how to identify what resources should be considered in the scea

Secondary & Cumulative Effects Analysis Training

ProgramModule 1:How to Determine Which Resources Should be Considered in a SCEA

How to identify what resources should be considered in the SCEA

How to identify what resources should be considered in the SCEA

CulturalResources

Community

Wetlands

Surface/Groundwater

Parks

Wildlife

Farmlands



• Scoping and initial SCEA activities

• Initial SCEA resource identification

• Data Sources

• Scoping and initial SCEA activities

• Initial SCEA resource identification

• Data Sources

OverviewOverview



Scoping and Initial SCEA ActivitiesScoping and Initial SCEA Activities

• Incorporate into project planning process during preliminary alternatives development.

• Identify environmental resources and SCEA issues in the project area. (Directly impacted resources are the starting point. More resources may be identified based on secondary impacts or if new alternatives, with other/new impacts, are looked at.)

• Coordinate with resource agencies to:

- obtain input on resource identification and analysis

methodologies- inform them of missing information which could become an obstacle- seek their approval

• Incorporate into project planning process during preliminary alternatives development.

• Identify environmental resources and SCEA issues in the project area. (Directly impacted resources are the starting point. More resources may be identified based on secondary impacts or if new alternatives, with other/new impacts, are looked at.)

• Coordinate with resource agencies to:

- obtain input on resource identification and analysis

methodologies- inform them of missing information which could become an obstacle- seek their approval



Initial SCEA Resource IdentificationInitial SCEA Resource Identification

• Identify resources directly impacted by each proposed project alternative.

• Identify potential secondary impacts from project alternatives in coordination with local planners and developers.

• Identify resources directly impacted by each proposed project alternative.

• Identify potential secondary impacts from project alternatives in coordination with local planners and developers.



• Identify readily available data sources.

• Create resource matrix identifying:

- each resource- data availability- data units- data sources- analysis methodology (Modules 4 & 5)

• Identify readily available data sources.

• Create resource matrix identifying:

- each resource- data availability- data units- data sources- analysis methodology (Modules 4 & 5)

Prepare SCEA Resource Matrix for Presentation at the Interagency Field Review

Prepare SCEA Resource Matrix for Presentation at the Interagency Field Review

IdentifyPotential

SecondaryImpacts

IdentifyDirect

Impacts

DevelopSCEA

Resource Matrix

DetermineData

Availability



Key Data SourcesKey Data Sources

Data Source DescriptionSHA

Availability

US Census DataUsed for demographic studies such as identifying low income and minority populations

4

Maryland Dept. of Housing and Community Development Technology Tool Box

Used to identify historic districts or sites 4

Existing Environmental Documents

Used to obtain background information on previous activity in the area

4

FEMA Maps Provides mapping for floodplains 4

National Wetlands Inventory Maps

Used to indentify wetland resources 4

Army Corps of Engineers Permit Files

Provides resource identification through ACOE permit files

State and Federal RTE species distribution and sightings data

Used to identify sensitive species protection areas resources

USGS QuadsUsed to confirm various natural and socio-economic resources

4

Aerial PhotographyUsed to confirm various natural and socio-economic resources

4

County GIS coveragesUsed to identify various resources, such as watersheds, forests and parks, etc.



Middle River Employment Center Access Study (MRECAS)






Purpose of the Project:

• To improve access from regional transportation network to enable planned economic development.

• To increase utilization of established employment areas in the Middle River Employment Center.

Need for the Project:

• There is a need for a sufficient level of access and mobility for the Employment Center.

• Support of economic development.

• Existing roads in the study area lack the capacity and continuity to provide adequate access to the entire MREC from the existing highway network.

Purpose of the Project:

• To improve access from regional transportation network to enable planned economic development.

• To increase utilization of established employment areas in the Middle River Employment Center.

Need for the Project:

• There is a need for a sufficient level of access and mobility for the Employment Center.

• Support of economic development.

