuster, PhD Pfessor of U ban Cultural Policy '09 Thesis Supervisor Accepted by: / Dennis Frenthmfan, MArchAS, MCP Professor of the Practice of Urban Design Chair, Master in City Planning Committee MASSACH USEUSq INSTIUTE OF TECHNOLOGY JUN 21 2004 ROTCH LIBRARIES Maximizing the Benefits of Mass Transit Stations: Amenities, Services, and the Improvement of Urban Space within Stations by Carlos Javier Montafiez B.A. Political Science Yale University, 1997 Submitted to the Department of Urban Studies and Planning on May 20, 2004 in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the degree of Master in City Planning ABSTRACT Little attention has been paid to the quality of the spaces within rapid mass transit stations in the United States, and their importance as places in and of themselves. For many city dwellers who rely on rapid transit service as their primary mode of travel, descending and ascending into and from transit stations is an integral part of daily life and their urban experience.
    [Show full text]
  • Green Line Extension Project EEA #13886
    Draft Environmental Impact Report/ Environmental Assessment and Section 4(f) Statement Green Line Extension Project EEA #13886 Volume 1 | Text October 2009 Executive Office of Transportation and Public Works U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Transit Administration DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT/ ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (DEIR/EA) AND DRAFT SECTION 4(F) EVALUATION FOR THE GREEN LINE EXTENSION PROJECT CAMBRIDGE, SOMERVILLE, MEDFORD, MASSACHUSETTS STATE PROJECT NO. 13886 Prepared Pursuant to the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 23, Part 771, Section 119 (23 CFR 771.119); 49 U.S.C. Section 303 [formerly Department of Transportation Act of 1966, Section 4(f)] and the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act M.G.L. CH 30 Sec. 61 through 62H by the FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION and the COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC WORKS (EOT) Draft Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Green Line Extension Project Assessment and Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation Table of Contents Acronyms and Abbreviations Secretary’s Certificate on the EENF Executive Summary 1 Introduction and Background .......................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 1-1 1.2 Project Summary .................................................................................................................... 1-2 1.3
    [Show full text]
  • Green Line Extension Update
    Green Line Extension Project Update Green Line Extension Update Fiscal and Management Control Board John Dalton, Program Manager April 13, 2020 1 Green Line Extension Project Update Agenda • GLX Project Update • GLT Lechmere Viaduct Rehabilitation (B22CN02) & Coordination with GLX • Lechmere Station Closure and Bus Diversion 2 Green Line Extension Project Update Design Build Entity Contract Cash Flow & Spending Updated Quarterly. Revised as of December 31, 2019. Actuals = Paid only (does not include retainage or change orders) 3 Green Line Extension Project Update Lechmere Viaduct and Station Area (existing and future) Gilman Square 4 Green Line Extension Project Update Red Bridge Viaduct Area (looking north) 5 Green Line Extension Project Update Future East Somerville Station 6 Green Line Extension Project Update Broadway Bridge Steel Erection 7 Green Line Extension Project Update Broadway Bridge Steel Erection 8 Green Line Extension Project Update Future Union Square Station 9 Green Line Extension Project Update GLX Site Overview Project Coordination Area 10 Green Line Extension Project Update Lechmere Station Demolition & New Viaduct Section Demolition of Existing Historic Concrete Steel Viaduct – Spring Viaduct Rehabilitation 2020 by GLT 11 Green Line Extension Project Update Lechmere Project Limits GLX – Project Limits GLT – Lechmere Viaduct Rehabilitation Project Green Line Extension (GLX) Green Line Transformation (GLT) 12 Green Line Extension Project Update GLT Lechmere Viaduct Rehabilitation Project Science Park/West End Station
    [Show full text]