Construction Impacts. Reducing Noise and Earth Moving Impacts - Construction activities will temporarily affect the surrounding landscape and vegetation. Development of the rail line may cause temporary disturbance and potential dispersal of Sage-grouse due to noise, human presence, and vibration. The Project is dedicated to reducing the impacts to Sage-grouse mortality or injury as much as possible. While the vegetation can be restored after the conclusion of the construction, sagebrush takes years to re-establish itself, prolonging these temporary impacts. The Project accordingly will take measures to reduce temporary construction-related noise and physical encounters with grouse, including:
Construction Impacts. H-10/ Item 1 “North of the Site: In Phase I, construction of the two Pilot Plants* on the NW corner of the site would generate noise exceeding the Berkeley Community Noise Standards which would be heard in offices along Xxxxxx Way between the Southern Pacific tracks and Fifth St.” 5G-6 H-11/Item 2 “West of the Site—Demolition: Demolition of buildings 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 12, 14, and 16 would exceed background noise heard in picnic areas of Aquatic Park by 3 dBA or more for one to two months.” 5G-7 H-11/Item 3 “West of the Site—Construction: Construction of the Pilot Plant buildings on the NW corner and the production building on the SW corner of the site would generate noise which would be heard in Aquatic Park for two to three months for each block, with peak construction noise exceeding background noise levels by 3 dBA or more.” 5G-7-8 Same as above. Same as above. Same as above. PILOT PLANT H-11/Item 1 “North of the Site: In Phase I, construction of the Pilot Plant on the NW corner of the site would generate noise exceeding the Berkeley Community Noise Standards which would be heard in offices along Xxxxxx Way between the Southern Pacific tracks and Fifth St.” 5G-7 H-11/Item 2 “West of the Site—Construction: Construction of the Pilot Plant on the NW corner of the site would generate noise heard along the Aquatic Park for two to three months, with peak construction noise exceeding background noise levels by 3 dBA or more.” 5G-7-8 Same as above. Same as above.
Construction Impacts. The Project will be under construction over a ten to fifteen year period or longer; thus, construction impacts, including environmental effects and economic and social effects (such as disruption of business, noise, dust) will be an ongoing topic to be addressed.
Construction Impacts. As described in Section 2.4, Tinian Alternatives, Tinian Alternative 1 RTA development and construction would include construction and improvements for support facilities and infrastructure (e.g., base camp, airport, port, Munitions Storage Area, roadways, utilities) and training facilities (e.g., Range Complexes A, B, C, D, and Military Lease Area-wide training assets). These activities would result in ground disturbance (e.g., vegetation clearing, grubbing, grading, excavation, and filling), and potentially impact historic properties and resources of cultural importance. In total, 1,902 acres (771 hectares) of ground disturbance would occur under Tinian Alternative 1 (see Table 2.4-8). Specific vegetation clearance areas within Range Complexes A, B, C, and D; the Landing Zone within Range Complex D; and the Military Lease Area-wide training assets are discussed in Section 4.2, Geology and Soils and Appendix F, Geology and Soils Technical Memo. Table 4.11-1 summarizes the historic properties impacted by construction activities associated with Tinian Alternative 1. Specific impacts to historic properties and resources of cultural importance are described in more detail by RTA or construction project and in Appendix N, Cultural Resources Technical Memo. Table 4.11-1. Tinian Alternative 1: Summary of Significant Direct Impacts on Historic Properties from Construction
Construction Impacts. As described in Section 2.4.3, Tinian Alternative 2 construction activities would occur within the Military Lease Area, immediately north of Tinian International Airport runways, and at the Port of Tinian. Tinian Alternative 2 construction activities would occur within the same areas as Tinian Alternative 1, but would accommodate an additional Battle Area Complex (Range Complex C) and five additional Convoy Course Engagement Areas. This development and construction would result in 2,025 acres (820 hectares) (see Table 2.4-8) of ground disturbance (e.g., vegetation clearing, grubbing, grading, excavation, and filling), and impact historic properties and resources of cultural importance. Table 4.11-3 summarizes the 182 historic properties that would be impacted by construction-related activities for Tinian Alternative 2, which is slightly more than the 172 impacted under Tinian Alternative 1. Specific impacts to historic properties and resources of cultural importance are described in more detail by RTA or construction project below and in Appendix N, Cultural Resources Technical Memo. Table 4.11-3. Tinian Alternative 2 Summary of Significant Direct Impacts on Historic Properties from Construction