• Existing roads in the study area lack the capacity and continuity to provide adequate access to the entire MREC from the existing highway network.

Project Purpose and Need





Study Area Boundary





Note: Strikethroughs indicate items that are inappropriately listed as SCEA resources.

Resource Boundary Time Frame Approach Data Source Agency

Disruption to Community

Sub-watersheds 1963-2020 Trend analysis, overlay*Aerial photography *Historic mapping

Baltimore County Planning

Employment Employment Center 1960-2020 Trend analysis County projections*Census *Purpose and Need

*US Department of Commerce *Baltimore County Planning

Population Census Tracts 1960-2020 Trend analysis*Census *County Projections


Land Use (re s idential, industrial, farmland)

Census Tracts 1963-2020*Trend analysis, overlay *Identifiy current and future capital projects

*Aerial photography *Baltimore County Master Plan *MDOT Consolidated Trans. Program *OP Land Use maps *Pipeline Res. Development

*Baltimore County Planning *Maryland Office of Planning *Baltimore Metropolitan Council

Historic Site s Census Tracts 1963-2020 Trend analysis, overlay Historic mapping*Baltimore County Historical Society *Maryland Historical Trust

Groundwater Sub-watersheds 1963-2020 Trend analysis*GIS files (MDE) *Historical records

*MDE *DNR *Baltimore County Planning

Surface Water Quality & Quantity

Sub-watersheds 1963-2020

Trend Analysis Matrices *Compare water quality data at specific monitring sites, if available. *Determine the change in the amount of impervious surfaces. *Identifiy NPDES sites and overlay land use

*Aerial photography * Internet * Maryland Stormwater Management (existing and propsed new regulations)

*Baltimore County *Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) *Save Our Streams *Natural Resource Conservation Service

Floodplains Sub-watersheds 1963-2020Trend Analysis Overlays *Identify floodplain boundaries and overlay land use.

*FEMA maps *Baltimore County GIS *Aerial Photographs

*SHA *Baltimore County

Wetlands Sub-watersheds 1963-2020Determine the change in acreage of wetlands based on work by MOP

*National Wetland Inventory Maps, US Fish and Wildlife *Baltimore County GIS *Army Corps of Engineers Permit Files *Maryland Department of Natural Resources *"Wetlands of Maryland", US Fish and Wildlife

*Maryland Department of the Environment *MOP *Chesapeake Bay Foundation *US Fish and Wildlife Service *MD Department of Natural Resources *DEPRM

Wildlife , Terrestrial and Aquatic Habitat

Sub-watersheds 1963-2020Trend Analysis, Overlays, Matrices *Use MOP data to identify changes in forest acreage

* MOP GIS/Maps * 1989 Maryland Reforestation Law *Aerial Photography *1990 Maryland State Forest Conservation Act *Maryland Seed Tree Law

*MOP * USFWS * Baltimore County *MDE *DEPRM

Noise Qualitive discussion

Air Quality Consult BMC - Regional discussion

Hazardous Materials

Overlays *Identify CERCLA List and overlay on land use

*CERCLA List *MDE lists

*Environmental Protection Agency *MDE

Resource Boundary Time Frame Approach Data Source Agency

Disruption to Community

Sub-watersheds 1963-2020 Trend analysis, overlay*Aerial photography *Historic mapping

Baltimore County Planning

Employment Employment Center 1960-2020 Trend analysis County projections*Census *Purpose and Need


Population Census Tracts 1960-2020 Trend analysis*Census *County Projections


Land Use (re s idential, industrial, farmland)

Census Tracts 1963-2020*Trend analysis, overlay *Identifiy current and future capital projects

*Aerial photography *Baltimore County Master Plan *MDOT Consolidated Trans. Program *OP Land Use maps *Pipeline Res. Development

*Baltimore County Planning *Maryland Office of Planning *Baltimore Metropolitan Council

Historic Site s Census Tracts 1963-2020 Trend analysis, overlay Historic mapping*Baltimore County Historical Society *Maryland Historical Trust

