FHWA-MA-EIS-78-03-F U.S. Route 44 Carver Kingston Plymouth Plympton Plymouth County, Massachusetts GOVERNMENT DOCUMENTS COLLECTION ■'. JUL 21 1987 University of Massachusetts Uepository Copy FINAL Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation VOLUME 1 U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration Massachusetts Department of Public Works JUNE 1986 FHWA-MA-EIS-78-03-F FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION REGION I U. S. ROUTE 44 (from State Route 58 in Carver to State Route 3 in Plymouth) In Carver, Kingston, Plymouth and Plympton Plymouth County, Massachusetts i FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT and LF SECTION 4 '(f) EVALUATION Submitted pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 4332 (2) (C) and 49 U.S.C. 303, and in accordance with the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act (MEPA) EOEA #01027. This action complies with Executive Order 11990. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION and COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS COOPERATING AGENCIES: FEDERAL: Department of the Interior; Environmental Protection Agency; Army Corps of Engineers; Department of Commerce; Department of Agriculture; Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. STATE: Executive Office of Environmental Affairs; Department of Environmental Management; Department of Environmental Quality Engineering; Department of Food and Agriculture; Massachusetts Historical Commission. ABSTRACT: The Massachusetts Department of Public Works proposes to relocate U.S. Route 44 from State Route 58 in Carver to State Route 3 in Plymouth, through the Towns of Carver, Kingston, Plymouth and Plympton, all in Plymouth County, a distance of 7.48 miles. It is proposed to construct two lanes in each direction as well as four interchanges. The project also includes improvement of Route 3 between the existing Cherry Street and Samoset Street interchanges, and improvement of the Samoset Street interchange. The following persons may be contacted for additional information concerning this document: Mr. Edwin P. Holahan, Assistant Division Administrator, Federal Highway Administration, Transportation Systems Center, 10th Floor, 55 Broadway, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02142, tel. no. 617-494-2253; and Mr. Frank Bracaglia, Assistant Direct of Systems Planning and Development, Massachusetts Department of Public Works, Transportation Building, 10 Park Plaza, Boston, Massachusetts 02116, tel. no. 617-973-7|4£4 r , fftC i 1935 Comments on this document are due by and should be sent to Mr. James A. Walsh, Division Administrator, Federal Highway Administration, (above address) and Mr. Robert J. McDonagh, Chief Engineer, Massachusetts Department of Public Works (above address). date /of Approval federal highway administration ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This Final Environmental Impact Statement was prepared under the direction and with the active involvement of the MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS and the U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION by THE ARCHITECTS COLLABORATIVE, INC. The following firms participated in this study, contributing to specialized fields: H.W. LOCHNER INC. Engineering and air quality L. G. COPLEY ASSOCIATES Acoustics CORTELL ASSOCIATES Water quality INSTITUTE FOR Archaeology and history CONSERVATION ARCHAEOLOGY, HARVARD UNIVERSITY Public officials, as well as residents of the four towns and, representatives of organizations, were generous with their time and knowledge. Their cooperation and assistance are gratefully appreciated. SUMMARY A. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION The proposed FHWA action, and the subject of this Final Environmental Impact Statement, is the relocation of U.S. Route 44 from State Route 58 in Carver, Massachusetts to State Route 3 in Plymouth, Massachusetts, a distance of 7.48 miles, shown on MAP 2-C. Both towns, and the entire relocation are in Plymouth County. Two lanes in each direction are proposed, with four interchanges: at Route 58, Route 3 (Cherry Street), Spring Street in Carver, and in the Plymouth Industrial Park. Improvement of the existing interchange at Routes 3 and 44 (Samoset Street) in Plymouth is also a part of this project, as well as improvement of Route 3 between the existing interchanges at Cherry Street and Samoset Street. B. OTHER SIGNIFICANT GOVERNMENTAL ACTIONS IN THE AREA There are no other known significant actions or proposed actions by federal governmental agencies in the project area. C. MAJOR ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Eight alternatives were considered: no-build; improvements to the existing road; a partial relocation with a partial improvement of the existing road; and 5 complete relocations, of which the one designated as 4-M-5 is the recommended alternative. D. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS * The relocation of 28 properties, of which 22 are residential, 5 commercial and 1 residential/commercial. Fifteen of the 28 are In Plymouth, of which 10 homes and three businesses are affected by the improvement of the Routes 3/44 Interchange at Samoset Street. However, further study of this interchange in the design period may result in a reduction of the number of properties affected. Two structures, on Richards Road in the Plymouth Industrial Park, constructed in 1984, are located within the right of way for the connector road ramp in the S.E. quadrant of the interchange within the Park. One is a microwave tower owned by Blue Cross /Blue Shield and the other is an office/warehouse building occupied by Ceeco Corporation. Further studies will be conducted during the design phase to fully assess the impact to these two structures and any mitigation measures that could be taken to save them. Twelve of the 28 total are in Carver and one in Plympton. Eight of those 12 and the one in Plympton are affected by the relocation of Spring Street as part of the interchange at that Street. The remaining four in Carver are affected by the right of way for the highway itself. * The removal of 28.67 acres of wetlands of which 5.16 acres are cranberry bogs. The 23.51 acres of wetlands other than cranberry bogs will be replaced by 29.6 acres of created wetlands as part of the project. Replacement of the cranberry bogs will be at the present owners' option. * The acquisition of 26.05 acres of the Kingston State Forest. The Mass. Department of Environmental Management (DEM) which manages the Fcrest has made an arrangement with the Mass. Department of Public Works whereby the latter will purchase and transfer other land to DEM to offset its losses in the State Forest. * Acquisition of 9.37 acres of Camp Nekon, owned by the Town of Kingston. The DPW is committed to the functional replacement of those 9.37 acres. * The right of way of 4-M-5 crosses the Annasnappet Archaeological District. However, there is a Memorandum of Agreement which states that the Massachusetts State Historic Preservation Officer, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, the FHWA and the MDPW have agreed that avoidance of the District and preservation in place are not feasible alternatives, and that mitigation in the form of data recovery will take place in accordance with stipulations set forth in the Memorandum. * Relocation of Route 44 will result in a major new source of noise in what is now a very quiet environment. Three locations will have noise levels that approach or exceed the FHWA noise abatement criteria of 70 dBA, and one will experience an increase of more than 15 dBA over the existing noise level. Two of the four are at the existing Route 3/44 interchange at Samoset Street, where a noise barrier is proposed. One is at the new interchange at Cherry Street, where a noise barrier is also proposed. Noise barriers are also proposed along relocated Route 44 at Brook Street and relocated Pleasant Street. * The Plymouth Industrial Park will be serviced directly by an interchange which could readily serve an industrial zone in Kingston, as well. Similarly, the Spring Street interchange could serve a large industrially zoned area in Plympton. Other types of development are not likely to be encouraged, due to the large tracts of publicly and institutionally owned land, and the cranberry bogs and wetlands through which a relocated Route 44 will pass. The secondary impacts due to the improved access to the industrial parks will be minimal. * Relocated Route 44 and the Spring Street interchange will divert traffic now using local neighborhood streets in Plympton and Carver to reach a plant with large employment situated in Plympton on Spring Street very close to the proposed interchange. * A closed drainage system will be provided throughout the length of relocated Route 44, including sedimentation basins, thereby shielding the Plymouth Aquifer, which underlies almost the entire project area. * It will facilitate the east-west movement of traffic for the considerable tourist attractions in the area, thereby alleviating conditions on local roads and improving the economic development of the region. * It will separate through and local traffic, thereby lowering the accident rate and relieving congestion on existing Route 44. -2- * The improvement of existing Route 3 between the Cherry Street and Samoset Street interchanges, the improvement of the latter interchange, and the rebuilding of the Cherry Street interchange as part of the relocation of Route 44, will alleviate traffic congestion in that area. E. AREAS OF CONTROVERSY Issues and areas of controversy identified during the course of the study, including those raised by agencies and the public, are listed below: The filling of wetlands. The taking of cranberry bogs. The taking of homes. Impact on Plymouth Aquifer. Chloride impacts on public and private wells. Width of right of way of median. Impact on Section 4 (f) properties. Impact on rare and endangered species: White-Bracted Boneset . F. SIGNIFICANT UNRESOLVED ISSUES The following issues are unresolved until the project enters subsequent phases of project development: * A further geometric design study for the existing Route 3/Route 44 interchange at Samoset Street. * Selection of site for replacement of existing park and ride facility in Plymouth. * Specific replacement lands for the Kingston State Forest and Camp Nekon . * Design of created wetlands. * A further geometric design study, for the Connector Road ramp in the S.E. quadrant of the interchange in the Plymouth Industrial Park will be undertaken to try to avoid two structures - BC/BS microwave tower and SEECO Building - located with the right of way. G. OTHER FEDERAL ACTIONS REQUIRED FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION * Section 404 Permit (Bridge excavation disposal), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers . * Section 401 Permit, Water Quality Certification (U.S. Clean Water Act) administered by Massachusetts Department of Environmental Quality Engineering, Division of Water Pollution Control. * * * -3- TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE SECTION 1; PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION 1 1. REVIEW OF NEED AND PROJECT ACTION TO DATE 1 2. PROJECT OBJECTIVES 3 3. EXISTING AND PROPOSED TRAFFIC 3 EXISTING TRAFFIC SERVICE CHARACTERISTICS 3 TRAFFIC VOLUME PROJECTIONS AND ANALYSIS 4 LEVEL OF SERVICE 4 SAFETY 6 SECTION 2: ALTERNATIVES INCLUDING PROPOSED ACTION 15 1. IDENTIFICATION OF ALTERNATIVES 15 2. CORRIDOR DETERMINANTS 15 3. DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES 17 ALTERNATIVE 1: NO BUILD 17 DESCRIPTION 17 LIKELY IMPACTS 18 ALTERNATIVE 2: UPGRADE EXISTING ROUTE 19 DESCRIPTION 19 LIKELY IMPACTS 20 ALTERNATIVE 3: PARTIAL BUILD: CORRIDORS 3-E AND 3-W 21 DESCRIPTION 21 LIKELY IMPACTS 22 ALTERNATIVE 4: CORRIDOR 4-L 24 DESCRIPTION 24 LIKELY IMPACTS 25 ALTERNATIVE 5: CORRIDOR 4-M 28 DESCRIPTION 28 LIKELY IMPACTS 28 ALTERNATIVE 6: CORRIDOR 4-M-l 31 DESCRIPTION 31 LIKELY IMPACTS 32 ALTERNATIVE 7: CORRIDOR 4-N 33 DESCRIPTION 33 LIKELY IMPACTS 34 ALTERNATIVE 8: CORRIDOR 4-M- 5 36 DESCRIPTION 36 SECTION 3: THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 45 1. SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC 45 GOVERNMENT 45 POPULATION AND ECONOMIC 45 2. ARCHAEOLOGY AND HISTORY 52 3. NATURAL FEATURES 53 PROJECT STUDY AREA 53 GEOLOGY, TOPOGRAPHY, AND SOILS 53 VEGETATION AND WILDLIFE 53 GROUNDWATER 54 WATER QUALITY 57 TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED) PAGE FISHERIES 57 WETLANDS 57 ENDANGERED AND THREATENED SPECIES 64 WETLANDS EVALUATION 65 FLOOD PLAINS 66 4. NOISE 71 GENERAL INFORMATION 71 EXISTING NOISE CLIMATE 71 SECTION 4: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES 77 1. NATURAL FEATURES 77 SOILS 77 TOPOGRAPHY 78 GROUNDWATER 78 SURFACE WATER AND QUALITY 79 PHYSICAL CONDITIONS 79 CONSTRUCTION 80 OPERATION 80 FISHERIES IMPACTS 87 WETLAND PROTECTION POLICIES 87 AVOIDANCE OF WETLANDS 89 WETLANDS IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES 90 COMPARISON OF VIADUCT AND FILL 99 WETLAND FINDING 100 FLOODPLAINS 100 2. NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS 102 TRAFFIC NOISE CALCULATIONS 102 METHOD OF ASSESSMENT OF LIKELY NOISE IMPACT 102 PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE 4-M-5 IMPACT EVALUATION 103 MITIGATING MEASURES FOR TRAFFIC NOISE 104 NOISE IMPACT AREA 1 106 PROPOSED MITIGATING MEASURE 106 NOISE IMPACT AREA 6 107 PROPOSED MITIGATING MEASURE 107 NOISE IMPACT AREAS 17 AND 18 108 PROPOSED MITIGATING MEASURE 108 NOISE IMPACT AREA 19 109 PROPOSED MITIGATING MEASURE 109 CONSTRUCTION NOISE MITIGATION 109 3. AIR QUALITY 110 INTRODUCTION 110 CRITERIA 111 MICROSCALE ANALYSIS AND IMPACTS 112 MESOSCALE ANALYSIS AND IMPACTS 115 CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS 116 TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED) PAGE 4. RELOCATION 117 INVENTORY OF STRUCTURES 117 DESCRIPTION OF AFFECTED HOUSEHOLDS AND BUSINESSES 117 NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS 118 HOUSING MARKET CHARACTERISTICS 118 SUMMARY 119 5. VISUAL QUALITY 130 6. HISTORIC AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES 131 7. FARMLANDS 142 8. LAND USE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 144 9. BIKEWAYS 145 10. ENERGY 146 11. OTHER IMPACTS 147 SECTION 5; SECTION 4 (f) EVALUATION 215 1. INTRODUCTION 215 2. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT 215 3. DESCRIPTION OF 4 (f) LAND 215 KINGSTON STATE FOREST 215 CAMP NEKON 216 4. EFFECT OF PROJECT ON SECTION 4 (f) LAND 216 KINGSTON STATE FOREST 216 CAMP NEKON 218 5. MEASURES TO MINIMIZE HARM 218 KINGSTON STATE FOREST 218 CAMP NEKON 219 6. COORDINATION 219 7. CONCLUSION 220 SECTION 6: LIST OF PREPARERS 247 SECTION 7; AGENCIES AND ORGANIZATION TO WHOM COPIES 250 OF THE FINAL EIS WILL BE SENT SECTION 8: COMMENTS AND COORDINATION 252 SECTION 9; TECHNICAL APPENDIX 299 1. WETLANDS 299 U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE WETLAND 299 CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM WETLAND REFERENCES 307 2. NOISE 309 DETAILS OF NOISE MONITORING PROCEDURES 309 DETAILS OF TRAFFIC NOISE MODEL (SNAP 1.0) 309 TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENTS USED FOR NOISE PREDICTIONS 310 DETAILS OF NOISE IMPACT DETERMINATION 311 LIST OF REFERENCES 313 3. AIR QUALITY 314 MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS ESTIMATES 314 MESO SCALE ANALYSIS 317 MICROSCALE ANALYSIS 318 LIST OF FIGURES PAGE 1-1-1 REGIONAL HIGHWAYS 2 1-3-1 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS 7 1-3-2 ACCIDENT INVOLVEMENT RATE 8 1-3-3 1977 TRAFFIC VOLUMES—EXISTING ROADWAY SYSTEM 9 1-3-4 YEAR 2000 TRAFFIC VOLUMES— RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE 11 AND NO-BUILD ALTERNATIVE 1-3-5 LEVEL OF SERVICE CONCEPT 13 3-1-1 POPULATION GROWTH 47 3-1-2 COMPONENTS OF POPULATION CHANGE 47 3-1-3 POPULATION PROJECTIONS 48 3-1-4 RACIAL COMPOSITION 48 3-1-5 AGE COMPOSITION 1960-1980 49 3-1-6 EMPLOYMENT IN PLYMOUTH 1970-1980 50 3-1-7 COMPARATIVE ANNUAL WAGES 1982 50 3-1-8 COMPARATIVE EMPLOYMENT 1976-1982 51 3-3-1 GROUNDWATER QUALITY 56 3-3-2 EXISTING AND HISTORICAL WATER QUALITY 58 3-3-3 WETLAND ACREAGES: PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE 4-M-5 60 3-3-4 LETTER DATED 10/28/81 FROM DEPARTMENT OF 67 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT TO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 3-3-5 LETTER DATED 8/4/83 FROM MASS. NATURAL 69 HERITAGE PROGRAM TO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 3-3-6 WETLAND EVALUATION SUMMARY 70 3-4-1 TYPICAL SOUND LEVELS IN dBA AND THEIR SUBJECTIVE 72 LOUDNESS 3-4-2 FHWA NOISE ABATEMENT CRITERIA/LAND USE RELATIONSHIPS 73 3- 4-3 EXISTING NOISE LEVELS: PEAK HOUR L10 75 4- 1-1 ROADWAY DRAINAGE AREAS 82 4-1-2 SALT USE IN WHITMAN SECTION, MA DPW DISTRICT 7 82 4-1-3 REMOVAL EFFICIENCIES FOR PRIMARY SEDIMENTATION 83 4-1-4 EXISTING AND RESULTING WINTER CONCENTRATIONS 84 4-1-5 EXISTING AND RESULTING NON-WINTER CONCENTRATIONS 85 4-1-6 EXISTING AND RESULTING CONCENTRATIONS — ONE YEAR 85 THIRTY-MINUTE STORM IN 7010 FLOW OVER ONE DAY 4-1-7 SUMMARY OF WETLAND IMPACTS 91 4-1-8 SUMMARY OF WETLAND IMPACTS 92 4-1-9 POST-CONSTRUCTION WETLAND EVALUATION SUMMARY 93 4-2-1 CRITERIA FOR TRAFFIC NOISE IMPACT 103 4-2-2 EXISTING AND FUTURE NOISE LEVELS L10 104 LIST OF FIGURES (continued) PAGE 4-3-1 SENSITIVE RECEPTORS FOR MICROSOME ANALYSIS 113 4-3-2 ESTIMATED CO CONCENTRATIONS FOR THE ROUTE 44 PROJECT 114 4-3-3 SUMMARY OF MESOSCALE ANALYSIS 115 4-4-1 INVENTORY OF AFFECTED RESIDENCES 120 4-4-2 INVENTORY OF AFFECTED BUSINESSES 121 4-4-3 1980 CENSUS DATA SUMMARY 124 4-4-4 DESCRIPTION OF HOUSEHOLDS 123 4-4-5 DESCRIPTION OF AFFECTED BUSINESSES 126 4-4-6 SAMPLE REAL ESTATE LISTINGS 127 4-4-7 COMPARISON OF AFFECTED HOUSES WITH HOUSES FOR SALE 128 4-4-8 BUILDING PERMITS ISSUES FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION 129 4-6-1 LETTER DATED 9/23/80 FROM MASSACHUSETTS HISTORICAL 132 COMMISSION TO MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 4-6-2 LETTER (WITH ATTACHMENT) DATED 9/11/84 FROM FHWA TO 133 MASSACHUSETTS HISTORICAL COMMISSION TO FHWA 4-6-3 LETTER DATED 10/24/84 FROM MASSACHUSETTS HISTORICAL 136 COMMISSION TO FHWA 4-6-4 LETTER (WITH ATTACHMENT) DATED 9/20/85 FROM ADVISORY 138 COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION 4- 7-1 FARMLAND CONVERSION IMPACT RATING 143 5- 3-1 LETTER DATED 8/4/83 FROM MASSACHUSETTS NATURAL HERITAGE 221 PROGRAM TO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 5-3-2 LETTER DATED 7/24/84 FROM EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF ENVIRON- 222 MENTAL AFFAIRS TO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 5-3-3 LETTER DATED 10/28/81 FROM DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL 223 MANAGEMENT TO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 5-3-4 LETTER DATED 12/6/80 FROM SISTERS OF DIVINE PROVIDENCE 225 TO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 5-3-5 LETTER DATED 1/18/81 FROM SISTERS OF DIVINE PROVIDENCE 226 TO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 5-3-6 LETTER DATED 1/23/84 FROM DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS TO 227 SISTERS OF DIVINE PROVIDENCE 5-3-7 LETTER DATED 5/7/80 FROM DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL 228 MANAGEMENT TO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 5-3-8 LETTER DATED 7/23/80 FROM DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 229 TO DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT 5-3-9 LETTER DATED 6/27/84 FROM DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 230 TO DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT 5-3-10 LETTER DATED 12/4/80 FROM TOWN OF KINGSTON TO DEPARTMENT 232 OF PUBLIC WORKS 5-3-11 LETTER DATED 9/13/84 FROM TOWN OF KINGSTON TO DEPARTMENT 233 OF PUBLIC WORKS 5-3-12 LETTER DATED 11/5/80 FROM DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 234 TO DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT LIST OF FIGURES (continued) PAGE 5-3-13 LETTER DATED 3/7/86 FROM MASSACHUSETTS HISTORICAL COMMISSION 235 TO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 5-3-14 LETTER DATED 8/25/78 FROM TOWN OF KINGSTON TO DEPARTMENT 236 OF PUBLIC WORKS 5-3-15 LETTER DATED 6/12/79 FROM TOWN OF KINGSTON TO DEPARTMENT 240 OF PUBLIC WORKS 5-3-16 LETTER DATED 2/18/86 FROM U.S. DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR, 242 FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE 8- 2-1 MEMORANDUM CONCERNING A CONFERENCE AT DPW ON 1/29/85 255 9- 1-1 PLANT SPECIES RECORDED FOR WETLANDS: PREFERRED 301 ALTERNATIVE 4-M-5 9-1-2 WILDLIFE SPECIES OBSERVED AND EXPECTED FOR WETLANDS: 303 PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE 4-M-5 9-2-1 NOISE MEASUREMENT INSTRUMENTATION 309 9-2-2 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUME PERCENTAGES 311 9-2-3 CRITERIA FOR TRAFFIC NOISE IMPACT 311 9-2-4 AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES 312 9-3-1 C ALINE 3 315 LIST OF MAPS PAGE 2 -A LAND USE COMMITMENTS AND CORRIDOR DETERMINANTS 39 IN PROJECT AREA 2-B COMPOSITE: ALTERNATIVES 3-E AND 3-W, 4-L, 41 4-M-l, 4-N 2-C PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE 4-M-5 43 4-A LAND USE 149 4-B COMMUNITY FACILITIES 151 4-C LAND AND CULTURAL RESOURCES 153 4-D ZONING 155 4-E TOPOGRAPHY 157 4-F SOILS 159 4-G GROUNDWATER RESOURCES 161 4-H SURFACE WATER RESOURCES 163 4-1 FLOOD HAZARD 165 4-J WETLANDS 167 4-J-l WETLANDS NOS. 3,2,1 169 4-J-2 WETLANDS NOS. 4,3 171 4-J-3 WETLANDS NO. 5 173 4-J-4 WETLANDS NOS. 7,6 175 4-J-5 WETLANDS NOS. 10,9,8 177 4-J-6 WETLANDS NO. 11 179 4-J-7 WETLANDS NO. 12 181 4-J-8 WETLANDS NO. 12 183 4-J-9 WETLANDS NO. 13 185 4-J-10 WETLANDS NOS. 13 187 4-J -11 WETLANDS NOS. 15,14 189 4-J-12 WETLANDS NO. 15 191 4-J-l 3 WETLANDS NO. 16 193 4-J-14 WETLANDS NO. 17 195 4-J-l 5(1) PROPOSED WETLAND REPLACEMENT AREAS 197 4-J-15C2) PROPOSED WETLAND REPLACEMENT AREAS 199 4-J-16 PROPOSED WETLAND REPLACEMENT AREAS 201 4-K VEGETATION 203 4-L AIR QUALITY 205 4-M POTENTIAL NOISE IMPACTS 207 4-M-l POTENTIAL NOISE IMPACTS 209 4-M-2 POTENTIAL NOISE IMPACTS 211 4- M-3 POTENTIAL NOISE IMPACTS 213 5- A SECTION 4(f) LAND 245 SECTION 1 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION 1. REVIEW OF NEED AND PROJECT ACTION TO DATE The need has long been recognized for improvements to U.S. Route 44 because it is an important east-west highway serving southeastern Massachusetts, and particularly the historic center of Plymouth. FIGURE 1-1-1 shows Route 44' s dual function: it is a through route from Plymouth to Providence R.I.; it is also a major link to Interstate 495 and Boston's circumferential highway system, connecting with 4 arterials - Routes 3, 24, 25 and Interstate 95. The last unimproved section of Route 44 is the one under study - approximately 7 1/2 miles from Route 58 to Route 3. At its western end in the town of Carver, Route 44 winds through rural areas and has several sharp turns and other substandard geometries, resulting in high accident rates in a number of locations. At its eastern end in Plymouth, it traverses an area characterized by increasing urbanization, and just before its interchange with Route 3, it goes through a stretch of intensive highway-oriented development, resulting in severe congestion and a high accident rate. As a result of studies dating back to 1963, the realignment of Route 44 between Middleborough Circle and Route 58 ir. Carver has been completed. Proposals were made in 1967-68 for its improvements from Route 58 to Route 3A in Plymouth. When the section from Route 3 to Route 3A met with a strong community concern about the intrusion of a highway to a densely populated and historical section of Plymouth, no action was taken. later a study was made to improve the section of Route 44 between Route 58 and Route 80 in Kingston, but that too resulted in no action because the report had not complied with the then new federal environmental legislation. The present study was started early in 1977 and was funded in part under the Economic Growth Center Development Highway Program of the Federal Highway Administration. Plymouth had been selected as an Economic Growth Center by Governor Dukakis, and as an Economic Development Center by the region's planning agency, The Old Colony Planning Council. An improved Route 44 was considered to be a significant factor in these designations and in its potential for improving Plymouth's economic position particularly through the development of its Industrial Park. The initial step in this process was the preparation of an Environmental Overview Summary, the purpose of which was to identify the need for improving Route 44 and to make a preliminary assessment of the potential impacts of various alternative methods of doing so. The Summary was published in November 1977, and benefited greatly from the contributions and participation of The Old Colony Planning Council and the Southeastern Regional Planning and Economic Development District, as well as from federal, state and local officials, and the general public. Six public information meetings were held in the study area to keep residents and officials informed. The Draft Environmental Impact Statement was approved in April 1979. It was reviewed at a public hearing in June 1979, which was followed by a series of -1- FIGURE 1-1-1 REGIONAL HIGHWAYS { . meetings extending over the next 3 years with community officials, state and federal agencies, organizations and individuals. This process involved adjustments to the corridor designated in the Draft E.I.S. as 4-M-l, and resulted in the preferred Alternative 4-M-5 in this Final E.I.S. Studies to complete the Final E.I.S. began in October 1983. 2. PROJECT OBJECTIVES The following general objectives provided the basis for studies to determine the optimal method to improve Route 44, based on traffic needs and regional concerns. Serve as the final link in the east-west system of roads created by Interstate 495, and Routes 3, 24 and 25. Upgrade physical characteristics of Route 44 and thereby improve traffic flow and reduce accidents. Provide direct access to as many of their industrial zones as possible in the study area. Separate through and local traffic as much as possible and keep non-residential traffic from residential streets and neighborhoods. Recognize and plan ahead for the natural increase in traffic due to expected growth of the four towns and the region. Adhere to pertinent design criteria for limited access roads. Minimize impacts on people, buildings, natural features, and historic sites. 3. EXISTING AND PROPOSED TRAFFIC EXISTING TRAFFIC SERVICE CHARACTERISTICS Traffic volume counts for the various roadway links in the Route 44 study area were recorded by the Massachusetts Department of Public Works in July and August, 1977 and in May, 1980. Intersection peak hour turning movement and vehicle classification counts were taken July 19 through 22, 1977. Although this section of existing Route 44 is classified as a Rural Primary two lane roadway, it was analyzed using the Level of Service criteria for urbanized areas. The reason is that within its approximately eight miles there are 17 intersections with local roads as well as numerous curb cuts for driveways all of which result in conditions more characteristic of suburban and urban areas than a rural highway. Peak hour traffic analysis of five key intersections within the study area indicates that existing Route 44 currently operates at Levels of Service ranging from Level B at the west end of the study area (Route 58) to Levels E -3- and F at its eastern end in the vicinity of the shopping center and the ramps of the Route 3 interchange. (See FIGURE 1-3-1) Similar results are obtained by the analysis of roadway link, traffic volumes, which shows that the ADT volume of nearly 20,000 vehicles in the vicinity of the shopping center and Route 3 approaches, as well as during occasional peak periods elsewhere on the Route, exceeds its capacity. Furthermore, a speed/delay study conducted along Route 44 during off-peak travel periods indicates that deficiencies in the existing alignment and geometric design also influence its operating characteristics. Actual driving time from the intersection of Route 58 and Route 44 in Carver to its interchange with Route 3 in Plymouth, requires an average of 13.5 minutes under ideal conditions at an average operating speed of 35 mph, which is equivalent to Level of Service D for a rural highway. Along most of the Route the relatively low speed average is due not to high traffic volumes or controls at intersections, but rather to deficiencies in alignment and the resulting restrictive posted speed limits of 20 to 40 mph. TRAFFIC VOLUME PROJECTIONS AND ANALYSIS Traffic assignments and projections (FIGURES 1-3-3 and 1-3-4) were developed by the Bureau of Transportation Planning and Development (BTPD) of the Massachusetts Department of Public Works. Growth rates used in developing the projections were provided by the Old Colony Planning Council (OCPC). The analysis assumes full development of existing and proposed industrial parks within the general area affected by this project. Trip distribution was completed by BTPD in concert with OCPC. FIGURE 1-3-3 presents the existing and projected traffic volumes for existing area roadways without any relocation of Route 44. Analysis of intersection capacity for traffic volumes in the year 2000 are summarized in FIGURE 1-3-1. It indicates that under the No-Build Alternative, traffic flow on Route 44 in Plymouth will become intolerable during peak periods. In Carver, operating conditions will deteriorate so as to require capacity improvements at the two intersections with Route 58; however, the remainder of the existing Route 44 to the Plymouth town line will operate at satisfactory service levels. LEVEL OF SERVICE Traffic service is measured by the volume of traffic carried by a particular segment of a roadway network relative to the physical capacity of that segment. Physical capacity can be defined as the maximum number of vehicles which can be accommodated by a roadway or intersection during a given period of time, under prevailing conditions. Prevailing conditions include such factors as signal phasing, the degree of interference from other vehicles and pedestrians, composition of traffic lanes or approach pavement, and presence of lateral obstructions in close proximity of the roadway. In general it can be stated that as traffic volumes increase and approach the capacity of the roadway, operating speeds generally decrease and traffic congestion increases. Operating characteristics of roadways, both existing and projected, can be studied and compared by means of the Level of Service Concept. Level of Service is defined as the composite effect of speed and travel time, traffic interruption, freedom to maneuver, safety, driving comfort and convenience, and operating costs. Six Levels of Service can be identified, ranging from excellent (A) to intolerable (F), which form a qualitative ranking of operating -4- conditions, and which can be applied separately to urban and rural roads. See FIGURE 1-3-5 for photographic illustrations of Levels A-F. On two lane highways in rural areas, the following Levels of Service are a function of speed limits, passing sight distance, roadway geometries and the physical makeup of the roadway. o Level A Rural: free flow operation, with highway geometries primarily affecting the speed limits; operating speeds are 55 mph or higher; approximately 75% of the desired passing maneuvers are made with little delay. o Level B Rural: stable flow operation with increased traffic volumes controlling speed and passing maneuvers; operating speeds are 50 mph or more. o Level C Rural: continues stable conditions with increased traffic volumes having a direct effect on operational speed, which is independent of the roadway alignment; operating speed for uninterrupted flow is 40 mph or higher. o Level D Rural: unstable flow is approached as speeds drop to 35 mph due to traffic volumes; the capacity of the highway is approached for short periods of time without a high probability of breakdown in flow. o Level E Rural: capacity is reached; operating speeds are in the neighborhood of 30 mph, but may vary considerably. o Level F Rural: jammed traffic conditions prevail; operating speeds are below 30 mph; volumes are unpredictable. In urbanized areas the following Levels of Service are a function of the intersection capacities along with the physical makeup of the roadway, parking conditions, peak hour traffic volumes, turning movements, truck and bus traffic, and traffic control measures. o Level A Urban: free flow operation; driver is concerned only about the chance of being stopped at a red signal; otherwise, movement is unrestricted. o Level B Urban: stable operation; many drivers begin to feel somewhat restricted with platoons of vehicles. o Level C Urban: stable operation continues; occasionally, drivers may be detained by more than one complete signal cycle, and backups may occur behind turning vehicles; most drivers feel somewhat restrictd, but not objectionably so. o Level D Urban: increasing restriction or approaching instability during peak fifteen minutes; frequently drivers may wait more than one complete signal cycle; individual delays may be substantial for short periods during the peak hours; however, recurring backups are not excessive and are cleared up during the lighter demand signal cycles . -5- o Level E Urban: volume equals capacity; represents the greatest moving volume an intersection can accommodate; drivers are faced with long queues and frequent delays. o Level F Urban: jammed traffic conditions; traffic flow breaks down on more than one approach to an intersection; blockages occur often, preventing traffic movement on cross streets; traffic volumes are unpredictable; drives are faced with prolonged stop-and-go conditions The preferred Alternative 4-M-5 will provide Level of Service A at the projected traffic volumes, as determined by comparing the projections in FIGURE 1-3-4 with accepted criteria in the 1985 Highway Capacity Manual for determining Levels of Service. In the future, compared to the No Build Alternative, Relocated Route 44 (Alternative 4-M-5) will also improve the Level of Service at the existing intersection of Routes 44 and 58, as well as other intersections along existing Route 44, due to the fact that truck and other traffic will be diverted to the new highway. Consequently, traffic safety will be improved on existing Route 44. The residential area in the vicinity of the Halliday plant in Plympton will benefit from the Spring Street interchange, which will divert traffic now using local streets to reach regional roads. SAFETY FIGURE 1-3-2 compares the accident involvement rate for several segments of Route 44 to statewide average accident rates for roads classified as urban secondary two lane roads. The comparison is given for the years 1979, 1980 and 1893, the latest three years for which this information is available. Accident involvement rate is defined as the number of accidents per million-vehicle-miles. It is valuable because variations in traffic volumes and roadway segment lengths are taken into account. This permits the relative performance along a section of a highway to be compared with statewide averages Accident involvement rates on existing Route 44 exceed the statewide average accident rates in all roadway segments, although it is noted that in 1983 there was improvement on the segment from Route 58 to the Plymouth Town line, and in 1980 and 1983 on the segment from the Plymouth town line to Seven Hills Road. However, of particular concern is the segment east of Seven Hills Road where the accident rate consistently exceeds the statewide average. For motorists using Relocated Route 44, there will be significant safety improvements. Accident rates on Relocated Route 44 should correspond to average accident rates for full access controlled primary highways. The 1983 average accident rate for a four lane divided highway in urban areas was 3.36 accidents per million vehicle miles, and 3.20 accidents per million vehicle miles in rural areas, as furnished by the Massachusetts Department of Public Works. The accident rates on existing Route 44 and other area Routes can also be expected to decrease due to diversion of some of the traffic to relocated Route 44. -6- FIGURE 1-3-1 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS Level of Service Year 2000 Peak Hours 1977 Peak No Relocated Hr. System Build Route 44 1. Rel. Rt. 44 and Route 58 a. Existing at-grade intersection B D b. New Interchange ramps — — D C* 2. Rel. Rte. 44 and Rel. Spring St. a. Interchange ramps — — A 3. Rel. Rte. 44 and Connector Rd. a. Interchange ramps — — B 4. Route 3 and Cherry St. /Rel. 44 a. Existing interchange ramps A A — b. Trumpet interchange (link cap.) — — B 5. Route 3 and Samoset St. a. Existing interchange F F* F* E* E** E** b. Modified interchange — — D** 6. Exist. 44 and Seven Hills Rd. C* D* C* 7. Exist. 44 and Route 80 C F E C* C* 8. Exist. 44 and Route 58 C* F* D D** C* *2 lane width on heavier traffic volume roadway approach **2 lane width on both roadway approaches Note: Levels of Service without asterisk (s) signify a single lane approach to an intersection. -7- I CO I O o o 00 CT- 00 o CD 0> • 10 O O at O o y a Z U 01 (D a 3 3 > d h £ fl O w M 0) — 4-1 • 3 3 O 01 r-t 0) n) a ■ 3 3 a r-4. Ci O ■ o o a z u si « 4J gl oi r 3 CO O CM CO CM CM CO U0 00 00 Xt r — \ •o T3 4-1 4J 3 5 iH 3 a) 01 3 0) o O at OU O o C/J o Tidal Flat i Indian > Pond \ ,„ f. PL Y MO UT H HARBOR |§8#f Muddy ' uhch a Tritpu< 20 1 «M>Va$m r "Si 1 ,^ , J^.jp |>nr,bi-.'i as Darby Poiid Billington Sea North Car\er.- f^TA COMPOSITE: ALTERNATIVES rfj^ J 3-E AND 3-W, 4-L, 4-M, 4-M-1, 4-N 5 •. IlV.-l Pd PROPOSED CORRIDORS ( Pond SCALE IN FEET r vp£ ROUTE 44 MAP 2-B V PLYMOUTH. White Flat PL Y MOUTH HARBOR SECTION 3 THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 1. SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC GOVERNMENT The towns in the study area were Incorporated on the following dates: Carver, June 9, 1790; Kingston, June 16, 1726; Plympton, June 4, 1707. Plymouth was founded December 21, 1620. Originally Carver, Kingston and Plympton were part of Plymouth. All four towns have a Town Meeting type of government with a Board of Selectmen in the executive role. They are included in the 12th Massachusetts Congressional District, the 1st Councillor District, the Cape and Plymouth State Senatorial District, the 5th Plymouth State Representative District (Kingston, Plymouth, Plympton) and the 6th Plymouth State Representative District (Carver). All four towns are in Plymouth County. POPULATION AND ECONOMIC The population of Massachusetts grew by 0.8% between 1970 and 1975, while the U.S. population increased by 11.4%. Plymouth's population increased 26.9% between the two federal censuses of 1960 and 1970, a very impressive 95.9% between the 1970 and 1980 U.S. Censuses. Carver grew by an extraordinary 159.8% while Kingston was growing by 22.7% and Plympton by 51.4% (See FIGURES 3.1.1 and 3.1.2) The overall picture is one of dramatic residential growth fed largely by those moving away from Boston and Quincy, who are leapfrogging the more built-up and expensive communities between those cities and Plymouth, and who are generally maintaining their employment outside the Plymouth area. Growth rates much larger than the state average are expected to continue, but not at the rates of the last decade. See FIGURE 3.1.3. The racial composition of the towns in the study area was predominantly white in 1980 with Plymouth having the largest minority population. See FIGURE 3.1.4. The large migration of population has been reflected in age composition data and school enrollments. Generally speaking, the younger age groups (below 24 years) show growth, while the older age groups (65 and above) have remained the same or declined, reflecting the fact that these towns have proven to be more attractive to families with children rather than to the elderly. See FIGURE 3-1-5. School enrollment figures for the four towns show that Carver and Plymouth experienced the largest percentage increases. Plympton had a moderate increase in its enrollment, and Kingston's remained relatively stable. These increases, especially in Carver and Plymouth, can be attributed to the migration of families with school-age children. The average annual wage paid in Plymouth establishments in 1975 was almost 15% lower than the comparable figure for the State; in fact, there has been a consistent difference between the State and Plymouth averages for annual wages. Median family income, as reported in the 1980 census, was also lower in Plymouth than for the State. Plymouth's recent residents are almost entirely -45- commuters insofar as employment is concerned. Although the statistic for median family income may have improved as a result, wages paid locally continue to be relatively low, partly due to the growing relative importance of jobs in services rather than industry, as explained below. The unemployed were 7.2% of Plymouth's labor force in 1980, compared with 5% for the State, even though employment opportunities and total employment have been increasing in recent years, as demonstrated in FIGURE 3-1-6. The increase in population has been bolstering Plymouth's position as a center for shopping, banking, insurance, real estate, and other services. FIGURE 3-1-6 shows there was a 128.8% growth in manufacturing jobs between 1970 ad 1980. During the same period jobs in wholesale and retail trade increased by 54.7%, those in financial and other services by almost 217%, and in the transportation-utilities group by 313.9%. Even more dramatic evidence of this situation is given by the fact that between 1970 and 1980, the number of employed in Plymouth increased by 3290, but only 724, or a little more than 18.5%, were in manufacturing jobs. But FIGURE 3-1-6 also shows that although the number of jobs has increased noticeably in almost all categories, the relative percentage of each category to total employment has remained fairly constant. The total number of jobs in the 5 major categories has remained constant, although there have been adjustments among them as new job opportunities have been created in Plymouth. The most obvious example of this is the sizable increase in the transportation-utilities group, which is accounted for almost entirely by the Pilgrim 1 Nuclear Power Plant. The number of jobs in Plymouth grew by 3920 from 1970 to 1980, but only 18.50% of that increase was in manufacturing jobs, whereas 41.9% was in services. These figures assume even greater significance when reviewed with the average annual wages involved: in 1982 the average for manufacturing jobs in Plymouth was $15,684, compared to $19,698 for the state; for jobs in wholesale and retail trade $16,765 and $7,925 respectively, and $10,784 for all service-type positions. The number of service-related jobs tyherefore depressed the average wage for the Town, even though the average wage in the utilities group was $28,874. See FIGURE 3-1-7. Another perspective of Plymouth's economic situation can be seen by comparing its data with those for the State as a whole, whereas manufacturing jobs were only 15% of all jobs in Plymouth in 1980, the comparable figure for the State was 26%; on the other hand, 63.7% of Plymouth's jobs were in service-related fields compared to 32.2% for the State as a whole. See FIGURE 3-1-6. Data on employment and wages (FIGURE 3-1-8) for Carver, Kingston and Plympton are not directly comparable to those for Plymouth, whose population is more than twice that of the other three towns together, and whose employment is nearly four times their combined total. Plympton has one major industry whose employment and wage data are therefore those of the town as a whole. Kingston has a number of small industrial businesses, employment in which has fluctuated but not significantly, during the past ten years. Kingston's Industrial Park on Route 3 will benefit from an improved Route 44; its service-related employment almost doubled from 1970 to 1976. Plymouth is the central place of the region and is therefore most representative of its problems and potential. Plymouth has two active industrial parks. One is Cordage Park, the former Plymouth Cordage plant; the other is the Plymouth Industrial Park at the Cherry Street /Route 3 interchange. The need persists to improve the local economy through a broader industrial base in order to reduce unemployment, raise local incomes, and increase opportunities for Plymouth residents to work in Town rather than elsewhere. -46- FIGURE 3-1-1 POPULATION GROWTH Ire I LcLl L Pa an Ire I Cell L Change Change Town 1960 1970 1960-1970 1980 1970-1980 Carver 1,949 2,690 38.0 6,988 159.8 Kingston 4,203 5,999 42.7 7,362 22.7 Plymouth 14,445 18,336 26.9 35,913 95.9 Plympton 821 1,304 58.8 1,974 51.4 Source : 1960, 1970, 1980 U.S. Census FIGURE 3-1-2 COMPONENTS OF POPULATION CHANGE Natural Increase Migration Total Change CARVER 1960-1970 1970-1980 108 687 633 3,591 + 741 +4,278 KINGSTON 1960-1970 1970-1980 355 452 1,341 911 +1,696 +1,363 Source: 1960, 1970, 1980 U.S. Census 1975 State Census, Mass. Dept. of Public Health -47- FIGURE 3-1-3 POPULATION PROJECTIONS Town 1980 Popultlon 1985 1990 1995 1970-1980 Change % Carver 6,988 * 8,173 * 1,185 17.0% Kingston 7,362 8,137 8,912 9,493 2.131 30.0% Plymouth 35,913 41,013 46,113 51,319 15,406 42.9% Plympton 1,974 * 2,300 * 326 16.5% Source: Old Colony Planning Council (for Kingston and Plymouth); Mass. Dept. of Public Health, 1983 * Not Available NOTE: Massachusetts Department of Public Health population projections in 1983 were based on the percent change for four age groups (0-14, 15-44, 45-64, 65+) from 1970 to 1980, and the application of this rate of change for each group to actual 1980 census data to forecast population growth for the year 1990. The forecasts were then reviewed by regional agencies and modified to reflect anticipated trends. FIGURE 3-1-4 RACIAL COMPOSITION Plymouth Race Carver (%) Kingston (%) Plymouth Plympton (%) County (%) White 6,624 (95.0) 7,238 (98.3) 34,963 (97.4) 1,931 (97.8) (96.4) Black 160 (2.3) 49 (0.7) 523 (1.5) 14 (0.7) (1.9) Other 204 (2.9) 75 (1.0) 427 (1.2) 29 (1.5) (1.6) Total 6,988 7,362 35,913 1,974 405,437 Source: 1980 U.S. Census -48- l co O i— i O oo on H o © ON 3 M C/i O Cm o o w 52 o ON 5-« | o on *«| d o 4J O CX © >> i— i o CO on 8* o is. ON 6^ | 4-1 3 O O © ^ 3 ^ ' i— I Pm O co on a-e | o a o •M O CO © 00 0> I (3 rH o CO o> | o on *e | u CD O > vO « rH u a 3 o M O O m CM O CO vO CN CO • • • • • • • • CO st o rH st o rH in ON co CO m in o CN CO rH ON CM rH rH vO st rH rH st CM CO CO H rH rH CO O ON v© © • • • • • st o> v© m n m rH CN 00 ON rH O CN ON rH m st CO — I CO rH CM CO m m rH CO rH © • • • • • • • • ON o m in rH rH rH CM st CO o CM CO rH CO r>» rH CN ON rH ON rH CM rH CO rH i-^ CM rH CO CO St ON o © on CO <© CO o CO o oo CM CN st st CO 00 CN H rH rH o rH CM rH rs CN CM rH o> in CO oo CO rH m •» a CN vO st vO st CM CO sr © O o o O o o O CO CM CO st st rH in o ON CN rH CN m in © ON rH CM rH CO rH rH rH CM rH O rH co rH in rH vO o 00 CM CM CO m M •t a a CO CM CM rH CM CM CM CO CO ON CO CM m © r> on CN vO o vO O m CN O CO ON rH o «* m rH CO rH ON rH CO rH O rH m rH o rH en o m st CO ON vO rH #N A A A r rH CM rH rH rH rH rH CN . ON CN CN CO rH ON rH o rH ON rH vO rH ON m rH r-> St m m in CO m CN in r» rH rH CO in cn o I— 1 ON rH m H rH CO m rH CO m in oo o CO rH ON CN rH rH rH CM r«» rH o ON rH St CO vO r-N « ON rH rH rH rH rH vO rH ON rH rH rH St in CN in St CO CN CO CM CM rH st O si- ON m rH • • • • • • • • CO on CO ON rH n st rH O CN CM rH vO 00 m CN CO r>» rH O rH rH rH st rH CO rH vO CO rH H co CO CM CM CN rH CM st ON st O CO rH CM CO CO rH ON •\ m co m st st CM © co ON ON ON •v m st o st rH m st CM m st CM I CO CM St st I m co st in l m st st V© I m in + m © 73 . 