Construction Impacts. As described in Section 2.4.4, Tinian Alternative 3 RTA development and construction would result in 2,003 acres (811 hectares) (see Table 2.4-8) of ground disturbance (e.g., vegetation clearing, grubbing, grading, excavation, and filling), and impact historic properties and resources of cultural importance. Tinian Alternative 3 construction activities would occur within the same areas as Tinian Alternative 1, but would accommodate an additional Battle Area Complex (Range Complex C) and five additional Convoy Course Engagement Areas. Only a Drop Zone would be established in Range Complex D. Table 4.11-5 summarizes the 179 historic properties that would be directly impacted by construction-related activities for Tinian Alternative 3; 7 more than under Tinian Alternative 1. Specific impacts to historic properties and resources of cultural importance are described in more detail by RTA or construction project below and in Appendix N, Cultural Resources Technical Memo. Table 4.11-5. Tinian Alternative 3 Summary of Significant Direct Impacts on Historic Properties from Construction
Construction Impacts. As described in Section 2.5, Pagan Alternatives, two High Hazard Impact Areas would be established in the North Range Complex under Pagan Alternative 1. The expeditionary airfield, munitions storage area, and base camp would be developed north of the isthmus. This development and construction would result in 764 acres (310 hectares) (see Table 2.5-6) of ground disturbance (primarily due to vegetation clearance), and potentially impact historic properties and resources of cultural importance. Table 4.11-9 summarizes the historic properties impacted by construction-related activities for Pagan Alternative 1. Specific impacts to historic properties and resources of cultural importance are described in more detail below and in Appendix N, Cultural Resources Technical Memo. Table 4.11-9. Pagan Alternative 1 Summary of Significant Direct Impacts on Historic Properties from Construction Complex Range Number of Historic Properties North Range Complex North High Hazard Impact Area 2 Landing Zones 2 Field Artillery Direct and Indirect Fire Ranges/Mortar Firing Positions 4 Amphibious Training Areas 0 Live-Fire Maneuver Area 0 Isthmus High Hazard Impact Area 2* Military Training Trails 7 Airfield/Base Camp/Bivouac Area/Munitions Storage Area 10 South Range Complex Non-Live-Fire Maneuver Area 0 Total 27 Note: *Although this area has not been surveyed, former residents indicate that two potential historic properties are located in the area of potential effects.
Construction Impacts. Under Pagan Alternative 2, only one, smaller northern High Hazard Impact Area would be established in North Range Complex. This would potentially impact historic properties and resources of cultural importance. Ground disturbance primarily associated with vegetation removal would total 696 acres (283 hectares), or 38 fewer acres (28 hectares) when compared to Pagan Alternative 1 (see Table 2.5-6). Table 4.11-11 summarizes the historic properties impacted by construction-related activities for Pagan Alternative 2. Specific significant impacts to historic properties and resources of cultural importance would be the same as found under Pagan Alternative 1, with the exception being that the isthmus High Hazard Impact Area would not be established. A more detailed description of potential impacts follows the table and is included in Appendix N, Cultural Resources Technical Memo. Table 4.11-11. Pagan Alternative 2: Summary of Significant Direct Impacts on Historic Properties from Construction Complex Range Number of Historic Properties North Range Complex North High Hazard Impact Area 2 Landing Zones 2 Field Artillery Direct and Indirect Fire Ranges/Mortar Firing Positions 4 Amphibious Training Areas 0 Live-Fire Maneuver Area 0 Military Training Trails 7 Airfield/ Base Camp/Bivouac Area/Munitions Storage Area 10 South Range Complex Non-Live-Fire Maneuver Area NA Total 25 Legend: NA = not applicable.
Construction Impacts. 37 6.1 Tunnel Alternative (Preferred Alternative) 37 6.2 Elevated Structure Alternative 39 Chapter 7 Secondary and Cumulative Impacts 41 Chapter 8 Operational Mitigation. 43 Chapter 9 Construction Mitigation 45 Chapter 10 References 47 LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit 1-1. Tunnel and Elevated Structure Alternatives with Options 2 Exhibit 1-2. Options Evaluated with the Tunnel Alignments 3 Exhibit 4-1. Park, Recreation, and Public Access Facilities – AWV Corridor 18 Exhibit 4-2. Park, Recreation, and Public Access Facilities – South and Central 19 Exhibit 4-3. Park, Recreation, and Public Access Facilities – North and Central 21 ACRONYMS AWV BNSF City EIS Alaskan Way Viaduct Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway Company City of Seattle Environmental Impact Statement I‐90 Interstate 90 SIG Seattle International Gateway SODO South of Downtown SR State Route WSDOT Washington State Department of Transportation
Construction Impacts. The discussion of construction impacts is based on conceptual plans for construction staging and construction duration. Generally, the construction times referenced are at the 90‐percent confidence level. The exact construction methods cannot be ensured because contractors have a degree of latitude in construction methods and scheduling within the contract specifications and the conditions of approval of the project. For both alternatives, the following construction impact now differs from what appeared in the Draft EIS: Pier 48, Periscope Viewpoint and Alaska Square: The AWV Project includes building a temporary over‐water bridge between Pier 48 and Xxxxxx Dock (this area is between X. Xxxxxxxxxx Street and Yesler Way). The Xxxxxx Dock Ferry Terminal access bridge would be needed for either alternative during construction to maintain access and egress for ferry operations. Once AWV construction is completed, this over‐water bridge would be removed.