Groundwater Sub-watersheds 1963-2020 Trend analysis*GIS files (MDE) *Historical records

*MDE *DNR *Baltimore County Planning

Surface Water Quality & Quantity

Sub-watersheds 1963-2020

Trend Analysis Matrices *Compare water quality data at specific monitring sites, if available. *Determine the change in the amount of impervious surfaces. *Identifiy NPDES sites and overlay land use

*Aerial photography * Internet * Maryland Stormwater Management (existing and propsed new regulations)

*Baltimore County *Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) *Save Our Streams *Natural Resource Conservation Service

Floodplains Sub-watersheds 1963-2020Trend Analysis Overlays *Identify floodplain boundaries and overlay land use.

*FEMA maps *Baltimore County GIS *Aerial Photographs

*SHA *Baltimore County

Wetlands Sub-watersheds 1963-2020Determine the change in acreage of wetlands based on work by MOP

*National Wetland Inventory Maps, US Fish and Wildlife *Baltimore County GIS *Army Corps of Engineers Permit Files *Maryland Department of Natural Resources *"Wetlands of Maryland", US Fish and Wildlife

*Maryland Department of the Environment *MOP *Chesapeake Bay Foundation *US Fish and Wildlife Service *MD Department of Natural Resources *DEPRM

Wildlife , Terrestrial and Aquatic Habitat

Sub-watersheds 1963-2020Trend Analysis, Overlays, Matrices *Use MOP data to identify changes in forest acreage

* MOP GIS/Maps * 1989 Maryland Reforestation Law *Aerial Photography *1990 Maryland State Forest Conservation Act *Maryland Seed Tree Law

*MOP * USFWS * Baltimore County *MDE *DEPRM

Noise Qualitive discussion

Air Quality Consult BMC - Regional discussion

Hazardous Materials

Overlays *Identify CERCLA List and overlay on land use

*CERCLA List *MDE lists

*Environmental Protection Agency *MDE

Resource Matrix



Rationale for Removing Items From the SCEA

Rationale for Retaining Resources in the SCEA

NOTE: “Disruption to Community” as it is termed in the MRECAS environmental impact matrix, is not a resource and was not analyzed in the SCEA. However, “communities” is considered a resource and can be analyzed as such in other SCEAs.

Resources Included RationaleHistoric Sites Direct ImpactsGroundwater Well/Septic ConsiderationsSurface Water Direct ImpactsFloodplains Direct ImpactsWetlands Direct ImpactsWildlife Habitat Direct Impacts



Items Stricken Rationale* Disruption to Community Not appropriate for a SCEAEmployment Not appropriate for a SCEAPopulation Not appropriate for a SCEALand Use Not appropriate for a SCEANoise Not appropriate for a SCEAAir Quality Addressed in Regional/TIP Conformity ProcessHazardous Material Not appropriate for a SCEA



MD 5 - Hughesville Transportation Improvement Project




MD 5 - Hughesville Transportation improvement Project

MD 5 - Hughesville Transportation improvement Project

MD 5 Location Map





MD 5 Direct Impacts Study Area





• The purpose of the MD 5 - Hughesville Transportation Improvement Project is to alleviate congestion and to address safety hazards along MD 5 at the MD 5/MD 231 intersection in the Hughesville area. MD 5 through Hughesville experiences a high accident rate due to a constrained typical section, limited capacity at the MD 5/MD 231 intersection, and numerous driveways with direct access onto MD 5.

• Traffic congestion and safety along MD 5 during morning and evening rush hours have become significant problems in recent years and conditions are expected to increase to 85 percent with the projected growth by year 2020 near

Washington D.C., Lexington Park, and along the MD 5 corridor. The MD 5/MD 231 intersection currently operates at LOS "F" in the evening peak hour.