4-) Ou o o H Cm CM CO O 3 CO CQ Wk a st CD o • 00 CO CO • ON •=> © o co ON rH M o O ON r» © ON rH CN o © ON ON St rH ON m rH a) CJ u 3 O CO -49- VO I rH I CO & o H fa H Q CM o 2fc o o oo H TJ t-J 00 CU CU T3 in d CU o CM CU • • X m st iH i— I to cO • XI o (X vO vO 00 i— 1 4-> ON CM CO •H H H H 00 t3 CU ON CU CJ 1— 1 d •H CU vO •H > 4-> • • 1 X U * CO a CU i— 1 vO vO O o r>. c_> ON <-a CU CJ •H > t-l CU C/5 ON st • • oo rH Csl CO Csl & r-. H w st ON CM CM o m co n CO CU >> M CU CO > cO CM 00 CO ON 4-1 H CO d o CO 4-1 O CU 00 rH ON X iH CO to cO u cx co a CU o t>» o U CU o x TJ >» I— I H 3 d o o * TJ CO CU XI CO • • 4-1 4J a vO ON rH cu cO a. CO w CM CM CO > CU a R o Go >N CU w VH m vO a CO o rH v£) CM CU •H CU cO cu St O o X d 60 60 0t d 4-1 4J o cO CM st CO d •H J !3 H rH u § M CO -«r> 3 o •H CO <4-l > d O •H M rH 4-1 Q 1 CX d rH >> * M a CU CO CO O 4-1 st m CU 0) CO 4J rH d vO ON CJ I CO O oo r» O vO t-l •k cO ON 00 St rH U rH H rH d o 4-1 CO 60 d CM 00 ON d o 4-1 a I rH CM X! ■P 3 O I d 0 •H 3 4-1 CJ cO M-l 3 I HO CM ON ON oo o CO ^\ /^-\ ^-s CM /— \ vO H vO CO ON CO ir> CO 00 rH CO CO rH rH * — ' rH \s N— ' ON CM rH vO rH vO vO 00 H U0 st CO CO r-» m CM CM •i r>. co o i— I rH rH st st m m CM st CM oo vO CM CO co rH vO co r>« on r» m 00 vo r~- rH o CO rH CM rH rH rH rH • oo o rH 00 m ON CO ON st CO CM r-« O CO vO o st rH m CO m m M ON CM m 00 st vO rH CM rH rH rH rH rH CO CU CU •H rH 4-> CO •H CO rH rH CU *H •H rH CO 4-1 O 4-1 IrS CM 3 0s • • CU a. • o CO cu •H d TJ • > cO CO M H M • u CU Xi CO >. cu 4-1 4J •H CO U O 3 "H CJ X) cu d en -h 4-1 CO d cu cu co a cu >» X! O 4-1 H d a cu a n w cO o. rH co d d -H o •h d co cu •H > > -H •H 60 Q M . cu CO X co a cfl 3 S SB u o 00 CU 4-1 tO CJ m m ^\ cu H oo CO O CJ CM CO r4 cu o rs 3 4-) rH So No o ON CO 00 rH CO CO oo ON CO o CM rH rH CO rH • 4-1 TJ CO CU 4-1 d CO ■H W X a rH O CO o cu co rH O •H * 4J CO CU O 4-1 CJ CU d co cO U s 3 TJ CO cu co d 4-i CJ cu cu u T3 d CU rH CO CU CU CO CJ CO d : cO d rH X! «H H S fa » CO CO ON ON st ON rH st io st rH rH rH rH rH A CM ■1 CM 00 l© CM LO CO r>. CO o o LO to v© CO o vO LO CO LO CO 10 CM CM rH ON O ON LO sl- LO CO rH CM CM rH ON St CO LO CM rH LO 00 I rH I CO W erf !=> O H b d O 4-1 (0 60 a •H CM CO LO CO O st U o CM H U st vO ON CO rs, vO ON LO LO LO CM to 00 ON o rH h* st rH oo H rH rH rH CM rH vO • vO CM rH rH st CO o CO vO LO CM CO r«. CM ON O O CO LO t>» ON rH to ON O sj- rH 00 rH CO rH m «N CM CO ON u QJ > U CO CJ vO r>. ON o • CO rH to st CM • CM 00 o ON co vO CO LO c_> CM ON to co st o * to o CO LO LO o CO u 4-i >> (1) d 4-) CO 00 a) a PM CO s » J5 t rH CO CO CO - ■H •H o 3 O CO rH rH d o 3 XI a c o a CO B 1 •u w 00 rH rH CO CO «J eio • •u) O O O H 5 z H V4 a) > o o CO 4J CO CO •H 4-1 d O L* r*. •H QJ CD 4-1 ON CO Q CO •o CO 4J rH 01 CO 4-1 d 4J CO 4-1 M CO U CO 4-> d • H w i O CJ 4-1 a; rH tM •H CU 1 •H rH rH Tj CO 4-1 •H CO CD QJ d 3 o J3 CO QJ > rH •H X! rH 4J Qrf o XI O (X oj o cO t CO a 60 orf • rH CO w a (J CO M •H CO aj o •H <-a d O CO CO LW u •H M § M <4H > X o 3 4-> 3 0) (0 4-1 CJ 4-1 rH CO CO 0) rH 3 CJ CO co 0J 4-1 4-1 4-1 3 60 M CO • CO o O CO o O o a 4-t tw CO OJ d O d CJ •H •H CO 3 a rH co > t-4 U a a a CO O d u 3 60 •rH o CO n •H CD • • O * H M B H T3 cd o o M 03 T) CD a d d 3 0) to o CO o «3 u 5 CO >, u u OJ CO 4-1 03 T3 0J C5 C3 O O CM U CO CO 0 60 03 t3 0J 0J z sc 0) M O 03 U 0J 3 z o CO CO u u 0J OJ > -w •H 03 Orf * 4-> 03 OJ OJ xi as 3 M OJ o3 * 8 CO 00 in CM CO CO s* CM 00 o oo CM CO CO CM 00 CO co CM co o co CM H co CM OJ 4-1 03 Q O I H I I I I I I I I I I I I I O CM I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I O I ON | I vO I O m O «CMCOsJ-CO O O sfsfO CM* CM m O •OOOCOOvOCrxOOHOOOOm • iO f\ • .00 «ON o • cm ••• • •••co* •• • * • • oo • • i— i in • v© i— il Hl^ .-HCOOOOOOOO HOOOOCMOmrHOOO H m 00^ N I I ^ H vO i— I o o oo o * o i— i i— i cm H cm H cm sf iH o m m o vo o co oo • • • 'OOOOOOO cOOOrHOvOOCOl^. «OCM • 00 • • O OOrH I CM • • CT> • CO CM ST CMHCMHOOOOOO I (OOOOONOvOCIrlHsfiOHiODrl m r^. o m m m sr *H ^ • OOHiHCMCMcOCO Or^cOco O O sT H ON m «OOOcMOOm HOHOHOOOW • o *o OO «sf CO t-HCMr^cOOOOHOOOmOOOOCOOiOiHvOO f» o co m m o • • r>. oo cr> • O cm • • • r-» i o H 0> sj- 0> I i-H vo o in co m -a- moo r>.« OOHHONHN H NOCO O O m vO CM »n • • •^.vOO •OOOOOOCMHOHOOvOOO • O sT • • r^. m CT> O o cm • oo •• • • •• • • • • • • • • •oo ••osj- ••srio CT> H I^cMOOOiHOOO mOOOOCMO^JOrHOOH HrHONH | i— I I vO o co >o* oh rno h o tHcovocm o cj\ m o r». cr> ooo • 00 •COOOO^OOH COOOOOvOOOCM • O O • 0> • • • on • h i •••cM«»m«mo>oi cOcOHiHOOOOOO I C0OOOOCMomv0t-li-l00v0Ov0v0Cr> I vO H iH O CO CM 00 m CO CMvOiHsT O CM vO • vOOOOCMOOOmoOOOOOOOOCO • O • O iH ir» v© HCMOOOHOO'H vOOOOOCMO^Or^CT>0 rH o o o • • • o sf O O I m co l O o o o =4fe =S= -58- FIGURE 3-3-3 provides the existing preconstruction right-of-way acreage for each of the seventeen wetland areas to be traversed by the preferred Alternative 4-M-5. These acreages are grouped further by wetland community type and municipality. FIGURE 4-1-7 indicates the wetland acreage within the right-of-way to be affected by the proposed project. A discussion of each of the seventeen wetland areas contained within the proposed right-of-way is presented below. Refer to MAPS 4-J-l through 4-J-14. Wetland No. 1, located within the eastern cloverleaf of the Route 3/ Cherry Street interchange consists of Palustrine emergent and open water communities. For areas, refer to FIGURE 3-3-3. Although technically isolated, the emergent community is considered a bordering vegetated wetland under MA Wetlands Protection Act regulations (310 CMR 10.00 et seq ) due to the open water portion of the overall area being greater than 10,000 ft^. Plant species associated with the wetland' s emergent community are primarily herbaceous, including jewelweed, nightshade, yellow loosestrife, sensitive fern, soft rush, and tussock sedge, among others. Such woody plant species as elderberry, highbush blueberry, and bayberry are present in limited abundance. The open water community is, for the most part, unvegetated. Wetland No. 2 consists of a streamside Palustrine forested and emergent wetland, and is located within the same cloverleaf and interchange as Wetland No. 1. For areas, refer to FIGURE 3-3-3. The forested portion of the wetland consists primarily of red maple in the canopy or overstory. Understory species characteristically include alder, poison ivy, arrowwood, willow, jewelweed, sensitive fern, and skunk cabbage. The emergent wetland area contains, for example, cattail, waterwillow, joe-pye-weed , jewelweed, soft rush, sensitive fern, cinnamon fern, wool grass, and steeplebush. Wetland No. 3 consists of a streamside Palustrine forested wetland located west of Route 3 within the cloverleaf of the Route 3/Cherry Street interchange. For areas, refer to FIGURE 3-3-3. Red maple constitutes the dominant overstory species. In contrast, the understory exhibits a relatively diverse mixture of plant species. These include alder, arrowwood, highbush blueberry, swamp azalea, burreed, waterwillow, leatherleaf, arrow-leaved tearthumb, and reed grass, among others. Due to the relatively small size and location of each of the above-referenced wetlands within roadway interchange sites, their suitability for wildlife is somewhat limited. During field investigations conducted in July, 1984, a total of six species of wildlife was observed at these wetlands. These include red-winged blackbird, catbird, swamp sparrow, common grackle, swallows, and bullfrogs. Although additional species are anticipated to periodically use these wetlands, the overall diversity and abundance of wildlife at these sites is expected to be low. A list of plant species recorded for each of the seventeen wetland areas associated with the preferred Alternative 4-M-5 is provided in the Technical Appendix, which also provides a list of wildlife species observed and expected to occur in association with each wetland community type along the proposed alignment. -59- FIGURE 3-3-3 WETLAND ACREAGES PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE 4-M-5 RIGHT-OF-WAY* Wetland No. Plymouth 1 2 3 4 5 Subtotal Kingston 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Subtotal Plympton 12 Subtotal Carver 13 14 15 16 17 Subtotal Total P-F 0.18 1.64 0.52 2.34 0.10 0.10 1.88 0.75 1.40 3.51 7.54 9.98 Wetland Community Type** P-S/S P-EM 0.31 0.28 2.94 0.10 3.63 0.05 0.01 0.39 0.02 0.66 1.13 5.88 5.88 4.18 0.72 0.06 0.06 4.90 11.91 2.72 1.56 2.43 6.71 10.40 P-OW 0.25 0.17 1.65 2.07 0.07 2.02 0.07 2.16 5.20 CB 5.20 9.43 8.72 4.95 13.67 13.67 Total Acreages Within Each Wetland OVERALL 0.59 0.54 1.70 24.07 1.78 28.68 0.35 0.22 7.12 2.49 0.32 0.02 1.56 12.08 10.66 10.66 51.03 5.72 96.81 76.87 2.64 233.07 284.49 WITHIN RIGHT OF WAY 0.56 0.46 1.64 3.63 1.75 8.04 0.12 0.06 0.01 2.41 0.17 0.02 0.66 3.45 5.88 5.88 22.70 1.47 7.91 3.51 2.43 38.02 55.39 * Acreage calculations are based on the entire right-of-way and an average width of 400 ft. ** Palustrine Forested (P-F) Palustrine Scrub/Shrub (P-S/S) Palustrine Emergent (P-EM) Palustrine Open Water (P-OW) Cranberry Bog (CB) -60- The area of Wetland No. 4 affected by the preferred Alternative 4-M-5 constitutes only a portion of the wetland' s overall acreage, as shown in FIGURE 3-3-3. Within the right-of-way, Palus trine forested, emergent, and open water communities occur. Scrub/shrub vegetation is also associated with this wetland to the south of the alignment. The majority of Wetland No. 4 consists of an abandoned cranberry bog. Overall, the diversity of vegetation is relatively high. Plant species characteristic of forested and scrub/shrub wetlands include red maple, sweet pepperbush, sweetbells, highbush blueberry, maleberry and tussock sedge. Emergent communities typically consist of waterwillow, soft rush, wool grass, steeplebush, and sphagnum, as well as a variety of woody plant species. Open water areas are, for the most part, unvegetated. Wildlife species observed included red-winged blackbirds, northern oriole, eastern kingbird, common flicker, bullfrogs and green frogs. Due to the diversity of wetland types and plant species associated with this wetland, the diversity and abundance of wildlife is also anticipated to be high. Numerous additional species are expected to occur in this area on a permanent or migratory basis. Wetland No. 5 is located within the Mayflower Sand and Gravel Company quarrying operation, is associated totally with the southernmost cloverleaf of the proposed Plymouth Industrial Park interchange. Wetlands in this area consist of three unvegetated open water areas and a small emergent wetland dominated by reed grass. For areas, refer to FIGURE 3-3-3. These wetlands are undoubtedly the result of sand and gravel removal. Eventually, excavation activities extended below existing groundwater elevations, resulting in the discharge of groundwater into depressions onsite. The suitability of Wetland No. 5 for wildlife is quite limited. This is due to the lack of vegetation in and near the wetland and the continued disruption generated by quarrying activities. Wetlands Nos. 6, 7, 10 AND 11 are small kettlehole-associated wetlands, all located in Kingston. Their areas are shown in FIGURE 3-3-3. Wetland No. 10 has the most wetland acreage within the preferred Alternative 4-M-5, while Wetland No. 11 has the least wetland acreage within the same area. The plant species composition associated with the same wetland community types at each location is similar. Open water areas at Wetlands Nos. 6 and 10 are primarily unvegetated, while Palustrine scrub/shrub communities associated with Wetlands No. 6 and 11 are both dominated by red maple and highbush blueberry, with sweet pepperbush and swamp azalea occurring in lesser abundance. Waterwillow constitutes the dominant plant species at the Palustrine emergent Wetland No. 7. In addition to open water, Wetland No. 10 also contains a Palustrine forested community composed, for the most part, of red maple, highbush blueberry, sweet pepperbush, and sheep laurel. Wildlife observations were limited to green frogs and bullfrogs at Wetlands Nos. 6 and 11, respectively. Although small in size, the location of these wetlands in relatively isolated and undisturbed surroundings enhances their status as habitat, particularly for small mammals and amphibians. Many species of the latter wildlife groups, for example, depend upon woodland ponds for breeding. Based on field investigations, each of the above-referenced wetlands -61- are anticipated to serve this function. The value of these wetlands for larger species of mammals and birds, however, is expected to be diminished by the wetlands' overall size limitations. Wetlands Nos. 8 and 9 consist of Pratt Pond and Great Mink Hole, respectively. Areas involved are shown in FIGURE 3-3-3. Only a very small portion of a Palustrine scrub/shrub wetland associated with Pratt Pond occurs within the preferred Alternative 4-M-5. In contrast, most of the open water and surrounding scrub/shrub vegetation at Great Mink Hole is located along the proposed alignment. Right-of-way wetland vegetation associated with Pratt Pond and Great Mink Hole includes red maple, sweet pepperbush, swamp azalea, and highbush blueberry. At Great Mink Hole, open water is primarily unvegetated, although water lilies are present in scattered locations. Great Mink Hole constitutes an isolated kettlehole, with a surface water area within the right-of-way of approximately 2.0 acres. Due to the size of this open water area, the Palustrine scrub/shrub vegetation which surrounds the open water is considered a bordering vegetated wetland pursuant to the MA Wetlands Protection Act and associated regulations. Similar to Wetlands No. 6, 7, 10 and 11, Great Mink Hole represents a suitable breeding site for area amphibians dependent on the presence of open water habitats during the spring breeding season. Although nesting sites are limited, Great Mink Hole is also anticipated to serve as both a feeding and resting site for marsh birds and waterfowl, particularly during the migratory season. The Palustrine scrub/shrub community of Wetland No. 12 lies within two towns, as shown in FIGURE 3-3-3. Approximately 10.1 percent is located in Kingston; the remaining 89.9 percent is in Plympton. The latter is the only wetland area directly affected by the proposed project in Plympton. The diversity and density of vegetation in this area is moderate, with a variety of woody plant species being present. The most abundant of these include highbush blueberry, red maple, swamp azalea, sheep laurel, and arrowwood. Waterwillow, steeplebush, and sphagnum are also present, however. This wetland community provides suitable habitat for a variety of wildlife species, particularly passerine species and songbirds. Common yellowthroat , brown thrasher, and cedar waxwlng were observed during field investigations. However, both the diversity and density of vegetation provide numerous feeding, resting, and nesting locations for avian fauna. Wetland No. 13 constitutes one of the more diverse wetland associations located within the preferred Alternative 4-M-5. Community types include Palustrine forested, scrub/shrub, emergent, and open water areas, as well as active cranberry bogs. For areas, refer to FIGURE 3-3-3. Palustrine forested wetlands typically contain red maple in the overs tory, with sweet pepperbush, arrowwood, highbush blueberry, skunk cabbage, and cinnamon fern being most abundant in the understory. Scrub/shrub wetlands consist of the majority of plant species characteristic of forested wetlands. However, the diversity of these areas is relatively greater, with swamp azalea, -62- sweetbells, alder, pussy willow, elderberry, steeplebush, meadowsweet, and sheep laurel also being present. Palustrine emergent wetlands consist, for the most part, of cattail, reed grass, waterwillow, wool grass, and soft rush, while open water communities contain water lilies, spatterdock and duckweed. In terms of wildlife, the active cranberry bogs are, perhaps, the least suitable habitats relative to the other wetland types. Although drainage channels associated with the bogs may contain such species as northern water snakes, eastern painted and spotted turtles, green frogs, and bullfrogs, the value of active cranberry bogs to other species of wildlife characteristic of the region is limited. The naturally occurring and vegetated wetlands comprising the remaining communities at this location are, in contrast, much more highly productive from a wildlife perspective. This is due not only to the diversity of vegetation and wetland types, but also to the high degree of vegetative juxtaposition, interspersion and edge exhibited in this area. Each of these characteristics serves to augment the overall diversity and abundance of wildlife. Wildlife species observed during field investigations include wood duck, common grackle, eastern kingbird, common flicker, cedar waxwing, American goldfinch, eastern painted turtles, and bullfrogs. Wetland No. 1A consists of Palustrine forested and scrub/shrub communities located immediately north and east of High and Brook Streets, respectively. As indicated in FIGURE 3-3-3, essentially equal amounts of these wetlands occur within the preferred Alternative 4-M-5. Forested wetlands consist of a mixture of dead and/or dying trees interspersed with scrub/shrub and emergent vegetation, as well as open water areas. Scrub/shrub vegetation is also associated with a transmission line corridor which traverses this wetland. Overall, scrub/shrub areas are dominated by red maple, sweet pepperbush, highbush blueberry, and steeplebush. Emergent portions of the wetland consist of waterwillow, wool grass, sedges and smartweed, among others. Due to the diversity, juxtaposition, and interspersion of wetland types, the diversity and abundance of wildlife at this location is anticipated to be relatively high. Although somewhat limited in overall size, the above-referenced vegetative characteristics increase the extent of edge habitat, thus increasing the availability of ecological niches for a variety of wildlife species. Species of wildlife observed at Wetland No. 14 include red-winged blackbirds, common grackles, starlings, green heron, green frogs, and bullfrogs. Wetland No. 15 is located north and west of High and Pleasant Streets, respectively. It contains Palustrine forested and emergent wetlands, and active cranberry bogs. Areas are shown in FIGURE 3-3-3. Forested wetlands typically contain red maple in the overstory. Understory species commonly consist of sweet pepperbush, highbush blueberry, ironwood, alder, sweetbells, swamp azalea, cinnamon fern, and skunk cabbage. The wetland' s emergent community is predominantly characterized by waterwillow, with areas of open water also present. -63- Although not as vegetatively diverse as Wetland No. 13, Wetland No. 15 does exhibit a relatively moderate diversity of wetland vegetation and community types. Consequently, wildlife diversity and abundance is also expected to be moderate. No species of wildlife were observed during field investigations. Regardless, this wetland area is anticipated to support a variety of mammals, birds, reptiles and amphibians, either as permanent residents or migrants. The Winnetuxet River, a Riverine open water community, and adjacent Palustrine forested wetland comprise Wetland No. 16. For areas, refer to FIGURE 3-3-3. The forested wetlands are similar to each of the previously described wooded wetlands. Canopy or overstory species consist almost exclusively of red maple, while understory species include elm, arrowwood, pussy willow, highbush blueberry, sweet pepperbush, alder, elderberry, and skunk cabbage. The Winnetuxet River is primarily unvegetated, with sphagnum and duckweed occurring in scattered locations. Although exhibiting only forested wetlands, the presence of the Winnetuxet River serves to augment the overall value of this wetland area in terms of wildlife. A variety of mammals, including raccoons, striped skunks, opossums, and muskrat are anticipated to be attracted to this area where both sources of food and adequate cover are located. Great horned and barred owls, as well as black-crowned night herons, for example, are also expected to use this area for feeding and as a roosting site. Additionally, the River serves as suitable habitat for a variety of water-dependent reptiles and amphibians. Northern orioles and bullfrogs were observed in this area during field investigations. Wetland No. 17 is the westernmost wetland associated with the preferred Alternative 4-M-5, consisting of a Palustrine emergent community located immediately east of Route 58. For areas, refer to FIGURE 3-3-3. The plant species composition of this area is relatively diverse, with cattail, reed grass, marsh fern, sensitive fern, wool grass, spike rush, arrowhead, yellow loosestrife, soft rush, steeplebush, and meadowsweet being present. Such woody plant species as red maple and sheep laurel occur in scattered locations along the wetland' s periphery. Wildlife observations included red-winged blackbirds, eastern kingbirds, and bullfrogs. Additional species of wildlife common to emergent wetlands, however, are also anticipated to use the area. These primarily include small mammals, reptiles, and amphibians. ENDANGERED AND THREATENED SPECIES According to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (1986), no Federally-listed or proposed endangered or threatened species occur in the project area, with the exception of occasional transients. Based on communications with the MA National Heritage Program and MA Department of Environmental Management, State-listed endangered or threatened species also do not occur in the project area. These State agencies did, however, note the occurence of two plant species of concern located at Muddy Pond in Kingston. These species include the white-bracted boneset ( Eupatorium leucolepis var. novaeangliae ) and bald rush ( Psllocarya scirpoides ). Refer to Fighres 3-3-4 and 3-3-5. The white-bracted boneset, presently under review for potential listing as an endangered or threatened species at the Federal level (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1980 and 1985) occurs along the northern and eastern shores of the -64- easternmost portion of Muddy Pond, approximately 800 ft south of the preferred Alternative 4-M-5. Approximately 2,000 individual plants are known to occur at this location. The bald rush community is located in a small open water area immediately north of the boneset population. This area occurs approximately 500 ft south of the proposed alignment. WETLANDS EVALUATION The U.S Army Corps of Engineers (U.S. AC0E) regulations governing the Section 404 permit program, have established general policies for the evaluation of applications for Department of the Army permits, including permits for discharges of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States (33 CFR 320.4 (b); July 22, 1982 and October 5, 1984). The determination of the effect of a proposed action on wetlands is among these policies. Criteria to be considered in the evaluation of a proposed action and its effects on wetlands were established and important wetlands were defined to include: "i. Wetlands which serve important natural biological functions, including food chain production, general habitat, and nesting, spawning, rearing, and resting sites for aquatic or land species; ii. Wetlands set aside for study of the aquatic environment or as sanctuaries or refuges; iii. Wetlands the destruction or alteration of which would affect detrimentally natural drainage characteristics, sedimentation patterns, salinity distribution, flushing characteristics, current patterns, or other environmental characteristics; iv. Wetlands which are significant in shielding other areas from wave action, erosion, or storm damage. Such wetlands are often associated with barrier beaches, islands, reefs, and bars ; v. Wetlands which serve as valuable storage areas for storm and flood waters; vi. Wetlands (which) are prime natural recharge areas. Prime recharge areas are locations where surface and ground water are directly interconnected; and vii. Wetlands which through natural water filtration processes serve to purify water." Such criteria are consistent with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (U.S. EPA) Section 404 (b)(1) guidelines used in the evaluation of permit applications for discharges of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States, including wetlands (40 CFR 230.41; December 24, 1980). At the State level, wetland evaluation criteria are associated with those interests identified in the MA Wetlands Protection Act (MGL Chapter 131, Section 40) and associated regulations (310 CMR 10.00 et seq ). These interests include: -65- 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Public and Private Water Supply Groundwater Supply Flood Control Storm Damage Prevention Prevention of Pollution Protection of Land Containing Shellfish Protection of Fisheries Due to the inland location of the preferred Alternative 4-M-5, however, the role of project area wetlands in terms of shellfish protection is not applicable . As indicated above, many of the Federal and State wetlands evaluation criteria are directly related. FIGURE 3-3-6 provides a summary matrix of combined Federal/State evaluation criteria pertaining to wetlands located within the preferred Alternative 4-M-5. Based on the functional evaluation provided in FIGURE 3-3-6, wetlands of relatively low overall value consist of Wetlands Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 10, 11 and 17. The overall value of each of the remaining wetlands is moderate. Although Wetlands No. 4, 13 and 15 are characterized by high ratings in terms of one or more criteria, their relative functions with respect to other criteria reduce their overall value. While there is no specific methodology used to evaluate the functional significance of the wetland, the evaluation was based upon available data and field observations . FLOODPLAINS Based on floodplain maps prepared for Plymouth, Kingston, Plympton and Carver by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, lands subject to the 100 year flood within the preferred Alternative 4-M-5 are associated with Wetlands Nos. 3, 4, 8, 9, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 16. These and other floodprone areas in the region are indicated in MAP 4-1, which illustrates that many of the floodplain areas directly affected by the proposed alignment occur in sparsely developed or undeveloped areas. Additionally, the majority of floodprone areas traversed by the proposed right-of-way, including the Winnetuxet River floodway, are located in the western portion of the project area, in Carver. -66- Re: Proposed Route 44 relocation, Kingston, MA. Dear Mr. Radlov: I ar writing as a result of a recent meeting between Massachusetts Natural Heritage Program (MNH?) staff and Department of Public Works personnel to discuss the proposed rerouting of Route 44, in Kingston. On September 11, 1981 John Feingold, Program Coordinator of MKHP, met with DPW's Rt. 44 project manager Gregory 'rendcrgast to brief him on potential rare species conflicts in the Muddy Pond area. These conflicts had previously been discussed with Mr. Hartley, Mr. Prendergast s ' s predecessor. After a review of its ongoing inventory of the state's rarest and most endangered species and ecological features, MNHP has ideat-if ie-d Muxidy -^P©hd as ODe of - t-en ecological sites in Massachusetts deserving highest priority for protection. Co the basis of this designation, The Nature Conservancy, a national land ccr.se rva: ion organization, is studying Muddy Pond to develop an appropriate preservation strategy. Eve Endicott, Director of the Conservancy's New England Field Office, was also present at the meeting. As you may know, the preferred alignment for Route 44, "4-M,' r 'may have adverse impacts on the world's largest population of Euoatorium leuc ol epis var. novae - ancjiae (Vhlte-Bracted Boneset.) This rare plant's range is restricted to a few sites in Rhode Island and southeastern Massachusetts, with about 60a of its known global population located along the eastern shores of Muddy Pond.. E. leucol epis var. novae-aneliae was cited in the December 15, 1980 Federal Register as a taxon with firs: priority for proposed federal listing under the Endangered Species Act of 1973. D?V and MNKP staff have been working together since December, 1980 to try to incorporate this rare Species' protection into the planning for Rt . 44. The 4-M alignment as shown in the Draft Environmental Impact Report was field-checked by MNKP staff on March 26, 1981, raising several concerns. First, the proposed route would go through, or very close to, a Dondlet just northeast of Muddy Pond. T'r.is pcndlet apoears to have direct groundwater connection with Muddy Pond, and is also one of two local sites for P si locarva scirnoides , a rare specie's of Bald Rush. Secondly, the topography along 4-M may provide visual access to the pond shores where E_. leucolepis grows. Thirdly, the topography would direct drainage from the proposed highway site towards Muddy Pond. FIGURE 3-3-4 Justin L. Radlcw Chief Engineer Department of Public Works 100 Nashua St. Boston, MA 02114 -67- y Ac the recent moot inn with Mr. Prendercnst, several specific recommendations ... ^ — - .- r - m ^^A j ^?>_-.. [ ■ j£2Li5j^li5: A^'- P.., sc i rpo idos were discussed. i-u IuuliI: I) To •.ir.'v cr.t rroundwator cort . inin.i t ion i^nncts - The 4-M alignment should be- moved farther north into the State Forest lands to avoid theadjacent pontile t entirely, if possible. Careful study of groundwater movcront in the area should be made to ascertain the effects on Muddy Pond of disturbance of the adjacent pondlet. 2) To prevent surface-runoff contamination imnacts - *Cfr>Stmfa&3mdmti&e: 4£K*d^~4d^>*0V'£4a4 along the section of highway north of Muddy Pond and the pondlet, to contain traffic wastes, road salt, and stormvater runoff. 3) T o minimize physical and visual access - Vegetative screening should be maintained thus discouraging passers-by from increasing the use of the site. These concerns should be reflected in the scope and recommendations of the Final Environmental Impact Report. The Natural Heritage Program would be pleased to meet with you or your staff to discuss the recommendations for the protection of the rare species in further detail. The development of regular coordination of MNHP with the DPW planning process was also discussed at the September 11 meeting. Early access to the Heritage Program data base, which is the only current and increasing statewide inventory of rare plants, animals, and significant ecological features, could be valuable to highwayplanners and ultimately yield substantial savings in staff time and money. The Program presently has over 2500 rare element occurrences mapped and cross- referenced in computer and manual files, the computer portion of which DPW has maintained until recently. Copies of this letter are being sent to MEPA, the Division of Forests and Parks, and the Federal Highway Administration with a request for MNHP to be included on appropriate "early coordination" mailing lists. The Department of Environmental Management and DPW have been cooperating through out the planning process to determine equitable compensation for DEM lands. In a letter on May 7, 1980 to DPW, former Commissioner Richard Kendall described the potential net acreage loss to Kingston State Forest from the proposed rerouting of Route 44. Please note that DEM's willingness to consider an incursion into the State Forest will be contingent upon protection of Muddy Pond and its rare species ptyp-ulations . &ased- on -these considerations, we will be prepared at some future appropriate time to enter into an agreement with your Department concerning the compensating lands which will be -added to the state forest and park systems as a result of the relocation of- Rt-. 44. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service in this planning process and hope such cooperation will continue in the future. Please do not hesitate to call us if you have any questions. William F. M. Hicks Commissioner, DEM cc: Sam Mygatt, MEPA Unit Gilbert Bliss, Division of Forests and Parks Norman Van Ness, Federal Highway Administration Frank Bracaglia, Staff Specialist for Environment , FHWA William Ashe, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service VFH/ASF/asf L ^, (/ , -68- August 4, 1983 Mr. Walter Williams Project Development Department of Public Works 100 Nashua St. Boston, MA 02114 Re: Rt. 44 Alignment, Kingston Dear Mr. Williams: We have reviewed the plans for the latest alignment for Rt. 44 in Kingston as prepared by G i E» McGuirc . So far as we are able to determine, the alignment 4M-5 is satisfactory in regards to its affect on rare species in the Muddy Pond vicinity. Relocating the alignment northward away from the pond has greatly reduced the likelihood of damage to the pondshore environment from runoff, spills, and construction. We appreciate the opportunity to participate in the planning process and remain at your service. Feel free to contact us with any questions in thi± future. Sincerely, JEF:phb -69- FIGURE 3-3-5 rV}\utnvnt of Environmental Management 100 Cambridge Sheet, Rorton. Mass. 02202 (o!7) Z27-.MiV z O h- o z D Ll Q Z < DC LLi CO Z LU □ B B B □ CD □ □ El □ u ED b m □ □ □ ■ H ■ □ □ u □ B CO ■ □ □ n ■ B B CM T— □ □ B □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ o ® □ □ □ ■ □ □ 0) □ □ □ □ CO □ B ® n □ □ □ □ □ B □ B CD S3 □ □ □ H □ B 10 □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ u ■ CO □ ■ ■ ■ □ CM □ B H ■ ■ □ ■ □ □ ■ B □ □ 1/3 o leristics Groundwater Supply/Recharge >> Evaluation Criterion Biological Functions/Fishe Sanctuaries/Refuges Physical/Chemical Charac Storm Damage Prevention Flood Storage/Control Water Pollution Control Public/Private Water Supp! s 4J CO CO t- OJ X3 O to -70- FIGURE 3- 4. NOISE GENERAL INFORMATION-NOISE Noise can have several psychological and physiological effects on people, which vary from one individual to the next. In particular, noise can interfere with sleep or with the ability to carry on a conversation without raising one's voice. Noise levels are expressed in units of dBA - decibels on the A-weighted scale, and are found to be closely related to human perceived noisiness and noise annoyance [1,2].* FIGURE 3-4-1 shows some commonly experienced sound levels expressed in dBA. A difference of 3 dBA occurring over a period of more than a few minutes is thought by many acoustical specialists to represent a just noticeable difference. A 10 dBA increase in noise level represents a doubling of perceived noise [3]. Noise levels in the community fluctuate during the day and the night. Generally they are quieter at night than during the day when there is more activity. To describe the changing noise levels it is customary to employ some type of statistical analysis. This study considers peak traffic hour L10 noise levels, where L10 is that noise level which is exceeded 10% of the time during the peak traffic hour and is expressed in dBA. For this analysis, the peak traffic hour was determined to be the loudest hour. Criteria used in assessing the existing, as well as the future noise climates include those set forth by the Federal Highway Administration in Federal Highway Program Manual 7-7-3 [4]. In that document the FHWA has established Noise Abatement Criteria for different land uses. As shown in FIGURE 3-4-2, most noise-sensitive land uses such as residential fall into Category B and thus qualify for a Noise Abatement Criterion of 70 dBA-LlO. In areas that are presently very quiet, noise impacts would occur If projected future traffic noise levels are substantially higher than existing noise levels, even if the projected levels do not exceed the FHWA Noise Abatement Criteria. The Massachusetts DPW has determined that a projected 15 dBA increase over existing noise levels defines a severe noise impact. This is in agreement with NCHRP Research which indicated that a 10-15 dBA increase in the L10 noise levels can be expected to result in severe noise impacts [5]. EXISTING NOISE CLIMATE Noise measurements were taken along existing Route 44 as well as along the preferred Alternative, 4-M-5. The objectives were to determine the existing noise climate in the study area and to identify noise sensitive areas. Noise monitoring was performed on a total of four days in June and July 1978, July 1984, and February 4, 1986. Noise monitoring was conducted at 14 areas adjacent to existing Route 44, the preferred Alternative 4-M-5, or along existing Route 3. The areas were chosen for their sensitivity to noise and proximity to existing or potential traffic noise. The purpose of the noise measurements was to quantify the existing Numbers in brackets [ ] denote the sources shown in the List of References in the Technical Appendix. -71- LOUDNESS SCALE 8 1 1/2 1/8 VERY LOUD LOUD QUIET VERY QUIET SOUND PRESSURE LEVEL 90dBA SNOWMOBILE* GASOLINE LAWN MOWER* COMMUTER JET TAKEOFF AT 2000 FT. JACKHAMMER AT 50 FT. A AT OPERATOR'S EAR PROPELLER AIRCRAFT TAKEOFF AT 1000 FT. DIESEL TRUCK AT 50 FT. DIESEL TRAIN AT 100 FT LATHE* 80dBA PHONE RING AT 5 FT. DIESEL TRUCK AT 200 FT. 70dBA AUTOMOBILE AT 50 FT. TYPEWRITER AT 10 FT. 60dBA CONVERSATION AT 3 FT AUTOMOBILE AT 200 FT. J 50dBA CRICKETS 40^fl . RESIDENTIAL AREA P5J30dBA (EVENING) WHISPER 20' TYPICAL SOUND LEVELS IN DBA AND THEIR SUBJECTIVE LOUDNESS. -72- FIGURE 3-4-1 FIGURE 3-4-2 FHWA NOISE ABATEMENT CRITERIA/LAND USE RELATIONSHIPS [4] ACTIVITY PEAK HOUR LAND-USE/ACTIVITY CATEGORY L10 DBA* D E 60 dBA (Exterior) 70 dBA (Exterior) 75 dBA (Exterior) 55 dBA (Interior) Lands on which serenity and quiet are of extraordinary significance and serve an important public need and where the preservation of those qualities is essential if the area is to continue to serve its intended purpose. Picnic areas, recreation areas, playgrounds, active sports areas, parks, residences, motels, hotels, schools, churches, libraries, and hospitals. Developed lands, properties or activities not included in Categories A and B above. Undeveloped lands. Residences, motels, hotels, public meeting rooms, schools, churches, libraries, hospitals, and auditoriums . * The peak hour L10 is denoted by L10(h) in FHPM 7-7-3 -73- acoustic environment and to provide a basis for assessing the impact of any projected noise level increases. In addition, the field work provided an opportunity to become familiar with existing patterns of land use and also to identify community noise sources other than traffic. Existing noise levels in FIGURE 3-4-3 and MAP 4-M are based on the noise monitoring program and are representative of the most noise sensitive locations of an area. All of these noise sensitive areas have only category B land use activities. Further details of the noise monitoring procedures may be found in the Technical Appendix. The character of the existing noise climate varies considerably within the study area due to the variation in type of land use. FIGURE 3-4-3 summarizes the existing noise levels at 14 locations, which range from 42 dBA in remote areas, to 67 dBA in residential areas near existing Route 44 and to 70 dBA in residential areas near Route 3. In general, traffic from existing Route 44 dominates the existing noise climate at locations 4, 5, 8, and 9, where L10 noise levels range from 65 to 67 dBA. The above locations are all 50 to 100 ft. from the edge of the roadway, where there are residences, churches, and schools. At locations 1, 16, 17 and 18 in residential areas, where L10 noise levels are between 60 and 70 dBA, the noise climate is dominated by traffic on Route 3, 100-500' away. Locations away from major roads presently enjoy a tranquil climate. The noticeable sources of sound at these locations include birds, wind, occasional light aircraft, school buses, cars, dogs barking, and children playing. Locations 7 and 11 are in this category and receive noise levels of 45 and 47 dBA, respectively. Location 15 receives noise from children at Camp Mishannock (summers only) and Location 3 receives noise from the Halliday plant in Plympton. In summary, noise levels close to existing Route 44 and other major roads such as Routes 3, 80, and 58 are presently in the range of 60-70 dBA-LlO. At measurement locations away from major roads along the preferred Alternative 4-M-5, existing noise levels are in the range of 42-47 dBA-LlO. -74- FIGURE 3-4-3 EXISTING NOISE LEVELS: PEAK HOUR L10 (dBA) (Based on noise monitoring in 1978 & 1984) LOCATION PEAK HOUR REMARKS (See MAP 4-M) UO (dBA) CORRIDOR 4-M-5 1 70 Residence, 100' from Rte. 3 and 115* from Cherry St, 3 47 Resid. 125' from Existing Spring St., 270' from PI ymp ton /Carver Town Line. 6 42 Resid. /Rural, 70' from Existing Brook St., 410' from Existing Pleasant St. 7 45 Resid. /Rural, 7' from Existing Spring St., 700' north of High St. 11 47 Resid. /Rural, 20' from High St., 360' from Existing Pleasant St. 15 44 Rural, Camp Mishannock at Muddy Pond, 1500' northeast of Plympton Rd. 16 60 Resid., 10' from Squanto Rd., 750' from Cherry St. EXISTING RTE 44 4 66 Resid., 60* from Exist. Rte. 44 near Clear Pond. 5 65 Resid., near Church on Exist. Rte. 44, 50' from Exist. Rte. 44. 8 66 Resid., 50' from Existing Rte. 44, 470' from Eaton Way. 9 67 Resid., 80' from Exist. Rte. 44. 17 61 Resid., 6' from Royal St., 500* from Rte. 3, 610' from Samoset St. 18 63 Resid., 15* from Westerly St., 270' from Rte. 3, 830' from Samoset St. 19 63 Motel, 150' from Samoset St., 600' South of Rte. 3. 