• The purpose of the MD 5 - Hughesville Transportation Improvement Project is to alleviate congestion and to address safety hazards along MD 5 at the MD 5/MD 231 intersection in the Hughesville area. MD 5 through Hughesville experiences a high accident rate due to a constrained typical section, limited capacity at the MD 5/MD 231 intersection, and numerous driveways with direct access onto MD 5.

• Traffic congestion and safety along MD 5 during morning and evening rush hours have become significant problems in recent years and conditions are expected to increase to 85 percent with the projected growth by year 2020 near

Washington D.C., Lexington Park, and along the MD 5 corridor. The MD 5/MD 231 intersection currently operates at LOS "F" in the evening peak hour.

Project Purpose and Need





No-Build - This alternative would not provide any significant improvements to MD 5 in the Hughesville area. Minor improvements would occur as part of normal maintenance and safety operations. These improvements would not measurably affect roadway capacity or reduce the accident rate. Possible minor improvements include items such as curbing, sidewalks, striping, signing, lighting, rumble strips and additional drainage.

No-Build - This alternative would not provide any significant improvements to MD 5 in the Hughesville area. Minor improvements would occur as part of normal maintenance and safety operations. These improvements would not measurably affect roadway capacity or reduce the accident rate. Possible minor improvements include items such as curbing, sidewalks, striping, signing, lighting, rumble strips and additional drainage.

Alternatives Retained for Detailed Study





Widen Existing MD 5 - This alternative proposes widening existing MD 5 to a seven-lane curbed section, with two through lanes and an auxiliary right turn lane for both the northbound and southbound directions and a continuous center left turn lane. This alternative would have three northbound and southbound lanes near the MD 5/MD 231 intersection. The posted speed limit would be 40 miles per hour (mph), similar to existing MD 5. This alternative requires the additional widening of MD 5 at the MD 5/MD 231 intersection. The widening creates the necessary storage to efficiently move peak hour traffic through the MD 5/MD 231 intersection.

Widen Existing MD 5 - This alternative proposes widening existing MD 5 to a seven-lane curbed section, with two through lanes and an auxiliary right turn lane for both the northbound and southbound directions and a continuous center left turn lane. This alternative would have three northbound and southbound lanes near the MD 5/MD 231 intersection. The posted speed limit would be 40 miles per hour (mph), similar to existing MD 5. This alternative requires the additional widening of MD 5 at the MD 5/MD 231 intersection. The widening creates the necessary storage to efficiently move peak hour traffic through the MD 5/MD 231 intersection.






Eastern Bypass - This alternative is a four-lane divided highway located east of MD 5 from south of Gallant Green Road to north of Carrico Mill Road. The Alternative 5 design speed is 60 mph. This alternative bypasses the town of Hughesville to the east. Alternative 5 is access controlled, providing only three points of access to the town of Hughesville. These points of access are at either end of the bypass and at MD 231, where a diamond interchange is proposed. The controlled-access Alternative 5 would safely and efficiently accommodate the 90 percent through traffic projected for this facility. Construction of the bypass will also safely accommodate traffic on existing in Hughesville. By intercepting the high volume of through traffic traveling between Calvert County and Lexington Park prior to Hughesville.

Eastern Bypass - This alternative is a four-lane divided highway located east of MD 5 from south of Gallant Green Road to north of Carrico Mill Road. The Alternative 5 design speed is 60 mph. This alternative bypasses the town of Hughesville to the east. Alternative 5 is access controlled, providing only three points of access to the town of Hughesville. These points of access are at either end of the bypass and at MD 231, where a diamond interchange is proposed. The controlled-access Alternative 5 would safely and efficiently accommodate the 90 percent through traffic projected for this facility. Construction of the bypass will also safely accommodate traffic on existing in Hughesville. By intercepting the high volume of through traffic traveling between Calvert County and Lexington Park prior to Hughesville.




Summary of Direct Impacts As Presented in the EA



Standard Diamond

Interchange

Compressed Diamond

Interchange (Option A)

SOCIOECONOM ICRight of Way Required Residential Acres 0 2.9 20.1 19.1 Commercial Acres 0 4.1 6.3 3.7 Agricultural Acres 0 0.0 2.0 2.0 Undeveloped Acres 0 3.5 44.7 44.1

Total 0 10.5 73.1 68.9

Residential Displacements No. 0 3 3 3Commercial Displacements No. 0 3 1 1Farm & Out Building Displacements No. 0 0 1 1Active Farmland Acres 0 0.3 1.5 1.5Parks Acres 0 0 0.04 0.04NATURAL ENVIRONM ENTWetlands Acres 0 0.02 2.1 1.6Stream Crossings No. 0 0 1 1Stream Impacts L.F. 0 0 346 323Forest Acres 0 2.1 50.4 48.2CULTURAL RESOURCESNRE Historic Sites No. 0 3 1 1Archeological Sites Affected No. 0 0 1 1NOISE IM PACTS No. 6 7 8 8AIR QUALITY IM PACTS No. 0 0 0 0ESTIM ATED PROJECT COSTSRight of Way Million $ 0 3.8 8.9 8.4Engineering and Construction Costs Million $ 0 23.3 36.6 38.3

Total Cost Million $ 0 27.1 45.5 46.7

Alternative 5 Eastern Bypass

Resource Category UnitAlternative 1

No Build

Alternative 2 Widen Existing

MD 5



Summary of Direct Impacts As Presented in the EA (Not Appropriate for SCEA)



Note: Strikethroughs indicate data sources that should not be included in SCEA Assessment

Standard Diamond

Interchange

Compressed Diamond

Interchange (Option A)

SOCIOECONOMICRight of Way Required Residential Acres 0 2.9 20.1 19.1 Commercial Acres 0 4.1 6.3 3.7 Agricultural Acres 0 0.0 2.0 2.0 Undeveloped Acres 0 3.5 44.7 44.1

Total 0 10.5 73.1 68.9

Residential Displacements No. 0 3 3 3Commercial Displacements No. 0 3 1 1Farm & Out Building Displacements No. 0 0 1 1Active Farmland Acres 0 0.3 1.5 1.5Parks Acres 0 0 0.04 0.04NATURAL ENVIRONMENTWetlands Acres 0 0.02 2.1 1.6Stream Crossings No. 0 0 1 1Stream Impacts L.F. 0 0 346 323Forest Acres 0 2.1 50.4 48.2CULTURAL RESOURCESNRE Historic Sites No. 0 3 1 1Archeological Sites Affected No. 0 0 1 1NOISE IMPACTS No. 6 7 8 8AIR QUALITY IMPACTS No. 0 0 0 0ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTSRight of Way Million $ 0 3.8 8.9 8.4Engineering and Construction Costs Million $ 0 23.3 36.6 38.3

Total Cost Million $ 0 27.1 45.5 46.7

Resource Category UnitAlternative 1

No Build

Alternative 2 Widen Existing

MD 5

Alternative 5 Eastern Bypass





Rational for Including or Excluding Resources from the SCEA

SOCIOECONOMICRight of Way Required Not a ResourceResidential Displacements Not a ResourceCommercial Displacements Not a ResourceFarm & Out Building Displacements Not a ResourceActive Farmland Direct ImpactsParks Direct ImpactsNATURAL ENVIRONMENTWetlands Direct ImpactsStream Crossings Direct ImpactsStream Impacts Included in stream crossingsSurface water Direct ImpactsGroundwater Sensitive to cumulative effects

FloodplainsConsidered as a resource, though further analysis not necessary because they are not directly impacted

Endangered and Threatened Species Sensitive to cumulative effectsForest Sensitive to cumulative effectsCULTURAL RESOURCESNRE Historic Sites Direct ImpactsArcheological Sites Affected Sensitive to cumulative effectsNOISE IMPACTS Not a ResourceAIR QUALITY IMPACTS Not a Resource

Resource ConsideredRationale for Including or

Excluding from SCEA