20 59 Resid., 310' from Rte. 3, 2,400' South of Cherry St. Note: All distances are approximate and are measured from the nearest side of the roadway, unless noted. -75- SECTION 4 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES 1. NATURAL FEATURES SOILS In addition to direct soils losses associated with roadway construction, soils will also be affected by erosion which accompanies the excavation phases of construction and by the erosion of roadway embankments prior to the establishment of vegetation. The extent of these impacts will be determined by the depth of cuts required to attain suitable roadway grades, and the sediment and erosion control measures implemented during highway design and construction. Due to the coarse, sandy /gravelly character of the majority of soils to be traversed, the potential for erosion is generally high. During construction all slopes will be susceptible to erosion. To minimize the extent of erosion, diversion channels will be constructed above all high cuts to prevent water from washing over the face of the slopes. Where appropriate, terraced cuts will be installed on slopes. All disturbed areas will be seeded immediately upon completion of rough grading, in areas of both cut and fill. All proposed construction activity will be confined to the right-of-way, with roadway cuts and fills being limited to those necessary for the establishment of appropriate grades. All cut and fill sites, including roadway embankments will be progressively revegetated subsequent to the completion of construction activity in a given area. The seeding and mulching of disturbed sites as soon as practicable will serve to minimize the erosion of these areas, thus limiting potential impacts to adjacent lands, and especially surface waters and wetlands. Where necessary, topsoil will be placed to further ensure the rapid revegetation of disturbed sites. In those areas where the erosion of sediments may adversely affect surface waters and wetlands, including cranberry bogs, filter fabric fencing in conjunction with hay bale dams will be installed and maintained to curtail the transport of sediments. Such activities will be most specifically appropriate along the the proposed alignment in Carver, where the roadway is to traverse the Winnetuxet River, as well as active cranberry bogs and wetlands. However, all surface water and wetlands throughout the entire preferred Alternative 4-M-5 will be afforded the same degree of protection in terms of erosion controls . To further mitigate impacts due to soil erosion, a series of paved sedimentation/retention basins will be constructed. These basins will allow sediment contained in highway runoff to settle prior to discharge to receiving waters. Each basin will be provided with trash racks at the outlets to prevent any rubbish from entering the streams. A solid filter baffle will also be installed across the basins, near the outlet end, as a barrier to contain runoff in the larger part of the basin and allow sediment to settle. In order for runoff to reach the outlet, the water level in the larger part of the basin will first have to exceed the height of the filter baffle. -77- An additional discussion of potential construction-related impacts and mitigation measures relative to surface waters and water quality is provided below in the subsection entitled SURFACE WATER AND WATER QUALITY. TOPOGRAPHY Topographic modifications associated with the proposed alignment pertain to the extent of cuts and fill placement. Inasmuch as possible, these cuts and fills will be limited to those required to establish suitable roadway grades. A total of approximately 6,639,410 cubic yards (yd 3 ) of material will be excavated during construction. Allowing for shrinkage and unusable material, the net amount of excavation totals approximately 5,361,320 yd 3 . The extent of fill required to attain suitable roadway grades totals approximately 4,209,960 yd 3 . Consequently, a total of approximately 1,151,360 yd 3 of excess material will be required to be disposed off site. This will be accomplished at suitable locations to be determined by the contractor during construction activity. The largest single cut is to occur immediately west of the proposed Plymouth interchange. At this location, approximately 83 ft of material will be removed. Some of the areas requiring greater amounts of fill include a portion of the preferred Alternative 4-M-5/Route 3 interchange (53 ft), a roadway segment located approximately 200 ft south of Wolf Pond (43 ft), and Great Mink Hole (40 ft). GROUNDWATER Potential impacts to the groundwater resources of the region pertain to two basic conditions. These include alterations to the quantity of recharge which reaches the groundwater system, and the quality of that recharge. The preferred Alternative 4-M-5 will be approximately 7 1/2 miles in length with a paved width of 76 ft. The total paved area will, thus, be nearly 65 acres, inclusive of inside and outside shoulders. This area will effectively be removed from contributing to the recharge of the regional groundwater aquifer. Due to the proposed drainage design, there will be no over the shoulder drainage from paved areas, which would allow some of the road runoff to infiltrate through adjacent soils and surficial deposits. Rather, runoff associated with the entire length of preferred Alternative 4-M-5 will be collected in a closed drainage system initially directing runoff to a series of sedimentation/retention basins, and ultimately discharging runoff into surface waters. Thus, the only opportunity for this water to reach the groundwater table will be during periods of low surface water flow at proposed discharge locations or by means of recharge induced by high volume pumping wells adjacent to streams. Due to the limited amount of paved area which is to be created, in comparison to the total area of recharge, however, impacts to individual wells and the total aquifer are not measurable. Groundwater quality may potentially be impacted by constituents of automobile exhaust, or by deicing compounds entrained in highway runoff. However, as runoff from the proposed roadway will be directed entirely into a closed drainage system, this potential source of groundwater contamination will be -78- removed as a source of recharge into the aquifer. Discharges will be located downstream as well as downgradient from any existing high volume municipal or private wells. Thus, there is little potential for contamination of well water by natural or induced recharge due to roadway runoff. The municipal well system which has been considered by Plympton, however, is located southwest of Brook Street, approximately three-quarters of a mile downstream from one of the proposed drainage discharge locations. At this location, there exists a potential for the induced movement of contaminated runoff, which is to be discharged into Annasnappet Brook, to be drawn into a high volume municipal well. Such induced recharge into the well's zone of influence would be of particular concern during low surface water flow periods. Rather than being transported downstream away from the zone of influence, such as during high surface water flow periods, surface waters during low flow periods would be more susceptible to induced recharge due to their reduced velocities. As indicated previously, however, Plympton currently has no definite plans to purchase or develop a municipal water supply system. Due to the location of the preferred Alternative 4-M-5, as well as the closed drainage system to be constructed, potential municipal well sites identified by Plymouth and Kingston will not be affected by the proposed roadway. SURFACE WATER AND WATER QUALITY PHYSICAL CONDITIONS Construction of the preferred Alternative 4-M-5 will result in the loss or alteration of a number of surface water bodies along the alignment's right-of-way. The impact areas consist of the Winnetuxet River in Carver, cranberry bogs and associated open water between Pleasant Street and Spring Street in Carver, Great Mink Hole and some very small open water sites in Kingston, and several equally small ponds near the Plymouth Industrial Park interchange and the Route 3 interchange in Plymouth. The crossing at the Winnetuxet River will be bridged and thus will not involve any loss of open water. For the cranberry bog areas in the Pleasant Street/Spring Street area, conventional construction will result in the loss of approximately 2.8 acres of open water and result in a number of separate bog areas on either side of the roadway. However, culverts beneath the roadway will maintain the hydrologic connections between any bog areas which are separated in this way. Open water losses in Kingston will total approximately 1.4 acres, with the majority of this loss (1.3 acres) occurring as a result of the filling of Great Mink Hole. Bridging the roadway over Great Mink Hole would cost an additional $1.8 million (approximately $1.4 million per acre of open water preserved) and is not considered practicable. This is especially true in light of this wetland 's low to moderate functional value . Finally, in the vicinity of the Plymouth Industrial Park interchange, West Cherry Street, and the Route 3 interchange in Plymouth, the 4=M-5 will eliminate a number of small kettle-hole ponds with an aggregate area -79- of approximately 0.5 acres. The ponds, like Great Mink. Hole and the other ponds in Kingston, are primarily groundwater discharge areas and are not hydrologically connected to other surface waters. A short (300-400 ft) stretch of the brook which originates near the Route 3 interchange will also be eliminated by the new interchange. The affected stream reach begins west of Route 3 and extends to Cherry Street on the east side of Route 3. Mitigation measures designed to minimize the above-referenced loss of open water area and drainage pattern alterations primarily consist of the narrowing of the roadway median from 100 ft to 60 ft and the installation of culverts beneath the roadway to allow the continuation of surface water flows. Reducing the median width will preserve approximately 0.8 acres of open water, while proposed culverts will assist in maintaining the hydrologic regime of affected surface waters. CONSTRUCTION The primary impact of the construction process on surface water quality will be a temporary increase in siltation and turbidity in those surface water bodies which lie in the right-of way of the preferred Alternative, 4-M-5, as noted above. This impact will be reflected in increased levels of turbidity, suspended solids, and color, resulting from soil erosion caused directly by construction activities and by the removal of surface vegetation during the course of construction. Nutrient levels may also increase slightly during the construction period. Also, since the dominant soils in the area are moderately to strongly acidic, eroding soils could contribute to temporary declines in pH levels of water bodies with low buffering capacities, such as the Route 3 brook and possibly the Winnetuxet River. As indicated in the previous subsection on SOILS, however, a variety of measures will be implemented to mitigate erosion-related impacts to surface waters. These measures include diversion channels to prevent water from washing over the face of exposed slopes, the revegetation of disturbed areas, and the use of filter fabric fencing and hay bale dams. Additionally, construction will be carefully phased to limit the amount of soil exposed at any one time and to allow for the implementation of necessary control measures; the construction area will be managed by grading and other practices to minimize slopes; silt fences will be constructed on the downslope edges of exposed areas; exposed areas will be covered with mulches of straw, hay, crushed stone or gravel; and temporary catchments will be installed during construction to detain runoff and capture runoff-borne sediment. OPERATION During preparation of the DEIS, concern arose over possible groundwater contamination from over-the-shoulder discharge of roadway runoff, especially contamination by roadway deicing compounds (road salt). Comments received on the DEIS requested that the FEIS include a detailed consideration of a closed drainage system (i.e., a system that captures roadway runoff and delivers it to defined discharge points) for all or parts of the roadway. -80- Water quality impact analyses have been conducted for the following drainage alternatives: 1) Closed drainage from Route 3 west to the Annasnappet Brook /Winnetuxet River drainage divide, and open drainage into the Winnetuxet River from that point west to Route 58; 2) Closed drainage throughout the entire length of the roadway with four discharge locations: a brook at Route 3, Smelt Pond, Annasnappet Brook, and the Winnetuxet River; 3) Same as (2) above, but with discharge into Smelt Brook instead of Smelt Pond; and 4) Closed drainage throughout the entire length of the roadway with three discharge locations: the Route 3 brook, Annasnappet Brook, and the Winnetuxet River. It was estimated in 1983 that the closed drainage system for 4-M-5 would cost $4,500,000 plus $650,000 for the retention basins, for a total of $5, 150, 000. By way of comparison, the conventional drainage system for Alternative 4-M-l (which most closely approximates the alignment of 4-M-5) was estimated at $2,500,000, which included a short closed drainage system along the shores of Muddy Pond. The last alternative has been selected as the most effective in protecting both groundwater and surface water quality. The choice of a closed drainage system, however, has resulted in impacts which are different from those usually encountered in highway water quality impact analyses . The protection of groundwater from contamination by sodium chloride by capturing it in a closed drainage system results in the capture of other pollutants which ordinarily become bound to roadside soils after draining over the shoulder and rarely become a water quality concern. These other pollutants (metals and nutrients) are thus introduced to receiving waters in runoff from a closed drainage system at higher concentrations than in runoff which has flowed over unpaved roadside areas before entering receiving waters. Also, unlike roadway deicing compounds, they are present year-round. Thus, while a closed drainage system which captures salt and other pollutants may not have serious detrimental effects on receiving water quality during high-flow periods, during summer low-flow periods more severe water quality impacts could be encountered. Under the selected drainage alternative, runoff is discharged at the three locations shown in the following table, and runoff which had originally been intended for discharge into Smelt Pond is discharged into Annasnappet Brook. FIGURE 4-1-1 shows the roadway drainage area for each discharge point. An alternative with the same three discharge points, but with runoff from the Smelt Pond highway segment being discharged into the Route 3 brook, was considered but rejected because its requirement of three pumping stations rendered it infeasible from an engineering standpoint . -81- FIGURE 4-1-1 ROADWAY DRAINAGE AREAS Area Draining To Location of Discharge Length (ft) Discharge 1 Winnetuxet River 7,700 Discharge 2 Annasnappet Brook 20,900 Discharge 3 Brook at Route 3 8,600 Highway-generated pollutant loadings were obtained using the method described in Predictive Procedure for Determining Pollutant Characteristics in Highway Runoff , Volume III of Constituents of Highway Runoff , a 1981 FHWA report (FHWA/RD-81/044) . This model simulates pollutant accumulation and washoff during a specified period for which accurate hourly precipitation data are available. Since the procedure is not meant to evaluate winter snow melts, only non-winter periods may be examined. The model itself is based on monitoring data gathered from five highway sites around the country during 1976 and 1977. The lead loadings calculated by the FHWA procedure were reduced to reflect sharp decreases in the amount of leaded gasoline sold in the United States as a fraction of total gasoline sales. By 1987, the percentage of leaded gasoline sold in the nation is expected to decrease by 2/3 of the 1976-1977 percentage of 75%. To reflect this decrease, lead loadings calculated by the FHWA procedure were also reduced by 2/3, since leaded fuel is the principal source of lead in highway runoff. Winter loadings of sodium and chloride from road salt, as shown in FIGURE 4-1-2, were obtained more directly from data supplied by MA DPW. FIGURE 4-1-2 SALT USE IN WHITMAN SECTION, MA DPW DISTRICT 7 Year Tons Tons/lane-mile 1977- 78 2,000 14.39 1978- 79 — 1979- 80 1980- 81 2,085 15.00 1981- 82 1,885 13.56 1982- 83 1,470 10.58 Average 1,860 13.38 -82- Values in the third column are based on the 139 lane-miles in the Whitman section. The low (10.58 tons/lane mile), average (13.38 tons /lane-mile ) , and high (15.00 tons/lane-mile) salt use rates were used in subsequent analyses . Winter roadway runoff volumes were computed on the basis of 1.70 ft of precipitation (November through March), the average for 1941-1970 for Plymouth, and a runoff coefficient of 0.95. The resulting volumes and calculated loadings yield average winter runoff concentrations of approximately 900 to 1,300 mg/1 Na and 1,400 to 2,000 mg/1 CI. Current drainage plans call for sedimentation basins ("paved sedimentation/ retention pools") to be located at various points along the proposed Route 44. These basins would serve to remove varying amounts of highway-related pollutants from the runoff before it is discharged to surface waters. To account for this removal, loadings for the various pollutants were reduced by the percentages shown in FIGURE 4-1-3. FIGURE 4-1-3 REMOVAL EFFICIENCIES FOR PRIMARY SEDIMENTATION Parameter Lead Zinc Iron Cadmium Total Nitrogen Removal Efficiency 20.0% 25.0% 37.0% 7.0% 16.0% Source: Cost Estimates for Construction of Publicly-Owned Wastewater Treatment Facilities — 1976 Needs Survey, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Report No. 430/9-76-010, February, 1977. Dilution volumes were calculated for each receiving stream for winter (November through March), non-winter (April through October), and low-flow conditions. For mass balance calculations, existing water quality data (FIGURE 3-3-2) for each receiving body were used to yield average pollutant concentrations. The results of the mass balance calculations are shown in the following FIGURES 4-1-4, 4-1-5, and 4-1-6. Winter concentrations of sodium and chloride show substantial increases over existing concentrations, except at Discharge 1, where the increases are more moderate. Resulting ambient concentrations in Annasnappet Brook are approximately fifteen to twenty-five times existing concentrations; concentrations In the Route 3 brook show a two- to three-fold increase. While the changes in sodium and chloride content in the receiving waterways may appear dramatic, they are the result of the intentional shift from over-the-shoulder drainage to a closed drainage system with subsequent discharge to a stream. Because of this change in drainage the impacts are unavoidable. However, groundwater is protected from contamination and the high salt -83- FIGURE 4-1-5 EXISTING AND RESULTING NON-WINTER CONCENTRATIONS (mg/1) Discharge 1 Discharge 2 Discharge 3 Winnetuxet Annasnappet Route 3 River Brook Brook Existing Resulting Existing Resulting Existing Resulting Lead 0.03 0.030 0.02 0.021 0.02 0.022 Zinc 0.01 0.011 0.01 0.018 0.02 0.032 Iron 1.0 1.0 1.22 1.16* 0.87 0.82* Cadmium 0.006 0.006 0.005 0.007 0.005 0.009 Total Nitrogen 0.02 0.025 0.035 0.079 0.04 0.115 Total Phosphorus 0.085 0.085 0.134 0.133 0.03 0.040 Chloride 9.6 10.2 7.5 12.6 115.0 111.0** * Reduced concentrations are shown because iron is generally more common in winter runoff. A reduction of the non-winter chloride level at this location is attributable to the high existing concentration. FIGURE 4-1-6 EXISTING AND RESULTING CONCENTRATIONS — ONE-YEAR THIRTY-MINUTE STORM IN 7Q10 FLOW OVER ONE DAY* Discharge 1 Discharge 2 Discharge 3 Winnetuxet Annasnappet Route 3 River Brook Brook Existing Resulting Existing Resulting Existing Resulting Lead 0.03 0.033 0.02 0.048 0.02 0.09 Zinc 0.01 0.023 0.01 0.086 0.02 0.122 Iron 1.00 0.99 1.22 1.30 0.87 1.03 Cadmium 0.006 0.009 0.005 0.016 0.005 0.020 Total Nitrogen 0.02 0.075 0.035 0.325 0.04 0.420 Total Phosphorus 0.085 0.107 0.134 0.278 0.03 0.260 Chloride 9.6 14.3 7.5 31.5 115.0 62.0 *7Q10 - the lowest flow occurring during 7 consecutive days over any 10 year period. -85- concentrations in the streams will not reduce the ability of benthic biota, fish, or plants to reproduce and grow in the streams. The resulting concentrations are well within the range of concentrations tolerated by even the most sensitive of organisms inhabltating the streams. Resulting concentrations for the non-winter period generally show little change from existing concentrations. Calculable increases occur for total nitrogen at Discharge 2, and for cadmium and total nitrogen at Discharge 3, but the resulting concentrations are still low. In contrast with winter conditions, the non-winter chloride concentrations show little change. The low-flow, intense-storm scenario shows the highest resulting concentrations for all pollutants except chloride. This worst-case scenario reflects the maximum period of pollutant accumulation allowed by the model (20 days), followed by an intense 1-year, 30-minute storm (0.8 inches), resulting in high runoff rates and pollutant washoff. Increases at Discharge 1 (Winnetuxet River) are still moderate. Discharge 2 (Annasnappet Brook) experiences larger increases, especially for zinc and total nitrogen, both of which show approximately nine-fold increases in concentrations. The highest resulting concentrations occur at Discharge 3 (Route 3 Brook), which has the smallest natural drainage area and the lowest 7Q10 (the lowest flow occurring during 7 consecutive days over any 10 year period) flow. The sharpest increases are for zinc, total nitrogen, and total phosphorus (six to eleven-fold), with lead and cadmium showing approximately four-fold increases. The drainage design calls for paved sedimentation-retention basins along the roadway. These basins will serve the dual function of controlling peak flows and reducing the amount of pollutants ultimately discharged to the receiving waters. They will be sized to be able to accommodate runoff from the 25-year storm event of 4.3 inches. (By comparison, the low-flow, intense-storm impact analysis used the one-year, thirty-minute storm of 0.8 inches.) During low-flow periods the basins will capture and retain runoff from most storm events and allow pollutants to settle. In this way, runoff will be prevented from entering the receiving streams until sediment-associated pollutants have had a chance to settle and the remaining water is diluted by runoff from a large rainfall event or series of events. Each basin will also be provided with trash racks to prevent rubbish from entering surface waters. Moreover, a solid filter baffle will be installed across the basins near the outlet end as a barrier to contain runoff in the larger part of the basin and allow sediment to settle. The proposed closed drainage system is designed to protect groundwater from roadway-associated contamination by diverting runoff to surface waters. As previously indicated, this water will be prevented from reaching the groundwater system except during periods of extremely low surface water flows. The resulting concentrations of highway-related pollutants other than sodium and chloride would be low. It is not expected that biota would be affected in any significant degree. -86- FISHERIES IMPACTS As noted in Section 3, each surface water body in the Route 44 study area may be considered at least a potential habitat for a warmwater fishery. Under this assumption, each surface water body eliminated by the project also represents lost fish habitat. The total loss due to the proposed project is approximately 4.7 acres. The most severe long-term water quality impact of the project will be changes in sodium and chloride concentrations in the Route 3 brook (FIGURE 4-1-4). The highest resulting concentration of sodium chloride is 619 mg/1. This is substantially lower than concentrations which have been shown to be harmful to freshwater aquatic life. McKee and Wolf (1971) report the results of numerous studies on the effects of sodium chloride on freshwater aquatic organisms. Threshold concentrations for toxic effects varied considerably, but were generally well above 1,000 mg/1. Fisheries may also be affected by the water quality impacts of construction activities (increased turbidity, suspended solids, etc.). Such impacts should be limited, however, since the construction impacts themselves will be temporary and erosion control measures will be implemented. During highway operation, potential fisheries impacts will also be mitigated by the proposed sedimentation/retention basins. These basins will allow roadway associated pollutants to settle prior to discharge to receiving waters. WETLAND PROTECTION POLICIES Applicable wetland protection policies at the Federal level primarily include Executive Order (EO) 11990, entitled "Protection of Wetlands". EO 11990, issued by President Carter on May 24, 1977 dictates that Federal agencies "shall avoid undertaking or providing assistance for new construction located in wetlands unless the head of the agency finds (1) that there is no practicable alternative to such construction and (2) that the proposed action includes all practicable measures to minimize harm to wetlands which may result from such use." Wetland protection policies at the State level include the MA Wetlands Protection Act (MGL Chapter 131, Section 40) and associated regulations (310 CMR 10.00 et. seq. ). According to the State statute: "No person shall remove, fill, dredge, or alter any bank, freshwater wetland, coastal wetland, beach, dune, flat, marsh, meadow, or swamp bordering on the ocean or on any estuary, creek, river, stream, pond, or lake, or any land under said waters or any land subject to tidal action, coastal storm flowage, or flooding . . . without filing written notice of his intention to so remove, fill, dredge, or alter, including such plans as may be necessary to describe such proposed activity and its effect on the environment and without receiving and complying with an order of conditions and provided all appeal periods have elapsed." -87- Revised regulations implementing the MA Wetlands Protection Act became effective April 1, 1983. These regulations, and specifically those pertaining to inland wetlands, specify interests identified in the MA Wetlands Protection Act to which areas subject to jurisdiction are presumed to be significant, as well as set forth general performance standards to be applied to activities which will affect regulated resource areas. Local wetland protection policies primarily consist of zoning by-laws. Sections 4.4 and 11.0 of Carver's Zoning By-law (1980), for example, establish a wetland and floodplain district, with a special permit from the zoning board of appeals being required for activities proposed within the district. Project area lands subject to this by-law include Wetlands Nos. 13-17. Section 10.54 through 10.57 of those Regulations define and set performance standards for four resource areas: banks, bordering vegetated wetlands, land under water bodies and waterways, and land subject to flooding. As indicated below in the subsection entitled "Wetlands Impacts and Mitigation Measures," the preferred Alternative 4-M-5 may not meet two of the performance standards. Specifically, Section 10.55 (4) for bordering vegetated wetlands allows a Conservation Commission to issue an Order of Conditions only for a project in which the loss of wetlands does not exceed 5,000 square feet. In addition, Section 10.55(4) also imposes conditions for the construction of replacement wetlands. Two conditions are (1) the replacement area should have an unrestricted hydraulic connector to the same water body or waterway associated with the lost area; and (2) the replacement area should be located within the same general area of the water body, or reach of the waterway, of the lost area. The wetland replacement areas are at the extremities of the project while lost wetlands are located throughout the project. It is therefore unlikely that the above conditions will be met. Section 10.56(4) for land under water bodies and waterways preclude Conservtion Commissions from issuing an Order of Conditions if any proposed work within this land impacts the capacity of the land to provide breeding habitat, escape cover, and feed for fisheries. As discussed above in the subsection entitled "Fisheries Impacts," each surface water body at least has the potential to be a habitat for warm water fishery. Therefore, preferred Alternative 4-M-5 may not meet this performance standard. Because two of the wetlands performance standards may not be met, the Massachusetts Department of Public Works must seek a variance from the Commissioner of the Department of Environmental Quality Engineering. Section VIIID of Plympton's Zoning By-laws (1984) establishes a Floodplain and Watershed Protection District. None of the preferred Alternative 4-M-5 right-of-way, however, appears to be located within this District. In Kingston, Sections V.H and V.I of the Town's Zoning By-law (1983) address conservation restrictions and land suitability, respectively. These by-laws primarily pertain to natural water courses and ponds, floodplains, marshes, and seasonal wet areas relative to site developments. Additionally, the Town has adopted a Wetlands Protection By Law (Article XVIII) similar in scope and format to the MA Wetlands Protection Act and associated regulations. Lands associated with the preferred Alternative 4-M-5 which are subject to these by-laws include Wetlands 6-11, and that portion of Wetland 12 located in the Town of Kingston. -88- Section 401.02 of the Town of Plymouth's Zoning By-laws (1983) is intended to preserve and protect the Town's streams and other waterbodies, to protect people and property against the hazards of flooding and improper waste disposal, to preserve and maintain the watertable and water recharge areas, and to insure the continuation of the natural flow pattern of the water courses providing safe and adequate flood water storage and runoff capacity. Additional parts of this section address the allowed, special permit, and prohibited uses of wetlands. Project area lands subject to this by-law consist of Wetlands Nos. 1-5. AVOIDANCE OF WETLANDS The following discussion reviews each wetland from west to east. Refer to MAPS 4-J-l through 4-J-14. Wetland No. 17 is affected by ramp "D" in the southeast quadrant of the interchange of 4-M-5 and Route 58 at the beginning of the relocation of Route 44. The position of 4-M-5 is fixed at this point. Even if the starting point of the new alignment was moved 1/4 to 1/2 mile westerly and proposed Route 44 was moved to the north to avoid this wetland, other wetlands (an unnumbered wetland and Wetland No. 16) would then be affected. Cole's Mill, an historic property is south of preferred Alternative 4-M-5 and would be affected by moving the alignment south. There is no practical alternative to avoid Wetland No. 17. Wetland No. 16 is the area on either side of the Winnetuxet River, which will be bridged by 4-M-5. The river is only 800' + east of the point where the two eastern ramps of the Route 58 interchange merge with the through lanes of 4-M-5. Since the River is perpendicular to 4-M-5, a crossing is necessary, and so there is no alternative to avoid Wetland No. 16. Wetlands Nos. 15, 14 and 13 cannot be avoided because the Spring Street interchange was fixed in a location to keep the highway south of the residential developments at Nel Bonney Road, on Brook Street, and north of Ricketts Pond. The other fixed point was the Route 58 interchange. Wetlands Nos. 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, and 6 cannot be avoided because the alignment has fixed points at the Spring Street interchange and at a point north of Muddy Pond which was determined for the following reasons. At the request of the Sisters of Divine Providence to move the alignment northerly away from Camp Mishannock, and the Department of Environmental Management's request also for a more northerly location away from the shores of Muddy Pond, the location of the white-bracted boneset, an endangered plant on the Massachusetts Natural Heritage list, the alignment was fixed about 400' north of Muddy Pond. This placed the highway location through Great Mink Hole (Wetland No. 9), a two acre kettlehole wetland. To avoid Great Mink Hole, the alignment would have to be moved more northerly which would then affect Pratt Pond, Wolf Pond, cranberry bogs, and would intrude further into Camp Nekon which is a Section 4(f) property. It would also Introduce a reverse curve into the alignment west of Route 80. The Plymouth Industrial Park interchange was moved to its proposed location to serve better the industries within the Park, as well as the Plymouth and Brockton Bus Co. In order to align the proposed highway from the area north of Muddy Pond to the Plymouth Industrial Park interchange, and in order to keep south of Monk's Hill, Wetland No. 5 could not be avoided. Wetland No. 5 lies -89- within the proposed Ramp "B" lobe area of the Industrial Park interchange. It is this lobe area that is proposed for the creation of seven acres of wetland replacement and Wetland No. 5 will not be eliminated but will become part of a large, new wetland. The final control point for the location of the preferred Alternative 4-M-5 is its terminus with Route 3 just south of the existing Cherry Street inter- change. This Route 3 interchange could not be moved northerly to avoid wetlands Nos. 3, 2, and 1 without introducing unacceptable design curves and affecting approximately 20 residences and commercial properties. To move the interchange south would further affect Wetland No. 4. As a general observation, the wetlands are so numerous throughout the project area that it would be impossible to lay out a reasonable alignment that misses them all. WETLANDS IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES As previously di scussed in Section 2, in accordance with E.O. 11990, none of the build alternatives evaluated therein would avoid impacts to project area wetlands. With respect to the preferred Alternative 4-M-5, its construction will also result in wetland-related impacts. Only the No Build Alternative will totally eliminate impacts to wetlands, and this Alternative was not considered practical for the reasons outlined previously in Section 2. The following discussion addresses both wetland impacts and mitigation measures associated with the proposed Route 44 Alternative 4-M-5. Both direct and indirect wetland-related impacts are described. Impacts to wetlands are also assessed based on an evaluation of anticipated post-construction wetland values. In documenting each of these effects, the primary methodology used to evaluate impacts to wetlands is based on functional criteria. FIGURE 3-3-3 provides the existing pre const ruction acreage of each wetland community type, including active cranberry bogs, associated with the proposed right-of-way. Not all wetlands within the right-of-way, however, will be affected by roadway construction. This is, in part, due to the proposed narrowing of the median from 100 ft to 60 ft., the effect of which is to increase the distance between the right-of-way line and the toe of the embankment slope. As FIGURE 4-1-7 indicates, project implementation will result in the actual loss of approximately 28.67 acres of wetlands. The majority of these losses will occur in the Town of Carver. Approximately 18.7 acres of wetlands, which include approximately 5.2 acres of active cranberry bogs will be directly affected within this segment of preferred Alternative 4-M-5. Coincident with the loss of wetland vegetation will be the loss of wildlife habitat, as well as reductions in the functional values associated with each specific wetland (see FIGURE 3-3-6 and FIGURE 4-1-9). Reductions in wetland vegetation and wildlife diversity and productivity, and the degree of wetland vegetative interspersion will also occur in association with project construction. Additional wetland-related impacts potentially include alterations in plant species composition and successional rates, the loss and displacement of wildlife, alterations in wildlife species composition, and the disruption and alteration of wildlife movements. The potential also exists for highway construction to indirectly result in alterations in wetland species composition and successional rates. This is -90- FIGURE 4-1-7 Wetland No. Plymouth 1 2 3 4 5 Subtotal Kingston 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Subtotal Plympton 12 Subtotal Carver 13 14 15 16 17 Subtotal Total P-F 0.00 1.59 0.42 2.01 0.04 0.04 1.75 0.12 0.82 2.00 4.69 6.74 SUMMARY OF WETLAND IMPACTS (acres) ROUTE 44 ALTERNATIVE 4-M-5 RIGHT-OF-WAY* Wetland Community Type** P-S/S P-EM 0.23 0.24 1.75 0.06 2.28 0.02 0.00 0.20 0.02 0.30 0.54 3.20 3.20 1.15 0.30 0.03 0.03 1.45 5.19 2.78 0.65 1.13 4.56 6.87 P-OW 0.25 0.17 0.08 0.50 0.02 1.32 0.04 1.38 2.83 CB 2.83 4.71 3.86 1.30 5.16 5.16 Total Acreages Within Each Wetland OVERALL 0.59 0.54 1.70 24.07 1.78 28.68 0.35 0.22 7.12 2.49 0.32 0.02 1.56 12.08 10.66 10.66 51.03 5.72 96.81 76.87 2.64 233.07 284.49 WITHIN RIGHT OF WAY 0.48 0.24 1.59 2.34 0.14 4.79 0.04 0.03 0.00 1.52 0.08 0.02 0.30 1.99 3.20 3.20 12.37 0.42 2.77 2.00 1.13 18.69 28.67 Acreage calculations are based on an average width of 60 ft. Palustrine Forested (P-F) Palus trine Scrub/Shrub (P-S/S) Palustrine Emergent (P-EM) Palustrine Open Water (P-OW) Cranberry Bog (CB) -91- FIGURE 4-1-8 SUMMARY OF WETLAND IMPACTS (acres) ROUTE 44 ALTERNATIVE 4-M-5 RIGHT-OF-WAY* Wetland No. Wetland Community Type** Total Acreages Within Each Wetland P-F P-S/S P-EM P-OW CB OVERALL WITHIN RIGHT OF WAY Plymouth 1 2 3 4 5 0.01 1.64 0.47 0.25 0.28 2.01 0.09 0.25 0.17 0.10 0.59 0.54 1.70 24.07 1.78 0.50 0.29 1.64 2.65 0.19 Subtotal 2.12 2.63 0.52 28.68 5.27 Kingston 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Subtotal Plympton 12 Subtotal 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.00 0.26 0.02 0.45 0.78 3.60 3.60 0.06 0.06 0.07 1.32 0.05 1.44 0.35 0.22 7.12 2.49 0.32 0.02 1.56 12.08 10.66 10.66 0.12 0.06 0.00 1.58 0.11 0.02 0.45 2.34 3.60 3.60 Carver 13 14 15 16 17 Subtotal Total 1.77 0.25 0.98 2.34 5.34 7.52 1.84 0.40 2.24 6.62 2.72 0.81 1.13 4.66 7.35 3.54 3.54 5.50 4.95 2.09 7.04 7.04 51.03 5.72 96.81 76.87 2.64 233.07 284.49 14.82 0.65 3.88 2.34 1.13 22.82 34.03 * Acreage calculations are based on an average width of 100 ft. ** Palustrine Forested (P-F) Palustrine Scrub/Shrub (P-S/S) Palustrine Emergent (P-EM) Palustrine Open Water (P-OW) Cranberry Bog (CB) -92- z g i- o Q Z < QC LU OQ Z O z < LU □ □ CO □ □ □ □ □ □ 10 □ □ □ □ □ □ □ CO H □ □ CM □ □ □ T— □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ o □ □ □ □ □ 0) □ X □ □ □ □ 00 □ X □ □ □ h- □ □ □ □ CO □ □ □ □ LO □ □ □ s □ □ □ □ □ □ □ CO □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ CVJ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ EVALUATION CRITERION Biological Functlons/Fisherieo Sanctuaries/Refugos Physical/Chemical Characteristics Storm Damage Prevention Flood Storage/Control Groundwater Supply/Recharge Water Pollution Control Public/Private Water Supply z g o z LL LU Z o z o LU r- < cc LU Q o 2 I □ s □ CO Q CO LU CC O LU LU I- < CO z I Q LU r- < O o _l CO Q Z < LU X -93- FIGURE 4-1-9 primarily due to the sensitivity of wetland plant species to modifications of hydrologic conditions. Roadway embankments, for example, are likely to alter surface and groundwater flows, resulting in either wetter conditions or those suitable for the establishment and growth of plant species associated with more dry site conditions. Additionally, plant species introduced along the right-of-way may serve as a seed source, allowing for the introduction of these species into wetlands at a more advanced rate than would occur under normal conditions, if at all. With respect to wildlife associated with affected wetlands, construction activities will likely result in the mortality of individuals belonging to less mobile groups of wildlife, such as small mammals, reptiles, and amphibians. The loss of wildlife habitat and displacement of wildlife species, however, are anticipated to result in more substantial impacts. The losses of wetland wildlife habitat may generally be considered tantamount to the vegetative losses cited in FIGURE 4-1-7. Consequently, approximately 28.7 acres of wetland wildlife habitat will be directly affected due to project implementation. As noted above, some wildlife mortality may be expected during the construction process. Wildlife species capable of avoiding construction activities, however, will be displaced. Displacement refers to the movement of wildlife species from those areas altered by construction to other suitable habitats elsewhere. Depending on the species, construction may result in either total, partial, or temporary displacement. Small mammals, for example, may be totally displaced because their home ranges are characteristically small and may be completely contained within the right-of-way. However, where construction results in the loss of an area used only for feeding and cover by larger mammals and birds, for instance, whose home ranges extend over a large area, the potential displacement is considered partial. As a result, new sources of food and cover will have to be located by these species. As portions of the right-of-way begin to become revegetated subsequent to construction activities, a variety of wildlife species will eventually return to this area. Thus, displacement for some species may be considered only temporary. However, assuming that the carrying capacity (the maximum number of a wildlife species which a certain area will support) of off site habitats has been realized for all wetland-associated wildlife species to be displaced by the proposed project, a condition which represents a worst case situation, wildlife-related impacts will be more widespread. Rapid or large scale dispersal could, for example, result in changes in the structure (density, age distribution, sex ratio, abundance) of the balanced populations into which displaced species of wildlife emigrate (Odum, 1959). Mass dispersal and resultant "crowded" conditions could also cause increases in competition for food, breeding sites, and living space. This could, in turn, result in increased mortality rates for affected species, and particularly for those individuals displaced. Regardless, assuming that the carrying capacities of offsite habitats have been realized and all displaced individuals do not successfully relocate, no long term or permanent effects on regional wildlife populations are expected. Construction of Alternative 4-M-5 will also result in the conversion of existing wetland vegetative resources to those typical of highway environments. Such areas are characteristically dominated by upland grasses and other herbaceous plant species, although various trees and shrubs may be -94- located within the right-of-way. This land use and vegetative conversion will, coincidently , result in the introduction and occurrence of wildlife species typical of such upland successional environments. Wetland wildlife losses may be expected during highway operation, as well, particularly due to wildlife-vehicle collisions. The occurrence and frequency of such collisions have been attributed to a variety of factors, including meteorological conditions; the availability of food, cover, water, and breeding sites; behavioral responses of wildlife; daily and seasonal movement patterns; existing wildlife population levels; and the plant species composition of highway rights-of-way, among others. Although mortality among certain groups of wildlife, such as mammals and birds, may be more frequently observed, wildlife-vehicle collisions have also been documented for reptiles and amphibians. Additionally, for those wildlife species with characteristically large home ranges, especially mammals, the presence of a highway may serve more as a barrier, resulting in their inability to reach previously utilized habitats. Highway fences reinforce this isolation. Comparing FIGURE 3-3-6 with FIGURE 4-1-9, wetland-related impacts will be more pronounced in terms of Wetlands Nos. 4, 9, 12, 13, and 15. This is primarily due to the wetland acreage affected at each site and/or the potential reductions in functional values. As indicated in FIGURE 3-3-6 and Section 2, the overall value of each of these wetlands is moderate. Additionally, Wetlands Nos. 13 and 15 contain all of the active cranberry bogs traversed by the proposed right-of-way, i.e. approximately 3.9 acres and 1.3 acres, respectively. The drainage outfalls from the closed drainage system are located down gradient of water supplies used for Wetlands Nos. 13 and 15. A summary of the anticipated functional values for each wetland traversed by the Route 44 Alternative 4-M-5 is provided in FIGURE 4-1-9. In terms of Wetland No. 9 (Great Mink Hole), this kettlehole wetland contains the second largest single area of Palustrine open water to be directly affected by roadway construction (see FIGURE 4-7). As shown in MAP J10, 9, 8, practically the entirety of Great Mink Hole is contained within the proposed roadway area. Consequently, this wetland will be essentially eliminated by construction activities. No Federal or State-listed endangered or threatened species, including the white-bracted boneset and bald rush, will be affected by the preferred Alternative 4-M-5. As stated by the MA Natural Heritage Program in FIGURE 5-3-1, "the alignment 4-M-5 is satisfactory in regards to its effect on rare species in the Muddy Pond vicinity". See also, FIGURE 5-3-16. With respect to potential secondary development impacts due to the presence of the proposed Route 44, such effects to wetlands, if any, are anticipated to be minimal. This is primarily due to the limited access provided along the preferred Alternative 4-M-5 alignment and the limited extent of wetlands in the vicinity of proposed access locations. Access to the proposed roadway is to be provided at only four locations, including Route 58, Spring Street, the Plymouth Industrial Park, and Route 3. Only Wetland No. 4, located immediately north of Industrial Park Road, occurs within close proximity to the two easternmost access locations. Because of its topographic position approximately 20 to 30 ft below surface elevations associated with Industrial Park Road and the steepness of side slopes extending -95- from this roadway to the wetland, the potential development of this area is remote. Lands within close proximity of the proposed right-of-way at Spring Street and Route 58 are zoned residential. In the Spring Street area, much of these lands are already developed. Although wetlands, including those associated with the Winnetuxet River occur in these areas, zoning and land use restrictions will serve to limit wetland-related impacts resulting from any potential secondary development. Each of the wetland-related impacts cited above is subject to potential mitigation through the implementation of a variety of measures. Wetland-related design measures primarily consist of the narrowing of the roadway median. This narrowing of the roadway median, from 100 ft to 60 ft., will preserve approximately 5.4 acres of wetlands, as can be seen by comparing FIGURE 4-1-7 with FIGURE 4-1-8. Additional design considerations, particularly in relation to wetlands, include plans for the installation of a closed drainage system, and the installation of a sufficient number of culverts or other drainage features to allow for the maintenance of existing drainage patterns. The installation of a closed drainage system will aid in reducing the quantities of roadway runoff and deicing compounds entering wetland communities. The maintenance of existing drainage patterns and the hydrologic regime of wetlands is critical to their continued value as functional communities. Therefore, facility design should minimize the disruption of such conditions and ensure an adequate number of culverts or other drainage features to allow for the sustained viability of wetlands in the project area. This is particularly crucial in the areas of Wetlands Nos. 13 and 15, to ensure a water supply connection between cranberry bogs. Such facility design measures are incorporated into the proposed Route 44 project plans. In terms of wetlands located within the proposed right -of -way, placement of the roadway on structure rather than fill is only proposed for Wetland No. 16 (Winnetuxet River). At this site, bridging will be required to cross the Winnetuxet River and allow for the passage of River flows during periods of high water. As previously indicated, bridging Great Mink Hole alone has been estimated to cost approximately $1.8 million over conventional fill techniques. Consequently, construction of the proposed roadway on structure at this or additional locations is not practicable. A comparison of building on viaduct or fill is discussed below in the following subsection. Construction-related measures refer to controls whose implementation will further mitigate potential wetland impacts. Such measures primarily include the limiting of construction boundaries and the area of disturbance, the placement and maintenance of hay bales and other erosion controls prior to and during construction, the revegetation and landscaping of disturbed areas and the sequencing of construction activities. Prior to construction, the construction boundaries will be carefully and clearly delineated and subsequent efforts made to limit construction activity to within these boundaries. Additionally, erosion controls, such as filter fabric fencing, hay bales and the seeding and mulching of soils which will remain disturbed for an extended period of time, will aid in maintaining the productive capability and quality of potentially affected areas. This is of particular importance in wetlands and surface waters. Where soils are to be removed the placement of excavated material in areas not to be disturbed will be avoided. The minimization of slope gradients along the right-of-way will also reduce the erosion potential and extent of affected areas, as will the revegetation and landscaping of disturbed areas as soon as possible following the completion of soil conditions for the establishment of those plant species to be introduced. -96- Operation and maintenance related measures include maintenance of the closed drainage system, roadway culverts, and sedimentation/retention basins. The maintenance and cleaning of the closed drainage system, including sedimentation/retention basins, will serve to ensure the effectiveness of the system in limiting wetland impacts, while similar activities relative to roadway culverts will aid to maintain existing drainage patterns and minimize hydrologic effects. In addition to the mitigation measures described above, wetland-related impacts will also be mitigated through the creation of wetlands to compensate for those wetlands and wetland functions affected due to roadway construction. Numerous documents pertaining to the creation of wetlands, the establishment of wetland vegetation, and the subsequent use of those sites by wildlife have been published. Moreover, based on the occurrence of manmade cranberry bogs in the project area, the likelihood of wetland compensation efforts being successful is highly assured. Generally, the most preferable and feasible sites for the creation of wetlands are upland areas within the same watershed and municipality as the wetlands to be impacted, as well as sites adjacent to existing wetland communities. Rather than disturb several scattered areas, however, it is also advisable to consolidate them whenever possible. Several sites which met the foregoing criteria were considered as possible mitigation areas, all of which were associated with or were in close proximity to the proposed right of way. Two were selected. However, due to the extent of the wetlands to be mitigated, only a fourth of the 29 acres required could be replaced within the right of way itself. That occurs in Plymouth, in the southernmost cloverleaf of the interchange in the Plymouth Industrial Park. As shown in MAP 4-J-16, there are about 7.6 acres within that cloverleaf for mitigation, not including the wetlands already there. Since this land is entirely within the cloverleaf, no additional right of way will be required. The other replacement area is located in Carver just north of the proposed right of way. As delineated in MAPS 4-J-15(l) and 4-J-15(2), this area of about 22 acres follows contour lines. However, in order to facilitate acquisition of this land and the description of its boundaries, straight lines have alse been drawn on those MAPS, encompassing an additional 13 acres, approximately, for a total of about 35 acres in this location. In summary, the 2 replacement areas total about 29.6 acres (which is about 0.9 acres in excess of the wetland areas to be affected), and there are an additional 13 acres approximately to be acquired, for a grand total of about 42.6 acres. In addition to compensating for wetland effects on an acreage basis, each wetland mitigation site will also function to replace those values associated with wetlands impacted by the preferred Alternative 4-M-5. These functions include public/private water supply, groundwater recharge, flood control and storm damage prevention, the prevention of pollution and protection of fisheries, and wildlife habitat. It is estimated that the cost of creating replacement wetlands will be approximately $1,200,000, based upon similar recent experience by the Department of Public Works. This figure is the sum of the following estimates: $825,000 for the wetland in Carver, $275,000 for the wetland in Plymouth, and $100,000 for archaeological investigations. -97- Wetland creation at these sites basically involves the conversion of upland areas to wetlands by means of soil removal /excavation to elevations at or below groundwater levels. Topsoil and/or wetland soils are subsequently spread over the sites to provide a suitable substrate for wetland vegetation. A variety of plant stocks, including seeds, rhizomes, root stocks, propagules, vegetative cores, or individuals or clumps of fully developed wetland plant species may then be used to revegetate the newly created wetlands. Maintenance/management of these area is subsequently conducted to ensure the success of wetland creation efforts. Orders of Conditions issued by local Conservation Commis- sions require that the Department of Public Works manage the wetlands for three years after their construction. As final design plans for the proposed roadway have not been completed, there are not presently available site specific wetland mitigation plans, such as the types, numbers and locations of species to be revegetated. These plans will, however, be prepared as part of the project's wetland permitting processes prior to project implementation. While the wetland creation plan will serve to mitigate project-related impacts to wetlands, this plan will affect upland vegetation and wildlife communities. The majority, if not all, of these environmental effects will be associated with the most westerly mitigation site. In this area, approximately 22 acres of upland forest and wildlife habitat will be converted to wetlands. Similar to the construction of the proposed Route 44 Alternative 4-M-5 itself, wetland creation at this location will also displace wildlife species. Some mortality of the less mobile wildlife can also be expected. Given that the easternmost wetland replacement area, to be located within the most southerly proposed cloverleaf associated with the Plymouth Industrial Park interchange, primarily consists of disturbed lands due to sand and gravel mining operations, the environmental impacts resulting from wetland creation activities in this area are anticipated to be negligible. With respect to potential social and economic issues, wetland mitigation plan impacts primarily pertain to land use alterations and plan implementation costs. As with environmental effects, socioeconomic impacts will, for the most part, be associated with the westernmost mitigation area. At this location, existing residentially zoned lands will be converted to wetlands. In conjunction with archaeological investigations required prior to construction activities, implementation of the wetland mitigation plan in Carver is estimated at approximately $925,000.00. Due to the location of the easternmost mitigation area within the Alternative 4-M-5 right-of-way, no social-related impacts are anticipated. Wetland creation costs in this area, however, are estimated to be approximately $275,000.00 Each of the wetland mitigation measures referenced above will be incorporated into the design, operation and maintenance of the preferred Alternative 4-M-5. Regardless of the mitigation measures implemented, however, wetland Impacts will, nonetheless, result from highway construction. Such unavoidable adverse impacts primarily include the loss of wetland vegetation, wildlife and wildlife habitat; reductions in the diversity and productivity of wetland vegetation and wildlife; reductions in the extent of wetland interspersion and edge habitat; the conversion of existing wetland resources to those typical of a highway right-of-way; the displacement of wildlife species; and the alteration of wildlife movements. Construction of the preferred Route 44 Alternative 4-M-5 is also expected to result in such indirect wetland effects as alterations in -98- plant and wildlife species composition; increased concentrations of deicing compounds and traffic-associated pollutants at each of the proposed discharge locations; and the increased occurrence of wildlife-vehicle collisions. The Department of Public Works has consistently conferred with local, state and federal agencies while seeking resolution of issues pertaining to the natural features of the affected area. It has met with the Conservation Commissions and other officials in each of the four towns, with the Environmental Protection Agency, Fish and Wildlife Service, Department Environmental Quality Engineering, and others. Refer to Section 8, "Comments and Coordination" for a chronological list of such meetings. COMPARISON OF VIADUCT AND FILL Building on structure has been mentioned as a means of mitigating damage to wetlands caused by the construction of a highway. However, there exists some doubt as to whether construction on fill is more damaging than construction on piles, and whether the increase in cost (construction costs, maintenance costs and the difference in projected life) is justified by the benefits. Use of either fill or a viaduct requires major construction and has accompanying impacts: turbidity, erosion, noise, etc. The area that fill occupies is unavailable for wetland vegetation or for wildlife habitat. However, a viaduct will shield the area under it from both sun and rain, which is not only very disruptive to growth of wetland vegetation, but also much less suitable as wildlife habitat. The viaduct would require a somewhat small land taking, since the embankment fill would have slopes. The difference in cost is large. Viaduct on piles is estimated to cost $65 per square foot, while conventional earth fill is estimated to cost $15 per square foot. The costs of viaduct vs. embankment was estimated for three wetland areas: Wetland #17 - viaduct $5,800,000 vs $900,000 for embankment; Wetland #13 - viaduct $13,500,000 vs $1,200,000 for embankment; and Wetland #9 - viaduct $2,350,000 vs $560,000 for embankment. Maintenance costs for a viaduct are also much higher, since the structure itself, and not merely the roadway, must be maintained. Routine maintenance work on the underside of the steel structural members, such as rust removal and painting would cause some damage to the wetlands in the immediate vicinity of the structure. A viaduct would also expose more of the road (underside as well as top) to freezing weather, requiring additional applications of deicing chemicals during the winter months, thereby increasing maintenance costs. The projected normal life span of viaduct structure is 50 years, while that of an embankment is 100 years, introducing an additional cost of earlier replacement for the viaduct . It has been determined that a closed drainage system, located in the median, will be used throughout the project area. Foundations of suitable materials will be required to support various pipes, ranging from 12 to 48 inches in diameter including the water within them. Therefore wetlands in the median will have to be excavated and backfilled to accommodate these drainage pipes. If viaduct structures were to be used to span the wetland areas, the drainage pipes would either have to be laid on a proper foundation or supported from the structure. If excavation and backfill for foundations were used, wetlands would then be either bisected or diminished to such a degree that the amount -99- and value of the wetlands would be reduced substantially. If a viaduct is used, then the drainage pipe must be supported by the structure. This additional weight, of up to a 48 inch diameter pipe filled with water, would require that the viaduct members be strenthened considerably, increasing the already high cost of viaduct construction. Based on the above considerations it has been determined to build the proposed highway on embankment in the wetland areas rather than on a viaduct structure. WETLAND FINDING Based upon the above considerations, it is determined that there is no practicable alternative to the proposed new construction in wetlands and that the proposed action includes all practicable measures to minimize harm to wetlands which may result from such use. FLOODPLAINS At the Federal level, Executive Order (EO) 11988, entitled "Floodplain Management", was issued by President Carter on May 24, 1977. The intent of EO 11988 is to avoid to the extent possible the long and short-term adverse impacts associated with the occupancy and modification of floodplains, and to avoid direct and indirect support of floodplain development wherever there is a practicable alternative. Floodprone areas are also regulated at the State and local levels through the MA Wetlands Protection Act and associated regulations, and municipal zoning by-laws, respectively. As with wetlands, none of the build alternatives evaluated in the DEIS would avoid impacts to flood hazard areas. Floodprone -related impacts will also be associated with the construction of the preferred Alternative 4-M-5. Although, as previously described, significant efforts were conducted since publication of the DEIS to minimize floodplain and other environmental concerns, there are no practicable alternatives which would not adversely impact floodprone areas. Only the No Build Alternative will totally eliminate potential floodplain area impacts . Although each wetland to be affected by project implementation likely serves to store flood waters, only Wetlands No. 3, 4, 8, 9, 12, 13, 14, 15, and 16 have been designated by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development as lands subject to the 100-year flood. Based on the acreage data presented in FIGURE 4-1-7, wetland/f loodplain sites within the construction area total approximately 26.5 acres. This figure, thus, constitutes potential floodprone area losses resulting from construction activities within the right-of-way of preferred Alternative 4-M-5. The majority of these losses will occur in Carver, specifically in association with Wetland No. 13. This area constitutes approximately 46.7% of the total floodplain area losses by the project. Due to the location of many floodprone sites in sparsely developed or undevel- oped areas, as well as the Implementation of mitigation measures, however, such potential floodplain-related impacts as increased downstream flooding and storm damage is expected to be minimal. Nonetheless, all flood storage volumes displaced by the preferred Alternative 4-M-5 will be compensated for as required under the MA Wetlands Protection Act and associated regulations. -100- Moreover, many of the mitigation measures relevant to wetlands are also applicable to f loodplains . For example, the narrowing of the median from 100' to 60', which reduced the loss of wetlands, will also reduce the loss of f loodplains. In addition, other measures will be applied such as the installa- tion of roadway culverts, limiting of construction boundaries and areas of disturbance, and the provision of compensatory flood storage. Each of these measures will directly or indirectly serve to reduce potential floodprone area impacts and will be incorporated, to the extent practicable, into final roadway design. As final design plans have not been completed, specific data pertaining to flood storage volume reductions resulting from construction of the proposed alignment, as well as calculations regarding the provision of compensatory flood storage are not presently feasible. These data will be generated during the project's final design phase with provisions for appropriate flood storage compensation being documented, as well. Based on the proposed wetland mitigation plan, however, much if not all of the requisite compensatory flood storage is anticipated to be provided by wetland creation activities. -101- 2. NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS TRAFFIC NOISE CALCULATIONS Future traffic-generated noise levels were calculated for locations along the preferred Alternative 4-M-5 and also adjacent to new roadways in the two interchanges with Route 3. The purpose of the traffic noise calculations was to provide a quantitative basis for assessing the likely noise impacts for 4-M-5 and near the Route 3 interchanges. All calculated noise levels are expressed in LlO-dBA and are shown as the future noise levels on MAP 4-M. These traffic noise projections were calculated for two alternative future conditions: with Route 44 relocated to 4-M-5; and also with Route 44 remaining in its present alignment. Traffic noise levels were calculated using the FHWA computer model, Snap 1.0 [6] based on the FHWA Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model [7]. Documentation for the SNAP 1.0 computer model issued by FHWA indicates that it complies with the requirement of FHPM 7-7-3 paragraph 10 [4]. The SNAP model calculates traffic noise levels based on input data describing the roadway geometry and the traffic characteristics — volume, speed, etc. Details of the SNAP model and the traffic volumes, etc., used for calculating the traffic noise levels may be found in the Technical Appendix. At areas for which noise barrier analysis was conducted, noise reduction estimates are based on either the STAMINA II/OPTIMA computer model of a preliminary analysis of the shielding geometry. Both incorporate principles of the FHWA Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model. [7,9]. Traffic noise levels were calculated at 14 noise sampling areas. In addition, L10= 60 and 70 dBA noise contour locations were calculated for the preferred Alternative 4-M-5. These contour locations were used in the analysis to locate noise impacted land areas. METHOD OF ASSESSMENT OF LIKELY NOISE IMPACT The following methodology was employed in the assessment of environmental noise impacts for the preferred Alternative 4-M-5 and the Route 3 interchanges: Calculate projected traffic noise levels at representative noise sensitive locations. Compare the projected noise levels with existing noise levels and FHWA Noise Abatement Criteria to identify potentially impacted areas. Noise measurements were used to identify potential noise sensitive receptor sites. Projected traffic noise levels were calculated for these sites. These traffic noise projections were used to identify noise impacted areas by application of the criteria summarized on FIGURE 4-2-1. Further details of the noise impact assessment procedures may be found in the Technical Appendix. -102- FIGURE 4-2-1 CRITERIA FOR TRAFFIC NOISE IMPACT PROJECTED PEAK HOUR L10 NOISE LEVEL IMPACT INCREASE OF 15 dBA OR SEVERE IMPACT GREATER ABOVE EXISTING NOISE LEVEL 69 dBA OR GREATER APPROACHES OR EXCEEDS FHWA NOISE ABATEMENT CRITERIA FOR RESIDENTIAL AND OTHER CATEGORY B LAND USES. PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE 4-M-5 IMPACT EVALUATION In general, relocation of Route 44 to the preferred Alternative 4-M-5 will result in a major new noise source being introduced into areas which currently enjoy a very quiet environment, such as residential areas, and a State Forest which is used for passive recreation. If Route 44 is not relocated, and assuming traffic volumes increase over the next 20 years as projected, there will be a corresponding increase in noise levels in areas along Route 44, which already experience considerable noise. Note that even if Route 44 is relocated, noise levels along existing Route 44 will continue to be high, although somewhat diminished due to truck traffic being attracted to the new road. All of these noise-sensitive areas have only Category B land use activities. FIGURE 4-2-2 lists the existing and predicted noise levels at 14 locations for the No-Build and Build Alternatives. It also lists the number of units impacted near each location. All of these units except one, a motel, represent residences. In addition to these residences, others along Existing Route 44 will continue to receive significant noise. Location 1, a residential area near the Route 3/Cherry Street Interchange, currently receives noise levels of 70 dBA-LLO and is projected to receive levels of 70 dBA-LlO for the No-Build Alternative and 73 dBA-KLO for the Build Alternative for the year 2000. These levels equal and exceed the FHWA Noise Abatement Criteria of 70 dBA-LLO for Category B Land Use/Activities. There are 12 residences in this area. Location 16 is east of the existing Route 3/ Cherry Street Interchange. There are three residences in the immediate vicinity subject to noise from either the existing ramps or proposed connectors, Connector A and Connector B. Since the proposed connectors are further away from the residences than the existing ones, these residences will receive less noise from the preferred Alternative 4-M-5. At this location, it will have noise levels of 61 dBA-LLO, whereas the existing and future No-Build Alternative will have noise levels of 60 and 63 dBA-KLO respectively. Location 15 is at Camp Mishannock, south of the preferred Alternative 4-M-5. With the existing and future No-Build Alternative, this site will have noise -103- FIGURE 4-2-2 EXISTING AND FUTURE NOISE LEVELS (LlO-dBA) LOCATION (See MAP 4-M) 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 11 * 15 16 17 18 * 19 20 # OF RESIDENCES OR UNITS REPRESENTED 12 2 11 10 7 6 8 6 6 1 5 7 6 1 60 EXISTING NOISE LEVELS (1984) 70** 47 66 65 42 45 66 67 47 44 60 61 63 63 59 PROJECTED FUTURE NOISE LEVELS NO-BUILD ALTERNATIVE (YEAR - 2000) 70** 47 72** 72** 42 45 68 68 47 44 62 65 68 72** 68 BUILD ALTERNATIVE (YEAR - 2000) 73** 59 59*** 66 62** 57 67 63 61 47 61 67 70** 70** 68 Location 15 Is a Girls' Camp. Location 19 is a Motel. Denotes a noise impact according to criteria in FIGURE 4-2-1. This increase is not attributable to relocated 44, which is nearly 2 miles away from this location. The increase is caused entirely by increased traffic on existing Route 44, due to projected development in areas tributary to it. Note 1: Locations are not numbered consecutively because several which applied only to rejected Alternatives were omitted in the Final EIS. -104- levels of 44 dBA-LLO, and with 4-M-5, it will have levels of 47 dBA-UO. Location 3, a residential area, is 125 feet from existing Spring Street and is north of the proposed Spring Street Interchange. The noise levels for the existing and future No-Build Alternative will be 47 dBA-LlO for both years. The noise level with the preferred Alternative 4-M-5 will be 59 dBA-UO. Neither Location 15 nor Location 3 meets criteria in FIGURE 4-2-1 for a noise impact . Location 7 is at the southwesterly quadrant of the proposed Spring Street interchange. This area will receive 45 dBA-LlO with the existing and future No-Build Alternative and 57 dBA-LlO with the preferred Alternative 4-M-5 and does not meet the criteria on FIGURE 4-2-1 for an impact. Construction of houses was taking place in this area at the time of preparation of this text. Further development directly adjacent to the right-of-way would undoubtedly be subject to a noise impact. Location 6, a rural residential area, is located near Brook and Pleasant Streets. With the No-Build Alternative, noise levels will not change over the existing levels of 42 dBA-L10. With the preferred Alternative 4-M-5, noise levels are projected to be 62 dBA-LlO, an increase of 20 dBA. This increase is identified as a severe impact (see FIGURE 4-2-1). Location 11, rural, residential in nature, is located near High Street and is south of 4-M-5. The existing and future No-Build Alternatives are both 47 dBA-LlO, and levels for 4-M-5 are 61 dBA-LlO. Neither Alternative meets the criteria on FIGURE 4-2-1 for an impact. Locations 4, 5, 8, and 9 along existing Route 44 have noise levels between 65 and 67 dBA-LlO. Location 4 will have an impact with either 4-M-5 or the No-Build Alternative with noise levels of 69 and 72 dBA-LlO, respectively. At Location 5, there will be a noise impact for the future No-Build Alternative which has levels of 72 dBA-LlO, 6 dBA more than for 4-M-5. At Locations 8 and 9, there are no noise impacts for either the future No-Build Alternative or 4-M-5, and the levels for the No-Build Alternative will be 1 and 5 dBA more than for 4-M-5. Locations 17 and 18 are residential and are at the northern quadrant of the proposed interchange at existing Route 44 and Route 3, and of the two, Location 18 is closest to Route 3. The existing noise levels at Locations 17 and 18 are 61 and 63 dBA-LlO, respectively, and those for the No-Build Alternative are 65 and 68 dBA-LlO. The levels for 4-M-5 at Locations 17 and 18 are 67 dBA-LlO and 70 dBA-LlO, respectively. The latter represents an impact and meets the FHWA Noise Abatement Criterion of 70 dBA— L10 for Category B Land Use/Activities. Location 19, a motel is in a business area at the southern quadrant of the proposed interchange at existing Route 44 and Route 3. The existing noise levels are 63 dBA-LlO. Both the future No-Build Alternative and 4-M-5 will have impacts with levels of 72 and 70 dBA-LlO, respectively. Location 20 is a new development of twelve buildings, each with five condominiums and is located along the northbound side of Route 3. See MAP 4-M. The existing noise levels are 59 dBA-ULO . See FIGURE 4-2-2. This area receives some protection from traffic noise by earth berms along the northbound side of Route 3. It is recommended that the existing earth berms be retained and connected with another earth berm to increase noise attenuation for the buildings. If the existing earth berms remain at the same heights, the noise levels will be 68 dBA-LlO for both the No-Build Alternative -105- and preferred Alternative 4-M-5. However, if the earth berms are connected to one berm, the noise levels will be 63 dBA-LlO in both cases. MITIGATING MEASURES FOR TRAFFIC NOISE In accordance with FHPM 7-7-3, alternative abatement measures were considered to assess their effectiveness in reducing the predicted design year noise levels to acceptable levels in the preferred Alternative 4-M-5 and at the two proposed interchanges. These alternative measures include traffic management, alteration of vertical or horizontal alignments, and construction of noise barriers. Potential traffic management strategies include traffic control devices; signing for prohibition of certain vehicle types; time/use restrictions for certain vehicle types; modified speed limits, and exclusive lane designations. Other than the regulated speed limit at 55 mph, traffic management measures are not possible for the proposed Route 44. Design considerations which dictate the feasibility of altering the vertical alignment include the topography, sight distance, aesthetics, economics, and drainage. These considerations pertinent to the selection of the horizontal alignment include avoiding property takings and minimizing environmental impacts from proposed Route 44. In view of these considerations, it would not be feasible to alter the alignments to reduce traffic noise. Overall, noise barriers were considered as the most practical approach to mitigating noise at impacted areas in this project and are discussed in detail by impact area. These areas are listed in FIGURE 4-2-2 and are shown on MAP 4-M. NOISE IMPACT AREA 1 Nine of the 12 residences in this area are projected to receive traffic noise in the range of 70-75 dBA-LlO, thus equalling or exceeding the FHWA Noise Abatement Criterion of 70 dBA-LlO. These residences presently receive 66-71 dBA-LlO, so that the projected increase is 3-4 dBA. See FIGURE 4-2-2. The projected future noise levels are the same whether or not the project is built since almost all of the noise comes from Route 3. PROPOSED MITIGATING MEASURE It is proposed to construct a noise barrier wall along the east side of Route 3 to reduce the traffic noise for these residences. Six of the nine residences with projected traffic noise impacts would receive a noise reduction benefit of five or more decibels from a wall. A noise barrier wall could be constructed for a distance of 905 feet along the east side of Route 3, STA. 17 + 50 - 26 + 50, approximately. (See MAP 4-M-l.) This wall would be 14 feet above the road for a distance of 255 feet, STA. 17 + 50 - 20 + 00, 17 feet above the road for a distance of 500 feet, STA. 20 + 00-25+00, and 14 feet above the road for a distance of 150 feet, STA. 25 + 00 - 26 + 50 and would end at the Cherry Street bridge. This barrier would provide a noise reduction benefit of nine decibels for two residences, six decibels for two residences, and five decibels for three residences. The approximate cost of the wall would be $164,000. The cost of the barrier is approximately $41,000 for each of the four houses that would receive a six dBA or more noise reduction. In terms -106- of the seven houses overall that would receive a benefit, the cost of the wall would be about $23,000 per house. Analysis assured concrete barrier due to the right of way width along existing Route 3. During design, the feasibility of fitting in an earth berm will be explored to reduce the cost of the barrier. It would also be possible to have the wall continue over the Cherry Street bridge. With this extension three houses would each receive a one decibel higher noise reduction. However, the bridge would require special construction to provide for the wall. The cost of this construction would outweigh the slight noise reduction benefit these houses would receive. Therefore, it is proposed that the wall should end at the Cherry Street bridge, STA. 26 + 50. NOISE IMPACT AREA 6 This area is located along Brook St. just north of Relocated Route 44. This area presently enjoys a very quiet ambiance with noise levels of approximately 42 dBA-LlO. Traffic noise from Relocated Route 44 would increase the noise exposure by 16 dBA or more for seven residences , which are projected to receive noise in the range of 58-64 dBA-LlO. The preferred Alternative 4-M-5 would be built on fill here. One possible way to reduce the traffic noise would be to construct a noise barrier wall along the edge of the roadway. PROPOSED MITIGATING MEASURE It is proposed to construct a noise barrier for a distance of 1610 feet, 1510 feet of which would be on top of two proposed earth berms basically located 50 feet from the edge of the road on the north side of Route 44. One hundred feet of the barrier would continue over the Brook Street bridge. (See MAP 4-M-2.) The top of the barrier would be at an elevation 16 feet above that of the roadway. The barrier would be 12 feet high for a distance of 630 feet, STA. 119-125, 16 feet high for a distance of 100 feet, STA. 125-126, and 10 feet high for a distance of 880 feet, STA. 106-134 + 70. This barrier would provide a noise reduction benefit of eight decibels for one residence, six decibels at three residences, five decibels at two residences, and four decibels at one residence, and would limit the maximum noise level increase to 12 decibels. The approximate total cost of the barrier would be about $216, 000. The cost of the barrier would be about $54,000 for each of the four houses that would receive a six dBA or more noise reduction benefit. In terms of the six houses that would receive a five dBA or more noise reduction benefit, the cost of the wall would be $36,000 per house. The cost of earth berms has not been included since the fill needed would be taken from excavation on the job. -107- NOISE IMPACT AREAS 17 AND 18 This Is the residential area adjacent to the northern quadrant of the proposed improved interchange at Routes 3 and 44 at Samoset Street. With the projected traffic volume increases on Route 3, residences in these areas are projected to receive at least a 4-5 dBA increase with both 4-M-5 and the No-Build Alternative. (See FIGURE 4-2-2). The noise levels in these areas will increase from the existing levels of 61 and 63 dBA-UO to projected levels of 65-68 dBA-LlO in the year 2000 without the interchange. With the proposed interchange, the noise levels would be slightly higher (2-4 dBA) at several residences due to the closer proximity of traffic on the ramps. The highest projected noise level at any residence is 70 dBA-LlO. This condition could be alleviated by constructing a noise barrier along the east side of the on-ramp (Ramp B). The barrier should extend along the ramp for a distance of about 1000 ft., from STA. 6, near Royal St., to STA. 16, near where the ramp completes its merge with Route 3. See MAP 4-M-3. The ramp is partially in cut and partially on fill here. A combination earth-berm and wall appears to be feasible. The top-of-wall elevation should be approximately 15 ft. above Ramp B. For preliminary cost estimating purposes it is assumed that the noise barrier would consist of a 15 ft. high wall for the first 400 ft. (STA. 6-10), where the ramp is built on fill. The remaining 600 ft. of the barrier (STA. 10-16), where the ramp is in cut, would consist of a wall 8 ft. high above a combination of berm and cut, with the top of berm 7 ft. above Ramp B. The estimated cost of the first 400 ft. of wall (15 ft. high) is $72,000. The estimated cost of the remaining 600 ft. long combination of berm and cut topped by an 8 ft. high wall is $58,000. Thus the total estimated cost for this noise barrier is $130,000. It is estimated that the four houses closest to the road would receive a 12-15 decibel noise reduction from this noise barrier. A further four houses would receive a 5 dBA noise reduction. The cost of the barrier is thus approximately $32,500 for each of the four houses that would receive a 12-15 dBA benefit. In terms of the eight houses overall that would receive a benefit, the cost of the wall would be about $16,000 per house . PROPOSED MITIGATING MEASURE It is proposed to construct a noise barrier along the east side of Ramp B for a distance of approximately 1000 ft. from the vicinity of Royal St. (STA. 6) to the ramp connection to Route 3 at STA. 16. See MAP 4-M-3. The top-of-barrier elevation should be 15 ft. above the ramp pavement. The most feasible approach appears to be a 15 ft. wall in one section and a combination of cut and berm topped with a wall for the rest of the barrier. The total estimated cost is $130,000. Eight houses are projected to receive noise reductions in the range of 5-15 dBA with four of these receiving a 12-15 decibel reduction. The cost of the noise barrier per house receiving a noise reduction benefit is thus $16,000 per house. -108- NOISE IMPACT AREA 19 There is a motel located on the south side of Samoset St. next to the southbound Ramps C and D of the proposed improved interchange. Various parts of this motel receive noise from Route 3 and from Samoset St., with the loudest exposure presently being 63 dBA-LlO. This noise is projected to increase to 70 dBA-LlO with 4-M-5 and to 72 dBA-LlO with the future No-Build Alternative. In terms of the L10 noise measure, the dominant noise sources are Samoset St. and the main line of Route 3. The contributions from Ramp C and D are relatively insignificant at the motel. Thus, the noise level at the motel is relatively unaffected by the project. PROPOSED MITIGATING MEASURE No mitigating measure is proposed because the future projected noise level at the motel is 2 dBA lower with the Build Alternative than with the No Build Alternative. CONSTRUCTION NOISE MITIGATION According to FHPM 7-7-3 [4], Paragraph 11, the following steps are to be performed with regard to mitigation of noise from construction activity: "a. Identify land uses or activities which may be affected by noise from construction of the project. The identification is to be performed during the project development studies. "b. Determine the measures which are needed in the plans and specifications to minimize or eliminate adverse construction noise impacts to the community. This determination shall include a weighing of the benefits achieved and the overall adverse social, economic, and environmental effects and the cost of the abatement measures. "c. Incorporate the needed abatement measures in plans and specifications." Critical noise receptors for the Route 44 project would include all of those potential impact areas shown on MAP T. Another potentially critical area is the residential neighborhood along Spring St. near preferred Alternative 4-M-5. This area will involve considerable earthwork and other construction activity. All of these critical residences and other land uses are close enough to construction activity that they could receive significant noise from earth-moving equipment, etc. In addition, all residences located along those local roads that will be used as haul routes should be considered as critical receptors. Contract Plans and Specifications will include the following requirements with respect to construction noise control. Locate contractor staging areas at least 200 ft. from any residence or other critical receptor, and further if possible. Do not use any diesel or gasoline engine equipment unless it is fitted with an exhaust muffler in good working condition. Do not operate any equipment outside of certain specified hours, say 7 am to 7 pm weekdays. -109- 3. AIR QUALITY INTRODUCTION Although there are no permanent air quality monitoring stations in the study area, its air quality can generally be considered good. The primary reason is that much of the area is undeveloped open space. The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Quality Engineering specified that 1-hour and 8-hour background CO concentrations of 3.0 ppm and 1.0 ppm, respectively, be used in this analysis. The primary transportation-related air pollution within the study area is expected to be concentrated along the major highway corridors. Carbon monoxide concentration projections were made utilizing existing traffic and meterorological conditions. Considering air quality on a much broader scale, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has determined that the photochemical oxidant concentrations in the northeastern part of the United States are presently high. The EPA has classified many of the northeastern states, including Massachusetts, as a " No n- Attainment Area" for photochemical oxidants, which signifies that the National Ambient Air Quality Standard for ozone is not being met. The contribution of the transportation-related activities in the study area to the overall photochemical oxidant concentrations is minute. The purpose of this air quality analysis is to assess and quantify any potential air quality Impacts due to the traffic generated by the proposed relocation of Route 44, and to identify any conditions which may be in violation of either the Massachusetts or National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for carbon monoxide (CO). The principal pollutants associated with transportation activities are CO, unburned non-methane hydrocarbons (NMHC), and oxides of nitrogen (N0 X ). NMHC and N0 X , in turn, react with sunlight to form ozone. Because highway vehicles are the prime source of CO and they also produce nearly half of the total NMHC and N0 X emitted annually, most air quality investigations for highway projects are primarily concerned with these three pollutants. The pollutants and their effects are described below. Carbon Monoxide is a colorless and odorless gas. Most carbon monoxide in urban areas is produced by the incomplete combustion of carbonaceous fuels. Transportation activities account for the major portion of carbon monoxide emissions. In man, carbon monoxide is absorbed by the lungs where it combines with the hemoglobin of the blood, reducing its oxygen-carrying capacity. As a result, the central nervous system is affected, with impairment of time judgment and visual acuity. Long term exposure at high levels damage the heart and the brain. The NAAQS for CO is 35 parts per million (ppm) for one hour or 9 ppm for eight hours, not to be expected more than once per year. Non-methane hydrocarbons (NMHC) themselves do not have direct detrimental effects, but are important as a precursor to ozone. Over half of all NMHC emissions are the result of automotive engine exhaust and evaporation. -110- Nitrogen Oxides are produced when fuels are burned at high temperatures. The nitrogen oxides of pollution importance are nitric oxide (NO) and nitrogen dioxide (NO^). Nitric oxide is not considered to have any adverse effects at concentrations in the atmosphere. Nitrogen dioxide has an effect on the respiratory system and has resulted in increased rates of bronchitis among exposed people. It is also one of the components in the formation of photochemical oxidants, as discussed above. The NAAQS for N0 X (indicated by N02) is 0.05 ppm, not to be exceeded more than once per year. Photochemical oxidants are the products of chemical reactions in the atmosphere involving precursor pollutants. The most prevalent of these oxidants is ozone, also known as smog. Not directly emitted into the atmosphere, ozone is the result of the chemical reaction that occurs when NMHC and N0 X react with sunlight. A summer season pollutant, ozone is not limited to an urban, or local area. Because the precursors require time to produce ozone, impacts may not be felt for 50-100 miles downwind from the sources. Adverse effects of overexposure to ozone include respiratory damage and eye irritation. Control of the precursor pollutants will limit the levels of ozone produced. The NAAQS for ozone is .12ppm over a one hour period. CRITERIA The target date for attainment of the NAAQS was December 31, 1982, under the provisions of the 1977 amendments to the Clean Air Act. In specific cases where it can be demonstrated to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator that attainment of the national primary ambient air quality standard for ozone or CO (or both ) is not possible by that date, the attainment deadline may be extended to December 31, 1987. Massachusetts is one of these "non-attainment areas" that has received such an extension. Massachusetts is also a "non-attainment area" for ozone. Plympton, Kingston, and Carver are In attainment for CO, and Plymouth is unclassified for CO. Under the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1970 and 1977, all states are required to submit a State Implementation Plan (SIP) for attaining and maintaining the National Ambient Air Quality Standards set by EPA. Transportation Control Plans (TCPs) are required for any Air Quality Control Region where controls on stationary sources, such as power plants and other industries, combined with Federal new car emission standards, are inadequate to ensure attainment or maintenance of the NAAQS for CO and ozone. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts has adopted a SIP which includes transportation control measures, and which was approved by EPA on Nov. 9, 1983. The FHWA has determined that both the transportation plans and the Transportation Improvement Programs (TIP) conform to the SIP. This project is included in the TIP for the Old Colony Planning Council and the Southeastern Regional Planning and Economic Development District. Therefore, pursuant to 23 CFR 770, this project conforms to the SIP. The air quality analysis was coordinated with EPA and the MA. Department of Environmental Quality Engineering (DEQE). To demonstrate compliance with the NAAQS for CO, a microscale (local) analysis was performed. In a microscale analysis, sensitive receptors within the study area are identified and detailed traffic data are compiled. Using air quality -111- modeling techniques, estimates of CO levels at these sensitive receptors are made for all project alternatives and analysis years. The predicted CO concentrations are then compared with the NAAQS. A mesoscale (areawide) analysis was also performed to assess the regional air quality impact of the preferred Alternative 4-M-5. In a mesoscale analysis, the total pollutant burden for CO, NMHC, and N0 X is estimated by calculating the emission levels for each pollutant, following which, comparisons are made between alternatives and study years. Both the microscale and the mesoscale analyses were performed for the 1984 existing conditions and for both the No-Build and 4-M-5. Alternatives for the years 1990 and 2000. MICROSCALE ANALYSIS AND IMPACTS The 1- and 8-hour CO concentrations were calculated for "worst-case" traffic and meteorological conditions at a number of sensitive receptors in the project area. These receptors were chosen in consultation with DEQE and represent locations where the highest CO concentrations are expected. They include the nearest residences as well as places to which the public has access. FIGURE 4-3-1 contains the list of receptors chosen. As shown on MAP 4-L the receptors are linked to the following four specific locations, as agreed to by DEQE and MDPW. 1. The overpass at Brook Street (New Route 44) 2. Spring Street Interchange (New Route 44) 3. New Route 3 Interchange at Cherry Street. 4. Improved interchange, Route 3 at Samoset Street. The EPA MOBILE-3 computer model was used to calculate vehicle emission rates. The traffic data used were based on existing traffic volume counts and projections developed by the MA. Department of Public Works (MDPW). Carbon monoxide concentrations were estimated using the FHWA CALINE-3 computer model. CALINE-3 is a Gaussian line source dispersion model which employs inputs related to emission rates, traffic volumes, roadway and site geometry, and meteorological conditions. The Technical Appendix contains further discussion of the input data and modeling procedure. FIGURE 4-3-2 gives the results of the 1-hour and 8-hour analyses. All concentrations are well below the NAAQS. Concentrations decrease from 1984 to 1990 and are nearly constant between 1990 and 2000. Relative to the No-Build Alternative, CO levels for the preferred Alternative 4-M-5 are unchanged at the Spring Street interchange and the Brook Street overpass. CO levels are unchanged or slightly higher for the new interchange at Route 3 and Cherry Street, and they are unchanged or slightly lower for the improved interchange at Route 3 and Samoset Street. -112- FIGURE 4-3-1 SENSITIVE RECEPTORS FOR THE ROUTE 44 MICROSOME ANALYSIS LOCATION RECEPTOR NO. DESCRIPTION Spring St. Interchange (4-M-5) Overpass at Brook Street (4-M-5) New Route 3 Interchange (Cherry St.) Samoset Street Interchange 11 12 21 24 32 34 36 37 41 42 43 46 48 49 Residence north of Spring Street Residence south of Spring Street Residence at Brook Street, north of overpass Residence at Brook Street and High Street, south of overpass Building north of interchange near Route 3 Building north of interchange on Cherry Street Residence east of interchange near Route 3 Building southeast of interchange on West Cherry Street Motel southwest on interchange on Samoset Street Sunoco station at interchange on Samoset Street Residence on Westerly Street north of interchange Residence at Royal Street and Samoset Street Building on Summer Street near Route 3 Building south of interchange near Route 3 -113- FIGURE 4-3-2 ESTIMATED CO CONCENTRATIONS FOR THE ROUTE 44 PROJECT CONCENTRATIONS* BY YEAR AND ALTERNATIVE RECEPTOR 1984 1990 1990 2000 2000 NO. EXISTING NO-BUILD BUILD NO-BUILD BUILD 1-Hr. (8-Hr.) 1-Hr. (8-Hr.) 1-Hr. (8-Hr.) 1-Hr. (8-Hr.) 1-Hr. (8-Hr.) 11 3.0 (1.0) 2.0 (1.0) 2.0 (1.0) 1.2 (1.0) 1.2 (1.0) 12 3.0 (1.0) 2.0 (1.0) 2.0 (1.0) 1.2 (1.0) 1.2 (1.0) 21 3.0 (1.0) 2.0 (1.0) 2.0 (1.0) 1.2 (1.0) 1.2 (1.0) 24 3.0 (1.0) 2.0 (1.0) 2.0 (1.0) 1.2 (1.0) 1.2 (1.0) 32 5.7 (1.6) 3.9 (1.4) 3.9 (1.4) 3.1 (1.4) 3.1 (1.4) 34 3.8 (1.2) 2.8 (1.2) 2.8 (1.2) 1.7 (1.1) 1.7 (1.1) 36 4.6 (1.4) 3.1 (1.3) 3.1 (1.3) 2.3 (1.3) 2.3 (1.3) 37 4.4 (1.3) 2.8 (1.2) 3.1 (1.3) 2.0 (1.2) 2.3 (1.3) 41 4.1 (1.3) 2.8 (1.2) 3.1 (1.3) 2.0 (1.2) 2.3 (1.3) 42 5.3 (2.0) 4.7 (1.6) 4.7 (1.6) 3.6 (1.6) 3.6 (1.6) 43 5.4 (1.6) 3.9 (1.4) 4.2 (1.5) 3.1 (1.4) 3.1 (1.4) 46 6.8 (1.9) 4.4 (1.6) 4.4 (1.6) 3.1 (1.4) 3.1 (1.4) 48 5.7 (1.6) 3.4 (1.3) 3.6 (1.4) 3.1 (1.4) 3.1 (1.4) 49 8.2 (2.2) 5.0 (1.7) 5.0 (1.7) 4.7 (1.8) 4.5 (1.8) *Concent rat ions are in parts per million (ppm). All 1-hour results include a CO background value of 3.0 ppm in 1984, 2.0 ppm in 1990, and 1.2 ppm in 2000. All 8-hour results include a background value of 1.0 ppm for all years. -114- The lack of impacts at either the Spring Street Interchange or the overpass at Brook Street is to to the relatively light traffic in the area. The slight rise in CO levels near the new Route 3 interchange reflects the additional traffic induced by relocating Route 44. The corresponding slight decrease in CO levels near the Samoset Interchange is due to traffic diverted from existing Route 44 (Samoset Street) to the preferred Alternative 4-M-5. However, all these impacts are very small. MESOSCALE ANALYSIS AND IMPACTS The total pollutant burdens of CO, NMHC, and N0 X in tons per year were estimated for the study area. The total pollutant burdens were calculated by multiplying the annual Vehicle Miles Traveled on each of the major roadways in the study area, including relocated Route 44, by the appropriate emission factor. MAP 4-L identifies the roadway links considered in the analysis. The traffic data used in the computations were based on existing traffic volume counts and projections developed by MDPW. The emission factors were computed using the MOBILE-3 model. FIGURE 4-3-3 shows the results of the mesoscale analysis . The Technical Appendix contains further discussion of the input data for the mesoscale analysis. FIGURE 4-3-3 SUMMARY OF MESOSCALE ANALYSIS YEAR ALTERNATIVE ANNUAL VMT* EMISSIONS BY POLLUTANT (TONS PER YEAR) CO NMHC N0 X 1984 Existing 1990 No-Build Build (4-M-5) 2000 No-Build Build (4-M-5) 72,450,500 85,093,200 84,744,000 112,163,400 112,520,300 2439 1576 1332 1750 1362 253 154 145 137 126 311 244 258 237 253 *Vehicle Miles Traveled. The roadways considered include: Relocated Route 44 (when applicable); existing Route 44; Route 58; Plymouth Road; Centre Street; Wenham Road; Carver Road; Samoset Street; Route 3; Cherry Street; Mayflower Street; Brook Street; Route 80; Gate Street; Spring Street; High Street; Parting Ways Road; and Smith's Lane. Refer to MAP 4-L for the identification of the roadway links. The pattern of impacts over time is the result of two opposing trends: increasing amounts of vehicle travel due to regional growth, and decreasing emission rates due to the Federal Motor Vehicle (Emissions) Control Program (FMVCP) and the Massachusetts vehicle inspection and maintenance program (I/M). The FMVCP requires emission controls on vehicles; by the middle 1990' s nearly all vehicles on the road will be so equipped. The I/M program began in -115- 1983 and would not have reached full impact by 1984, but would have well before 1990. Therefore, vehicle emission rates drop considerably between 1984 and 1990, but less from 1990 to 2000. This trend in emissions is greatest for NMHC and least for CO. The growth in traffic volumes is evident in the VMT projections, and higher traffic volumes also entail lower predicted speeds. The result of all trends is that for a given alternative, CO emissions decrease from 1984 to 1990 and then increase in 2000. Emissions of NMHC and N0 X decrease continuously with time. The impact of 4-M-5 relative to the No-Build Alternative, is to decrease NMHC emissions but to increase N0 X emissions. Both impacts are small, and stem primarily from the increased travel speeds afforded by the new roadway facility. In accordance with MDPW and DEQE SIP policy, the existing park-and-ride lot at Cherry Street will be replaced following construction, in order to retain its transportation benefits and emission reduction credits. CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS Construction of the project will cause a temporary increase in air pollution levels during the period of construction. The short-term effects on air quality will include: an increase in particulate matter and nitrogen oxide emissions due to the usage of heavy diesel construction machinery; an increase in the corridor emissions due to the decreased speeds; and an increase in particulate matter due to fugitive dust stirred up by the movement of construction equipment together with the exposure of soils. These increased particulate matter levels will be the largest component of the air quality impact from these activities and perhaps of greatest annoyance to residential areas located near the construction site. Dust control measures will be taken during construction to minimize impacts from particulate matter. Dust control will be maintained through application of water or other dust palliative in areas designated by the resident engineer. Dust covers will be required on all trucks hauling borrow to and from the construction site. -116- 4. RELOCATION INVENTORY OF STRUCTURES An inventory of properties whose acquisition places them in the relocation workload is presented in Figures 4-4-1 (Residences) and 4-4-2 (Businesses). Information was obtained from Assessors' records and field inspection. Of the total of 28 affected properties, 22 are residential, 5 are commercial, and 1 is both residential and commercial. Fifteen are in Plymouth, 12 in Carver, and 1 in Plympton. None is vacant. Thirteen in Plymouth are affected by the Route 3/44 interchange improvement, as presently designed; and 2 are affected by the interchange in the Plymouth Industrial Park. Only 13 are affected by the relocation of Route 44 itself. Twelve are in Carver and one in Plympton; all but 4 are affected by the interchange at Spring Street. These numbers pertain only to those properties in the relocation workload; severed parcels, or land only, are not included. It should be noted that while these data are valid as of April, 1986, residential development continues to take place, particularly in Carver, so that the ultimate number of relocations may be higher. During approximately the last 18 months, for example, 8 houses have been constructed within the right of way in Carver on Spring Street, some of which are so recent that local official records on them are not available. DESCRIPTION OF AFFECTED HOUSEHOLDS AND BUSINESSES To establish the context for the required relocation, selected data for the affected census tracts were compiled along with comparable data for Plymouth County. See FIGURE 4-4-3 the U.S. Bureau of the Census does not report statistics by census blocks for these areas. Over 90% of the housing units in the Carver and Plympton census tracts are owner occupied, while fewer than 50% of the dwellings in the Plymouth census tracts are owner occupied. With the exception of the Plympton census tract, the median value of owner occupied units is $4,000 - $5,000 below the median value for the County. Plympton, with a median value of $51,400 is $3,000 above the median for the County. The median rents for each of the four affected census tracts (ranging from $168 to $216) are all below the County median of $226. The median income for the Carver and Plympton census tracts is higher than the median for the County, whereas the Plymouth census tracts are each below the County median by more than $5,000. Similarly, Carver and Plympton have lower percentages of families below the poverty level than the County. (4.6% and 5.7% respectively, compared with 6.8% for the County). The Plymouth census tracts, with 8.9% and 9.1% of families below the poverty level, exceed the County level. To identify potential relocation problems, information was gathered on the characteristics of affected households (FIGURE 4-4-4) and businesses (FIGURE 4-4-5). Sources for this information include the Plymouth Assessor's office, Plymouth Annual Census, Carver Assessor's office, Carver Town Street List (Town Clerk's office), and the Plymouth County Registry of Deeds. The available information indicates that the residential properties to be acquired are primarily single family, owner occupied houses. Owners appear to -117- be middle income families of average size. Three elderly households and one female-headed household were identified; eight other households were identified. Available information indicates that the other households are primarily one and two person households. Ten residents under the age of 18 were identified. Since available information indicates that no family had more than four members, special relocation measures to accommodate large families are not anticipated. NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS CARVER The Spring Street and Brook Street Areas are relatively new subdivisions of single family houses on wooded lots. With Carver's increasing development, there are many comparable houses in similar subdivisions. PLYMOUTH The Westerly Road/Royal Street Area is a residential enclave of well-kept single family homes. It is adjacent to Route 44 and is relatively isolated from other neighborhoods. The two Nathaniel Street buildings, which are bounded on the east by Route 44 and on the north by undeveloped land, are relatively isolated. The Nicks Rock Road Area is characterized by single family residences that range in condition from fair to good. Plymouth continues to experience a high rate of growth and there are many other houses to fill relocation needs. HOUSING MARKET CHARACTERISTICS To determine the availability of comparable replacement housing in the Plymouth Area, real estate listings in the "Old Colony Memorial", a weekly newspaper serving the local area, were tabulated. (FIGURE 4-4-6). The selected sample included houses for sale and apartments for rent during the first six months of 1984 only. As FIGURE 4-4-6 indicates, 100 houses were included in the sample. While many of the houses included in the sample listings exceeded the price range of the affected houses, during the six month period, over 30 houses offered for sale were within the same range. A comparison of the price and size of affected houses and houses offered for sale indicates that, over a one-year period, there would be an ample supply of comparable property. See note on FIGURE 4-4-7. Sample listings of rental properties indicated that numerous apartments were available in the Plymouth area with rents comparable to the median rents for the affected census tracts. The number of housing starts has been somewhat erratic in Carver and Plymouth during the past five years; however, there was a sizable increase in the number of building permits issued in Plymouth in 1983. (FIGURE 4-4-8). See note on FIGURE 4-4-7. -118- The Housing Authorities in Plymouth, Carver and Kingston have the following numbers of dwelling units for the elderly: 273, 20 and 48 respectively. SUMMARY The relocation of 28 properties, of which 22 are residential, 5 commercial, and 1 residential /commercial . Fifteen of the 28 are in Plymouth, of which 10 homes and 3 businesses are affected by the improvement of the Routes 3/44 interchange at Samoset Street. However, further study of this interchange in the design period may result in a reduction of the number of properties affected. Twelve of the 28 total are in Carver and 1 in Plympton. Eight of those 12 and the 1 in Plympton are affected by the relocation of Spring Street as part of the interchange at that Street. The remaining four in Carver are affected by the right of way for the highway itself. It is reasonable to assume that with normal turnover in the housing market and the current rate of new construction, comparable replacement housing and apartments could be obtained within the Carver-Plymouth area. Since no minority families or large households were identified, no special measures or services will be necessary. Two structures, on Richards Road in the Plymouth Industrial Park, constructed in 1984, are located within the right of way for the connector road ramp in the S.E. quadrant of the interchange within the Park. One is a microwave tower owned by Blue Cross/Blue Shield and the other is an office/warehouse building occupied by Ceeco Corporation. Further studies will be conducted during the design phase to fully assess the impact to these two structures and many mitigation measures that could be taken to save them. Further study will be given during the design period to the location of ramps serving the interchange in the Plymouth Industrial Park in order to avoid the Blue Cross/Blue Shield microwave tower and the Ceeco Corporation building. The tower would be difficult to relocate because of the state and federal regulations for such facilities, as well as technical considerations involved. The Noonan-Leyden Press, located near the present Route 3/44 interchange on Samoset Street, could consider a site within the Industrial Park. Unlike the residential market, it is more difficult to determine whether normal turnover in commercial real estate can accommodate a relocated gas station, auto repair shop, and dog kennel. -119- a H > o o o o o co 00 (Jn vO co < <3 o o o o o o vO "0 CO lT) 00 CN CN v£> . N lO M o w CU o w X> aj fa a X) 3J 4J CO CO o r». CTi CU CO CU 4-1 U CU X! 4-) CU 60 CO V-l •H 4J EC 00 CO d H 00 n d CX-H M CO M CX 0u CO CO CO 60 d 4-> CU 0) 4-1 M CU 4-> CU CO U 4-1 60 CO d •H 60 m d CO M CX r-» co CO CU u 60 4-> d co •H M 60 P. d CO -H H P. rH CO o •H rH M u (1) CQ 01 d CU d c cu 0) ^ X) 4-> CO CU o cu 4J (3d U CU 4J CU ^ CO n o 4J OH CO prf CU •H 60 CO (3 d J«! CO •H O X! U -H 4-1 P- 2 JO co 2 -3- m o co i— I i— I CN 4-1 o pel orf Prf od CU CU CU o CU X CU cu CU >^ >. >. >i rH CO r4 U u rH rH rH rH 4J O 4J 4-1 M u t-l U CO Drf CO CO CQ , u >> CO 15 IS O CU O O CO pel 4-1 Prf Prf CU st CT* CN CO CO CN rH O rH CO 0) vO h a O CO m co CO CU CU rJ x x a, xi ccj 60 0) a ■H CJ iH O cO M H>H t>1>H>-t>H>H>H rJ (J rJrJHHH rl PdPM O-iPMP-iCtipLifa • • co , on H in oo H O m st st CM u vO OOM»N (SO CM H N CO H * IN !Ji o m on co o m st in vO rH CM 0> CI (M St N S >D CO O CO ON CM CM ON i— I IN vO st sfr |n O CO CM CO IN i— | cm rN vO co on st m >h i— l o o CM CO I st I st W o CO <3 H CO co 55 w o o CO on H CO H c_> H CO CO as w U .3 4-1 O rH CM CM O CO m ccj n 6-9 st CO CO n on o CM o m st CO 00 on m n IN o> ON CM 10 o vO H co |N st CM O o vO CM n H CO st co IN CO IN st st lO m m O st co IN IN ON O CM CM rH rH vO CM rH c^ CM "i H rH o CO H st rH .H m st IN IN IN St rH CO st H ->9 vO St CO o O CO on st st CO O vO CO <£> vO O rH CO st St iH CO 00 O rH ON IN O rH ON rH CM St rH CM in in co co on cm m H H n O H rH IN H H H On m vo H co in m cm st vo st o> on m oo CO st rH o CO CM CO rH iNiNcMcoiNONeMstmoo m CMOmrHinstlNONvOH CM COCMrHrHcMrH H H st rH CO m St rH O IN St CM CO rH O St ON | |N VO St O IN O rH CM CO rH rH IN CM CM O CM >N u o 00 0) 4-1 cd U CO •H 3 PQ M CO •H 3 00 3 o oo ON U rH CO •H X! H 0 CO ON ON ON r4 h n, in vo m st co CO ON ON ON ON ON W S rH rH rH rH rH M 1 I I I I I O cooNinoooooN 3 in in in vomstco O ON ON ON ON ON CTs ON KrHrHHrHHrHrH CO -3 rH o JS , 3 in rH o u rH st st st m n tn s n o o> cm cm co st co d o rH j-i CO &, <*oc^ ■n stcNvocMststosto 00 CM CM H H N H N CO vO CN ON co o> r- co co m co m ON o CO vO CO vO st moNoooomvocNjvOst r^vOHstcocoo o 0) us- rH vO CO CM CM CO CO 3 o r-l > p- 0) OJ d rH O- T5 CO kh" rH H cO 3 d oo ra rH o T3 o CO H •H o (1) •H - VH Cfl £ 4-1 + CO • c o rH 4J o O co d o 4-* •H
  • oo nH •H CO CO O rH 14H S 4-1 o 4-J -d a) CO O T3 O •H > CD •> o a CO 4-1 CO CO cn rH 0) 03 3 Ou O oo • ■H *H •H CO 14H O) 0) •H a O TO 3 rH CO XI > s O 3 rH <4H B 3 (0 D + O ex d t) M M 0) (U d O o ctj -o V4 00 m o a co aj a) (0 rH a. CO rd r-l w o 0) 4-1 3 cO 0) 3 co cu o 3 O OO -123- 01 4-1 co tn a <0 01 •H -C u M u «H o o o o o u l-i o © o u 3 Om o ON -a- Cu Cu «* CJ-v < CI CM * < z 0) r-l <4-l as o CO oi 4-1 tNI O r~- 4-1 a) 00 00 r-» r~- CO tfl CX> O ►J r-l 2 Z z z u oo 4-1 •H c u 01 4-1 as <4-4 o CU H (4M U 01 ■4-1 -H rH CO 03 01 *w o M 4J 14 01 4J U 09 Cu *H O 0 H C a 01 o » 01 4J 01 ex » 01 U 01 u Z 03 oo 3 -! • C u t— 1 0) tJ as XI rH •H Dt 0) 0 XI 0 0) OJ •H T5 01 a >s a X 1-1 0 "0 r-( c x: rH 01 l-i c a) 4-1 u O CO -H 0 •H X! 4-1 CO -H 01 CO 00 01 CO 03 U CU >-> CO Xi CO cci 01 •H X! U 4-1 a a > X! 4J 1-1 O X! 0) •H B CU c T3 D. -H X! x; 4-J 11 01 O CO u U 0) T3 T> O CJ •J M CU XI <-i •H a C CU CJ H CO x; a 5 0 0 as •H a = u u 0 3 CO XI V CO -4 •H 3 4J a X as CO CO as at CO 1— 1 0 M 0 l-l d a a 01 1-5 CO CO CO as t4 Oh CO s CO !-) H 0 a O u u u U > > > > -C X! XS O 0 CO CO cu 0) 01 u O O O O >> ao 00 00 03 co p > 00 00 03 01 cu a c 0 a c a M 4-4 U M co CO co 00 u e a 01 X x: ^-1 4-1 4J 4-1 •H 1 0 0 CO co CO CO 01 fH f-l l-l 01 CU XI X X XI V 01 01 •H •H A! 4-1 4J •H 01 01 01 i-l 1-t 4-1 4-1 u u tJ t— i 01 CU 01 a c s e a a XI x> X < XI X) O ■H •H 00 0) 01 01 3 3 u u u u 14 iH » 8 XI u u 0 0 0 0 O O a a 01 » 5 3 O O 0 0 01 01 01 cu 01 0 0 as as 0 0 0 0 3 33 z" at ai > CO to a CO CO CO aJ ad x as H H H H ai ai a as as CJ u O CJ of CO tH 4-1 CO c 0 01 01 z ai XI z 4-1 4-1 4-1 l-l 4-1 4-1 01 01 CU 4-1 01 0) 01 at 01 CO 01 4J 01 4-1 l-l 4-1 u u u CU l-l 01 4-> 4) 4-1 4-1 X 4-1 41 4-1 01 CO 01 CO CO 00 CO (4 CO U u •H 4-1 4J M 4-1 9S 60 CO 00 CO CO 0 CO 0 O 0 c CO 0 0 O 00 •H 00 •H 00 01 u Jrf u u C V4 a M c l-l n O CO « ^-1 a •H Cu •H ■d O h CO M CO h 10 l-l 0 0. Cu a < co CT> CO C3 CO CO < -a- cs z CM -3" •O CO 0 4-1 4-1 a! cu 0) 01 0) M u 4JJ u 4-1 0 4-1 CU 4-1 0) 0 CO 0) CO 01 ai l-l l-l 00 4-1 00 4J CO CI CO a CO M •H ■H O w U 00 ■H 9 CU 0 z CO T4. CO •H M l-i -* rH a u-i Cu 0 H CO CO f— I CJ CJ Sj CJ 3 9| CJ CJ 3 CJ si CJ 5f % CJ CJ IX S X Pu -124- I — -J o X w C/3 O X Bu O z o M H Cu 3 O to W a 11 4J w CO 0] S t8 CD ■H x: 0 X o —i o O o O O o O o Ul o O © O o o O u Cu o CM o o o o O a Cu < e. o CM 1/1 sr CM o H 1M 0) O c/3 CD 4-> o CM CM 4-1 03 rs U"l rs CO r» \0 00 CO to « CTN ON CT> CTv on CTn ON a rH H i-H -4 i-i iH H n cc 4-1 O c II 03 -o ■H a 05 CO 01 Z ad I-l Ui Ij 01 01 41 CD oi Q i-l •h s 0 e l o ; i « « e x x ufl c c a a e tl u u h u tj to £ US < < H -a t) u o ■H X 4J 01 4J at < u 01 u ■H >> o> 0) 01 at at O rs, CO r~» 73 0) lu CM I •a o o) 0 4-1 O a x « O 4-1 o < CM m U1 CM CI CO ►■> a) 4-1 O • CO u •a Cu a M z Id U V 14 vH Ol 01 01 CO X! tB a 4J 4-1 « -O H 01 x ca a X >» ■rt CO a e ■ y c o c u o o Ol y I-l C iH u o d 01 0 ad >, * — « i-i 1 as M -H c I-l cn 01 h c cc i-l •O u CU £ J T3 0 as a ad V X CO — — ' 0) a a - 0) W HH « —> X C5 Q u H ^ o CJ z: CO ■H > 01 X co u 09 0) 09 4-1 o" o 4J P (J f-l •w i-l at 00 00 X! 4-1 4-1 I-l i-i l-i ■H -u 0 - 01 01 r-l — 1 O o o a T3 T3 <4-l U-l i*-i U-I y o U e - u u X X X a a X) o O <4-l 14-1 <4-l U-I o 0 0 3 •H CO at a) o 0 o <8 CO •H iH •H 0 o o O H H H CO Cu 3 0- Cu CO 33 S3 C/3 C/5 X Q Q X rx X M a> T3 C 4) CO co 01 3 3 01 O" X i-l 4-1 C 4-1 o a a « A 0 0 a a o o u U o o T3 •a vO CM CO CM CM CM 4-1 01 01 ■o T5 u « 0 a) i 4-1 O O O o 4-1 4VI 4-1 4-1 t/5 ad ad ad ad 0) T> 4) 01 01 01 CO 01 01 01 ^-4 tK ►» >% C O U M u 01 iH I-l ^-i H 4-1 ad 4-1 4-1 i-l U u It lu 1/3 Ui ca w a « 41 V Ol 6s CO 4-1 4J 4-1 4-1 i-l H i— i i— i X CD CO 09 00 IU « o) CO 4-1 01 01 01 tl Os Ss a) £ 3 3 3 o 4J o o o z at 00 ad ad ad CM -a- CT> CM 01 CO CM -* O iH CO 3 MS 10 -* CM »H iH iH 1-1 iH i— 1 *— i * O u 01 y Ol oT •H X y lu 4-1 i-i a <4U c u-t 01 •H o 03 cO 01 00 X X y M lu o 0 9 4J a Cu a 09 01 11 0) 09 X CO 00 4J 3 • < o o T3 X o M 01 o 01 4-1 T3 - > a) 01 O u 0 4J CO 9 lU y r-t u 4-1 00 M T3 01 4-1 O a CO 4J <« 01 a > o o X CO y o 4J X o 3 >, - O cs r-l o 01 4J O s. y 13 i-l I-l M CD V» Cu 3 y O 0) uu co n O 00 3 iH 01 CD 09 a) co oo 0 y oi a 01 o X co c_> 4J lu « CO 1 X CO •— I X iH 4-1 CO I- 3 > 01 O < £ ^ 4J OHO O CU z J <: Cu z i a. Dm -J Cu cu a. CD "8 -125- © Q <■ — J CO o vD CU CM o 00 3 ft A 13 t— 1 CN 00 sr 00 CO CO i— 1 o rH CM -J > -H o o o o o o o o CO vO O O CD o * 4-> 3 <— 1 o o o O O Pd CM CM CM CM • • • • • M u o <* -cf- CO CD CM CM CM CM CM H a. -Sr> o CN • CN I I O M 55 O H H Cm M ad O C/5 w Q CO • CD o a) 55 >s o m o o • i— i -* H +J ex CO 1 w c/5 w C/5 C/5 CU w 4-1 CU « H H Q cO C/5 C/5 4-1 O rH rH • • CQ CO IH r>» 00 r^. CO O as C7n C3> • • Q *1 H rH rH 55 55 W H c_> W Cu • En oo sf rH 4H O CO cu I *rt CO rH rH 3 to a •O-H ft CI M 9 M 4-t C/5 a cO EC U rH CU 3 3 CO 5 CM O a o 4J ex a rH CX CM O ,3 « C/5 4-1 CU M CU r4 . 4-) ex c/5 cu c O iH 4-1 U 3 cx u X! 4-1 3 O CO CO CU CM u CM " 4-> 3 cu cu cu T3 H 4-t CU C/5 ►J CO CO 3 O rH iH rH O rH cu CO 3 rt tS CO o o a 3 •H •H r4 4-1 H OJ rH CU CO > 1 CO 3 •> cO 4-* a. cu a 4-> C/5 rH •H 4-» O CU CQ 3 O X co a 4-> O CO 3 •H C/5 O H 3 CU rH >, 55 C/5 rH CM 4-) CU CU U 4-1 CO rH CU rH 3 CU r3 3 •H CU 3 M CO .3 60 4-t O CO Q 55 CM 4-) 3 O a C/5 cu V4 3 CU rH | CQ O H co CO cu o > u u X) cO o Qi CQ .3 CO TJ 4J £ H 3 O cO O CU M r3 a 3 U U >> CO 32 Qrf CM CD a CO CO •3 cO • O ex erf rl O CO C_) -3 K O cO O X! cu o CU -H rH O oi Cm .3 4-1 3 O R V40 00 V4 CO CU >« 3 O co •H CU rH ja U 3 O rH 14H iH 3 CO > cu m m in i— I CO CM vO CO CO 4-) H •H rO c •u O H m rs, i-H CN CO vO CO 00 CT\ 00 00 H 00 CO o> 00 H ON ft i— i o> rH vO i— i M CN vO ON 00 CN CM CO >> CN «* CM CN i— 1 XI cc3 CU •H CJ a h M ~Q d 3 CtJ a, ctJ CU cO 52 O O CU z;| ex CO o * 1 o Q rH CO u O O M_| ■ CO I m a) Q to i-M 1 1 Q u 1 u 1 1 u 1 + m o m rH CO A cu ■H M-l •H O CU cx CO el CD 4-1 CO cu CU d CD cu o 43 •H 43 a 4-j CJ o 4-1 3 •H 4-1 O co a M CU CD 4-1 00 (X CU 4-1 ON CO * — / tr ca 4-1 rH CD wa CO CO o ^ a CU n o CU CO 00 CD cO U d 3 d u a '*-< o O •H rH 43 pr to CU Tj 43 CU CO 00 CO >» 4-1 rH 43 er d M d 3 > •H CO M-l d O M 43 o 43 CO >. 4-1 4-* en O M-l rH CU CU 43 CD o d a CJ 60 43 •H 3 d •H M CO •H U 4-1 CU CO ed •H X) 43 CU a 4J 3 cj the • CO CTJ d 3 o 43 M 4-1 co a CU 4-J eO • o 4J 4-1 CO 43 X) rH pr ha co d 3 O 4-1 an A 4-4 cr cj 60 a CD CU cu d cu d co TJ) CO •H X) 3 CD co cu 4-1 4J CO cO rj d CTJ d d o O m-i •H rj CO O •H •H o 43 •H 43 43 X) 4-1 u -d 4J cO X) •H C MH •rH a d s •H CD O o CD n «« rH X) r-» o u m CU CU cu 1 a cu 00 U 43 4-1 * rH •H d CU CO CO CU u 43 De a CU >> u CD * O o 43 3 u XI 43 u 4-1 O 3 1 rH CO MH rH CJ 1 •H CD u o cu W cu l 60 rH o 1 u <* cO o O CO cu 4-4 H o 43 W X) •» 1 rH 4-> 0d cu CD 1 Cu U3 rH M rH 1 o -O 43 CO CO St o d 0) d o rH CO CJ o <* eO o < 4-1 CU m-i oo rH O d CO d ON vO 43 •H o CO rH 1 co • a d CD CO 4-1 <* CO o d u M-l CO 00 CU CD m rH eO CTJ 43 ON u rH CO En M CJ> 00 4-> rH 60 eO 4-1 o H CX 3 a d cO cO CO r~5 H O -128- FIGURE 4-4-8 BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION Carver Plymouth 1979 62 431 1980 48 418 1981 39 547 1982 52 435 1983 42 617 1984 87 352 1985 134 422 -129- 5. VISUAL QUALITY The very introduction of a road where none existed before will alter the visual aspects of the landscape through which it passes. From the point of view of those looking at the road from the outside, the change will be apparent only where the road is located adjacent to developed areas. Even there, good design requires that as much of the existing vegetation as possible be retained or restored. The driver's view of the road also deserves particular attention, not only to make a journey less monotonous and therefore safer, but also to provide the infrequent visitor as well as the commuter with a visually attractive and instructive experience. A highway's appearance is governed by applicable construction standards regarding pavement, land markings, guard rails, signs and required slopes and setbacks. The principal variables are: the topography and the potential for vistas and panoramic views; the character of the existing landscape; how it is changed by the construction and the consequent need for beautif ication; the design of bridges; landscaping; and the location of the pavement within the right of way. For over 2/3 of its length (5 of its 7.48 miles), the preferred Alternative 4-M-5 will traverse areas which are owned either by institutions or governments and will therefore remain pristine, forested, and undeveloped. The other 1/3 of 4-M-5 will traverse relatively open areas, principally cranberry bogs and wetlands. The right of way will approach homes in a very few locations and even then the pavement will be at least 200' distant, for as the typical cross section shows, there will generally be about 135' of open area on either side of the travelled way. Due to these circumstances, there will be no adverse visual impacts from 4-M-5. -130- 6. HISTORIC AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES No historic sites will be affected by the preferred Alternative 4-M-5. See FIGURE 4-6-1. There are prehistoric archaeological sites within the right of way of 4-M-5 that were determined by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the Massachusetts Department of Public Works (MDPW) , and the Massachusetts Historical Commission (MHC) to be potentially eligible for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places as significant contributing elements of the Annasnappet Archaeological District. See letters from FHWA and MHC, dated respectively September 11, 1984 and October 24, 1984, FIGURES 4-6-2 and 4-6-3. A Memorandum of Agreement has been ratified between the FHWA, MDPW, Massachu- setts SHPO and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, stating that avoidance and preservation in place are not feasible alternatives and that full scale data recovery will be undertaken as the means of mitigating the adverse effects of the project upon the District. The archaeological data recovery program will be implemented in accordance with the stipulations outlined in the Memorandum (FIGURE 4-6-4). -131- U COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSE1 II60C3I Office of the Secretary of State September 23, 1980 Mr. Justin Radio, Chief Engineer Massachusetts Department of Public Works 100 Nashua Street Boston, MA. 02114 Re: Route 44, Plymouth Dear Mr. Radio: MHC staff have reviewed the information supplied by Elizabeth R. Amadon regarding historic buildings and structures impacted by Route 44. MHC feels that this project is unlikely to affect significant historic architectural resources. No further re- view in compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 is required" for building; archaeological review is still pending. If you have any further questions, please feel free to call Valerie Talmage, State Archaeologist. Sincerely, MASSACHUSETTS HISTORICAL COMMISSION 294 Washington Street Boston, Massachusetts 02108 617-727-8470 MICHAEL JOSEPH CONNOLLY Secretary of State PLW/pmb FIGURE 4-6- -132 U. S DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION 55 Broadway - 10th Floor Cambridge, MA 02142 REGION ONE IN REPLY REFER TO: Route 44, Kingston, Carver and Plymouth HPE-MA Ms. Patricia Weslowski, State , Historic Preservation Officer - ' '-^f Massachusetts Historical Commission 294 Washington Street f ;ASS l ;ist . COMM. . Boston, Massachusetts 02108 J Dear Ms. Weslowski : The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) in accordance with 23 CFR 800.4(d) has determined that the proposed Route 44 project through Kingston, Carver and Plymouth will have an adverse effect upon four prehistoric sites deter- mined to be potentially eligible for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places. The attached archaeological reports (Attachment 2) describing the results of an intensive survey and site examination serve as the basis for determining the potential eligibility for nomination to the National Register of a site identified as locus 8. The sites identified as loci 1 and 2 were previously determined by the Department of Public Works, FHWA and SHP0 to be significant and potentially eligible for nomination to the National Register. The significance of locus 9 will be determined upon re- trieval of data during recovery operations of loci 1, 2, and 8. The full scale data recovery program will be in accordance with procedures outlined in the attached research design (Attachment 6) and is proposed to serve as the mitigation in accordance with 36 CFR Part 800.4(d). We have attached a preliminary case report for your review and request your concurrence in the "adverse effect" determination. If further information is required please call Aida Berkovitz at 494-2255. Sincerely yours, James A. Walsh Division Administrator By: P. Robinson Transportation Planner Attachments cc: Mr. J. Eliot, DPW -133- FIGURE 4-6-2 Preliminary Case Report The following information is submitted in accordance with Section 800. 13( of 36 CFR 800. 1. From Title 23, United States Code, "Highways", the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is authorized to expend funds appropriated fron the Highway Trust Fund for construction of Federal-aid highways. Applicable implementing regulations, procedures, and guidelines are contained in the Federal-aid Program Manual, Volumes 1 through 7. 2. FHWA has aprpoved a Draft Environmental Impact Statement and is awaiting completion of the Final Environmental Impact Statement. FH> must still authorize the design of the project, authorize acquistion right-of-way, and approve the plans, specifications and estimate befc authorizing construction. 3. The Draft Environmental Impact Statement was approved by FHWA on Apr: 23, 1979. The target date for completion of all environmental respoi sibilities is October 1985. 4. The proposed project entails the improvement of U.S. Route 44 betweei Route 58 in Carver and Route 3 in Plymouth, a distance of about 7 miles. The selected alternate is on new location and will be a 4-laij controlled access highway with 4-interchanges . Attachment 1 is a prij liminary plan showing the relocation of Route 44 in relation to the historic sites. 5. There are four prehistoric sites affected by the project that appear i be eligible for the National Register. They are identified as loci 2, 8 and 9. Detailed descriptions of these archaeological sites are included in the attached Phase I and Phase II reports (Attachment 2a 6. The criterion listed under 36 CFR 800.3(b)(1) applies. These sites will be destroyed or altered by the proposed horizontal and vertical alignment of the new project. 7. A letter from the Massachusetts Department of Public Works dated Aug 9, 1984 is attached (Attachment 3). 8. A letter from the SHPO dated October 24, 1984 is attached (Attachmen; 4) 9. Attachment 5 shows the various alternatives studied in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement. The No Build and Upgrade Existing alternatives do not affect the prehistoric sites in the Annasnappet Archaeological District. -134- The No Build alternative does not resolve the traffic safety problems associated with existing roadway and the Upgrade Existing alternative would have severe impacts on the residential neighborhoods in Plymouth, thus requiring excessive relocations. A partial relocation of Route 44 in the form of alternatives 3-W and 3-E would not affect the prehistoric sites, but again, this alternative does not resolve the traffic and safety problems through Plymouth on the existing roadway. In addition, this alternative would affect another historic site with potential National Register eligibility. Any other southern alternatives that would avoid the Annasnappet Archaeological District would require massive right of way takings because of the large resi- dential area in Plymouth. Any alternative to avoid the Annasnappet Archaeological District by swinging north of the area would impact wetlands and would not be geometrically feasible. The selected alternative (4-M-5) and alternative 4-N, 4-M-l, 4-M and 4-L all affect the Annasnappet Archaeological District. The selected alternate was chosen to avoid 4(f) lands, an area with a rare endangered species, wetlands, and a historic area. It was also chosen because of its ability to alleviate traffic congestion at Spring Street and to make contact with the Plymouth Industrial Park. The adverse effect of the archaeological sites will be mitigated by a data recovery program. The data recovery program will be consistent witht he procedures outlined inthe attached research design (Attachement 6) and Memorandum of Agreement between FHWA, MDPW, Massachusetts SHPO and Advisory Council. Cost Estimate: Construction Total $42,373,000 Federal Funds $31,779,750 -135- The Commonwealth of Massachusetts Office of the Secretary of State Michael Joseph Connolly, Secretary Massachusetts Historical Commission Valerie A. Talmage Executive Director State Historic Preservation Officer October 24, 1 984 Janes A. Walsh Division Administrator Federal Highway Administration 55 Broadway, 10th Floor Cambridge, MA 02142 ATTN: A1da Berkowltz RE: Route 44 - Kingston, Carver and Plymouth Dear Mr. Walsh: Thank you for submitting the archaeological reports and project materials regarding the proposed Route 44 project through Kingston, Carver and Plymouth. My staff and I have reviewed these materials. The selected alternative for the Route 44 project will have an adverse effect (36CFR 800.3(b)(1)) on the Annasnappet Archaeological District 1n Carver, a property which Is considered to be eligible for Inclusion in the National Register. The Annasnappet District Includes several Important prehistoric archaeological site loci within a geographically defined area encompassing the headwaters of the Annasnappet River, presently used for the cultivation of cranberry bogs. , The boundaries of the district are defined topographically to Include the well -drained sandy ridges which flank the bogs and possess evidence of prehistoric land use. The prehistoric sites which are contributing elements of the district are loci 1,2,7,8, possibly 9 and 10 (see enclosed map, which Identifies the loci by number; these numbers should be added to your Attachment 1 for clarity of discussion). Site loci 5 and 6 are non -contributing to the district. FIGURE 4-6-3 -136- The remainder of the ridges Included within the district boundaries have not been formally surveyed; however, by analogy to the site loci within ■ the surveyed areas, the nonsurveyed ridge tops possess topographic and environmental attributes analogous to the settings of the known sites within the district. Thus, It 1s highly probably significant archaeological remains associated with the prehistoric exploitation of the Annasnappet headwaters are present within the remainder of the district's elevated areas. The Annasnappet District possesses sufficient Integrity and significance to be eligible for listing 1n the National Register. The significance of the district Hes with Its archaeological data, which are Important for addressing compelling research questions concerning the prehistoric settlement and subsistence systems of the Interior region of the Massachusetts coastal lowland, particularly during the Middle Archaic period. Thus, the district meets criterion D of the National Register. Project design plans indicate that the proposed highway construction will have an adverse effect on prehistoric site loci 1,2,5,6,8, and 9 through destruction of these archaeological sites (36CFR 800.3(b)(1)). The adverse effects of the project on site lod 1,2,8, and 9 should be mitigated through an archaeological data recovery program. Included within the scope of the data recovery program should be a site examination of locus 9 to determine 1f the site is Indeed a contributing element of the district, as well as a survey of the proposed outfall drain line, which traverses as previously unsurveyed portion of the district. Additional possible project Impacts to the district which have not yet been determined include the probable removal of gravel, the construction of replacement cranberry bogs, and/or construction staging use of areas outside the proposed right-of-way but within the archaeological district. MHC requests the opportunity to review any such proposals in order to evaluate their effects on the district and to determine the need for additional archaeological investigation or data recovery within the district. If you have any questions concerning these comments, please feel free to contact Brona Simon, State Archaeologist, or me. Sincerely, v\u '" r ,/ . :• Valerie A. Talmage State Historic Preservation Officer Executive Director Massachusetts Historical Commission YAT/hi Enclosure cc: Ron Anzalone, Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Robert McDonagh, Mass. Dept. of Public Works Jim Elliot, Mass. Dept. of Public Works -137- Advisory Council On Historic Preservation The Old Post Office Building 1100 Pennsylvania Avenue. NW'. #809 Washington. DC 20004 SEP 20 1985 Mr. James A. Walsh Division Administrator Federal Highway Administration 55 Broadway - 10th Floor Cambridge, MA 02142 * R£F: U.S. 44 Improvements Kingston, Carver, and Plymouth, Massachusetts Dear Mr. Walsh: The enclosed Memorandum of Agreement for the referenced project has been ratified by the Chairman of the Council. This document constitutes the comments of the Council required by Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the Council's regulations. A copy of the ratified Agreement has also been sent to the Massachusetts State Historic Preservation Officer. The Council appreciates your cooperation in reaching a satisfactory resolution of this matter. Sincerely, Don L. Klima Chief, Eastern Division of Project Review Enclosure -138- FIGURE 4-6-4 MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT WHEREAS, THE Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has deter- mined that the selected alternative (4M5) for the Route 44 relocation {project in Kingston-Plympton-Carver-Plymouth will have an adverse effect upon the Annasnappet Archaeological District and has requested comments of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (Council) pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470 f) and its implementing regulations, "Protection of Historic and Cultural Properties" (36 CFR Part 800). WHEREAS, Phase I (intensive survey) and Phase II (site examina- tion) archaeological surveys were conducted within the proposed right- of-way and several site loci -1,2,8 and 9 - were determined by FHWA, the Massachusetts Department of Public Works (MDPW) and the Massachusetts State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) to be poten- [ tially eligible for listing in the National Register as significant contributing elements of the Annasnappet Archaeological District . NOW, THEREFORE, FHWA, the Massachusetts SHPO and the Council agree that avoidance and preservation in place are not feasible alter- natives and that mitigation shall be implemented in accordance with the following stipulations in order to take into account the effects of the undertaking on archaeological properties. STIPULATIONS x. Full Scale Archaeological Data Recovery A. Properties identified within the Annasnappet Archaeological District FHWA shall ensure that a Phase III archaeological data reco- very program will be conducted on site loci 1,2,8 and 9 as the means of mitigating the adverse effects of this project on a portion of the Annasnappet Archaeological District . Included within the scope of the data recovery program will be a site examination of locus 9 for the purpose of evaluating the site's significance as a contributing component of the District . This program for data recovery, including the research design, scope of work and work plan, will be reviewed by MDPW, FHWA and the Massachusetts SHPO for approval prior to implementation . Auxiliary project impacts such as drainage and the staging of construction equipment will be confined to the proposed right-of-way and previously surveyed areas. The design profile of the project is such that borrow material will not be required from outside sources. Once areas for wetland replacement have been identified, archaeologi- cal investigations will be conducted within the unsurveyed portions of these areas prior to construction. The nature and scope of these archeological surveys will be determined by FHWA, MDPW and the Massachusetts SHPO. -139- B. Research Goals and Scope of Work Allowing for minor refinements, the research goals, approaches methods and laboratory analysis will follow the guidelines presented in the research design (see attachment) prepared by Harvard University's Peabody Museum. C. Written Report After completion of the fieldwork and analysis, a full report will be prepared, describing the goals, methods and results of the study consistent with descriptive and analytical practices common to the discipline. Copies of the report will be provided to MDPW, FHWA and the Massachusetts SHPO. 2. Performance Standards A. The archaeological investigation will be conducted by qualified individuals who meet, at a minimum, the appropriate qualifica- tions in "Professional Qualifications" contained in the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation and in a manner con- sistent with those Standards and Guidelines and the Council's Handbook, Treatment of Archaeological Properties . B. The Massachusetts SHPO shall review within 30 days of receipt any documents submitted by FHWA in accordance with any of the stipulations written above. Failure by the Massachusetts SHPO to respond within 30 days of receipt of any complete documents from FHWA shall be deemed to constitute full approval of such documents under the stipulations written above. If the Massachusetts SHPO and FHWA fail to agree, then the agency shall submit documentation to the Council and request con- sultation under 36 CFR 800.6. Execution of this Memorandum of Agreement has afforded the Council a reasonable opportunity to comment on the Route 44 relocation project, Kingston-Plympton-Carver-Plymouth and its effects on archaeological properties and the FHWA has taken into account the effects of this undertaking on archaeological properties . -140- 1 (date) 7j6j/$3 Federal Highway Administration sachusetts State Historic^ L (date) ' Mas: Preservation Officer AfZ* chief Engineer / /^^f^Massachuset;ts Department *t>f Public Works (date) Excutive Director Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (date) /3 rairmj ^dvis0ry^e6uncil on Historic Preservation RECEIVED W6 2 71985 ! I An~-.30?Y CCUKCDL C3 KTST03IC j PSESBKV .'.T: X' -141- J 7. FARMLANDS Construction of any roadway will convert some land away from its original use; in particular, the conversion of farmland is becoming a major concern. In response the federal government put forth the Farmland Protection Policy Act (FPPA), 7 U.S.C. 4201 et seq and the regulations promulgated thereunder in 7 CFR Part 658. This act considers farmland to be both land currently being used for agriculture and soil types suitable for farming (not necessarily in agricultural use). The U.S. Soil Conservation Service (SCS) has classified and mapped out these soil types (See MAP 4-F) . The Washington office of the SCS and the MDPW underwent extensive consultation regarding the FPPA so that proper steps toward compliance could be taken for the Route 44 project. These steps included, but were not limited to, meetings and discussions with: the local office of the SCS, a representative from the Federal Highway Administration, the Massachusetts Department of Food and Agriculture, and local assessors from Carver, Plympton, Kingston, and Plymouth. The U.S. Department of Agriculture recommends that sites receiving a total score of less than 160 (see Figure 4-7-1) be given a minimal level of consideration for protection and, no additional sites be evaluated, therefore, this site (corridor 4-M-5) has been found to be of relative minimal value due to its receiving only 152 total points, thus falling below the 160 point threshold for minimal consideration. Cranberry bogs are considered prime and unique agricultural lands. The preferred Alternative 4-M-5 will require the acquisition of portions of two cranberry bogs, both in the town of Carver: 3.86 acres from one bog, and 1.30 from the other, a total of 5.16 acres. It appears that by far the greatest part of the existing bogs will remain unaffected by the road, and that they can continue to operate with a slightly reduced size. The 5.16 acres within the right of way are the minimum acquisition and are based on a median width of 60' , instead of the 100' customarily used. It was not possible to avoid them altogether, because bogs in this part of Carver, east of Route 58 and north of High Street, are very numerous and widespread. Furthermore, the more southerly the alignment, the greater the impact on residential development and on a historical site at Cole's Mill. It is intended to retain as wetlands those portions of the existing bogs which lie within the right of way, and are not affected by the roadbed. It is not possible, however, to continue the use of those portions as cranberry bogs, because of the legal issues involved in maintenance and liability. The Department will compensate the owners of the bogs for their at fair market value. It will then be the option of the owners to create new bogs or not. -142- U.S. Department of Agriculture FARMLAND CONVERSION IMPACT RATING T I (To be completed by Federal Agency) I Oat* Of Land Evaluation Request . _ _ . 0 nil Name Oi Proiact Fadaral Agency Involved Proposed Land Um County And_St*t* nd_Stete PART II (To be completed by SCS) Data Request RecWed ty SCS Doe* the tit* contain prime, unique, statewide or local important farmllnd? (If no. the FPPA does not epply - do not complete additional pent ot thh form). ■ w . Major CroptW Yn No Fermeble Land In Govt. juHadJctioaT Acm: 87g^ % 20 % A cm Irrigated Average Farm Siza 25 - Amount Of Farmland At Defined In FpTa Name Of Land Evaluation System Used USA Name Of Local Site Assessment System Date Land Evaluation Returned By SCS \-o- Ratir* PART III (To be completed by Federal Agency) Site A 1£K Alternative ScX 3 Y1 \ / Y 6. O is t a n ee To Ur b o n Gu ppo rt S e rv i c e* 7. Size Of Present Farm Unit Compared To Average /o 8. Creation Of Nonfarmable Farmland 9. Availability Of Farm Support Services 10. On-Farm Investments 20 1 1 . Effects Of Conversion On Farm Support Services 12. Compatibility With Existing Agricultural Use LP TOTAL SITE ASSESSMENT POINTS 160 2L PART VII (To be completed by Federal Agency) Relative Value Of Farmland (From Part V) 100 8i Total Site Assessment (From Part VI above or a local site assessment) 160 7/ TOTAL POINTS (Total of above 2 lines) 260 /5£ Site Selected: ^Hjl $ Date Of Selection Reason For Selection ^4 Was A Local Site Assessment Used? Yes □ No B Sl&f*# r 4/.J«*n>S 'tiftuds. \Jt^< ^ ~?so\<*J- F £/S fV c&J*> % 6 . FIGURE 4-7-1 -143- (See Instructions on reverse side) Form AD 1006 (10-83) 8. LAND USE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT The preferred Alternative 4-M-5 is likely to intensify the rate of development of industrially zoned land in Plymouth, Plympton and Kingston, a consequence which has been a prime objective of the project from its inception. However, such development in Plympton and Kingston is dependent on additional local actions, as described below. Relocated Route 44 will pass through the Plymouth Industrial Park and an interchange will be located within it, as shown on MAP 4-D, which also shows industrially zoned areas in Kingston and Plympton. 4-M-5 will not serve that area in Kingston as directly as it does the Park in Plymouth, but a connection is possible from Cherry Street/Nicks Rock Road which would enable direct service. There is a similar situation with respect to the industrial area in Plympton. 4-M-5 will pass through a portion of it, thus providing highway visibility for future industrial buildings. However, the undeveloped portion of this industrial area, closer to the Kingston town line, will require access roads to be built off Spring Street, where there will be an interchange. The Spring Street interchange will also provide service to the existing Halliday Lithograph Co. plant which is located on Spring Street a short distance from the interchange. Since nearly all of the 4-M-5 corridor in Kingston goes through land which is institutionally or publicly owned, its development is unlikely. The relatively small area which is privately owned is remote and inaccessible, and there is no reason that 4-M-5 should stimulate development. Nor can any changes of land use be expected in Carver due to a relocated Route 44. The land through which it will pass is committed to wetlands, cranberry bogs and existing houses, or to residentially zoned areas in which development has been occurring during the past few years. The 4-M-5 corridor has, in effect, been adapted to conform to existing land use and zoning patterns. Consequently, no changes in land use or zoning are anticipated. No community facilities are affected. The region's dramatic residential growth in recent years is attributable in part to the discovery of its natural environmental qualities in the expansion of the Boston metropolitan area. Although some growth was therefore to have been expected, it is not likely to have attained its current pace had it not been for the existence of Route 3. An improved Route 44, as the final link in the 1-495 circumferential corridor, will provide the region with the east-west connection it now lacks and can therefore be expected to provide it with the same kind of economic stimulus as Route 3 has done. A foreseeable and desirable impact of the resulting residential and industrial growth will be a shortening of the journey to work for those employed in local industries. It is not likely that tourism will increase if Route 44 is relocated, because Plymouth's historical attractions are sufficiently magnetic despite traffic and parking congestion. -144- 9. BIKEWAYS The 400' right of way of Alternative 4-M-5 is sufficient to allow construction of a separated bike path without affecting the layout of the travelled ways, the median, or the side slopes associated with the highway portion of the corridor. The recreational use of the corridor is a desirable concept and is recommended in new highway development when feasible. This type of bikeway is a Class I facility called a Bike Path — that is, one which shares a right of way with another transportation use. A Boston to Cape Cod Bike Route was established about six years ago. It is considered a Class III facility, because it makes use of existing streets and highways, which ideally are those carrying low volumes of traffic and with low accident rates. Within the general area of Route 44 and Alternative 4-M-5, this Bike Route utilizes Route 58 in Plympton and then follows local streets including Brook Street. After crossing into Kingston, it follows Route 80 to Route 44 for a short distance and then proceeds to the center of Plymouth via Summer Street. The Draft EIS gave serious consideration to the possibility of using relocated Route 44 as a Bike Path. Theoretically, at least, such a Path was indeed possible. It would have followed accepted standards for Bike Paths with respect to slope gradient, curvature and lane width. Crossings at intersecting streets and interchanges would have been at grade. Its purposes would have been recreational, and as a possible attraction to nearby commuters. Despite the attractiveness of the concept, however, the feasibility of a Bike Path in the 4-M-5 corridor is questionable, due to the number and extent of the wetlands involved. As has been documented in earlier sections, great care has been taken to minimize the impact of the highway on existing wetlands, principally by reducing the width of the median and by retaining as much of the wetlands and natural areas within the right of way as possible. The addition of a Bike Path would necessitate the widening of enhancements and increase filled areas, resulting in greater losses of wetlands. In view of this, and since there already is a Bike Route serving the area, it is not prudent to propose a Bike Path within the right of way of a relocated Route 44. -145- 10. ENERGY There is no formal statewide or regional transportation energy plan in Massachusetts. However, it has been a major objective of the transportation agencies in Massachusetts to reduce the growth of private automobile commuting in the Metropolitan Boston area by providing efficient and adequate alternative transportation services. The Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA), through its consultants the Sverdrup Corporation, is presently preparing a study seeking to maximize use of its rights of way which were once part of the system of the Old Colony Railroad, a branch of the former New York, New Haven and Hartford Railroad. Specifically, the study involves the possible extension of commuter rail service to Plymouth and other communities south of Boston from the MBTA's Red Line terminus at Braintree. The study will have the form of an Environmental Impact Report pursuant to Massachusetts law, since there are no Federal funds involved at this time; there is an understanding however, that it will be equivalent to a Draft Environmental Impact Statement pursuant to Federal regulations. The study includes analysis of commuter parking lots at several likely stops of the proposed rail service: at the former Cordage plant in Plymouth; at the so-called Winery location just north of Plymouth's central historic area; and at the junction of Routes 3 and 3A in Kingston. The Report is to be completed in mid-1987, and the proposed schedule calls for operations to commence in 1990. At the present time bus service to Boston from Plymouth and other communities is provided by the Plymouth & Brockton Street Railway Company. It maintains a commuter parking lot in the Plymouth Industrial Park at the interchange of Cherry Street and Route 3, which will be served directly by the proposed Alternative 4-M-5. The Commonwealth is actively seeking and developing satellite parking facilities in the region and is encouraging use of its transit system and commuter rail facilities. These measures are directed towards reducing the region's consumption of energy and improving air quality while maintaining a healthy economic environment. The region's roadway network is a significant factor in the economic environment. All build alternatives for Route 44 will require similar energy consumption for construction and operation. The energy operation consumption of Alternative 4-M-5 is lower than that which would be required to operate the existing network under the No-Build Alternative. This is due to two reasons. First, Alternative 4-M-5 is approximately 7.48 miles long while existing Route 44 is about 8.03 miles long. Also, the proposed Alternative 4-M-5 will be a new limited access highway providing a high quality traffic flow at Level of Service A. By contrast, projected traffic volumes show that under the No-Build Alternative, traffic flow on Route 44 in Plymouth will become intolerable during peak periods by the year 2000. Vehicles will be travelling at slower speeds with many stops required at intersections. -146- 11. OTHER IMPACTS; UNAVOIDABLE PROBABLE IMPACTS; SHORT TERM USES VS. LONG TERM PRODUCTIVITY; IRREVERSIBLE OR IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENT OF RESOURCES. The relocation of Route 44 will result in short term costs and benefits as well as long term costs and benefits. An evaluation of their relative values, nearly all of which are unquantif iable , is a matter of judgment. The short term costs will be the temporary disruption of the environment through which the preferred Alternative 4-M-5 will pass, and the dislocation of families and businesses, both of which effects are highly localized. There is also the expenditure of funds which will come from the state and federal governments. The short term benefits derive principally from the expenditure of those funds, resulting in increased employment and therefore increased purchasing power, and the purchase of materials. The long term benefits will be greater industrial growth and local employment bolstering the economic base of individual towns and the region. Other benefits will be: improved safety; relief from traffic congestion both on existing Route 44 as well as in adjoining neighborhoods; and savings in travel time. These advantages will be enjoyed not only by residents of the area but also by tourists to Plymouth and Cape Cod, and will therefore benefit the region's productivity. The long term costs include the introduction of air pollution and additional noise into a new environment, although these same effects will be reduced and eliminated by appropriate mitigative measures. As a benefit, their transfer to another environment will result in a reduction of the same effects on existing Route 44. There will also be an unavoidable and long term loss because of the removal of cranberry bogs. Although the alteration of wetlands represents an unavoidable and long term commitment, appropriate mitigative measures, including their replacement, will assure the long term maintenance of their ecology once construction has been completed. A new highway is a permanent addition to the landscape and consequently its maintenance is a permanent commitment. It may be theoretically possible to remove a highway but that likelihood is similarly theoretical. The length of the preferred Alternative 4-M-5 is 7.48 miles which, at a right of way width of 400 feet, means that approximately 363 acres of land will be committed, not including ramps or other improvements outside the main corridor. Within that total, 28.67 acres of wetlands will be affected, as shown in FIGURE 4-1-7. However, it is proposed to create 29.6 acres of new wetlands as a mitigating measure, through the conversion of uplands outside the 4-M-5 corridor. It will also traverse the Annasnappet Archaeological District, but full data recovery has been committed. Apart from these readily identifiable changes, a new highway will have other consequences which are not as easily predictable. Alternative 4-M-5 will accelerate the development of industrial land because of the accessibility and visibility it will provide. Other effects producing irreversible commitments of resources are those relating to the materials required for construction, and the secondary growth of population and land use changes caused by a bolstered local economy. -147- $50 >is K- T N Tidal Flat >4Z Plyrapton / .A PLYMOUTH. HARBOR aid ;<•»••• r ....v NaWragatur, 1 ■ roOL-T* * w-y/ J&" .+*** Billi ngton Sea J, ..C/v a^?^V 9 A: ^ V 1 COMMUNITY FACILITIES ( ,' ., NAT. GAS 4 , g, ff . /s X >'*- f '"'"' (M) municipal — TOWN LINE ^ WATER TOWER i ♦ WASTE DISPOSAL — WASTE DISPOSAL, ^ potential A SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT .w^.m* ;v<- ROUTE 44 1000 p ■ 2000 ■ 10 00 t C ALE I N FEET ', Vol South Pond ,' './fFc?^ MAP 4-B A ; t Corner.^ PLYMOUTH \ ^X, f /Korth C;t ^ \ \ Muddy Pond ,,N > R V C E- GROUND MORAINE OF GLACIAL READVANCES """'V' HP ROUTE 44 H ' • „.\ OMfilLt SOUHCE. 1.S.B.P.E.D.D, 1977 SCALE 2, WILLAMS AND TASKER.1974 MAP 4-G M RELOCATION OF ROUTE 44 CARVER-PLYMPTON-KINGSTON-PLYMOUTH MASSACHUSETTS PLAN STATION 395*00 to STATION 400*25 a CONNECTORS A,B,C 8 D WETLANDS 3,2,1 WETLAND NUMBER PALUSTRINE EMERGENT lltl) PALUSTRINE FORESTED PALUSTRINE OPEN WATER HORIZONTAL 0 200' 400' 600' VERTICAL 0 20' 40' 60' CONTOUR INTERVAL: FIVE FEET PREPARED OCT. 1984 MAP 4-J-1 RELOCATION OF ROUTE 44 CARVER-PLYMPTON-KINGSTON-PLYMOUTH MASSACHUSETTS PLAN STATION 37K00 to STATION 395*00 WETLANDS 4,3 WETLAND NUMBER PALUSTRINE EMERGENT I PALUSTRINE FORESTED PALUSTRINE OPEN WATER HORIZONTAL 0 200' 400' 600' VERTICAL 0 20' 40' 60' CONTOUR INTERVAL: FIVE FEET PREPARED OCT. 1984 MAP 4-J-2 FOR CONTINUATION SFF FIGURE 28 RELOCATION OF ROUTE 44 CARVER-PLYMPTON-KINGSTON-PLYMOUTH MASSACHUSETTS PLAN STATION 344*00 to STATION 371*00 WETLANDS 5 WETLAND NUMBER PALUSTRINE EMERGENT PALUSTRINE OPEN WATER HORIZONTAL 0 200' 400' 600' VERTICAL 0 20' 40' 60' @ CONTOUR INTERVAL; FIVE FEET PREPARED OCT. 1984 MAP 4-J-3 200 180 140 -EXISTING GROUND 290 295 220 200 180 160 140 300 ROUTE 44 305 310 315 RELOCATION OF ROUTE 44 CARVER-PLYMPTON-KINGSTON-PLYMOUTH MASSACHUSETTS PLAN 8 PROFILE STATION 289*00 to STATION 316*50 WETLANDS 7,6 WETLAND NUMBER U PALUSTRINE EMERGENT PALUSTRINE SCRUB/SHRUB PALUSTRINE OPEN WATER HORIZONTAL 0 200' 400' 600' VERTICAL 0 20' 40' 60' CONTOUR INTERVAL: FIVE FEET PREPARED OCT. 1984 MAP 4-J-4 I 200 r PVI STA. 261 + 00 180 T \ / 120 EXISTING GROUND LVC = 280 200 265 270 275 ROUTE 44 280 RELOCATION OF ROUTE 44 CARVER-PLYMPTON-KINGSTON-PLYMOUTH MASSACHUSETTS PLAN 8 PROFILE STATION 261*00 to STATION 289*00 WETLANDS 10,9,8 WETLAND NUMBER PALUSTRINE EMERGENT PALUSTRINE SCRUB/SHRUB PALUSTRINE OPEN WATER HORIZONTAL 0 200' 400' 600' VERTICAL 0 ® 20' 40' 60' CONTOUR INTERVAL FIVE FEET PREPARED OCT. 1984 MAP 4-J-5 \ , '8/ O RELOCATION OF ROUTE 44 CARVER-PLYMPTON-KINGSTON-PLYMOUTH MASSACHUSETTS PLAN STATION 234*00 to STATION 261 + 50 WETLANDS 1 1 WETLAND NUMBER PALUSTRINE SCRUB/SHRUB HORIZONTAL 0 200' 400' 600' VERTICAL 0 20' 40' 60' CONTOUR INTERVAL; FIVE FEET PREPARED OCT. 1984 MAP 4-J-6 140 | — EXISTING GROUND LVC = 580' / \ / / / v__/ \ \ \ X / J / \ PVI STA. 202 + 50 "\ % + 1.05% \ V- ... — ^ ^ X— LVC = 2060' \/ • J SWAMP PVI ST A. 183 + 00 200 190 195 ROUTE 44 200 205 120 RELOCATION OF ROUTE 44 CARVER-PLYMPTON-KINGSTON-PLYMOUTH MASSACHUSETTS PLAN 8 PROFILE STATION 179*00 to STATION 206*50 WETLANDS 12 WETLAND NUMBER PALUSTRINE SCRUB/SHRUB HORIZONTAL 0 200' 400' 600' VERTICAL 0 20' 40' 60' a- CONTOUR INTERVAL; FIVE FEET PREPARED OCT. 1984 MAP 4-J-7 200 180 S UI z 1 ECTRIC POWER LINE _^ LINE _^ PLYMPTON KINGSTON LCTRIC POWER L .ECTRIC POWER / _r_ •IXISTING GROUND p —J iQ-6 % / / / J 7"' ' \ 3! - 40Q5%v J \ \ \ UJ 1 / / / ( V \ A \ ; \ / N / y a r — LVC = 880' PVI STA. 222 -t-00 200 180 160 140 210 215 220 ROUTE 44 225 230 RELOCATION OF ROUTE 44 CARVER-PLYMPTON-KINGSTON-PLYMOUTH MASSACHUSETTS PLAN 8 PROFILES STATION 206*50 to STATION 234*00 WETLANDS 12 WETLAND NUMBER PALUSTRINE SCRUB/SHRUB HORIZONTAL 0 200' 400' 600' VERTICAL 0 20' 40' 60' CONTOUR INTERVAL; FIVE FEET PREPARED OCT. 1984 MAP 4-J-8 3og RELOCATION OF ROUTE 44 CARVER-PLYMPTON-KINGSTON-PLYMOUTH MASSACHUSETTS PLAN STATION 134+00 to STATION 161+00 WETLANDS 13 WETLAND NUMBER PALUSTRINE EMERGENT PALUSTRINE SCRUB/SHRUB PALUSTRINE FORESTED PALUSTRINE OPEN WATER CRANBERRY BOG HORIZONTAL 0 200' 400' 600' VERTICAL 0 20' 40' 60' CONTOUR INTERVAL; FIVE FEET PREPARED OCT. 1984 MAP 4-J-9 RELOCATION OF ROUTE 44 CARVER-PLYMPTON-KINGSTON-PLYMOUTH MASSACHUSETTS ' PLAN STATION 161+00 to STATION 179 + 00 WETLANDS 13 WETLAND NUMBER PALUSTRINE SCRUB/SHRUB PALUSTRINE FORESTED PALUSTRINE OPEN WATER HORIZONTAL 0 200' 400' 600' VERTICAL 0 20' 40' 60' CONTOUR INTERVAL; FIVE FEET PREPARED OCT. 1984 MAP 4- J- 10 RELOCATION OF ROUTE 44 CARVER-PLYMPTON-KINGSTON-PLYMOUTH MASSACHUSETTS PLAN STATION 106+50 to STATION 134+00 WETLANDS 15,14 WETLAND NUMBER PALUSTRINE SCRUB/SHRUB PALUSTRINE FORESTED CRANBERRY BOG HORIZONTAL 0 200' 400' 600' VERTICAL 0 20' 40' 60' CONTOUR INTERVAL; FIVE FEET PREPARED OCT. 1984 MAP 4-J-11 100 60 EXISTING GROUND -j 1 _\ ~\ \ \ \ i ^ / / / C T / -3 V J 0 U W. E. = 99.5 u W E. = 99.5 140 100 85 90 100 105 ROUTE 44 RELOCATION OF ROUTE 44 CARVER-PLYMPTON-KINGSTON-PLYMOUTH MASSACHUSETTS PLAN 8 PROFILE STATION 79*00 to STATION 106*50 WETLANDS 15 WETLAND NUMBER PALUSTRINE EMERGENT PALUSTRINE FORESTED CRANBERRY BOG HORIZONTAL 0 200' 400' 600' VERTICAL 0 20' 40' 60' CONTOUR INTERVAL: FIVE FEET PREPARED OCT. 1984 MAP 4-J-12 RELOCATION OF ROUTE 44 CARVER-PLYMPTON-KINGSTON-PLYMOUTH MASSACHUSETTS PLAN STATION 25*00 to STATION 52*00 WETLANDS 17 WETLAND NUMBER PALUSTRINE EMERGENT HORIZONTAL 0 200' 400' 600' VERTICAL 0 20' 40' 60' CONTOUR INTERVAL: FIVE FEET PREPARED OCT. 1984 MAP 4-J-14 T RELOCATION OF ROUTE 44 CARVER-PLYMPTON-KINGSTON-PLYMOUTH MASSACHUSETTS STATION 50+00 to STATION 75+00 PROPOSED WETLAND REPLACEMENT AREAS CONTINUED ON MAP 4-J-15 (2) ///// // // PROPOSED WETLAND REPLACEMENT AREA APPROXIMATE ADDITIONAL LAND REQUIRED TO BE PURCHASED HORIZONTAL 0 200' 400' 600' H 1 1 20' 40' 60' VERTICAL 0 CONTOUR INTERVAL: FIVE FEET MAP 4-J-15 (1) ;//////• RELOCATION OF ROUTE 44 CARVER-PLYMPTON-KINGSTON-PLYMOUTH MASSACHUSETTS STATION 75+00 to STATION 100+00 PROPOSED WETLAND REPLACEMENT AREAS CONTINUATION OF MAP 4-J-15 0) //////. A PROPOSED WETLAND REPLACEMENT AREA APPROXIMATE ADDITIONAL LAN REQUIRED TO BE PURCHASED HORIZONTAL 0 VERTICAL 0 200' 400" 600' H 1 1 20' 40' 60' CONTOUR INTERVAL; FIVE FEET MAP 4-J-15 (2) contin'uatioivPsee figurf RELOCATION OF ROUTE 44 CARVER-PLYMPTON-KINGSTON-PLYMOUTH MASSACHUSETTS PLAN STATION 344+00 to STATION 371*00 PROPOSED WETLAND REPLACEMENT AREAS REPLACEMENT WETLANDS EXISTING WETLANDS HORIZONTAL 0 VERTICAL 0 0 200 400' I 1 h 0 20' 40' 600' 60' ® CONTOUR INTERVAL- FIVE FEET PREPARED OCT. 1984 MAP 4-J-16 A - i J RELOCATION OF ROUTE 44 CARVER-PLYMPTON-KINGSTON-PLYMOUTH MASSACHUSETTS PLAN STATION 395*00 to STATION 400*25 a CONNECTORS A.B.C a D POTENTIAL NOISE IMPACTS CORRIDOR 4-M-5 NOISE MEASUREMENT LOCATION SAMPLING LOCATION FUTURE L10 (IDA EX1GT1NG L 10 clBA POTENTIAL IMPACT LOCATION / , > IMPACT LOCATiON FUTURE L 10 dBA EXiSTiNG L10 ci[3 A 1 1 1 1 ■ 1 1 ■ 1 1 NOISE BARRIER PREPARED OCT. 1D84 MAP 4-M-1 RELOCATION OF ROUTE 44 CARVER-PLYMPTON-KINGSTON-PLYMOUTH MASSACHUSETTS PLAN STATION 106+50 to STATION 1 34 + 00 POTENTIAL NOISE IMPACTS CORRIDOR 4-M-5 NOISE MEASUREMENT LOCATION _ SAMPLING LOCATION FUTURE L10 dBA EXiSTiNG L10 dBA POTENTIAL IMPACT LOCATION _ IMPACT LOCATION _ FUTURE L10 dBA — EXISTING L10 dBA nnnnnnn noise barrier PREPARED OCT. 1984 MAP 4-M-2 * RELOCATION OF ROUTE 44 CARVER-PLYMPTON-KINGSTON-PLYMOUTH MASSACHUSETTS PLAN-ROUTE 3 STATION 72*00 to STATION 90*00 POTENTIAL NOISE IMPACTS CORRIDOR 4-M-5 NOISE MEASUREMENT LOCATION SAMPLING LOCATION FUTURE L10 dBA — EXISTING L10 dBA POTENTIAL IMPACT LOCATION IMPACT LOCATION FUTURE L10 dBA — EXISTING L10 dBA imnnnnn noise barrier HORIZONTAL 0 200' 400' 600 VERTICAL 0 20' 40' 60' CONTOUR INTERVAL; FIVE FEET PREPARED OCT. 1984 MAP 4-M-3 SECTION 5 SECTION 4(f) EVALUATION 1. INTRODUCTION Section 4(f) of the U.S. Department of Transportation Act of 1966 as amended states that publicly owned parks, recreation land, wildlife/waterfowl refuge areas, or historic sites of national, state, or local significance may be used for Federal Aid Projects only 1) if there is no feasible and prudent alternative to the use of such land, and 2) if such projects include all possible planning to minimize harm to these lands. The official having jurisdiction over 4(f) land determines its "significance" and the agency conducting the Environmental Impact Statement customarily seeks such a determination from that official. Sites which are on, or are eligible for inclusion in, the National Register of Historic Places are to be included in this category. 2. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT The preferred Alternative 4-M-5 and the other alternatives studied, as well as the purpose and need for the proposed action, were described previously in SECTIONS 1 and 2. 3. DESCRIPTION OF SECTION 4(f) LANDS KINGSTON STATE FOREST Kingston State Forest is an irregularly shaped area of about 147 acres, supervised by the Division of Forests and Parks, Massachusetts Department of Environmental Management. It is used entirely for passive recreation such as riding, hiking, nature study and hunting, as well as for growing wood crops. The Forest contains sapling sized trees or larger of planted Norway spruce, red pine and white pine; the natural forest cover includes: white pine, pitch pine, scarlet oak, white oak, red maple, poplar and tupelo. There are no fields, meadows or water bodies, but the Forest does adjoin Pratt Pond along its eastern boundary. Wildlife includes red fox, raccoon, skunk, squirrels, rabbit and some deer. Birds include ruffed grouse, crows, hawks and song birds such as chickadees. There are box turtles, snakes and other small reptiles. There are no known rare or endangered species. See FIGURE 5.3.1. No figures are available for usage of Kingston State Forest because of the passive nature of the available activities. Access to the Forest is from Route 80 which passes through it near its western extremity; unimproved gravel roads traverse it in various places. Based upon the above described multiple uses of the Forest and upon the fact that there is no plan designating park or recreation areas within the Forest, as distinguished from land used for growing wood crops, Section 4(f) is not strictly applicable (See 23CFR7 71. 135(e) ) . In reaching this conclusion we have also considered the facts that there are no improvements within the State Forest for park/recreational usage or any documentation indicating that there -215- is a recognizable level of actual use of the land for park/recreational purposes. Therefore, the evaluation of impacts to the State Forest is presented in this section on the basis that the adjoining lands of Camp Nekon are covered by Section 4(f) and, as a practical matter, our evaluation of alternatives to avoid using land from Camp Nekon provides the reasons for aligning the road through the State Forest. No Land and Water Conservation Funds have been expended on the Kingston State Forest or Camp Nekon property. See FIGURE 5.3.2. CAMP NEKON Camp Nekon was purchased in 1975 by the Town of Kingston, using Town funds only, from the Plymouth Bay Girl Scouts. The principal features of its approximately 200 acres are Smelt Pond (the Town's only fresh water swimming facility located along the eastern edge of Camp Nekon approximately 2400 feet northeasterly of the proposed highway) and Monks Hill, (the second highest point of land in southeastern Massachusetts and the site of a fire watch tower). The Town estimates that as much as 90% of the tract is undeveloped; the principal developed area is the location of several buildings and tent platforms formerly used by the Girl Scouts. The Camp can be used by the Town of Kingston only for recreation, conservation and water supply. The Town's objective is to keep the Camp in its natural state as much as possible for hunting, fishing, camping, swimming and other outdoor recreational activities. Expansion of swimming and parking facilities are possible improvements, as well as a ski slope on Monks Hill. No figures are available on usage. Access to the Camp is principally from various unimproved roads in its northern section. Unimproved gravel roads from Nicks Rock Road in Plymouth to Monks Hill Road in Kingston provide access to the top of Monks Hill. 4. EFFECT OF PROJECT ON SECTION 4(f) LAND * KINGSTON STATE FOREST The Kingston State Forest is shaped irregularly like a butterfly. As Route 44 cuts across its wings, 2 parcels of the Forest will be required for the right of way of Alternative 4-M-5. One parcel contains about 14.52 acres, the other about 11.53 acres for a combined total of 26.05 acres taken. Also, two small parcels, containing 1.91 acres and 3.70 acres, located on the north side of Route 44 at Route 80, will be severed from the main part of the Forest. In addition, a large 42.8 acre parcel adjacent to Pratt Pond will be isolated for a combined total of 48.41 acres isolated. See MAP 5-A. The 3.70 acre parcel north of relocated Route 44 and east of Route 80 will remain accessible from Route 80. The other two isolated parcels will be landlocked, but will still sustain wood crops. The effect of the highway on Kingston State Forest will be minimal because 19.62 acres will be added to the Forest as partial replacement for the 26.05 *There are minor discrepancies in the acreage of referenced parcels of Camp Nekon and Kingston State Forest due to the many 4-M alignments studied and modified; that is 4-M, 4-M-l, and 4-M-5. -216- acres taken for the highway, leaving a net loss of 6.43 acres. THe replacement of this 6.43 acres will be made at a location agreeable to Kingston State Forest (Department of Environmental Management - DEM). For further details see section below on Measures to Minimize Harm. The taking of land for the highway and the replacement of acreage to Kingston State Forest will rearrange the configuration of the Forest but the net effect to DEM's land will be an increase of 20.94 acres. Alternatives 4-M, 4-M-l and 4-N would have had only a minor effect on Kingston State Forest. Alternative 4-M would have required 3.1 acres; 4-M-l, 4.9 acres; and 4-N, 1.7 acres of State Forest land. At the request of DEM to move the alignment further north away from the shores of Muddy Pond, to avoid conflict with one of the state's rarest and most endangered plant species, the White-Bracted Boneset, (see FIGURE 5-3-3). Alternative 4-M was further modified into the final alignment called 4-M-5. This modification of the alignment away from Muddy Pond caused the further incursion into Kingston State Forest requiring the taking of 2 parcels, one containing 14.52 acres and the other 11.53 acres. The Sisters of Divine Providence (Sisters) also requested that the alignment be moved 400' further north away from Muddy Pond, than Alternative 4-M-l, to protect their girls camp, at Camp Mishannock, from visual and noise impacts. (See FIGURES 5-3-4, 5-3-5 and 5-3-6). Alternative 4-N would have required the taking of 9 homes and 3 businesses, affected 35 acres of wetland (23 of which are cranberry bogs) and would not have served the Plymouth Industrial Park. One of the objectives of the project was to provide access to the three industrial parks in the area. Alternative 4-N therefore does not satisfy that objective. If Alternative 4-N was moved further north to avoid the Kingston State Forest, even more wetlands would have to be taken. Also, the alignment would then be approximately 500' from Indian Pond. Based upon the above stated reasons, plus others as discussed in the Alternatives Section, it was determined that Alternative 4-N was not a prudent Alternative. To avoid the Kingston State Forest by moving the alignment southerly, Alternatives 4-L; Partial Build: Corridors 3-E and 3-W; Upgrade Existing Route and the No Build were studied. Alternative 4-L would have affected Parting Ways Cemetery, a historic property on the National Register of Historic Places. Partial Build Alternative: Corridor 3-W would have affected Cole's Mill, a site of historical significance and potentially eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. See FIGURE 5-3-13. Corridor 3-W would also have affected 30 acres of wetlands, and a portion of Doten Brook would have had to be relocated. Corridor 3-E would have affected 4 acres of wetlands and would have been within 1000 feet, up gradient of the Plymouth Town well north of Triangle Pond. Neither Alternative 4-L; Partial Build: Corridors 3-E and 3-W; Upgrade Existing Route or the No Build would have served the Plymouth Industrial Park. One of the objectives of the project was to provide access to the 3 industrial parks in the area and these Alternatives did not satisfy this objective. Based upon the above stated reasons plus others as discussed in the Alternatives Section it was determined that Alternatives 4-L; Partial Build Build: Corridors 3-E and 3-W; Upgrade Existing Route and the No Build were not prudent Alternatives. If Alternative 4-M-l was moved southerly to avoid the Kingston State Forest, it would have had to cross Muddy Pond. This would have affected the habitat of the White-Bracted Boneset and would have had a greater visual impact and noise impact on Camp Mishannock. This modification is not considered prudent. -217- CAMP NEKON Two small remote corners of Camp Nekon will be crossed by Alternative 4-M-5. Neither area is used for active recreational programs. One contains about 5.07 acres, the other about 4.10 acres of which about 3.60 acres are within the proposed right of way and about 0.50 acres will be isolated. See MAP 5-A. There are no known roadways to be severed by the proposed highway that would prevent Kingston Police or the Kingston Fire Department from responding to an emergency in the southern areas of Camp Nekon. The area of Kingston south of the proposed highway can be reached via new Route 44 to the Connector Road to Route 80. Route 80 is the only connection between north and south Kingston at the present time, and the new highway does not change that situation. Also mutual aid assistance from Plymouth is available. Both Alternatives 4-M and 4-M-l would have required a taking of 4.6 acres of Camp Nekon land. At the request of the Department of Environmental Management (DEM) to move the alignment further north away from the shores of Muddy Pond, to avoid conflict with one of the state's rarest and most endangered plant species, the White-Bracted Boneset (see FIGURE 5-3-3), Alternative 4-M was further modified into the final alignment called 4-M-5. This modification of the alignment away from Muddy Pond caused the further incursion into Camp Nekon requiring the taking of 2 parcels of land, one containing 5.07 acres and the other containing 4.10 acres. The Sisters of Divine Providence also requested that the 4-M alignment be moved 400 feet further north away from Alternative 4-M and away from Muddy Pond to protect their girls' camp at Camp Mishannock from Visual and Noise Impacts. See FIGURES 5-3-4. 5-3-5, and 5-3-6. The areas of land to be taken from Camp Nekon are from two isolated wooded areas far removed from the recreation areas. The taking of land for the highway and the replacement of acreage to Camp Nekon will rearrange the configuration of Camp Nekon but the net effect will be positive as 19.65 acres will replace the 8.67 acres taken plus the 0.5 acres isolated for a net increase of 10.48 acres to Camp Nekon. For the discussion on moving the alignment either northerly, southerly, or No Build to avoid the use of Camp Nekon land see the discussion above on Kingston State Forest. The Alternatives which best minimized harm to Section 4(f) properties are Alternatives 3-E/3-W, No-Build, Upgrade Existing Route and 4-L. These Alternatives would have required no land from Camp Nekon or the Kingston State Forest. However, as discussed above, these Alternatives have been determined to be not prudent. 5. MEASURES TO MINIMIZE HARM KINGSTON STATE FOREST Many meetings have been held between the Department of Public Works (DPW) and the Department of Environmental Management (DEM) to negotiate equitable compensation for the land to be taken from Kingston State Forest for the proposed Route 44. See FIGURES 5-3-7, 5-3-8, and 5-3-9. The 19.62 acre parcel of privately owned land that will become isolated will be transferred to DEM as partial replacement land payment. DEM feels strongly that there should be additional replacement lands at some other location other than to the Kingston State Forest. See FIGURE 5-3-7. -218- DEM has submitted to the DPW a listing of 4 privately owned land parcels that they would consider for additional replacement lands either in total or in any combination. Parcel #1 contains 17.25 acres. Title to this parcel is claimed by a private party, that pays the yearly property tax, and Myles Standish State Forest (MSSF), that is under the control of DEM. It is DEM's purpose to obtain a clear title to this property and add it to MSSF. Parcel #2 contains 133.53 acres, Parcel #3 contains 15.53 acres and Parcel #4 contains 43.0 acres. Parcels #2, #3, and #4 are all owned by the same person and are tax title property. The purchase and transfer, by the DPW to DEM, of Parcels #1, #3 and #4 containing 75.78 acres combined approximates the 74.46 acres to be taken or isolated from Kingston State Forest. This mitigation measure is contingent upon the parcels of land being available during the design phase, when the right of way acquisitions will take place. If the referenced parcels are not available at the time of right of way acquisition, the DPW will negotiate with DEM for other replacement lands to the mutual satisfaction of both Departments. Existing statutes do not allow for compensation to be placed in an escrow account by DPW for future use by DEM. Notwithstanding the ultimate resolution of a land transfer agreement between the responsible State agencies, FHWA will apply normal procedures pertinent to the acquisition of real property to determine compensation requirements for lands to be acquired from the State Forest. CAMP NEKON At various meetings and in letters Kingston town officials stated that they would not oppose the taking of 2 parcels of Camp Nekon land totaling 9.17 acres, provided that they receive functional replacement lands. See FIGURES 5-3-10 and 5-3-11. Although no formal negotiations have been held between the DPW and Kingston, the DPW proposes to transfer the remaining 19.65 acres of private land to Camp Nekon as functional replacement land. See MAP 5-A. The DPW is to acquire 3.45 acres of the 23.10 acre parcel for the highway leaving 19.65 acres isolated. This proposal is contingent upon this parcel being available during the design phase, when the right of way acquisitions will take place. The Department of Public Works is committed to the functional replacement of Section 4(f) lands to the Kingston State Forest and to Camp Nekon as explained in the Measures to Minimize Harm section. See FIGURE 5-3-12. Disturbed Section 4(f) land areas will be regraded, stabilized, loamed and seeded as part of the construction contract. A separate landscaping contract will follow the construction contract. DEM will be invited to participate in the final landscaping contract. 6. COORDINATION The United States Department of Interior (DOI), Washington, D.C. office commented on the Draft EIS on July 6, 1979. DOI's comments were primarily with the impacts to the Section 4(f) lands and wetlands. All of DOI* 8 comments on the Draft EIS have been responded to and appear in Section 7. The Town of Kingston submitted a letter to the Department of Public Works dated August 25, 1978 (FIGURE 5-3-14) giving the pertinent information on Camp Nekon, Section 4(f) land. -219- The Town of Kingston reviewed the Draft Environmental Impact Statement, which included the Draft 4(f) Evaluation. They submitted comments in a letter dated June 12, 1979 (FIGURE 5-3-15). This letter is also included in Section 8, along with DPW's response. 7. CONCLUSION Based upon the above considerations, it is determined that there is no feasible and prudent alternative to the use of land from the Kingston State Forest and Camp Nekon, both in Kingston, and that the proposed action includes all possible planning to minimize harm to Kingston State Forest and Camp Nekon resulting from such use. -220- >lkj* Natural Heritage August 4, 1983 Mr. Walter Williams Project Development Department of Public Works 100 Nashua St. Boston, MA 02114 Re: Rt. 44 Alignment, Kingston Dear Mr. Williams: We have reviewed the plans for the latest alignment for Rt. 44 in Kingston as prepared by Mc & uir e. So far as we are able to determine, the alignment 4M-5 is satisfactory in regards to its affect on rare species in the Muddy Pond vicinity. Relocating the alignment northward away from the pond has greatly reduced the likelihood of damage to the pondshore environment from runoff, spills, and construction. We appreciate the opportunity to participate in the planning process and remain at your service. Feel free to contact us with any questions in the future. Sincerely, JEF:phb FIGURE 5-3-1 -221- l\-}\irtnvnt ot Environnx-nh! Mnu^mx-nt 100 Cambric Street, Ho: ton, Mjss. 02202 July 24, 1985 Dr. Michael D. Meyer r Director Bureau of Transportation Planning and Development Department of Public Works 10 Park Plaza Boston, MA 02116-3878 RE: Route 44-Carver-Plympton , Kingston and Plymouth Dear Dr. Meyer: I have reviewed our files for the Land and Water Conser- vation Fund, the Self-Help Program and the Urban Self-Help pro- gram for the above referenced municipalities. Based upon our available records this office has not executed monies on any land included in your proposed highway project. If you have further questions don't hesitate to contact this office. Land Use Administrator WHL/jd FIGURE 5-3-2 -222- 6 6 ?*/ 0 LIAM F. M. HICKS OMMISSIONER ^eim/wc/ae n CSPGS <<\ October 28, 1981 Justin L. Radlow Chief Engineer Department of Public Works 100 Nashua St. Boston, MA 02114 Dear Mr. Radlow: Re: - Proposed Route 44 relocation, Kingston, MA. I am writing as a result of a recent meeting between Massachusetts Natural Heritage Program (MNHP) staff and Department of Public Works personnel to discuss Che proposed rerouting of Route 44, in Kingston. On September 11, 1981 John Feingold, Program Coordinator of MNHP, met with DPW's Rt. 44 project manager Gregory Prendergast to brief him on potential rare species conflicts in the Muddy Pond area. Ihese conflicts had previously been discussed with Mr. Hartley, Mr. Prendergasts 1 s ^predecessor . After a review of its ongoing inventory of the state's rarest and nost endangered species and ecological features, MNHP -has ari&Si&8&&^^jad!fy<#&QTid as one*:e#-^fcen ecological sites in Massachusetts deserving highest priority for protection. On the basis of this designation, The Nature Conservancy, a national Land conservation organization, is studying Muddy Pond to develop an appropriate preservation strategy. Eve Endicott, Director of the Conservancy's New England Field Office, was also present at the meeting. * As you may know, the preferred alignment for Route 44, "4-M, m may have adverse Impacts on the world's largest population of Eupatorium leucolepis var. novae- anglia e (White-Bracted Boneset.) This rare plant's range is restricted to a few sites in Rhode Island and southeastern Massachusetts, with about 60% of its known global population located along the eastern shores of Muddy Pond.. E. leucolepis var. novae-angliae was cited in the December 15, 1980 Federal Register as a taxon with first priority for proposed federal listing under the Endangered Species Kct of 1973. DPW and MNHP staff have been working together since December, 1980 to try to incorporate this rare -fepecies ' protection into the planning for Rt. 44. The 4-M alignment as shown in the Draft Environmental Impact Report was field-checked by MNHP staff on March 26, 1981, raising several concerns. First, the proposed route would go through, or very close to, a oondlet just northeast of Muddy Pond. This pondlet appears to have direct groundwater connection with Muddy Pond, and is also one of two local sites for Psilocarya scirpoides , a rare spaciea of ^Bald Rush. Secondly, the topography along 4-M may provide visual access to the pond shores where E_. leucolepis grows. Thirdly, the topography would direct drainage from the proposed highway site towards Muddy Pond. FIGURE 5-3-3 -223- to At the recent meeting with Mr. Prendergnst, several specific recommendations ■-• '. - ■ ' nTfr '--= i .i } I . J'J ' .J.^. ..' ..l " L,ij i. fiSiSSlSliiS . A 11 * 1 .5 cjrpo ides were discussed. hiuso included: 1) To prevent groundwater contamination imnacts - The 4-M alignment ' should be- moved farther north into the State Forest lands to avoi theadjacent pondlct entirely, if possible. Careful study of groundwater movement in the area should be made to ascertain the effects on Muddy Pond of disturbance of the adjacent pondlet. 2) To prevent surface-runoff contamination impacts - ^^^ f ^^VVV^ ^^^!^^ 10 ^ thG section of highway north of Muddy Pond and the pondlet, to contain traffic wastes, road salt, and stormwater runoff. 3) To minimize physical and visual access - Vegetative screening should be maintained thus discouraging passers-by from increasing the use of the site. These concerns should be reflected in the scope and recommendations of the Final Environmental Impact Report. The Natural Heritage Program would be pleased to meet with you or your staff to discuss the recommendations for the protection of the rare species in further detail. The development" of regular coordination of MNHP with the DPW planning process was also discussed at the September 11 meeting. Early access to the Heritage Program data base, which is the only current and increasing statewide inventory of rare plants, animals, and significant ecological features, could be valuable to highwayplanners and ultimately yield substantial savings in staff time and money. The Program presently has over 2500 rare element occurrences mapped and cross- referenced in computer and manual files, the computer portion of which DPW has maintained until recently. Copies of this letter are being sent to MEPA, the Division of Forests and Parks, and the Federal Highway Administration with a request for MNHP to be included on appropriate "early coordination" mailing lists. The Department of Environmental Management and DPW have been cooperating throu out the planning process to determine equitable compensation for DEM lands. In a letter on May 7, 1980 to DPW, former Commissioner Richard Kendall described the potential net acreage loss to Kingston State Forest from the proposed rerouting of Route 44. Please note that DEM's willingness to consider an incursion into the State Forest will be contingent upon protection of Muddy Pond and its race species populations. Based** on -these considerations, we will be prepared at some future appropriate time to enter into an agreement with your Department concerning the compensating lands which will be added to the state forest and park systems as a result of the relocation o£ Rt~ 44. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service in this planning process and hope such cooperation will continue in the future. Please do not hesitate to call us if you have any questions. Yours Sincerely, lours bincereiy, * ' William F. M. Hicks Commissioner, DEM cc: Sam Mygatt, MEPA Unit Gilbert Bliss, Division of Forests and Parks Norman Van Ness, Federal Highway Administration Frank Bracaglia, Staff Specialist for Environment, FHWA William Ashe, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service WFH/ASF/asf L ^ -224- Sisters of Divine Provident* Provincial House Box 2, Route 80 Kingston, Massachusetts 02364 Telephone 7tfS0i5 December 6, 1980 Mr. Justin Radio Department of Public Works 100 Nashua St. Boston, Massachusetts 02114 Dear Mr. Radio: Mr. Frazer-Hartley has informed us of the change in the location of that portion of Route 44, 4MM alignment, which enters our property. We are grateful that the change in the design will relocate the road an additional 400 feet further away from Muddy Pond. The water level of the ponds at Camp Mishannock is crucial to our operation of the camp, as well as to the water supply for personnel, students and faculty. Ve find no difficulty in participating in negotia- tions which will allocate the segmented portions of our property (as indicated in the latest re- alignment) to Camp Nekon. Thank you for your consideration. Copy to Office of Selectmen, Town of Kingston Sincerely yours, Sister Dolores Kohout (For the Community Board) CHIEF ENGINEER RECEIVED OEC 1 01980 -225- FIGURE 5-3-4 Sisters of Divine Providence Provincial House Box 2, Route 80 Kingston, Massachusetts 02S6U Jaunary 18, 1981 Telephone 7^6-501*5 Mr. Justin Radio Department of Public Works 100 Nashua St. Boston, Massachusetts 02114 Dear Mr. Radio, P In the letter Sister Dolores wrote on December^6, 1980 and the letter I wrote on January 7, 1981, there was some confusion as to the reply we were seeking. Let me summarize the situation and try to state my question succinctly. In November, 1980, in a verbal discussion with Mr. Frazer-Hartley a request for a change in the proposed AM alignment of Route 44 vas made. This alignment was designated as 4MM in our discussion. The change in the design would relocate the road an additional 400 feet away from Muddy Pond. The water level of the ponds at Camp Mishannock is crucial to our operation of the camp, as well as to the water supply for our personnel, students and faculty. We would find no difficulty in participating in negotiations which will allocate the segmented portions of our property (as indicated in the latest realignment) to Camp Nekon. Does it seem feasible that the 4MM realignment will be incorporated into the final plan and will it become part of the environmental impact study? Does the State Department plan to effect the negotiations discussed for the 4MM design? Your attention to this matter is deeply appreciated. CHIEF ENGINEER Sincerely yours, RECEIVED Sister Ida Mary Lutz (For the Community Board) Copy to Office of Selectment, Town of Kingston FIGURE 5-3 January 23, 1981 Route 44 Relocation M ngston Sitters of Divine Providence Sister Ida Mary Lutz (Provincial) Provincial House Box 2, Route 80 Kingston, Massachusetts 02364 Dear Sitter Ida Mary Lutz: This 1t In reply to your letter dated January 18, 1981 requesting that the proposed Route 44 alignment be moved 400 feet further away from Muddy Pond and Camp Mlshannock In Kingston. I under- stand that both you and the Town if Kingston have met, are In agreement with the requested change and are willing to enter Into future negotiations during the Route 44 Right of Way Acquisition Stage. Your request appears reasonable but any taking of Camp Nekon/or highway purposes will Involve additional Section 4(f) Properties, However, our Department 1s glad te respond and by a copy vfUhti /erU I em directing our Study Consultant, the Architects Collaborative \\ (T.A.C.) to review this proposed change and te stake sure of Its feasibility. Upon receiving e favorable report from our Consultant* Commissioner Amldon will be briefed on their review and I will notify you of his decision. Please contact my office If you have any questions on this project* Very truly yours. JUSTIN I. RADIO FH/emf CHIEF ENGINEER CC: T.A.C. Dlst. #7 Kingston Selectmen FIGURE 5-3-6 -227- RICHARD E. KENDALL COMMISSIONER /00 Kan/stc/jre Sfocc/, 38cs/ox May 7, 1980 Mr. Dean Amidon, Commissioner Department of Public Works 100 Nashua Street Boston, Massachusetts Dear Commissioner Amidon: The Departmert of Environmental Management has reviewed the situation relative to the placement of a proposed new Route ffkk> and its impact on the Kingston State Forest. The summary of facts appears to be as follows: The highway routing, which seems to be the only reasonable course of action should a new highway be built, would utilize 25.8 acres of the state forest and isolate an additional 57.5 acres. It would seem likely that 17.^ acres of private land adjacent to what will be the only remaining large block of state forest land could be transferred to this agency resulting in a net loss in acreage of 65.3 acres. It does not seem likely that replacement of any large acreage at this location would be of any significant benefit to improving the values that would be lost, although we would entertain the consolidation within the remaining state forest of the 17-^ acre private tract which presently belongs to the Sisters of Divine Providence. It is my feeling, however, that the replacement of acreage to the state forest and park system in southeastern Massachusetts should be done at some location other than Kingston in the approximate amount of 65 or 70 acres, or their equivalent in value. The Department of Environmental Management could support the placement of the highway with the understanding that additional acreage would be acquired by D.P.W. to compensate for the losses incurred at Kingston. It would appear that the impact of this highway would reduce by about 50% the open space and natural resource benefits that this land currently is providing. We can only support the proposed highway action if an additional compensating lands are returned to the state forest and park system at some regional location that we may mutually ajjree upon. ■A JsJ la j.'O Comrni ss i oner REK: GAB .mk FIGURE 5-3-7 -228- July 23, 1J30 I. S. Route 44 Reolcatlon flings ton . Nr. Richard Kendall, Conditioner Dtpirtoeut tf Cnvlrongeatel Management 100 Ca»br1dge Street lostoa, Katsicuusettt 4tZ0t Dear Cenatsiloner Kendall* Think yea for yeu> fttlir iittl lit/ T, 1980 acknowledging the " proposed routing «f •* I* Rout* 44 through the Kingston Stilt V MM Foreit nd ttggottlpf tftt t replacement of acreage pond swap) or equivalent at tout regional location othor than Kingston aey be outuilly iceeptanle. At a follow-up neeffejlfl .Mf\. IttO with Nr. Russell Weeks of your Forest and Parti Joutheattern fteg1oa» our Department received Information ob 41 acre! of prtlvntely owned land 1n Plymouth that •at your basic land swap conditions. This land It presently tehodolod far Invest! gallon e«r JMgbt of Way ftureau. At tooa at no the* prsfrejt on tolt proposod land swap, wo plat to •oat a$a1i vUi yto>wm| lid farts representative. - v Should you have any e>o^tieat, plcise contact John P. Hurley, environmental Engineer or hit designee, Freser Hartley at #727-4166. lory truly yours. DEAN P. AM I DON \* n COMMISSIONER FH/omf ' 4 €€: D1st.#7 fillbert S?1m 4 f Finale^ •• t.a.c. mi M< n F FIGURE 5-3-8 Jun 27, 1934 Janes Qutensohn, Ccrmlaa loner Department of Environmental Hanageraent Leverett Sal tona tall Building 100 Cambridge Street Boston, Mass. Attention: Oil Bliss „ Director Fbreat and Parka Dear Conniaaloner Outensohn: A aeetlng was held an February 15* 198* with Q. Bliss and D. Boogdarian of Department of Environmental Managaraent (DEM) , to review land taking from Kingston State Forest required for the proposed Route to highway project in Carver, Kingston and Plymouth. The attached plan shows the location of the proposed highway and its effect upon the forest land. The Right of Way required for the highway equals approximately 26 acres. Forest parcels "A" "B" and as shown on attached plan, containing approximately 57 acres will beoorst isolated and it is ray understanding that DEM is not Interested In Maintaining or retaining title to them. If the owners of Parcels "D n I "E" containing approximately 6 and 17 acres respectively do not desire to retain ownership the Department could transfer these two parcels to OEM as partial functional replacement land for the 83 acres of forest affected by the DfV. The negotiations for the transfer of parcels "D" a "B" to DEM plus the renaining functional replacement land cannot take place until the Design Phase of title project, probably Vt to 2 years hence, but they will be carried out to the Mutual satisfaction of both parties. We are encroaching into the Kingston State Rarest In respo n s e to DEM request, letter dated October 28, 1981 to Chief Engineer J.L. Radio from V. 1 licks, Coranisalanar DEM to sot* the alignment northerly away from Muddy Pond to protect the white Braoted D o n ee* t . A closed drainage systen is being designed for this area to protect this endangered plant, as per your request. Richard Kendall, Oxcaiaa loner DEM in a letter dated May 7, 1980 to DPW Ccmnissloner Dean Amldon stated that The DEN could support the placement of the highway with the understanding that additional acreage would be acquired r ■ FIGURE 5-3- -230- -2- OcnnisBloner Qutensohn by EPW to compensate far the losses Incurred at Kingston". I can assure you that the DPW is eorar&tted to negotiating with DO* to the mutual sa- tisfaction of both parties to functionally replace the forest land lost to DC-t by our proposed hi#iway. I request that you concur In wrltinr with our proposal to negotiate for functional replacement lands. This letter is required to conply with Section 102(2) (c) of the National En- vironmental Policy Act of 1969 end Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966 to show that consultation with officials having Jurisdiction of the affected lands has been held. Your Draft of proposed legislation, establishing; a fund to be the repository far the value of state forest land taken for highway purposes is being reviewed by Department personnel, we support the basic concept of such legislation and would like to meet with you to Incorporate some proposed additions to the bill. Please contact David Heilly at 973-7333 at your convenience to establish a meeting date. If you have any other questions concerning the Route project please call Walter Williams, the project expediter at 973-7^95. Very truly yours, ROBERT T. TCEKNEY CCMttSSICNER WW/is Ehcl. -231- TELEPHONE 585-4*45 R.5 TOWN OF KINGSTON, MASSACHUSETTS Offiet of THE SELECTMEN REGULAR MEETINGS TUESDAY 7:15 P.M. December: k* 1980 Mr. Justin Radio, Chief Engineer The Commonwealth of Massachusetts Department of Public Works 100 Nashua Street Boston, MA 02111* Sear Mr. Radio: The Board of Selectmen, although not rescinding its objection to having Route Uk constructed through Kingston, will not oppose negotiating with the Congregation of Sisters of Divine Providence on their proposal for a realignment of a portion of the 1*MM pro- posal for Route kk* Sincerely yours, William B. Martin Chairman 00 Sister Dolores Eohout CHIEF ENGINEER RECEIVED DEC 81980 FIGURE 5-3-10 -232- 'HONE 585^445 TOWN OF KINGSTON, MASSACHUSETTS Office of THE SELECTMEN September 13, 1984 Robert McDonaugh, Chief Engineer Massachusetts Department of Public Works 100 Nashua Street Boston, Massachusetts 02114 Re : Route 44 Dear Mr. McDonaugh: In regard to the taking of land in Kingston for the construction of Route 44, it is our under- standing that negotiations will be established and various options may be available to the Town. Generally, the Board is in agreement with this procedure and the f unctional re pl arpmpnt concept. If we may be of any further assistance, please let us know. Sincerely, Thomas D. Lawton Chairman H/p -233- FIGURE 5-3-11 loreefcer 5, 1980 He: Rout* uU Relocation Kingston Mr. Richard £. Kendall, Commissioner Department of Environmental Management 100 Caabridtfe Street Boston , Mass. 02202 Dear Commissioner Kendall t This la reference to the proposed Route *fc Relocation In Xlngstea. The alitrnmeat recommended for the Final Itrrironmental Impact Statement (FKIS) vould as you hare stated la your May T, I960 letter utilise 25.8 acres of the Kingston State Forest and Isolate an additional 57.5 acres. Federal Highway Right of Way Progress Manager R.I. Dutil, Jr. has been contacted ead the eoaeept of "functional replacement" for the public land - Kingston State Forest - required for tbe relocation is eligible for federal partlcip&tloa. I have directed Kr. John F. Hurley, B&viroceaental Furineer, to arrange a aeeting through your office to discuss the compensating leads and particularly the land la Plymouth suggested by Mr. Russell Weeks of your Foreet ead Parks. The latent of the recti eg vould be to mutually agree oa c o m p ens ating lands so these leads nay be Identified in the FKX8. Very truly yours i D2AV P* AMUXW C0MdS8I0nR FH/sfp ce District 7 I.A.C. OUbert Hiss -234- FIGURE 7srtioi*(S ' J «**A'S Hi f 7 AcrZc), < \ '0 /c v ,'0 ■ TOWN Of KINGSTON, MASSACHUSETTS I Office of THE SELECTMEN TELEPHONE 6*6-4448 REGULAR MEETI TUESDAY 7 15* June 12, 1979 Justin Radio, P.E. Chief Engineer Department of Public Works Commonwealth of Massachusetts 100 Nashua Street Boston, Massachusetts 021 1l* Sear Mr. Radio: The Town of Kingston has formally stated to the MDPV its objection to the relocation of Route U4 through the Town of Kingston. Once again ve reiterate that objection. Ve are vehemently opposed to the following alternate routes proposed by the MDPW and The Architects Collaborative: Alternate I4-N, Alternate 4-M1; U-M, and Alternate I4-L. Ve are opposed to Alternate I4-N because it bisects the town and threatens our Townspeoples' safety and because it presents a threat to the environmental situation occasioned by its nearness to the Town's landfill operation and water resources. Ve are opposed to Alternate U-M and 1*-M1 because it bisects the town and threatens our Townspeoples* safety and because It presents a threat to the environmental situation along the route which Includes the State Forest, Camp Mishannock owned and operated by the Sisters of Divine Prov- idence, the town-owned Camp NeKon, and proposed well sites in the area of Treacle Pond. Ve are opposed to Alternate U-L because of its bisection of the Parting Vays Cemetery, a site which the Federal Government has stated shall be preserved as a monument to our national heritage. For the sake of brevity and to avoid redundancy we refer you to our letter of August 2$ , 1978, with its enclosures, for more and specific objections to the proposed routes. Ve beg you not to mistake our brevity for lack of resolve in objecting to these proposals. -240- FIGURE 5-3-15 Justin Badlo, P.I, -2- June 12, 1979 Ve applaud the intention of the MDPV to correct the traffic situ- ation now existing on Route hh and to develop a coordinated, two-fold pro- gram to encourage by this means the economic development of Carver, Plymouth and Plympton. Ve must now insist, however, as ve have requested in the past, that the route be laid out so as to be completely contained within those towns that seek Its benefit. Ve further insist that an alternate route be found that will avoid the alternatives which are not only of no value but also detrimental to the welfare of the Town of Kingston and its 6,776 residents. Such an alternate has been proposed by the Commonwealth's engineering consultants. Another alternate was proposed by our Town and submitted to you last August. Ve understand a third alternate, contained completely in Plymouth, was proposed as early as 1975 and is in the files of the Office of State Planning. Ve urge you to direct your energies more productively by assessing these three proposals and avoiding all others that lie within the Town of Kingston. Enclosures -241- United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE ECOLOGICAL SERVICES P.O. BOX 1518 CONCORD, NEW HAMPSHIRE 0330 1 Dr. Michael D. Meyer , Director Bureau of Transportation Planning and Development FEB 1 8 1QP£ Department of Public works Ten Park Plaza Boston, Massachusetts 02116-3973 Dear Dr. Meyer: This responds to your January 16, 1986 request for information on the presence of Federally listed and proposed endangered or threatened species within the area of the proposed alignment for Route 44 in Carver, Plymptcn, Kingston and Plymouth, Massachusetts. Our review shews that except for occasional transient individuals, nc- Federally listed or proposed species under our jurisdiction are known to exist in the project area. Therefore, no Biological Assessment or further consultation is required with us under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act. Should project plans change, or if additional information on listed or proposed species becomes available, this determination may be reconsidered. This response relates only to endangered species under our jurisdiction. It dees not address other legislation or our concerns under the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act. A list of Federally designated endangered and threatened species in Massachusetts is enclosed for your information. Thank you for your cooperation and please contact us if we can be of further assistance. Sincerely yours, Gcrdon E. Beckett Enclosure Supervisor New England Area -242- FIGURE 5-3-16 FEDERALLY LISTED ENDANGERED AND THREATENED SPECIES IN MASSACHUSETTS Common Name Scientific Name Status Distribution FISHES: Sturgeon, shortnose 1 REPTILES: Turtle, green* Turtle, hawksbill* Turtle, leatherback* Turtle, loggerhead* Turtle, Atlantic r iJley* Turtle, Plymouth red- bellied BIRDS : Eagle, bald Acipenser brevirostrum Chelonia mydas T Eretmochelys imbr icata E D crmcchelys cor iacea E Car etta car etta T Lepidochelys kempii E Clir ysemys rubriventr is bangsi E per ogr me Plover, Piping Hal i aeetus leucocephalus Falcon, American Falco peregr inus anatum per egr ine Falcon, Arctic Falco per egr inus tundr ius Charadrius melodus Connecticut River & Atlantic Coastal Waters Oceanic Southern Oceanic Southern Oceanic Oceanic Oceanic straggler in New England straggler in New England summer resident summer resident summer resident Plymouth & Dukes Counties Entire state Entire state-r eestab- lishment to former breeding range in progress Entire state migratory- no nesting Entire State - nesting habitat MAMMALS: HOLLUSKS: Cougar , eastern Felis concolor couguar E Entire state Whale, blue* Balaenoptera musculus E Oceanic Whale , finback* Balaenoptera physalus E Oceanic Whale, humpback* Megaptera novaeangliae E Oceanic Whale, right* Eubalaena spp. (all species) E Oceanic Whale, sei* Balaenoptera borealis E Oceanic Whale , sperm* Physeter catodon E Oceanic - may be extinct NONE PLANTS : Small Who r led Pogonia I s o t r i a meleoloides Hampshire, Essex Counties * Except for sea turtle nesting habitat, principal responsibility for these specie's is vested with the National Marine Fisheries Service Rev. 2/11/86 -243- ■ SECTION 6 LIST OF PREPARERS FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION Arthur Churchill P.E. District Engineer Mr. Churchill is a Professional Civil Engineer with more than 28 years of experience with the Federal Highway Administration in Design Engineering and Construction. Mr. Churchill was responsible for the supervision, review and coordination of this FEIS at the Federal level. MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS Frank A. Bracaglia P.E. Assistant Director of Systems Planning and Development Mr. Bracaglia is a Professional Civil Engineer with more than ten years of experience with both the Federal Highway Administration and Massachusetts Department of Public Works. He has supervised the preparation of numerous environmental documents at FHWA and MDPW. Mr. Bracaglia was responsible for the supervision, review and coordination of this Final EIS at the state level. Walter Williams P.E. Project Manager at Mass. DPW Mr. Williams holds an Associate Degree in Civil and Structural Engineering. He has worked on numerous environmental documents during the past twelve years in the Systems Planning Section. Mr. Williams was responsible for the review and coordination of this FEIS. Beatrice Reynolds Air and Noise Specialist Ms. Reynolds holds a Bachelor's degree in Civil Engineering and is matriculated in a Master's degree program in Environmental Studies at the University of Lowell. She has been involved with numerous air and noise studies for the Systems Planning Section during the past two years. Ms. Reynolds was responsible for the review and coordination of the Air/Noise sections. THE ARCHITECTS COLLABORATIVE, INC . Alex Cvijanovic Principal -in-Charge Mr. Cvijanovic is a Vice-President of TAC. He has undergraduate and graduate degrees In Architecture and is registered in Massachusetts. He has been a practicing architect for over 30 years, responsible for many major buildings and community plans throughout the world. -247- Morton B. Braun Project Manager Mr. Braun 's undergraduate degree was in Government and he has a Master's in City Planning. He has had over 37 years of experience in community and regional planning with local, state and federal agencies as well as in private practice. He has coordinated the impact studies for Route 44 since 1978. Joanne B. Crowe Planner Ms. Crowe has undergraduate and graduate degrees in Urban Planning, and has been associated with various planning and research projects for the past 10 years. She was responsible for updating the relocation, demographic and economic data for the Final EIS. Herbert Kronish Architect Mr. Kronish has been a practicing architect for over 25 years and is registered in Massachusetts. Mr. Kronish was responsible for updating the maps in the Final EIS, and for assembling the right-of-way data. CONSULTANTS TO TAC INCLUDED THE FOLLOWING FIRMS AND SPECIALISTS: L. G. COPLEY ASSOCIATES Lawrence G. Copley, Ph.D. (Harvard, 1965) B. Mech. Engine. (Univ. of Queensland, Australia, 1960). Registered Professional Engineer (Mass., 1968) . Has been a consultant in environmental noise and building acoustics continuously since 1967, including numerous noise impact studies for transportation facilities. Mr. Copley prepared the Noise section. INSTITUTE FOR CONSERVATION ARCHAEOLOGY, HARVARD UNIVERSITY. Mr. Russell J. Barber, Ph.D. is Director of the Institute, which is part of the Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology at Harvard University. ICA was responsible for carrying out the archaeological survey investigations required by current federal and state guidelines. JASON M. CORTELL AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Mr. Carlton L. Noyes, Vice President, Environmental Sciences, has two degrees in Biology, undergraduate from Bridgeport University, graduate from the University of New Hampshire. Mr. Noyes directs aquatic impact analyses, as well as other water and wastewater related studies, for most of JMCA projects. His training in aquatic biology, water quality analysis, and pollution control techniques provides the basis for the evaluation of potential impacts to the chemical, biological, and physical quality of surface waters. In both his academic and professional careers, he has placed particular emphasis on mathematical ecology, and has extensive knowledge of state-of-the-art methods for quantified field investigation. -248- Mr. Marshall W. Dennis, Senior Ecologist, has a B.A. in Biology from dark University, and a Masters in Wildlife Ecology from the University of Rhode Island. Mr. Dennis has had a broad spectrum of academic and professional experience in the botanical and wildlife sciences. His expertise includes the identification, mapping and evaluation of plant communities and wildlife habitats, both wetland and terrestrial. H. W. LOCHNER, INC. George Stuopis, P.E., is Vice-President for New England operations. He has a B.S. in Civil Engineering from Illinois Institute of Technology. He has been project manager for numerous highway location and design assignments, and has had over 28 years experience in transportation engineering. Mr. Stuopis was responsible for and directed the preliminary engineering activities required for the FEIS. Warren Vincent is a Senior Engineer as well as Highway Location and Geometric Design Specialist with H. W. Lochner. He has had over 33 years experience in highway engineering. Mr. Vincent prepared the closed drainage system and other related engineering work for the layout of the proposed highway. ADDITIONAL CONSULTANTS TO MASS. DEPT. OF PUBLIC WORKS ; H.W. MOORE AND ASSOCIATES Dr. Franklin G. Ching is Vice President in charge of transportation and environmental analysis. He has served as Principal on a number of environmental impact reports. Dr. Ching has received his B.S.; M.S.; and Ph.D. in Civil Engineering at Mass. Institute of Technology. Mr. Ching was responsible for Air Quality. DAVID A. ERNST David A. Ernst has worked for Mass. Division of Air Quality Control as an environmental planner as well as for private consultants reviewing various federal and state environmental impact reports. Mr. Ernst is a graduate of Brown University and holds a Master's degree in City and Regional Planning from Harvard University. Mr. Ernst was responsible for the Air modeling. -249- SECTION 7 AGENCIES AND ORGANIZATIONS TO WHOM COPIES OF THE FINAL EIS WILL BE SENT FEDERAL Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Department of Agriculture Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service Department of Housing and Urban Development Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service National Park Service Environmental Protection Agency Federal Emergency Management Agency STATE Department of Commerce and Development Department of Communities and Development Department of Public Utilities Executive Office for Administration and Finance Executive Office for Communities and Development Executive Office for Consumer Affairs Executive Office for Environmental Affairs Department of Fisheries Wildlife and Recreational Vehicles Division of Fisheries and Wildlife Department of Environmental Quality Engineering Department of Environmental Management Division of Forest and Parks Division of Water Resources Division of Waterways Department of Food and Agriculture Environmental Impact Review (MEPA Unit) Executive Office for Transportation and Construction Governor's Advisory Committee on Transportation Governor's Office Joint Legislative Committee on Transportation Massachusetts Historical Commission Civil Defense Agency State Clearinghouse ELECTED OFFICIALS U.S. Senator Edward M. Kennedy U.S. Senator John Kerry U.S. Representative Gerry E. Studds State Senator Edward Kirby State Representative Peter Forman -250- REGIONAL AGENCIES Plymouth County Commissioners Southeastern Regional Planning and Economic Development District Old Colony Planning Council TOWN OF CARVER Board of Selectmen Planning Board Library Board of Public Works Conservation Commission Development and Industrial Commission Historical Commission TOWN OF KINGSTON Board of Selectmen Library Planning Board Park Commission Camp Nekon Committee Industrial Commission Conservation Commission Historical Commission TOWN OF PLYMOUTH Board of Selectmen and Executive Secretary Planning Board Department of Public Works Development and Industrial Commission Industrial Development Financing Authority Permanent Land Use Study Committee Library Historic Commission Conservation Commission Cemetery Commissioners TOWN OF PLYMPTON Board of Selectmen Planning Board and Industrial Commission Library Conservation Commission Historical Commission PRIVATE GROUPS Plymouth Chamber of Commerce Plymouth County Development Council Ocean Spray Cranberries, Inc. Parting Ways: The Museum of Afro-American Ethno-History Sisters of Divine Providence Route 44 Task Force -251- SECTION 8 COMMENTS AND COORDINATION 1. PUBLIC INFORMATIONAL MEETINGS Public meetings on this project were held on the following dates : February 24, 1977 in Plymouth April 14, 1977 in Kingston May 25, 1977 in Carver June 29, 1977 in Plymouth January 26, 1978 in Plymouth June 22, 1978 in Plymouth June 6, 1979 in Plymouth (Public Hearing on Draft EIS) 2. COORDINATION WITH FEDERAL, STATE AND LOCAL AGENCIES May 26, 1981 April 3, 1984 Department of Public Works (DPW) - Kingston Selectmen and Sisters of Divine Providence (Sisters) met, at the Sisters request to discuss moving the alignment away from Muddy Pond. As requested the alignment was moved 400 feet northerly away from Muddy Pond. DPW met with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA); Fish and Wildlife (F & W) and Department of Environmental Quality Engineering (DEQE) to review DPW's proposed closed drainage system. All were pleased with the proposal especially the protection that will be given to the Plymouth Aquifer and wetlands from roadway runoff pollutants. April 24, 1984 April 30, 1984 July 5, 1984 DPW met with Carver, Kingston and Plymouth Selectmen, three separate meetings, to review DPW's proposed closed drainage system. All were pleased with the proposal especially the protection that will be given to the Plymouth Aquifer and wetlands from roadway runoff pollutants. DPW met with Plympton Selectmen to review DPW's proposed closed drainage system. They were pleased with the protection to the wetlands. DPW met with Carver Conservation Commission to review DPW's proposed closed drainage system. They were pleased with the protection to the cranberry bogs and wetlands. -252- July 16, 1984 July 19, 1984 August 6, 1984 November 16, 1984 DPW met with Plymouth Conservation Commission to review DPW's proposed closed drainage system. They were pleased with the protection to the wetlands. DPW met with Kingston Conservation Commission to review DPW's proposed closed drainage system. They were pleased that the closed drainage system will protect existing and proposed wells. DPW met with Plympton Conservation Commission to review DPW's proposed closed drainage system. They were pleased with the protection to the wetlands. DPW met with Executive Office of Environmental Affairs (EOEA) to review DPW's proposed responses to EOEA's Draft EIS comments. Their primary concern was with the wetland impacts, wetland replacement, reducing the width of the median and compliance with wetland regulations. December 6, 1984 December 21, 1984 DPW met with EOEA, DEQE and Division of Food and Agriculture (F&A) to review Wetland Regulations, and project wetland impacts. They were pleased with the closed drainage system for the entire project. They were assured that all wetland regulations will be satisfied. Food and Agriculture would like to reduce the impact to cranberry bogs. DPW met with EOEA, Division of Food and Agriculture and DEQE to review DPW's proposed responses to EOEA's Draft EIS comments. Reviewed Farmland Conversion Impact and Rating Form with Food and Agriculture. EOEA again requested that consideration be given to reducing the width of the median, especially in wetland areas. DPW agreed to review this issue . January 9, 1985 DPW met at Lakeville field office with DEQE and F & A to review the proposed project and the wetland impacts. DEQE was concerned with the water supply to wetlands that are divided by the area. They were also concerned that there will be no threat of flooding from water released from the retention ponds. DPW assured DEQE that culverts will be installed if required to assure water supply to the wetlands, and that the water released from the retention basins will be controlled so that there will be no threat of flooding. January 29, 1985 DPW met with EPA, Department of Interior (DOI) Boston office, F & W to review DPW's proposed responses to their Draft EIS comments. U.S. Corps of Engineers was invited but could not attend. A copy of the meeting memo was sent to their office. See attached memorandum of meeting, FIGURE 8-2-1. -253- June 25, 1985 DPW met with EPA to review DPW's proposed responses to EPA's concerns raised at 1/29/85. U.S. Corps of Engineers was invited but could not attend. Reviewed in great length the reasons why Great Mink Hole could not be avoided, as well as the proposed location for the wetland replacement areas. The DPW, after an in-depth review, reduced the width of the median from 100 feet to 60 feet. July 11, 1985 DPW met with F & W to review DPW's proposed responses to F & W's concerns raised at 1/29/85 meeting. DPW briefed F&W on their proposals as presented to EPA on 6/25/85. See meeting note above for 6/25/85. In April 1983 a Route 44 Task Force was formed by business and civic leaders in the project area to encourage the prompt completion of Route 44. Monthly meetings were held through April 1984 with DPW providing project status reports. Two meetings have been held since April 1984, one on September 10, 1984 and one on February 27, 1985. 3. SUMMARY OF PUBLIC HEARING On June 6, 1979 a corridor public hearing was held at the West Elementary School, Plymouth to record testimony on the Draft EIS. Plans showing the first seven Alternatives (Alternative 4-M-5 was developed subsequently) were on display and each was described for the audience. Public officials who stressed the need to relocate Route 44 and urged that those opposed should work with the Mass. DPW to develop an acceptable Alternative included, among others: State Representative Alfred Almeida, State Senator Robert McCarthy, Plymouth Selectmen Ken Tavares, Roger Silva, Joseph Gallitano and Clarence Kreuger, and Carver Selectman Frank Masile. Plymouth, Carver, and Plympton Town officials stated their preference for Alternative 4-L because it was entirely outside of Kingston, but Plymouth officials were opposed to Alternative 4-L because of its impacts on neighborhoods and on Parting Ways Cemetery. The Sisters of Divine Providence expressed disfavor with Alternative 4-M and 4-M-l because of their impacts on Camp Mishannock, Muddy Pond and their schools. The Southeastern Massachusetts Regional Planning and Economic Development District favored Alternative 4-M-l. The Old Colony Planning Council stated its opposition to Alternative 4-L, but favored a relocation of Route 44. Boston Edison Company indicated that Alternative 4-N would have the least impact on its long distance transmission lines, and Alternative 4-L the most. Written comments were solicited and many were received, principally a form letter prepared by the Sisters of Divine Providence opposing the project, and sent by residents. 4. COMMENTS ON DRAFT EIS On the following pages are presented the official comments received by the Mass. Department of Public Works following publication of the Draft EIS. The letters received are shown on the left side of the page, each comment or question identified numerically. Responses, shown on the right side of each page, are numbered correspondingly. For additional comments on the DEIS and the Public Hearing, see Volume 2. -254- ROUTE 44 MEMORANDUM RE: Conference at DPW January 29, 1985, 10 am. Walter Williams DPW Frank Burke DPW Ken Wilnvin Gabe Brazao FHWA Betsy Higgins EPA Donald Cooke EPA Greg Charest EPA Edward Reiner EPA Jim Mikalaites Fish & Wildlife William Patterson Dept of Interior Morton Braun TAC Marshall Dennis Cortell Assoc. DPW interns: Pat Trembly, David Johnston, Paul Chen, Margaret Nutter This meeting was held to deal with the questions raised by EPA, FWL, DDI following issuance of the DEIS. It was one of a series of meetings which have been held with other state and federal agencies for the same purpose. Some of those present had been furnished with some or all of the new material written by Cortell Associates far the FEES. In order to bring all participants up to date, Morton Braun reviewed the events of the past 5 years since the DEIS was issued, principally the adjustments made to the then preferred alignment, 4-M-l in order to: reduce the number of houses to be taken; avoid houses constructed since the DEIS was prepared; avoid the white-bracted boneset on the shores of Muddy Pond; increase the distance between Muddy Pond and the right-of-way, as requested by the Sisters of Divine Providence; minimize the impacts on the State Forest and Camp Nekcn; serve the needs of the Plymouth Industrial Park as well as the industrial areas in Kingston and Plympton; avoid impacts to the Plymouth aquifer; minimize impacts on archaeologically significant sites; minimize impacts on cranberry bogs and other wetlands; accomplish the foregoing while following geometric standards for design. The group was pleased to hear that a closed drainage system will be utilized throughout the entire length of the road. There was a brief discussion of the retention basins and their outflows to the east and west. Almost the entire meeting was devoted to a discussion of the wetlands impacted by the now preferred alignment, 4-M-5. The EPA representatives -255- FIGURE 8-2-1 page 2 pointed out that while economic, social and political problems may have been resolved, there are now 55 acres of wetlands to be taken, whereas 4-M-l would have taken 41 acres, and 4-M, 34 acres. Mr. Reiner stated emphatically that given thepresently available information, EPA could not approve the project. He decried the apparent emphasis given to resolving other impacts, while those on wetlands have increased. He also disparaged the concept of replacement as a satisfactory solution. The discussion focus sed on Great Mink Hole: that 4-M-5 will require that it be filled or bridged, in either case, its loss. Since it is a kettlehole, its replacement would be impossible, Mr. Reiner asked whether the road could be diverted at that point to avoid the Hole. The reply was that the geometric standards would probably not permit that. The EPA representatives indicated that the level of information to be provided in the FEIS would not be sufficient for them to make a finding. Morton Bra unpointed out that there appears to be a basic conflict between the level of detail desired by EPA and the level reuired for an FEIS. They were not mollified by statements from DPW representatives that there would be ample time during the design stage for participation and resolution of problems. Nor were they satisfied by the obvious facts that there is no perfect alignment for Route 44, and that in balance the 4-M- 5 alignment has resolved a great many problems even if it is not ideal insofar as wetlands are concerned. The meeting continued after the departure of the EPA group, in order to discuss next steps. It was agreed that Corbel 1 Associates would study the areas adjacent to the impacted wetlands to determine the degree to which mitigation and replacement are possible. It was also felt that while maximum practical mitigation should be proposed in the FEIS, what EPA wants is total avoidance, an impossibility . In phone calls following this conference, it was agreed to hold a meeting involving Lochner, TAC and Cortell, with various rep- resentatives of DPW and FHWA to discuss this problem and related considerations such as the width of the right-of-way, the width of the median area, mitigation measures f avoidance of Great Mink Hole. This meeting has been scheduled far 1 pro at the DPW, Wednesday, February 6, In a review of the estimated loss of wetlands following the 1/29/85 meeting, Marshall Dennis discovered that the 55 acres included wetlands within the entire right-of-way, including those at the edges, between cuEand-fill lines and the limit of the right-of-way. Exclusion of such wetlands will reduce the total by 21 acres} to 34 acres which is the same as the projected loss for 4tM and less than that for 4-M-l. Narrowing the right-of-way and/or the median will reduce it even more. -256- ) 3 I O -t K fa u •< • 2 J • J5 « M U ► K jj J} 3 ** J*% § 3 I 8 ** e o 0 u u *"8.xM*a « »b i jo s5s"« Is if M lion ' | 5 • I? S C fa M) M -3 fa 3 3 *f x -2 f • u- - 8 8 • I til Jia!"- j V E Ku t - sal* J f i Ml • • a d 3 • J> o lift!' i; a x fa -h a a. • a x x -h m m« Until iiteittl llli 52 £ "i d im 3 5 o mm (0 3 V * v. I *3 4 31 •3 * cacao I "S3 § - « fa — • fa w i a 4* u a » fa t a fa O fa a -■ a 3 X a a a) a a x 3 a a X k a • u • a x a • • 3 fa • X •* a a — fa • o 2 ■>» 2. c • 5 I ■fa. • X • w tt m • ww > fa J*«S a S.2 * fa a i» — »> c a ^ «-* v4 *-< •fa u a. a »• o ■ X fa < ft o r* a • KX c fa fa .fa aj o a v t» 3 * I 2. S. 2 > a r o x a o <-" fa fa a ■a c a c c > a o o o «- 1 K. -• ~4 -fa o c ~* " « a o a u • x >. b 4< a x fa -fa a u> n -o a > 3 °- a Q fa -> a. —• t> a w c fa U C fa a • u fa — . ■> ** T> a o > > c x fa a o o fa a. J M u c 2 4 c •» \l a o a a «- fa fa o H •* — • X »• • u fa a K *3 9 • 1 O 2 a. B »-• z s K ^" Q ■fa U *-« fa- i V • a a k x C "fa fa O fa c c -» a 04 a fa - a 2 W ~4 -> > » u a a «h w a> fa • b O. fa o o •» "3 w a fa a u • > ■* > 9 *• a o h* • o • 8X • fa -< a a >» X X fa fa fa «fa fa c ! o O a a ^« a fa — ■- a a fa J >. fa -< o a a O.X C a fa- • fa a« a a o •5 o o o fa ^- -fa O fa r-* a a >s -fa fa -Q fa ► x a fa e C O C »» -fa a c fa a 3J!- fa a 3 a •fa fa u > a e «4 a x o • x fa u u o ^ a *> c a u • w c fa u a a a a -4 a e a o> o o x o. 1 •« a x « O. TJ O 53 > e* -a 3 a c — fa 3. a w o c C — « H -fa > a. a a ffx a «4 M a • a fa X I u a fa a > a a. fa - fa C W K O a o -i a fa -fa *-i .d 2.23 fa o a 43 W »< *» a a fa c 2 !S 8 '82 f •fa • I - fa a a i m a • a a> • > • fa *4 a s sl - : AH E O • »» X a « ■v P fa a •fa -D fa o. a a fa a 33 •o fa X B C u w a o a a c ft. fa o >. a ■ o — -< a *4 *fa fa fa b a c a — -• a a a 3 fa fa «4 -fa x fa u fa fa a a a c e w > — . a a t> O fa fa "O a -fa £•3* •fa a c a o > X ! a a « x -fa - s fa a a x ^ fa x a a 5? -257- WA 5-H B ft Ill] 15*1- -J b o a Vil" o o • • <4 • 3 q j mY ilia u 9 b O o» 5 a w a a > u u »> a * "9 • • S3 J o * 3 -Is ■ ■ o a x a ■H • • f Tj » o 4f x j3 3.3 ■ 3 Tl ' 3 2 • lis 3 * n & £3!i5S3? 3 ii 9*3 3 x • w a • u • o a 3 -i 8 8*1 -U22 •H U w b U • • assess: 22s elius 5 K 4 • 1 • b «0 ; 3 * sr C b X l*s a «< e • Hi • M imJ* CM O CM •a CM CM CM to jO CO CO o CO CO • <• « JB • " e • > e t> > ^ - o > « 1 • -O b 6» ~- c ~4 • X o o A b 4 • X b IS S a 1 — • • - 9 -H s » ? I w a. o o • 3 5 > u * u » « r> S f i J- « a • a. o > O •* X • « Tl • >, X J» r4 U b 3» -a u • • v — u JS « 4 w ** *-* M C X O. -4 o «-» • ■ o V U »J 5 S §. U K £ c > •5 & 2? • -a ^ % 2? 8 • > a. o •3 §1 > • u a u • ■ •» •■> O X • O " 5 •> " o W • • m a a a a Q. • - • U ^1 -o k a k — • w e • 9 u «* o c ' C 5 • 3 o cr 9 a ■ t-< u • o o • JB e»u V u f ■» -< 9 • ^ -3 2 -3 8 • S J • as m U — • «3 • •«—-• IS k- — i o e 8o > «. a. 3 J? "S " 2 ° 3 1 5o a b a .u UH a o -< > c m m 9 o •< O • > U « • C • o > • > 11 • • > u it w • • u w O 1^ u o e •< »• ■ -h u w o • 0 "O -> -> £ 1 0 W U » ■ u u a u o a •-< o a a S B-2 5 » • -• • T> • X • C u >, H x a e f« „~ i : ft — • b 3 — u • e a- > x «" -o • o • • o o • «4 « u w a fo 3 b a a «b a • a x *-» l»s O b U X »>• u *> M U w a 3- 52 3 M ^ b SL2 • 2 8 3 • x -o x u a M 9 b ■ a • ^9 c H •< e • m -i a e "do u o • a a a a > x a 53 3 U b b <3 b 3 " if .r owe «•»• 5 a o •4 • • • b • «J O 9 U a b a c - 8 • a tg ^ s s 3 a J- a c — o x • -< • w o> o> • • • • owe nu ti a o n — e • ' w 9 a ti u a x a u a c » b cl -4 m « q -i • «D i S. i . »• «M 6 ■ O U x 6 o w • • *» -o ■> o x a a •« -o *> • a b o « a «4 >4 ■ • • a 9 a a a t> £ o x e 4J -< o > b o c > b »< a a o m u a > 4# ■ b w U a c a. u o • o •» • c -o > o a O — 3 "a ** " u b 3 e -< •< • o • b a f« u ** M ii Is 2 i?7 3 s X a *» a a. a b « 9 > K •-} a a . b x a — o •• a b -i o x a «4 *M b u «4 u a b a 6. b x o a a w a b a a X u b a a w a e a b a a. a o o v< ■ X U b a b O v« b O O. o a x a •w b a c x o> a ^ a x •< b o b b x a > a • m a a a ■o «- o — 9 Sea b -o U >, • -D C a a c a c a a o a a — ■ +|h • b a >» > a » a • jc 5 «4 b w b a *o u a o b 3 a I o a «- o t» <~ . o X «b 5 c B * O b a a) 1 ^ -258- • • e X C • - o -t «-» • we k. — • ft. tj 5. 8-5 U • • w > tw O « • TJ w b TJ • • > tj c a o • • • b • itb a a • ■ ay a* c a» x • e w • • • o -a " c : Ji^ X w e » • w • p • — a © c a o — - O . -t rM O X U a» >* • O > • •» t-i • TJ ■ aj a ■ - a 3 i « - - o C u a u o 4* o > • > i • — > GO CIO u at • O O V- b q 3 • O w w « O ■ C - • X ■ M o — m w u e > •* w o e • • ■ <~ -< x e at • • a. o > X X — «-» o w C a -> ** 2 ' ** ■» ft. — • c :j 3 ? - a • m a a • a. x a 3> w u w u js . : ° b w •- a a a u • C — X 0» b a* w ft. • a. a a - a o ^ S S TJ X c w < § w a 0» • a* N a H B I B b b t» C »- a — a » w • «« w — • 2t- u ax u w w X • • •aw OT) 3X a. a. tj a> a o C TJ C a* -r — « TJ • a • w e C 6 X a* • O ° 5 s .sr tj ~» o ft. u • i m • • • X • ■"> a fj -f «a • • w a -o - c o a a • » w x a J X — t O • X OUOh^ a* b OHHvl tl u M> N w b WW b • • -i • • f a • w a • ■ 5 a. a a - a a g w o o a< ■ 1 a. b 3 TJ J ft.*- • a a m h at x ^ .2a?2" • X WO x a • e > • c • 0 -« -t O X O e 5. x a at ** w • »a a 8 w • "e * iaa 0?S a*W a o ■ " • -i •o • e a. e c | s * ° a* *« b a W w 4 U • w u u a 5 t> u • a* • - a a ? 982 ilsa w fa u a TJ - a- c TJ u •amove* • e ■"• b • a a< w • e HJ O • 11 a w • a* e • • 5 > t O a b U O TJ • • ■» w w • > • <0 ■ #« • b o x f> a © u l-t a-.fi b e • f • -* x • 5 ■ • x H ■ b M at a C a. c • a« > b — O X t< • • x O w w • fa X • w • : ? M U S-e- b • 3 • WW w • u c ■ • • . » O X TJ w w w e u • • ?1 •? u • a ■»» w at c c b w TJ x at a o o. a e w a x u So b w ■ a u a a • b • XX* w a* (a a -a q t-a b ■ » T3 W CM • •-• 3 • a o a. S > w b w O O B. o x e e a • • a. b O • • • • • a • a • • a) • a c m • b a 6 " e-52 W a* b U bt • b U w • — e w a. a4 0 b w • 3 • « • w u ■ 3 O 1 • • O aa a4 w b • a q trt U X X »* a« e b w w o • ■ e "o w e w • • K C a« C • • — a« • a CH w ■ w • r» e 3 • a —i .** u X X w • • O W a« W b T9 W e a w c O a« q • TJ -< » w r2 a -i a w b a b i • • O w i X X >SX • w w w • • • T> O U W w a w • b ». co a o w • w ■ • i -t • • • u • u • b • at a b • u t-t a. ft. TJ u • >a * X t w ■» b a tj — ». o a» a4 • b a w u i M 2 Ot b •x w a> a ItHN I • H • b e ■ tWQ • • ►.*•<»* ewe -» w O *t o • w m * 9>sra i • o • at C *H o 3 > a at O • ' — t . — ■ — 1 ■o • x • i e a a • p at b b a w a x • a TJ a* w • • x m • •» w • on ■ u4 b a c • • c a a. 3 b- t C W 2Hab1 at w • w O • — c -i w a w >. • u a c b a > •H a« b TJ • a w • ' w o- a o C U C b a» • O ~d i—* a o X a »a w w -«a i • TJ a* § • c e w e * a* tj ua e x C-» ^ x ^ t-* w •» t-t x e a e i ■ o o TJ 3 X • O w TJ - at tj i a -t > 28*1 O U Q. S 8 S IcT 3J!8 3 ft* b a b a X 3 a* w o o w a"xJ a b • w x o a " at o a« w UNO c a k • *t w i-a > t» x e • a< at O > T< • 0 b TJ X b • w ft. -i w • u C a. t a4 0 w b C w C • • O w • •a M u " ^3 ft. 3 • e • x > X • u . O X i X > w-8 e w ' • • w O. e a« 22 g o a b ft. ft TJ X • > • W a • w a cii- w X a c ■ b H ■ a w • WW e - • a • I sr* . u a w a w G C C b • O • • • ft. b ■ w X K • ■ IC» I TJ X • b OC* w ° ■ X b • tM w a • ■ a ft. tj b • 9 a tj 31 - b o a w tj S"?a. 5 a a o b • S it w i-i tj a a ■ a TJ W ' e • w • e x w a • w a Sa u O • a w x •r tj • •*•-) •» e a< • b ■ • • O w w • > a a a w a 5 o O 3 »- 3D b b O • • w c c e — at .2 . -259- LO LO CD 00 4» a o a • a t> x « o u 4- x 44 <"auoxa«> o o •» 4i D e a. • xxti-" auwawawc "seaocsax o & a u o o *-» a > e u I - 3 o. » a c o x-o g ■ a -4 — a -> a 0 -< c a a x a. « x a x x a a »4 «-t%«fc»M : tj ^ 3 a, • • 3 o -4 o u T> C Oa 3 a ■ a o c > o c > u a. a w a O 44 3 X 44 *4 X O u u g «4 R a a o — So w Q O -4 > W X 4J 6, 44 44 c o — ' u • a a a a «4 o. 3 B -4 -o 3 o w -< a a. u x • u a > w x «- o a a "o w q oaMuwe -3a a a u o a t> o a o a a 1 w • a o c a i-t • w x o x OUOaflhMU«-4h ■ a>ba3waa?3 * o me Boo 44 u a c 9 u > " go-x - i-ri^ s 3B4>-o<*« p u a a 44 • u u j! oiri <* -o " «4 C U U O. "oca^aoaja to) 44 a 3 4 -o -4 c u o a. 44 «4 x a a " » c a >aaao44*4 a u»x u u» w u ^ TJ Jd 44 44 44 o3 o u a o t* x 0 3 o x w c «w a » o i. a o • ■ a x » «n o a > a r* 41 e 44 a a 44 44 " c o i a o uati^uuax aaauuaxau ^ ) tj u * u> w c P " «« S » a a O- X C *4 <4) 44 *4 4» 0 3 » 44 a 3 4* x u a a a a • a * • • a a x 41 X 44 a 3 41 -O S S a J A I i c 5 c a o oak >- > g> ?44 F a «4 u -< • ..a • — • 3-" • >• c 44 *4 w. j* a W 44 x a a a i- a. • U X > a 4. u 4» U « X a B X « x B -o aa a w o e a 4» o o I uh e a. a a a -o xw. a a a - x 3 3 a 2. d > -h u x o a w a 4, • 4* Q.-0 O. 14 a San a u o a u e u x 4* a a a w a X a aa 4» o»-o c a a o »< x a " « • u u 3 o 5 aaaa 3 44 o a q a a o a at x .* u &~ s a ■» a o o g IT 3 a a x a u u x X >H - 4t o 44 10 >-4 f. aacLob a aa o|a<4«aka •H 44 44 M OH U « & moo M acao. UH«4 14 -■ a a 3 a a a b >>0 a a ff 4* a a j J 3 a a a I w a X a -4 M a), a CO C £ • -o < -< •-> • a 44 • U H o e fc» 4* a ■ o o a 4« m c/i a ~-4 a. o -< u -a -a a 3 . i. ° . X 44^ a o a X x a 44 « e o >» o "1 a U U O a m w I . : a x 3 a x a a « >. •** •44 a o w4 44 44 O 4* a 44 M -> u a u a 44 •44 C o o 1-4 c u a x a 44 3 x a a " I a u 3 x o ■w > 44 a a »■> C -4 O. O j< -• a o • • o a u a 3 X < 44 X 4*. af 44 *o o wove co 44 O W O 44 r* o u u a t> •> 4> 44 a j • a e S 44 -4 a c a — x a a -4 4. -o a 44 a. t» a c t> 3 4> 7 e c — • a u a a a 3 a a a> • o a o. a a> | > x e o 3 a a 44 «4 44 -4 -» X X 44 o -» 4i « a v > T> 44 44 a a -4 4, *i m 4» 3 a 4» a 3 »4 3 o -o a a i4 44 •>•■»« a a A a a 3 4< 3 a >, 3 a o i a X O Q K "H " J 4> 44 al a 44 a -a 41 44 g>X a <44 U »4 44 r O o a o a> 3 a 44 •jo a> o <44 a a _ a o 44 u a MUM Q a W -O a a u ■ a <4< a o- «h a x 4 a x a o 44 -o a. caw a o -a 44 < 0 a »> u al 44 44 o " u a "o a M a a -4 x a a u a *44 M 4> a o a a 44 1 -4 a 14 44 x a 3 a o o x -4 4. • x a a pi o e 4-i u x > a 44 4 4» a a u 44 a ax «4D a 4. t. c -. 4 a >4 w a) 3 9 c a : » M -4 |4 5 2 85-3^5 T3 a O 44 a e w a -4 o J a 5 u * i g a c 44 a a a 3 a o a tr x lA 44 4* a a 4t > x -o o a x a a — 1 « 4) alas > 44 Q a x 3 at ri U O ■h u aa ax c • > a -4 44 X 44 c a a -4 o » »4 -4 o £ a o at u 44 44 a a a a -H -4 x rw 44 44 H 4i u u g £ c* ! - a -4 x o. a 4? W «4 Sax *K x o a a a o •8 »4 u • % : X a o 44 u u af a a • " •00 u B "i Z a 3 a- • x • - a x a £14 a b o 4) 4. a a a ■« £1 o o a a. m a -* x 32 i: -260- y- CNJ CM o rg ^rl 3 O • «n 6 SrH • +> co e« • • S ♦* u ;> «o to ♦> 3 .x h c W j: u>*o o «« > ♦> • * > C 00 « •» W • TJ » COf A * *> e - o • • « c ►> o t. o o -to v • K > c •» > Q O • 2 * 8£ o » CO X u •I u o u m M - >■> i «» i >-» «» C _ ^ • O » >yw — • tl u > (• ♦>M -4 • • « K > Mk . .4* « • O O • I. <* c * c to • m C*> . • flu • c t> o tcV-« 5 •• M . O p +>«H C •/> W O I -**> e> c m X ■a u >»c-h i t. « h 0-OV.-J • at. co «•«•>,• u e c «• « « |H • O m O U ON « U »HU f- U U C "O C4 H > vi 3 ««-- • O C 3«H l-t M O fc. C -4 ••H3U" u c «»4> 6 r 0.«« O 0 TJ I < MO "rH-* • O -< 3 *J «> r-t O •- 0 c .c *4» > « co cr • u 1 * n >» > > o Mfl C • • • O > • V •HPW CH +> C «C v« • « jt*~> « — m f> m u« •«» • *» k> KM) •- * JL- <•) C 0*-» J> « to H U O C » «> U e •»< »> cv o u o o <-> 3 ■•-> a j « ttu (T3 o * c **s> • c • iH « CV *> O O VI « 3 av» e> «c e o • - B M W) vt « & o C C > - >« o * u u u *> -H •> « «» U > « -a to > • cue u-o ^vciccc c > i-t oo 3 c >H ~ HUI«H 0 B 3* C w " •0 tH « .|H >3C«« CO O O L, U 1 tO -I O 3 3 C- C U +> V I -rt MHHH U) 4> « U U U 41 «4 • -H 4> O c *1 r-t 6 -O 4-> *i -• O-H c U. r. a. « O O C 4>»H «UHQU « 3 o* QUO i-i CO -1 10 ■O T3 •< ■o • c tv 1* « c CO -261- >. -1 3 SJI 3 -a o H a 3 • a~ 8. ^ it 5 U B OH O «■> U I *> !-•«»• o o o » U C «0 u taw *> C CHH, -5 1) r-t f ■ O m «J .C Vi >, O -t-> o u •H O C » -P VI O V) •H O > +> • T3 o c OC.CC l-< rH O • «»-» O < O rH tl • X> T> d/> « • e x> u H O X C « O U 10 "O 10 UlH -< -<«« • E •> o/> £ c c c » o o « «t u -•CI, «< « u« ■ C 4) Xi -* a o « >> o •» o £> a> <-> o o«cu • > «H "H K\ *J T3 B • r-C U O V> ■ O C C U y O V 3 O u O ♦» m m m m J> • (. 3 ** |H 3 U a « DO C « -K U V4 u • S£ «M • « *> C « fttJ c « -I I* * r-l 3 « o 5 «■ .o 3 O 5 I a • « II o v c • o • C « C or — < 0 4> b * •o to * • «l ■» 3 C O OX « V a *h u * b ■a t> ti « *-> « a X CI ♦> o u O a. v c u O X «i u u o CO «l o VI c 4» O — < £ CUD. > •d O a a (o ^ uoo a K -262 ■? u ■i 2 a I 2 -263- o C\J CNJ K 9 2 • • jw • A 0 »« « >» a u • o • Of a. • 0> — 3 "O O t-t X 3 " O 3 c u O o -« g u u m » u > • -< 0 0 -H . 3 11 4J U .£c S S § • «» * 0 0 O -< a u C 0 u 0 U «4 • W «4 u X ax M u • U U XI • a o w £ « 6. W O 0 U »4 -ICO* «4 — • IN C < H S • • o 0 • a o " a r* • £ -a a 3 0 t-« d <9 • o m i -a • * • a a. i e* 0 > 6 O r-l u 3/ 0 -t 3 • A « 3j " >33 SIS 4 u Q Q 0 o 0 u • 2 8 • d ■ 3 —> O O U O -3 u o o u >• u a Suit) 0 0> O X 0 ,«fl«"3 S S • « > a s u H « O 4 »> ? " ^ -j -3 1 B H • H H 4 0 ■0 0 0 4 0 ■ 4 - x 6 0 3 £J"*0«*^4 0 u > 0 U r-t . . O O i-i 3 O »*• »M ■ u u 9 o 3 0 3 • 3 S 3 2 2 X o a n 0 u w l 4 S 4*9 S 2 15 2,3 ► 1 , a 13*2*1 is - |? V 5^ 3^ 4 M 3* y • » • S5 3 0 ** 8 0 4 »4 d 0 o u q 0 0 4 > w 1 • c O " ) i i o -o 3 u 0 U rl U fl • D ^ A Ck u u u d u o 3 0 3 0 0^ T» 4J*<-IM030go q o W w B 0 ■ ,d • ■ x -o o 5 ^9UMv4w0 "O ■»< d 0 0 t« I w 4 o A 0 M r4 d . £8-4^ ylJ « » « 3 > > H0M « -265- -266- -267- » u \ a ■H • ~< » • H £ 4J X! > M • 5 w 8 3 8*3 d u 3 L. u O i-l a> 1 a vl 9 « u u U M M « • • 3 § J3 O S u O O • -4 0 3MWU O, « V> .» 0 • J3 • r4 I o o %-* u u e u H w u «-i u - w« 0 i ° SS 5 W w 3 8 -H K< d a » o h • a • •< d • a j: w o i m « e 3 *» v» f-i S a wh i^t ww o y* 1 • t-l d «u 5 b 3 « «fI U • B a w 3 o. d D d >M w « o w • d u w 18.2 2 * E a 3- 3 O. K O J2 • 6 • ■ «w W U > Q i 9 X a t4 o» cau d u a atJ^ww^SiS- >9f 8 3^«« *» q o o a a una «S m m so - U NO u 3 o a u • . w • w J « i • . o u s o i> ** • Wa«tdw>nd-r] " 3 ' 1 3 2S3S* 8h J t4 • u T> _ p »• u u " 8 • ° 5 1 ? 3 5 d 5 si a X a B "2 a at o ■ a w w3-88 8 -268- -271- -272- -273- CO z O P < Z td O Z o o e* Id I- z D Z g 3 O z «< o z .a a 0 w cl CL a c 3 c c J Q 8? 3 3 8 sr 3 s 3 - X < ~ s E * Z o p < z W o z 8 ee u Z Z o z o z g ttf Q Z < o z go to S3 c o .a Q go S i if c-* o o ' O O CO O "*"* < n o t n o o oc o o o o ^ o o o o o o «/> ,3 - c* — * c* o < — o o c« o o • d d h d i .Hz a. 2 "§ £ c f 3s! « ._ o o o o -c t: .3 § 8 k - e 3 2 3 s 3 5 ■9 c § J c "5 * 2 II ■o •> •I o t. c < 8 >• < I 0 CO rj] z > u 2 z 5 o 5 o s Z e£ PO as « 3 z a; P w S o .9 C o .a Q c •- ■ -- ov C4 n C4 r4 V 2 o o « o o e> 1 « *■• «- O V < o o oo o o O ( 00 o o o o , 3 8 1 o O O m »rt •» 1 O c-j « <=> o — B O o o (J r» o> 1/1 1~- 3 nNaOr, Q O O O O O O V 3 2 — O O tx O O O O o o t O o v+ d o o oi 3 z 0.2 JNiO H {- 0 -274- r T< '* V • > >, t» a u -•a y -p <■ O V * V V Q t4 u a -> a o 5 a 3 was a a ■ a U it ~1 — P □ » u a. o a o m o a — t V J! > '-. " O * 3 O w 3 ^ -* -« O *j • u a 4 V M > 00 U 41 -H a -< o u a 2 * «9 ■ • I -p • T> u a ** pa a a ■ r v -h V > V • V u J iii! - 3 a V •h .c u u 4 *J W W a 3 S o ^ a 1 st ■ a a 3.3 ■ u 3 • -P 3 • Q £ v a u a v v > & « a • o JZ II o " h h u a o 9 U 00 u O 3il O o P-P «l a 5 o u . 3 t: a £5 3-S a J3 2 a u o • □ "3 .33* < S 3 5 ti K * a J «l a J3 fS 3 •? a -e o a * ■H • a. u o " !t won u H M il o 33 - s- a "a 3 a a a J3 O u u -< 3 «e a. 53 - V ■o a u V u o T5 *t >M U J3 a u 2~ 2^ 3 3 «l 3 u -p -s J -p a. * a 5 Sfi jC H . • 3 5 -■4 O • U O ftl U • ^ £ O <• O a. o o B 3 3 5 • a JZ U U -H a* Q. d Jo o o Ip H u Ok • U > w u « u a a « 8 « u a » U h O H « ■ U £ TJ -I U U « -p ■ ■ a aluo n ^•~pd«»^pS^pu o pj » pp u O • 4i ^* PM a • > v a S8 •1 5 S = 3 3 S ^ a ~ « K ate : 1 CO CO 1 d . 5 3 ^ U O V. u • e x o *» 3 » o c a ^ « ■« Is b y o p 5 511 "o 5 v v -> » •55 ^ - - *» ppO <■> mo! : *• a « 8 •£ • 5^ u 0> *»*•■?? 2 -p o -c M > K *• 3 ■h •» d • *^ , C i> O -< u, 3 c -o B « 11 c • - 9 ^ I" U «J a O a-23 05 CO 5 S > -3 2 s 5 o c c • 5 a . U 9 o o * . *3 35 S5 s;a s -s ? 2 w a fl o 352 q335 ? 3 •>, o o H T» • h o m m n u 9 U p 0. CA HO H -H . a d H Ml ill Sua .^1 a 5 2 2 25i _ a o, a r* ^ CM* -J £ AW« o a a o ,333 :3 S3 » a a u a 3«pj8'!»'1 ll M V U O 0 "* nil 2 9 I-» • •-* 0> -p-< o o 3 * a • a o u • -1 -P • ^ a » a • M -H JC M *• ♦> U « a C *J 0. 1 5 "3 i m S 5 3 O. 3 ■<-» «1 fl U O e « » u 31 * " * 1 a a o -0 J c JJ u * JZ- O O 0. vp o> « h a -j a p>fl -rf fl d *» " "O -t ca 2M c o » Up -4 u 0 L, 2, X « O po IP i ft u a o « _ 0 -» w> «• O M s o e 5J 0 3 S . 3 5 JB ■O (9 C a o S rt I 9 5i w> 0 3 B o ji „ t 2.8 5 • a pj 5x U p 3»d U O 0« 3 :?3 « u a Dt fl 3 a ^ 2213 ll -276- e e o o k — c «t •a o k Q. V Ck JE 5 k o» u e o B U r- m e o e v» a. VI •»- O ** *» +» 41 C >» a. k u m v c 3 m « k *> k 41 vi 4i r U 4i X) . o» 4). • *- cnv. „ O 3 . 8^„ o o *» ■' fcx?3 •. •—ML. m o 4-> k o *»..• 5jr ** c ■ ♦* -3 • e wc»» - r - a> vi *> «J o -u 4» «j \JJ.„ O > «* V» >» A- • Ck • X» ** ■ : v- o Cf 1 . V| r— k fir-' . . .*> *> a. e — •-wo B J3 . •■«»- >>^* u w ■• e u • ft v» C *> k o *«•« <« & ' •a w ex £5 o Cw ■• *» C UTI a kx> v > « k 41 C S 3 vi OU cr • U 41 I » 8 i S ."i ^ 4- 41 Cw 2 5 "S ° "~* ■ *» k N ** k «9 3 v- U «l ■ " . . B^S 3 *>»u . «- c *i *J WX) _ XJ _ _ O § +» O 3 1 . , ■r- O JZ k >, . • ** k OlH- r- a nc ■ c c « . •a *»XJ*- •• •• # u v» a» . vi 4> — — x> . k e m ck o x» x» *» '. k k U v ** m m m • ■ • JZ U 3 IX •— U *-» C «-> M t* vi V. m o c n-» g > <• o w XI W C k — v> O U O *> >J 4J w ■a k » (' H£ tl VI U ♦* k o — 5vt o o • r- I. -W— •• O Q. V k 4< B -r- ■ — > k *» < e as. a v» o — VI ut r _ m c «» — ♦> xi a. k k 5 . •< <• « >**♦* • * 1 8 V. ; :; - J!vi .'•'•I*. k ■ • t- o u o e »- k — w m e • • o . *j . *3 c »- «f C ** O V. cr S o» ♦» 3 o I S «> *» r- vi of N ♦> o * £? «pp t? o . k k k o CK XI CW OL CM 2i ' m u qt . S 3 . • e e >, i»- v H — jc -o 8 2 3 «J c ♦* o V- _ o > VI k 10 Ck c a* Q. v- v « • E « O > •♦■» C «r- • I. V «l X» _ jt %J cn»- 5- >- o c ♦» m *> •a . c «/ q +-»B c — ^ c 8-8 S vo>^ • SSls?^ •• fe; *3 »i*i C • C <••— B •*•»<■.. V JC O C m V C - /»: S v n «t- *> o • ».4-$>- .1 8 <« *• *jTt .* kekc« v Muor.'l «v ^ - - , L > *» M M — ' «* W.jC'. l C u v cxi • • O k a m o 3 « o c.jj— 4J c <- ** 6 *• B /■ c o *> iv m k > *» k 4i c o m -o *> t- 41 41 t— ** n •t U U VI k X> *- •> k 3 C <« « vi o 3 k m <• k cr o xr 4i B vi ** > x> n C «! TJ£ VI 41 C 41 41 X> > 41 VI C a* x: «< « V- >> «»- *> C 3 1^- 'x'.« — "k vi k"-V 4i a; rt.V «« S 2" -i X> vi O k I 44 ♦> (k w w u) « v». • urn +*a W * y ">y j>«. r 9 •1 1 ^ i4 y J 111 1 I s 2 • i ■hi to • O ^ • ** w a « O M •seas,?, •o X o a ox e -» e o • o • • Nl» • a • to to aj OT) • B e a a h 5 M w ft. to u- M • ■ a >. -a • 5 -o c to § .3 to to • & to c» 8 X to B <3 X • to • e o u a » o, • • > to M W vt j> x 6 a • tj o u r> 0 o a c O «4 H 3 ft. to to r* to 8 o, M >> o c o c -O «M to M a a X as w • a • at X St •o to o g • o c a • ••4 -to. i a • > • o > O O to u 3 c *« «9 a K to • 9 4 • to 1 > toftt «4 O O O «* 8 » •» CkO> » « »fl o r*| MB «< to e • l -o a o . •H X G -O • to e a r ■ a » to to X to to to =• v . «< ■ ■ ■fx Of sp*^ O to a e a to ~i CL T3 to e a a a o o -< 5 - g^S ? to to at M O at ' • a • Ml to T» a C ' • c o -< ' « • e to to X to • ■ « a to a -to to X a «t a » -IX a x x a a o. } to C 9 4 too • • to to • O tol«4 M toaew«>o^ op u r> o. e c^towavaoo • • » c o -o w ft. (Z to 3 C " o ^ 5 wo o — *> • 3 3 •at*- 1 ■ c d M X o ^ O w «3 b ft. M • a u « M to • to X ■o a -a • u £ ft. • to _ "I "» 0 «. O co-< O » >3 to e» w 0 a — m m 5 a • to r« a >< • to c a >. • O > to w > { a a a> 3 xx X w to to X *< a t P o a M 6 to «4 C »< «4 a • a -3 u « a «J a to • a o a • • u x •h a -O w to MM • O O J u u hXh »h a O X - -o Si a) a «4 (< _ r-t x a •w 3 P to • a> a too a to 0>*va • • X Is I O U 0 to a a o a M a a rj to a a p u 'to u 5 o Ea a to jp v e a. a B a a u a k a • a w x a a a t> • a o a « *< a > to a a o a a x x o. x a. " - fia.t M 0 O.W « 0*3 a to o to to a »n -j o a to a a w e «4 w ft. 0 • • O • to o a to • u to «H > ~* • a o 4 o a > to O to to 3r4 «« X M X • wax w m x a u a m im e> to > w to o m •+ m * m t * to > x 9 O • H io ■o to o a o Jjj M O to ^ to kS|8 w o -* ■ > a -to ' -O-Janaaac aa,MtoXto a a S . o 3 e o ft • x h ,a Mxa a £ *4 o "to u a to MH aXtoOa-otoa oaoao _ -h a a 6.-" x M O HuXua mu 0 ■ to a X >H _ O 6- WtotoMOto WQOtoa a«M 0 to U to 0 a • O T> to -< • a a >o i -4 to M • to 6 X -< i U to S to 6 * to a to *" a u a t> a a to • • • -a u * o T> a >^ueo>v«0to 9ri U.9H to a • 8 . at a a X to T» va ii 9 >toa«ktoi>ttoM • to 6 u 9 XX9I _ X a a oa aa& < aMoa^w«4ga aoH k « « .0 to 6 > "_ to* a to o a u 9.a< to W to w ak m-o a a o a • -o *4 C O • H U 4> 13 « r-< toa-39aaaaogaa « 2 2. a 3 to 0 to M a p a too, X • 5oxa>toWtoa 6 o to o D a x X to 0 X to a *. o a a 5 > w an o u a a w ^» 0 m a to a o o i. v. u 9 6. a o C ft, O tH • X • sir 8,S • C -1 -o ■o a a a a x ■ 5 -o _ to P «< M C ~" X »~ to a> I to o to a XH9999 a a > a a a M X 3 Hi O X a •»» i I X a O • to w •* u • ft. v w a • O o o O to a x 6. x 3 - ~> X y O t3 ft. • aj P f to -g • • aj a> 3 X»« a T) * J*, a 2L u o *• « o X a. a > -279- CM o e > w o ce c a *. «u|c W B 2.? > X b C ^ o e b o • C&Q. w o "O c X 3 «* e C -3 LJ w ~* m 3 a e • X b «b ti 4* K w • b O • «b 2 u c • a • x ■ bOW x x c e n a w - 2. 5 ■o w a - •> I 8 -o •9 • T3 >M 3 vi X O fi S 2 X b •a a c a r4 «4 • 3 I hi H ox a x w • «M w X •c o C -o •4 • 0 iH C a 9 • 3 • O • C > u • o- O X «« B • W W 4 w • b U V a m c • e b w SSI c • o a •3 » « "W «4 4 ' > b o w b •< C •< i . , U L ^ H u | u If 3 C O (I « < X X ' « W « C -O 3 E O X c a m 3 — w 4 — c » • 3b 2 . o O X W . a • W 4 W e c* V • • ■-! • O C T» • »< C " «-i a 5 6 \ X 4 a w J"D X v. £ ' X«2 Ok a w X O 3 I • w • 4 b • X • X • w • la* « V X c • I W • • C o > a w a b b -a §i i 3 • K w U X O 4 • O b w C I a *4 b 4 0 Q a a 4 r< a. ee w « £ a.x X 4 „ W) u 4 X T> b 3 X C C > • C U & • < §« -rl r-t SB s«3bC K « fHM«i0«b>r4 ■OrtH « 6" • 3 « O I •* w: m rs « o »2 Hi. Sub • • w « o * t» • 'u • ex • b ft « a 3 w aw 3 O 3 O W • «M b d b • «4 • • b Mi ■e I • 2 • «4 W ■ 2 S S*S 0> • wi a • w o 1 • a. w w 1 «4 • • b 1 "m ft, 9 1 • b v. 1 b w 9 U O 6 I • ■ 1x9. a b m > O « I r4 *H : 3 ft 3 u ' O • O • X w >« o> • *< m -o • • O > W S • • -H • b • •OBMBXtxB C » X w X X X B -3 ■ ■ >-> H tJ • o o w o w • > • ft w w I -ii & m • w « www s as g w 3 8 gs-b w -H O • a* afill □ 00 2 gw r4«tkab««*4a «b a «k b 4j <• * !£ 'la k OOO O 00 w b o> a o.-> s - . w b r» b •< ^ • B K Bin w w w -280- a B X -o b « •-! a b w a b a b 3 •H • o o. a • o - > b 6 a Ob v x i 3 J«8 3 b b «4 v< a o a ■q »< w • < «4 W WH • K • « 6 b > w a b «*w m m *iuh 8S E 3 ih-> «< O kiiti -281- CO CO < CO z o z bl 2 U 111 J lit (A bl I I J3 2 tM M 3 O • O Z i =» a . * ^ : 2 ►» -o 3C *• O • 3 • 3 ES Vi • J3 M O »« o t> «> *~t *> # ^ » or» • s- a - 3 'oja • 8 8 o « l> a «_> — m t. C > o o *» § a • • HI o sr. a> -i as 4> . X (_> *> n *> 4 4 -c p -« c ► o T3 *» » i> ) a i v *- j» « o 3 *» *.s a 3 39 s s a 53 5 C * 5 S 3 S -t -< •-> *• A 3 W t 6-35- 1^ «» — o < w Ed M "C a 52 2 •o • -• • c c ■ 31 tl JC •< O - t ♦* ^ u \) CO* V tl • Q a t< 13 ** C <->>2 o 1 S CM «! TJ *-« CX O * 8-3 3 * g q x 4 o u ■ •« u <~* * *» V, <| Q. i o o 3 -4 • a « S « -3 ■ "6 no* •«<»«"• 3 J3 ■ ■ • « Jo v £ c 3 • o « O t> « H • ♦» C Co £3 £ C <* O t. — o > " £ I - 5 3 yes si ** O* * M 4> > c +> • w 3 m t. ti 8 » q » ti x-a >o • U *» 1 S * 6 f. 3 i 5 S 5 3 « 2 a v n c 8 o « S ►* 5 £ a o «o « a -1 p q c « o uc o •> »• jo 0 & »• C « ► « — J • J] ♦» -o <• y F. c « S o. • f> > p S, .5 3 3 5 3 i. « » o o -o £ 0 C •1 •* tl « ♦> • m V > w 8C I) ' l< *4 p. -c C II H "!9 S 3 I o • «» • if :u^ 5 1o O O O £ o C 3 ** o woo«-*vo t-l »(iCo-e.e.o«> *> t> a. c H£ • C o «* o — « • *o I. y £ ^3 »• p <2 -a V. T f. ^ j q . c • o « O V H t 41 H *» r-« * 1. u * 1 a\ p s * m • « o U a • X *• 3 ♦» O • ♦> C O M « ♦> • -4 « IA £ • >> C tt v 10 • o tl C U 4t ~ 3 d O S K 55 2 8 S "t 8 « TJ "O > P. • -* 2 $ § a s a u - * - •» •» o> z a I * i l 1 ? ■ «ri 3 S 0 i !> J A ■ 3 11 4 r4 U > • at o. J o.«^u*St*S »• -< O -1 c 00 o o J *. . *j 3g« a u I a o * b • li M U t> »» C ti ti ♦* ** «* 41 SB4«* P H O J3 «l 5 m • fi 3 a ♦» » « fv o v «• « # Vi « 3 j tl Vi ti ► * — g - ♦» — c • « «- rtO Ctltl»4S<~ -282- r_ * ~j 'z i v t a « — • —i >•-. 4i -* ~* ~ = C O w ;! ~ ? ~ = -* ^3 J "O a o •j ^ — Z * % U c 3 »- * 4* C 4» OC ; x a w q u ft w o a c. « • — _ ■ -4 > i C — * 3 U 5 C O 5/ ^) «* o o w f a* > *- *- «- u X u a x f— -a « *- « a *> ^ * 41 5 O - X w. a v, : -> ft* 4. r- --HI <_ ,--- ****** JZ JZ k. 4 (j — < to _i oc w, o> a g C ~ u 3 « w jz • « u b O w - w . c c C O U V u t- O. W o « a a) « — . 1 *f «j t- 3 < ■ — 4< X 3 «-> I- "O QC c c « -o o w « U u -i — • V u -H > - -o — « -t » • o - a. > - « a u c m • 3 o o £ a <-> o 5 g 4J > 0 C O u o I SI u I 3 « O C • c I c (S < • o z a. n u a* to u c 9 > C V a) to § a* ^ C 4J > : -5 oj O It V >M <+* JZ u u ai O I -t O M «) (A 3 a at I JZ 4J c at 60 3 -H >> C T3 4> «l 0 C 4J X 4) w jz x m i*J 3? « g *-» M - O X *-i O i aj 3 3 m -a 3 -a u i c x IJ V (I ftl ^ 0} QC c x 3 a - 4> H 4i a u: c x a ^ or: o C ■ > -o O M -o 00 CO 41 41 O 41 41 4J U 00 I- 2 « — < C pu q a v o * a. a 4) • T) V S O c c ft* 3 u o a. T3 4t 41 3 u »• *-» u -a H H C -H 41 a * e *j cc « 0 «-o J * * 3 4* ^ -o ai a> a C 4) (8 o **-« o Pv, a. ^ O U *-» <0 k- a. 3 «M (0X 41 ft" 00 4J X 4J 4) 4J <9 X 41 u «*- e •H -o 0 •O 41 O U C CO O i_ ■H O O ft X Of — * b 3 ft) X O H tl « 3 u ■O T3 O os a. 4* o -o *-» -O ft* 3 (0 oj r o U Q. ceo. ft* o o a. oo O c o x c b co P- 3 TJ CCO -« o 5 > "H C U 4* ft* X u u O *j w w oo O tO 4> C Jd ^ x 4> v a* C/i *J M g 2 4» O 4-> 00 U D. JZ c 01 -h e *-» h (fl tg CO C 05 -H u ft* ft* X O c 0 h H >m » CI C CO H H H U O H 3 > 4* O 4-i 4* cr o co m (j * S 00 K * C C 09 >» O (0 -h o. v o u a ^ J= 3 to o r~i 4j x oo 6. o h tOC O u < *-* «h n c e < jz u a -h ft § 4J "TJ C ««-. 41 C 00 C o. 41 "O 15 u u u *-> O a h a. -H -O O e u a ■o 3 ^ " J 5 2 C 0) C -h (0 -< -H -4 O a. u as c c to 03 41 O X 0) H OJ O, 0J 00 C 3 9 E C o ~* to 5 -*) X U 00 4J 4> -H U X C «*-( h 0) I -283- t C O > u « 3 O 00 u C V a lj u m C 4i >. aj oi j= — » 4) "O J *-> C *J 3 • 4i tn *J » (0 3 <0 X O *j u *-» C W u 4i 3 a. 41 e m q u 41 O 00 H PS 4! >n 41 I- X U u u 3 X> 4i m c h 3 41 O C 4) O > *-» «t) -o o 4» 00 B «i h 3 n ^ cj 4i m >M 41 U H o o »- CX 41 0) -H C X 5 5 41 -Sf 3 > 4> *-> -t i u JZ H C C O 4» -* 5 *-» 3 at «J -H Oi H H 41 4-i O0 41 ki V 41 rl u V> en u u ,C 4» O J= 9 O O H ) a: u w a: a 3 §5 41 3 41 U U 4J 8 co CJ c c c J2 a. 3 O E C IS — 4/> O • •s e s 8s; - 3 5 21 i C V u x 3 o -> O X — 8 5 3 I c 3 c 8 •5 2 2 J! M V M > V — 8 |f i! si ^1 - u ll *J <* V V m >- «i — «« *; 8- 1 a o o woo.** * *. v> c a « 9 » • o <• a o e *• f ill X 4> X — C » <• ~ — 3 -r 4J ** t W 3 .o --r x«^-^ 5 <« . o u * >- , M « u x « «> ^ * * .i: ^f^wcfia.t'C x M»*i!ifll - 1 a. a E 0 5 tr? - 1 c o o — V u O x O C —> *> - 2 5 s > » w ua !• Q • T>E — it « «.« 5* c • *x -3 « 0 o I « M ■ 5 0 L E 1 L. c w 3 a. O i> m - ' .i . s > 5 5 I • " 13 ?lii= 85 i! « C X 3 -286- O GO cc o 3 a o i J li . I X — u V w « V. 2 f £2 v - - c — 6 T> k M - • M k cow-Twno.1- v — • u 3 >- i- « e 5 o »- • — E O - 3 -» »- • O C « k .* • — w S w w o • „ kf sjr ^ w u. k o lino a a— • — = at o <• k k k « > « - « a o k i x Si ■ ji w • w w c "O — 9 0 9»«* > — o a. c ■ c • X k W 3 x — X t> UP O W M W C j o ct)* k 5 B*»0» 00» — — t> TJ w -0 — • M -D w k — C V » — « 5 — »- v e o I 4 w w — - - x> 1 }tl u C c • 4 Q k 3 U«««£X«k if § > Q »- w — • W u= J « • e s • .2 2 § 8 t>S * w 1. 1 S •- i 2 O I <-> it 3 oGcox'tiQX §•600 c — as u OC XI O C « k — w w m — E w « CO* 3 w «l <2 y o O • M O w CC C V t) — k k X IIT} L V a. r- k I v w w XI w — C V >» • » > X >.— - o w — C M z u — u 6 • -» 8- » ** _ - E • xi i» X c "O X> k c u V * *> - 0> C E k «• S c t» E o> • 3 — a o « x s O V C — k • — Jk - 8 ^ X • «c w TJ U W •«• T> 5-0 -» «> * X ^ w IBs - So k W U — CO o> iik . ?5 %i s X X *• k u w o *- Z k c «• » 5 -T www 3 M •* C W bus I — w T3 2:5 M 4 J! 1-4 I* 111 I* • w XI cue 1= . ^ Jo § V k. C m o v 6> lip itU U k k • ■ • x* V X «- w k U <^ • — ■» T! v "5 • •• k 1*- h ti w e u o>x — — C *• — «l — • •• c •* — o w C k — ». > p 2 c v v v s "Sx 1 J - I. T«- — —ww C XCWU #30— — — 6. — «w U U tj w X a. «ywc«»wxw _« X« C-OU3 Xwmwwm — c n cr W — W M — H- ■ V> — 8x- « OT, ° Jjt g — OIMXWVWC — 5 — w w a. 5 c u X -J « O ll « « x J >. .m v « t * v 0 0 •3«X m — c 6 3 w o w • •« x 1 6 V 9> M V M M M 3 W ■ 0 w w — C O w w — O k y w w w 4 « k CO. •- « C c w u c» — cm -6 .2 1 1 I "* w XX rkj!.rk — O w J o X) ■ c • « • w JZ~Z. w C M 11 i?| 0—0 w «l *_ a. a C W V • k — ■00 C « k. • o o • n n » — V • k o >> « • — ac x C (X *1 8 -J?J5 >. w v M si- U w o\ at ox 33 k. « i> 3 > > — k. <-> >■. — o o *• "O ** • CUM • «-•«•• X • — > k. — S-8 S3 la! >.«> — — w. — i. f» * — o « — m o m i_ c «• • W\ 3 o. o v II O » - *» » o c o M k. 3 • C ~ 8 8 "8 . — k. w> w x • «k- CO" O >> t| 0 - E »w • •> *> S. c c mo m 0 — — 1 • • — J£ u • M W, • ■ 3 3 I — X V — — U *■» M 3 J — 3 • u e x x V o V u M M C C k. *> 3 e o "s -o • — C w a c *» x o> • <• • — 0 — w w «- w> •» k — o e « a. • «. o -o i -> 3 a • • c o» • -I — u u w m n 3 w — C q x • •> S O C D C — o • — 5" c" o • H L O « - tl I k. *J M V « C w. V X X X -- v O >» F *J *J *J O — fc XOO 3 TJ <-■ — 1 >. x x 6 « « >o CO— ~> o — E — <••> — — u -CO. — — — o u opxo-w — — 1.-0 ^yov -o £ «j — *j f i X) > «' f 5 o «-> C • 11 u * E « « — C m o C k. II >. X — • u — « t*. C — X <•- — a. k. u -o u >» « a <*> - £ 11 c X — X II C II C B wi.M — *• y 3 — a.«x I* 2 O *0 O — w k. — O V — >- <* V "O Q 11 o ~ a. 1- — — 3 c c E omvicqo* v • 11 w ox — >- x • a o «• c c -5 Js s s- .2 ? — .3 D « 3 l. J *> — 5 «- — x *» w> v T u tj SE<*<*oow>— tic >» 3 > 3 X V O M * _J — M — L M ) J O- — I- « ~" V v >— t.M . >XXM u c v 3 _i « o* *■» « C— «XV-Q-»} — _X S Xw C {if" £ q *-> ■ — *• x 9 Co XVwCM«lk.H> — 11 1- " — *>XC«*«Cl »J • 3 w — v cn^ — o <- t> o e u. w »- On *— — • > m «t>mw\« «-> a Jl l v -r c a — m m *o ~o «u ti * — v — a. o « o 3 - *2 |^~^ s Ar- — T? J X MM CT» *0 C u. c o>** o>— <• — -•C>n—UCO- • J cc'^u'^mUm.^' 0OMyT>M*«tv3l X — ^ a c * *-< • *-• *■> u OC O 4 <«OM o C 11 u — ^- V .— • * TJ V — -o a. UXVT>QC«IC 4^M— VOWMIJ — — JM u M fi. CEU X • c— 11 >>« E£ " V U« 1 k. XI m — w • 3 • M Jl fc ♦> — o a. w C V — M o M • — il - X 01 c c — o — it M ° 2 O M • • « w X .~ J? c *-* o c — » c *-» u — ■owe n — ii • C M > C k. T» o 6 S— 11 o <-» — — -C M — oi« xow c o • t«5H>J»N - M ? 2 o — •5 *» C <* — • X c o»— 5- i. — X 3 M V W\ I— 3^i Ot M w— • ill L 11 y « — >» — • § « • * ' — www ^ www — — O C" •w>3Uk.X>wi J — C-OV«0X 3 <->'— 9 L. — — XOkwIOl L ( 3U3>MCw>w> «M Q L. II — 4 Ww>w E TJ J Cw>»Mw>X >. • - C - L C X II O « r- Dill • Vw « « «x- — f«\ X — — -001.0 M-ww — mo—**-' c >. — ••>~>xx — — H- EU — OM • 0003C3W-0 >. II C f L 9« V Q L 4 >*C W — i l> — . J — o — u.x u x j C L. — II C7> OM*i«4V^> O U w — C 3 — Kl OX — XL.— — • M V — l - • WOKE-J MUX T> w> i I- 0 -» I- — 1|*»C w>C *0 OXE ww. o — */ a wio-Pem o — x o c S * v L. TJ *> >.— UK V> 2 M L. x -J! x- x t 5 8"d -o -o ^ ^ — 3L. — TJOWO — 3 C O W 5 — — fM L.XC a c m w • 3 -t V U 5 U 3 M TJ -0 —J SmoxS* — c c 3 v w».— v 11 x 5 • XI II — X >s *J *> o w. — 4J 11 <• U 3 •-> OTJ— — ^> — — VOCMC O 3 N • X \ O m o X y w • n g.«-a> j> «-x. I • = wTI >,»w4w I- £ «M,« c — " ^ -J m q uwr« if *■§,! 2 52- w> — 3 at i_ «j 0-0-0 11 3 O w — CI. KOOOOOw* • — o i- 3 — w> lb H> 2ll X C TJ » « V » TJ — w>-ICw3mU1I' OI — M«^ww_nSXl>M UXO - p E C v -O k. w30«vy>— <» — u 11 w.Mww>x*o m ***** > S i - « « kw>x ow o cr*J M w) X lZ Z o « • X w> x o w X • 8 O • L. — M X O O « u IJt a T> M * J! I M — X • V *» 11 X > — M O — 4 1. k. w v a o C k. 5 I- 3 — — • k. • — V • MM X - C • U U w V r% k. ♦* w MO • X C X V 3 — w> X M • M p • • o — ** 00 - — w> TJ «< k. U |l 2 o> k. x — M W 3 M w M II »- TJ r 0 & w, — — "3 M ■ i § 8 S * -388- Hi ill • I -in 3 0>— -I a *»a J - C u " u — O 2 • I >■ « • > ; -f e >■» — x - l_ L. l_ O O !{°c. — • o " • -o *> 3 — •-»*> o f 12. % u . — 1_> c • « w •— • • • 5 "2 M O +* *-* > S • W O M is C «-> L. O-Jf v c • o V *> s. - &s «• 3U S u o • • £ h £ 3 — «» #*»*»«- 3 • • >»*" w - mm** 1 I 6 C I M 0 O — a.— " • 2 4J _ — M U *»♦**• 9 ^ ? : 5 St o ~ ' ~S. 2 . ? § ; j - • d *» oi (r«_ •w. u 0 v c -o j o *• S £ «. M £. T> C «- - • 8* S Se I If! "til - ■ c *•= s - i a 8' « - 5 • • a • I all -289- !"• -I > -< O J O -I 21 vj 00 CL >, X I 01 3 u •a — n oo w ' o x o i u . oi oi >> eg x a. tO 01 4J ^ 3 u x a oc *j oo c x -H C O OC £ —I ^ "i a C X 4 tV «J o *J b x a u u u u V - O ■ Ss T) tl U — . C -H 0) — t : £ -a O" C -1 o> OJ V. «l 3 I* X- a oo ■h a a o o Si o B a fll « T) O » ^ i-l 9 U 3 OX u ih U £ u oo a o O. -H Xc O X « o a u X *1 u »TJ B u B "O 3 a u a. v oi o -a a s u -o x -h 3 u o t» W > H B U u -j -H o -a -a oc o a •h a > u ^ a a -o o -< 4J o ■— * c <7 -< OP J S> O f- z u < - IT o »- z w z rr H — u O I 2 Q 5 w id <^)V E3 J 01 T5 V- V> C *-* C O 0J C — - *J «o 1 u c u c 41 41 C 01 ••- «-> > C • O X "O "B U t- O "O (J 4-> ■•- ^ fl a c > u au o •»- *0 4-1 3 V- C TJ O I- O "O O O VI O V. 0J r— LO£ I *-» O 0J 6 IB — OI 3 •— > c C X vi nj u C «l OUv u U Olr- 3 - V* 0j j* Ort n « E 4-14-1 1*0 E •— > L. E V- 01 oi >•. o -g Xt c o *j L- u o x U 0J 4-» 4-* -0"*-*t— ■*-» CJ -*-» 3 X CO X C O 0J OC£CUCJI_l/><_> 4-1 i_ — c II x cov>ejuu>>4-' OJV-WI*— O-r-rOj §*J E oi *~u § -o £ CEL. C w to U CJ O t- 41 O O §o «-> X u t- o> CfU X <-» O O Oi M <-> SO «*-*»■— Ul •» O - C I. *-» a. oi 4-* o . — . at ^- «— C O- «/> O >. *-» ir oj c -*-> U X O *->•-- eet— <— sole-— o. o a mx a-*- >.x. » 3 L. «J 6 woo I— X3 _ O- L- C Is o o •»- » ct> £ I O co u c vi cn-tJ c i — - a. o c a ai OI E — ** 3 'O *j »j ~- *-> ^- T3 cr-»- •— 41 O n i«- ^- O *J *-* u O i- C — 3 H- o ,■»- o « OJ — 5 4-* VI VI C O VI 01 01 OJ VI 4-1 i. U ♦> O i m I- o oi cr. %m U 1- — o x -o n xi oj B oi Z> L. JZ a. Q.4J 4-» ■O OI4J o ff) C Wr E <- C 4J i~ o iC VI — c x c OJ *- 19 V fl 41 0 II U JO 01 VI s- •— >» O. 3 <•- OJ XI VI a. > > SZ — »» OV U. XI . u VI ro Ul O VI CJ|I4- OI c o c 4-1 VI £ •— i 01 C 4-> oj o • > OJ L. — O — 4J u 0 1 i. « e p ex o--r- oj u I L. O O. C IT >,4-l c — Xt VI c VI 01 3 3 C 3 0J •»- CL O > £ t- VI 4-> — O ■ a. oj m vi ♦> C TJ L u U t C < r- - IV 41 oi •» «s e x 4-1 4-> ' — OV/J C U 3 C - «i ao 2 S _ c vi X E o w >, l_l 4J r— ■JTICl c c o vi >a "O — 4-1 C 4-i c - m 5 OJ 4-1 6 TJ C t- -r— VI •» U C — I- O c O. O O VI 41 41 O vi E > V- oi 9 t- C t- O •» O o *— "TD c «a >i O U 4-> •— O U XI ■o «— 01 •» £2. S.4J e-o ux:—4J •— ia 5 c 4-> > o. u i- — • — *a »4- — c c -j x 41 41 O) O X 4-1 l_ > 4J 4-1 -O C •»- O- Oi 41 41 41 4-1 B OJ C X E W «J XI. L Oil 3 C «— 41 ■— O O t- O. O O 01 >— U OI 4-> C % - 4-> 01 O p — • — ■ X 4-» l_J 0J 0J — rt *-» C XI TJ 3 u >» 4- -o VI 6 u oj oj a v V a >£ aj b > > B *■ ** b I- O — 4J 4- tJ 41 t L. U e ov »i aaci- -290- 9 ~i 9 -I u U V > rH «0 00 > O -< 3 a t> in oo 3 • I* 9 tl 4» X 01 V) n U 3 : •< e u o i - «, oc 3 u as c o oc as o a C CI " 3 >. — 03 .4 03 -« O 3 -J x > x c u c u U c O 3 "J J - c *-» U 03 OC OS -H 03 **4 4-1 « 41 C X C II u « oo e — —•CO H os 0 *J 00 00 *~ — < U Q. X O u ~< X 3 •J *-c O -O » ■ a -h 3 O H 4i 3 H (I u 3 « C X -H -O (J 0) ■H U H f O 60 3 • T5 1 «K C O *J -H u U II CO C -•— » ("1 « O -I a U u ■ C 3 a o o « *H OS O u *■< a . II T3 rt H 03 V" 3 X *** Q ll It i_ «— w s «« $ 0. 3 • X T O- 01 O • 3 — O VI C «J 0"— T3T3UQI- O Q. «-» « O 01 C IIU1 Q e o e g u e «n . >» M ■ r— ^— xi o a l oi f Kf J J P» OI> O. «J _ o C X ■a o> a> •— 3 o o o •— v Q. T3 C <■ Q »•«•■ O E Q. — S iv > >, 9 *J V> " — I. >»UH--*-» w o i- x x -6 > • X «->»->«-> o oo c u o *-» **9x; « u 6 ptj o • ^ u 03 • » 3 Ol 01 <0- >, *><■ C O Ml- Lkl Or- ^ II HoK « o a k • U C 03 >» « • O T3 *J r- C >, • •— C II CVOD"' 3 ^-X *rt C M «3+J 0*01^-^- • foiuiitinojLgdtits «3 3«Lt3r-a«k4l Cv y J X CJ c c > -u l_ 6 • +-> E O V 01 MX S vt 3 u 6 -a s- 4i v- «» •— II c»-- o. o ^~ WXiUOOOOlO*^ u w 30«->- >f>— act-oa 8L «-> -o D X O «J X 0.01UCU > +i \j l~ II II II 4-» ^ — x Tp c *— 01 *- o er c wi — ' v ^ o • i llx — xoai^«->wi I ♦-»**- 3— (J C7*-«- i u «» v ■ -r- ~ C ICO k C II OJ 9 • > i >»- x; ^- oi ■»- I « II H > u. — c i — 01 >,<-• 01 *> L7 ■ *> l M f ** u" a «-» 3 Ol O SO - wucx-oq—u OWUltllllciU WO, Lt> «l llC >.£ k C O'-i^ O « D lluiu.^ J oiwwv > 0 8^ 3 w> C M II *l U :2 00 "2 3 w 01 c 58 23 m C «A 3 M *l 01 -291- > U Ok |i .e c -C W V *-» "O c k o o o <-> — *J 5 "2 Is iff v o il O *5 *_» -X Ok a. o> k •- o * 8 > c k o ci u vi SZ Ol ** - *-» -C «-» *-» c U 1 Of 3 £ C O • C o o .e o «-> c «l 41 ** JZ ~o ag w 4> o *-> *0 «-» k Of 0» Q «->&!«>&. >> CI — £ k 4J Is . 4-> VI « •«- e c o m II 1- —I VI 3 a. vi 3 Ei «> k > o -»-» a, — > « 1>« » | « VI M O S ^ • J= C 9 O *■» VI 4-» »- k v» V E 5 0 *J — O at ci e c o VI .C Of 3 i— — B.TJ o — — *J o c U i) « r- « b C 3 JC 0> o 3 «k *i > W c 5 41 <0 •k Ol ^ 3 C o o. u u • 41 OT3- «-> x ■»-» -c w x> vi CI *J c >» > k C T» VI O — *0 O C VI o — : k k . 4> O VI : > I V : O 3 T5 VI • >> k v> *> k V) VI If 41 -p- VI 4/ »J C -X 3 «> — O «; h- 5 BOO k «J 3 *>'*> O •>- V> £tt 3 •I -o f- -p vi c ■ k Q O «-» o a. vi — B f v vi -o k 2 s k p— +-» (S> oi c « «* .— ■»» 171 3 X OH- Z O 41 3 _ «-• • — Q. O vi k JZ Q O O xuZ^o 2 U C >| p • c Ira V- >, VI O O -O C v» 3 O k- *> u> Ol X *J «-»«-* fz vi u — k d e 41 41 Q.T3 £ E C X O (--««! ** O i« O 41 «■»— <0 41 k — w • 3 Ik O O •a k * — vt |- -o 4! *" 8 2 « T> *> O O C — Q. 4> O a. n *-> cr> o vi C TJ W — VI c c > VI -o 2 -o o C 41 41 C o — o ■ — . u •— 41 W 41 > VI *J > 4> W C 4» •O I « -o _ c k m k H - « a j- W£ tl U I > >- V V) V CV- «j k o o 4> w <-> I 2 C <0 v> 01 vi O -C 3 f u — »- Ol-v- VI k «||> E ^ C 3 u« «3 >v ik C i— 3 TJ CI •v- — Ol ag k >t m ci -o C £ > 4> 01 — * — -C k y « *-» U « V. V » <• « L£ w VI O V «> 4J »-> CI w * jc U JZ Of C Ol «-» 4-1 W 41 D 0J '"-I O VI -o V o V- w v m k ai k O v> j5 e «> Q. •o3 ci tJ ^ri c ci • . f *4» 41 3 Q Ol y UJ B 4. -292- o -i a. x z u u > e u c « — -a < 3 —I « —I "O *-> » « 3 u 3 - 6 ^ 8 §*x" 2 O V u S > " 2 S x — » •2 «x o e C 0 »— — O. cs un a> 41 u « u o 4* — « OC D» O C <2° s a Li a - C X & " X « u X — H 3 1 5 2 C Ml JJ « O a 5 c- u o U CU -o > ■ u "O U . a a. i — « u u o o a o i. a a m ^ s 3 O - CO a o u u x v a » a. c « o o 1 -O X u 41 ft. c " a. O O. Jd >. O a y *-» a "O >- a P 3 •O C •>< H I ■O T3 O « 3 -I >. u 4J - X ti a a « §3 » -i X SJ cu U o -H < — a. X a a -293- at — i to 01 c O -H C O I- O 3 *J u 01 » X 00 >, u C -I u o use ci -3 o It u ) was raovi :he request an endangi A closed c "Om Muddy I o the near 'proximate] kle Pond e Kingston : ie Depart! at (4-M-: suit of I protect nesec ) . f away fi llutlon t way Is aj e at Trac y Pond. ■ en from I ced by tt 1 allgnme k as a re ce and to racted bo way runof ng any po osed high well sit eat Mudd 4 -> U D. • T> U I flna hanoc viden ite-b road vent 1 prop posed 1 sit Si 1 -< « » On ki X u 01 ■ C F- a. 3 3 S 043 K I 111 Mm cm M 9 O O X =-3 . u • ♦* -t 3 »• * H J V w « i« « 3 41 3 P* (£ 4> X 1. o £. 0 . 41 <-■ ~* i O 41 O X CO • c ♦* n 3 -s-a Si ^rS s s | . c ♦* i 9 6 -4 I. a x o ** ** d Q *> S 2 £" o 8 S ■-» o o o «S X, if a 8 41 O if 33 • x • S c *» ~* O 3 ♦» ■»> O O a** c ♦» 4< o a| o •* x •q So o o ♦» 41 h « t< * as E E a. 4> S3 ♦» 3 - 8 s ? ir.. > *> o > m o IS *» -3 a 41 ti fi 4. « <• X TJ C 4> q C ► 3 • e , si 3 s 5 - 6 |ll 0 ♦» ♦> « « X • *> X n «» ♦» o c «• » 4> ♦* 11 m oil 1 H V * 41 O X X i fl fl ■ CO* =? s 8 5 *» • o i» • m m ♦» *-! O 4> W > *>• 9 O O 3 -o P. c * S 2 a - E 0 ■-use: Ijs s is • S 4> -3 4i • X ► X • ♦» • c m a 4 <~ -1 •H « « O x • 3 •> *> S u c * a. q 4> — g X i-i 3 O Vt r+ % 9?JS s X 41 ♦> TJ U • « 2 « *> ■ * * & -3 -O 6 T> O 9 4) E 41 *> O. S k2E, • SCO J J o • H fl 5. - StS • •> B 4> r* *+ 4» 3 !! »f ■ j< «^ "3 f g • *» ■ o • HOX I ! 1 1 3 i t," p. S x o c O ■> p *> o O H p, P. •>»>-• 11 «J (± ♦» > 8 X 4< « * P O ♦> 4* S U « H - - 4 > X 41 •»» 4> II « r ■ o fi «• ♦> c fr« ■a f« « SO O T> v. ♦•»>.-< o r 5 £ <-. ^1 "3 o ■ p 3 41 -3 O ♦> I 3 - * 4| o - - t? 3 o a > O. 4> d P.U 4* d 3> R, B It — > 0 at E *» Ct. x U 41 1 8 . V, o K ♦» • u m 9 « h o • § ■ 3 & 3 t 2 £E < « 11 « ox o ♦* ♦* • ♦* 9 ."Si CO K 1 — A o *> cr- 4. »« T» "I > 41 X 41 • a o C vA O X IN o. ^ O « All X o ■355 • on X <— M 4> O 41 C U — O M O — o [•. 41 •»• « i-» O <-l -294- tn »-* o x sfi Ci 3 U 3 c - M 'J « «_> c — * w = " 3 > ^ (3 ft) w > " O 0 ! =- -o -3 3 — E J O — to ji w ft) l. -i z o a cue E 10 u c/l -3 J c c- ■Jt ~ i> c E — u 0 — o > - _ - c g a o — E u u « C C > » t a u - - £ 3 _ - a c c o .= 00 ft) w a — « -i — i x £ — c " 0 u V) 0 « — < c i> -* 1 J. - _ — 0 u Q a ft) — 3 O T r O C > « ss o ^ « 3 — o = 3 3 0 w -3 u. ^ n — — r-* c — I o C 0 -3 0 Z — 0 ♦» Q Ch .• • 9 • -3 "3 3 «j r.r - "S o J 5 S f .5 n Is j C u * «. P. s - 6 ; I rJ > ■a 3 65 2 ••» 3* - lis 3 3 ll 11 *) ^ u o ♦» . . R 5-822:2 2 § « v. o. 4 -295- ti « 3 a o o y - 3 IB « C 41 > « i al x ' U u ■ 3 X C O u O -T 41 3 u o • 41 4) *Q u 4J 0C -H 41 at C > 41 5 o u -a ■c u u e u o. in a 13 5* 3„ a 8f <9 »H *J -H o o c a ! 3 5 a ! J ■rt -. « - 3 * 5 3 - g 5 3 2 |TJ 5 1 u a c 8±j 3 C T> w V n S o i §| * §5 ? -3 E - 8 c- b x a a o a » 41 5 5 5; • e « • o 5 2 5 3 V 4 85 5 & ~l %4 *l « »4 iH f u a < a iiii 2 8^3 -< r H 3 » * 3 0 C u o * i r - •J -< 3 S I ^ v v 5. 5? # 1 52 ■11 « 5 2 tt e s O 9) 5V* 1 3 a a i" 2 2 0 4J D £ 0 » W o g i 8 8- 8 41 T3 (J C C «4 -r^ > o i *< •x a • fi, u a a a u a u • ti C ii * tj 0 a 1 ti x o> • v ' e •J t- C M H t) -3 •-4 J o O x O •< I >.« S5f5 1 ti ago O ~* B U tJ G M 5. e o. j: -i o -< 5 -h w > *j o. -H 41 a 3 c a h X « -4 j| » ** 9 • a s> B Jt o J u O -3 0 « a >» v i > mil S5 8 a c h -) i *t a 5 8 « c5 4-» I T3 S X 6 i 5 a a « * « o M c w a a e a 0-4 m « a *> x u o 41 ti u -rt — > x a w u « • • °3? e 9 • 4J M H al >* C jQ d 5 5 2 a n a m 8. E a a 3 3 • o § g 51 . a S C 3 > 3 5 S 52 8 a § 255 x 5 * ax 73 X 41 a c « X a o «> ti a ° e 5 a a o ■ u a |S|! 15 s 33 >> -C VI -> 9 5 w Q> m a* w >• w « c 3 a> a B. «• a> T3 o c a a a 3 u n a a o -4 -< «( ti b £5 II S C5 -296- o* o . o (a (C *- U 3 V aj 4» «) — < 4) CT" 4J 41 UJ a a IB c 41 41 U 11 Z ■ (fl -o V u — » J= O Ci a) E— u 03 i-< ■o m ») .2 a 41 V u u O l- -o *T3 as TJ 1» — < OJ U) ~- ~* U 4> • 3 ~ ~H ^ c a 41 <1 O l ^ 41 > -= : u - ~* u z u H X >» *H 1-1 aj x U »- CO a 41 41 u 4J £ 9 w >. w - e •— < O 4) X O. (J W i-l M U > 41 C 41 *J — _ (j c o u 2 3 2 -297- c o- u a w • ■ 1/1 j c -» o « >- 0 O T> • — C CI"* on w « c u 3 01 O 3 3 0 -O y u ■ 0( I U ^ (J -i p o H Q O O CO H cd « CM b co W ad H a, a, ON oo vO m CM <4H •H 4-1 d 0) •H o co X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XX X X X XXX XX XX XX X X X X XX X XX X X X XX X X X X X XX XX X X X X X X CO d CO a -h d u u cu -S s d co H CO u d mH cj d CD CO M 0 -H CO rH X co O CO CM CO d •H CO 4-1 T3 O •H »-l oo cu •H CO CO CO 3 d d d d •H H CM CM CO d co CO CJ d d •H CO 60 > U iH CO ■h >■> d > « co d o CO CU iH CO d h CU CO ex o •H -H d n d co a d rH X CO at \4 cO CO d d CO cO •H iH d d •H iH tH 00 O U U tH CO > CJ CO CO 1-1 d rH d cu •h a a- co m a CO CO a d 4J •H d oo o CO CJ co cO cO CO d o •h a u cu 4-» CJ CO CO d u ao •H X X X X X X X XXX X XX X X X X cO 4J d cu T3 >-i 0J c_> co CO co 1—1 cu a CO z d o o o cu i-H CX cO 33 CO TJ CU U 5^ r< CU •H iH X Pm Cm O CU c d ^ cO CJ •o a H CO 14 m d d cu o o J3 CO co >i iH iH CO O O PQ CM Cm rS u u CU £> CU d X! CO d u o CU rH o rH CU cu o X 4_> cu U CU rH 5^ CQ rH CO a S X CO cu rH d N •d rH )-i CO r-,H cx 00 CO d 0) J^ cO TJ CO o •H X N M rH cu o d X !* o o hI o rc o CU CO < M CU Cm Q X cu co r4 d o X d CU X d rH c CO cx t XI M 1 u X (XX 4J 4-1 >> o a o cu >-. CU a CD o to CU X s CU CU OJ Jji 4J cu TJ cu CD o 4J T) CO T3 00 rH CU cu rH 4J cu cO rH c 43 •H rH »-l d rH •H CO 5 •H d 4-> cu o o CO 1 — 1 (X, W CO S co CO CO CQ CO o EC -301- X u 00 r-» vo m sr 0 S CD d 3d d cd cd a •rH CO <4H •H ■H 0) • CO Cfl 3 3 cd a CO tH 3 a > 3 4-> *3 ■H iH cd CJ U •H <4H M CJ CO (X a> •H ■H i— ( 3 3 cd 42 •h cd cd cd cd cd U M 4-1 3 r4 CO 0) ex B 4J M <4h •H d •H O d d 4-1 rH o CD CD cd co CO CO rH cd 4J cd cd CO 3 ■H o O d o ex cd cd a> o O o Cd r4 TJ 4-1 3 3 42 CO ex 73 CO d B 4-1 4-> CO •H 60 . d rH cd 00 60 cd cd 3 , rH -H n a O rH 42 ex 4-1 •H H M , CX,d CO 43 o cd cj O cd cd rH 3 42 CO d CO ex si W W OS > cm CO C_J Q H H CO 55 55 cm co co C/) W ■"3 H o o en CM a) I 55 d o o o TJ CO CO CO •d -dfl S CO CO CO i ■ CO 42 CO 4-1 5 co >, co 43 a 3 42 4-1 VI cd co H tj CD > >> cd >, u a) U U rH 4H 60 St co cd & 1 cd Jj4 O CO o 43 rH O rH rH -3 43 •H ^ rH CO cd tJ M •H CO rH O CO CO ex o CO 42 E CO M a rH u 4-1 CO rH 4-1 d Cd rH u CO 4-1 rH 4-1 3 •2 co 3 CO CO CO CO C/5 >-i pq .-3 3E H O CO J^ o rH O M CO CD M 4-1 CO 4-1 M cd o CX iH C/> CM 42 CO 3 U rH 3 PQ CO U cd co 3 CO w cd CO M co CO M 42 O H » d co d M 60 n CO T3 CO fa CO 42 d liM co CD CO 42 n CO s co 3 co CO d > J4d CO 3 Ua o •H CO 3 rJ CJ Qd B 4-1 CO ti O O CO CO 42 cd •H 60 CO 60 4J CO d CO 1 CO -3 CO TJ -H <4H d d CJ 42 CO 3 CO CX O cd •H CO 3 CX CO HMO) cn c_> CO Q CO -302- 60 O PQ U u cu JO d co u cj x CU H I o u •o C3 (0 rH 4-1 CU t-J cu ■u d cu o d 0) 60 u cu a w 3 V4 43 C/> 43 3 M CJ C/> X X X X XXX XX XX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X CM I rH I ON w o M Cu T3 (U •u CO cu u o [X4 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 8 <4H •H 4-t d cu •H o en 3 CO (0 CO •H O 3 •H 3 to r4 •H > rH d ■H CU d CO co cd CO CO CO a, CO rH •H CO T3 d CO TS 4-1 a. > <4H a •H •H cu CJ 3 CO rH 43 3 •u M d co CO CO •H to CO 4-1 00 >> CO 3 CO •H O •H 3 0) 4-1 43 to o to CO 3 CO u >-< 43 X rH rH U d CO 4-> 3 •H •H CO d -h o cx «4H O CO •H a 01 CU 4J > (-1 d d CO a •u cu a u •H s cu 43 U 03 cu a I" cu o 3 o a o CO CO U (-1 u •H cu 3 M o a co rH CO rH a 3 CJ 4-1 01 •4H N d rH CO d -d rH •H CO 60 CO ■H CO o co 3 CU 43 d ■H cO CO to CO CO CO CJ a CO 3 •H 3 43 u a o 4-1 u rH 3 CO rH rH M d rH U 4-1 4-) i— i o •H U CO 0) CU 4-1 X ■H 5^ 43 o co CO cu o 43 > 3 ■H 4-1 4-1 CO CU CU X) 4-> U 3 •H T3 o a B rH iH a to to T3 M CO d CU cj a. CX •H M cu CJ CO 3 3 d o o rH o rH •H ocj •H Q (X, 22 X CD cn H 32 a o cn cn pq u CO X N> ex, CO 3 4-1 CO CO -H CO U •H 4-1 x> co o r4 CO cu cu 43 -3 •H CO U cu o T3 4J M 3 CO o d cu . d X) 43 CO »h x d CO CO U CJ CO O rH U cd ft •H 4-» 4-1 d co CJ cO co n m a z pq O 3 cx, O 3 •H rH d •H CU > a d •O 3 d cr d cO •H 4-1 M CO to J*i d 3 o CU 43 >-i w 4-1 CO CO ■d cu 4-1 0 CJ * !S r4 CO o Ou CJ cu cu 4J 4-1 u CU 43 4-1 d CO o o CU to CJ •H T3 4-1 4J U 60 ±£ M 4-1 U u 43 T3 *d 4-1 o a u o to CO to O d to to u O cO TJ CO CO CO cx CO 4-1 O CO CO 43 o 3 CO o -d 4J CU CU cu cO o od c/3 w o w cn X z C/3 CO ad S2 52 w c/> M pa d o V4 cu ac 4-1 43 60 •H 2 cu x» rr cu cu d d co cu o ? o d n o o H CU U O pa K CJ *o I CO U d J*! T) CO CJ CO rH CU CU CO d H »-l r4 H CO CO CJ O PQ CJ 22 4-1 CO CU -303- 00 o CQ >. U u D 42 d cO M cj cu ex >> H ■U •H d 3 n CO CO CO U CU CU CU O) 4-) T3 t3 U ftrl H CO CO O O 60 rH o a CU O "H «H CQ CO S CJ CM CM a3 > •H n 4-1 CO 3 d d to u >> 43 4-1 co 3 d d CO r4 >, H CU 42 . u c0 iH co EC H O rH O CJ cO H 42 K CO CU d. d *h O Ll o Li CO CX iH O r4 •3 CO •h a Ll -H H Orf CO o 43 CO a 4-» d co 4-> 43 W Ll iH >, U 43 O O <0 CO Ll 4J 42 4-1 •H CO O 3 O > d Li CO o >» CJ o CO CO 3 H H co rH d CU CU a, d CO "H O rH •H O Li Li 4J CO CO O CO CO 3 4J Ll 4J c0 iH CM CO CO ■H Li 4J CO CU 3 O rH CO CO CU a. o CO CO 3 3 MH Li O co *\ ? 4J Ll O 4-> 43 CQ 4-1 •H CO CJ CJ 3 CO CO Ll 'H CO O 43 43 Ll CJ O CU iH 4-1 t-l CJ CU 4J cx CO CO -H rH u a. •H iH >s O O rH ^ Li 43 42 TJ 4-» ado O CU CU woo -3 CD c0 CU a c0 55 d o o CJ 4*! d CJ tH 3 Cm Q d 4*! O cj a co a rH O pa cj CO rH CU CO H H CU H H CO T3 U 11 3 d 60 cu d 604*! •h d CJ •H 3 IS Q CU -3 3 O rH O pa Dc 4«2 o o CJ rH -3 •H O CO O oi Es co d •H co d o •H f-l 60 Ll Li CU > J | CO 33 •3 CU Ll 0J •3 rH 3 O 43 co I nd CU o X) CU d Ll o 33 D CU 43 CO U •H CU 14-1 M 60 O d *h •H rH T5 *3 CU CU d o li 4-i a Ll CO CU oj o pa pa cj L Li cu cu 4»5 4*! O O CU CU a cx •3 t3 o o o o DS SB >> >, O cO Q 33 O O •3 Li •H CU 42 42 60 CU IS COO T\ U Cm H c0 cO c0 (3 d S ? S Ll Ll CO CO CO cu cu 4-» 4-» d CU M co co d cu d cO CO CO Ll CO w w pa h pa is o Li CJ d ►> c0 cO O *-) •H D CU CU 3 PQ 43 CU O 0) 4-J •3 CO cO 43 4*; 4-1 O 3 •H 43 CJ •3 CU -3 4-> 0) CO cx CO 3 cx CU O) CO Ll Ll a I 42 1 4«S cu 43 o 4-> co cO ■H Ll H cO CQ S Ll 0) CU > D 60 CU 3 rH •H 42 cO S= Li O 4-1 cO O M 43 4J o d o o CJ -304- 00 o CQ >. u u CU XI d CO U X X X X X CU a H >> 4J •H d d u cu 4-1 d cu a o X X X X X o •d d CO r-t 4-1 cu 3 4-) d CU 60 U CU a w X d I X d n o CO X XXX X X X X X XXX X X X X X X XXX X X X 7- rH 73 V § d CU 4-> CO cu o [Z4 CO Z o ■H <4H •H 4-1 d 00 CO B co co o 3 3 4-) co co •H § CO iH d CO CO cu X d d CO 4-1 CO co ■H •H •H «H CO H 4-1 a 00 T5 >-H H X rH CU CU 4-t O 3 OUT) a g 3 3 cO o »-5 o CO l-i CO CO u n to id •rt t4 r-l O Q, ftH rH CO CO CU •H O O N ftH rl rl rl 01 O ft CO d •H 4-1 d co co % co a a CU h CU X X! -H U O CJ CO U T3 >s CO 4J d t-i O -H co cu ft CO iH (-i S-i 3 4J CO CO CO X! ft o d s c9 x H CO 4-> •H rH X CU ft ft O O d u a ft co a £3 X X co d cu o co CU a t3 3 -H 4-1 U CO -H ■H > a a rH cO cO a x O 4-1 4J X CO ft >. O X 4-1 IS § z d o o •d M o CU •H u X cu X d a X 3 d g O 0) —) •H CO CU rH l-l 4-1 H rH rH O cu •d ■d CO ■H X T3 cu rH X) o o U co o CU M o o t3 cO o CO •H O o X) t-i l-l (H CU U M X rH ■H CO 1-1 t-J 00 O oc d X 4-1 O d co ft CO cO CO d d H to y CO 1 CO ft ft w iH cu CJ 1 CJ co CO CO rH X cu «H d ft H a l-l 4-1 5* 4-> h o a oo CU H *d 1 CO 1-1 0 CO CO 0) UH cO d cu ft CU o 4J o M rH o u co z pa O co 1 CO CO H 4-1 cu cu CU M M d CO cO CU H a d d J*! CU CO CO CO cO cu *d d d % rH cu cu 1-4 l-l d CO CO cu 4-1 4-1 rH CU cu o a z M d 4J 4-1 4-1 X J«S CO d •H U CO l-l X rH rH •d H CO 3 CO •H •H CO tO CU ft H CJ Oi s CO 4-» 00 d 4-1 d d -d n d d d T3 o iH u cu 0) i-i i-i V4 pq CU ft ft CU 4-» X cu cu a; H 4-1 CO ft 4-> 4J 4-» 4-1 4-1 4-1 w 4-1 1 cO CO o l-l CO co CO O T> d tO ft o cO CO cO ft CU CO W CO z W w W CO -305- 60 O 0Q U u » u •H d 3 CD 4-1 ccj a CD a- o xx x o U t3 d cO iH 4-1 a) d CD 60 r-4 CD a w 43 3 m J3 CO X X X X 43 3 n o CO x X X X X X 7~ rH ^ -1 ^ 5 5 0 T3 CD 4-1 0] 3 4-1 CO o 4-1 CD 3 Vj 4-1 cO rH rH tH d -a O CO s r-l CD c6 rH >> CO 4-> 60 o CO CD cd o > O CJ CO 0- d O 43 X) O CD a 4-1 ■H >> o cO CO CO cO cO CO •H CO CD a m rH rH d d d d O CD H >rH J*i CO CO CO CD 3 a O T3 CO CD d ^ M o d CD CO O 43 rO a 4J 1 a 1-4 T3 o O CD CJ 55 OfJ M CD 73 d CO a cO CD d a -h (0 zn I 13 O CO 5e o . H H CD r-l CO se u •H o- H o I Pa z C J Pa 1 < o T D I K ■H IH Pd 14-1 OS fH 03 P _l M IG 1— 1 < H [in p o r w PA RAG ed Pd to > ED < w H P O os H Pd w OS H co & OS os w P o o o o o o CO oo 00 PQ PQ Pd Z Pa Pa O O O o o O o o » >» z z o o o o • • 3 O l/1 o > > a z — o * t> o ■ ■ i/> o < «JJ z z z a > o C — -5 * -J (J .\ ^ ri| ^ o o •» f» ^ aa o> o «© • -r^-«Oi^NioDtr>o(»a) 4 N N N 0 co 4 ii T.i «/» ui z l/t UJ 9 -1 z UJ UJ U UJ 'JJ u a o > J- > > UJ < oc Of oc ac 111 oc eci* oc ec Z ec a. t Q Ui Ui;UI UJ -jj o < 1 Jt UJ — • <\l rf> >r z > Z X •N. Ui > OO0D3O3 1 o Of o o Z Q u • -r • • • at • • s/l l -r >r ac ac ec z X z z Ui X X o • Z Uf • -^>-*-XZZX UI uj uj • _i -J 1 Z Z z z X u o • Z <*» * «% o o o • • o o > > at X (O 3 X "3 z — o >f • _i o «s o o o z o T» V. Ui 3 i/» o Z < >sj -J -J >» ui < rO _) >» 3 t'J ~w XI _l «n a < UI Ui tc t > *s. UI z o xi o • OJ • (A -« * •• • • H CD 3 3 O —i iS 3 UI X 3 '< z ►- < O a ui o -I z 3 -* o w • r» o in < l*\ a -r i -i » o *r «m «m * ■* s Z Z XI « i/t Z Z Z Z UI o o O ui O ui xi UI O J JOOOO —I CO Z J Z Z JE UI CD • ui co ut ui ui . viiAfioa ZuiOuiuiul-iZ — ecoatetocoo — XI fHMi»i^n\0'*«l Q 3 O a i CO I Ox CD -316- PERCENTAGE OF COLD AND HOT START OPERATION Vehicle exhaust emission rates vary according to the temperature (operating phase) of the engine. The percentages of travel by operating phase, as agreed upon in consultation with DEQE, are as follows: Condition Cold Hot Percentages Microscale: 1-hour 50.0/10.0/50.0 8-hour 20.6/27.3/20.6 Mesoscale: 20.6/27.3/20.6 This assumption is conservative (tending to overestimate emissions) because the limited access roads in the study area would tend to have very low percentages of vehicles in the cold hot phase, rather than the 10-50% range used in the analysis. AVERAGE OPERATING SPEED This varies for each roadway link. Speed data were supplied by MDPW and range from 15 to 50 mph. AMBIENT TEMPERATURE Emission rates of CO and NMHC increase with decreasing temperatures, while N0 X emissions increase with increasing temperatures. As agreed upon in consultation with DEQE, CO emissions were estimated at 33° F, and NMHC and N0 X emissions were estimated at 75° F. VEHICLE INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE (I/M) The effect of the Massachusetts I/M program was included in the modeling effort, as specified by DEQE. This included an inspection/maintenance flag with 15% stringency and no mechanics training. OTHER VARIABLES The averages built into MOBILE-3 were used. MESOSCALE ANALYSIS The total pollutant burdens of CO, NMHC, N0 X in tons per year were estimated for the study area. The emissions for each roadway link are the product of the annual vehicle-miles traveled (VMT) and the appropriate emission factor (calculated as explained in the previous section). MAP 4-R identifies the roadway links considered in the analysis. The traffic data (average daily traffic) and link lengths used in the VMT computations were based on existing traffic volume counts and projections developed by MDPW. The total emissions, given in the Final EIS for each pollutant, are the sum of the emission contributions from each roadway link. -317- MICROSCALE ANALYSIS After the pollutants are discharged into the atmosphere by the various emission sources, the pollutants are transported by the prevailing wind and diluted through dispersion by atmospheric turbulence. The resulting pollutant concentration of any location in the study area is determined by the rate of emission of the pollutant sources, the spatial distribution of the emission sources, and the meteorology variables. Ambient CO concentrations caused by motor vehicles were estimated by the Federal Highway Administration's CALINE-3 computer model (See Section 4-3 for reference). Inputs for this model were data for roadway and receptor geometry, traffic volumes, emission rate, and meteorological conditions. These inputs and the sources of data are as follows. TRAFFIC VOLUMES MDPW counts and projections. These are quite conservative, since they include summer peak traffic conditions, whereas peak CO emissions occur in winter. EMISSION RATES Emission factors specific to each microscale roadway link were calculated using MOBILE-3, as discussed above. Meteorological conditions comprise several variables, as detailed below, and were chosen in consultation with DEQE. WIND SPEED A speed of 1.0 m/sec was used for the 1-hour analysis, and 1.6 m/sec for the 8-hour case. WIND DIRECTION The wind direction was varied in the modeling effort and the direction which produced the worst-case (highest) CO concentration at each receptor was used. ATMOSPHERIC STABILITY Pasquill-Gifford Class D (neutral). BACKGROUND VALUES Back CO concentrations used in the predictions vary by averaging time and analysis year as shown below. Concentrations are in parts per million (ppm). 1984 One-Hour case Eight-Hour case 1990 3.0 1.0 2000 2.0 1.0 1.2 1.0 FIGURE 9-3-1 gives an example of the CALINE-3 input and output. -318- The procedure for converting the modeled CO concentrations was agreed upon in discussions with DEQE. Concentrations greater than the National Ambient Air Quality Standard for CO occur over 8 hours, rather than over 1 hour. Therefore, the 8-hour case is of greatest importance and should be modeled most accurately. For this analysis, the CALINE-3 model was run with 8-hour traffic volumes and emission rates. However, the low wind speed of 1.0 m/sec was used because it results in the highest CO concentrations. Since CO levels in the study area were expected to be low, the use of a higher wind speed would have sacrificed useful resolution in the model results. In dispersion modeling, CO concentrations vary inversely with wind speed. Therefore, the modeled concentrations were multiplied by 1.0/1.6 (0.6245) to derive the impact for the 8-hour case. The total predicted 8-hour CO concentration is the sum of the modeled concentration (as adjusted) and the 8-hour background level . To derive the 1-hour CO concentration, the wind speed was left at 1.0 m/sec but two other adjustments were made to the modeled results. First, traffic volumes were adjusted to reflect the higher peak hour volumes relative to the lower hourly averages for 8 hours. Based on the MDPW traffic data, a value of 1.75 was chosen for this adjustment factor. This factor is conservative because it represents the maximum of the various 1-hour and 8-hour values calculated from the MDPW traffic data. The second adjustment applied to the 8-hour modeled results was an emission rate adjustment factor. The emission rate adjustment factor accounts for the different proportions of vehicles operating in the "cold start" phase between the 1-hour and the 8-hour period. Vehicles with cold engines emit more CO than vehicles with warmed-up engines. At the direction of the DEQE, the proportion of vehicles in the "cold" and "hot start" phases was 50% and 10%, respectively, for the 1-hour case. For the 8-hour analysis, the proportions were 20.6% and 27.3%, respectively. As a result, the 1-hour emission factors for moving traffic calculated by the MOBILE-3 model are 55.1% higher than the 8-hour values. Therefore, the 8-hour modeled results were further adjusted by a factor of 1.551 in deriving the 1-hour results. The total predicted 1-hour CO concentration is the sum of the modeled concentration (as adjusted) and the 1-hour background level. The microscale analysis did not consider vehicle queuing because all the analysis locations are grade-separated interchanges rather than at-grade intersections. However, it is possible that during periods of heaviest traffic some queues could develop at the ramps leading to and from the main roads. Following discussions with DEQE, the interchange at Route 3 ans Samoset Street was considered the most likely location at which queuing may occur. This location was therefore chosen to test the sensitivity of the results to the impacts of (queued) vehicles. Hypothetical worst-case queues were located at each ramp or main road approach where an opposed left turn is possible. The average queue length was assumed to be 100 feet, and the average delay per vehicle was assumed to be 30 seconds. For every year and alternative, the maximum impact of the queues was less than 0.1 ppm. Therefore, the impact of vehicle queuing on microscale CO concentrations is not expected to be significant. -319- < f