CFE agenda 010818 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

while also noting areas in which the Final Environmental Impact Statement ( "FEIS ") should be improved. A. Natural Resources Overall, we are content with how the DEIS addresses potential impacts to natural resources, including wildlife and broader ecosystem impacts. The DEIS recognizes that the indirect impacts largely compact development in the affected area—"would be more beneficial to natural resources than the type of dispersed growth that typically occurs with auto - oriented development." 65 We believe such acknowledgments and comparisons are important when considering a project such as this, where some minimal environmental harm may result in the construction and implementation phases, but where the long -term environmental effects are substantial. Even then, the natural resource impacts will largely be limited to already disturbed habitats . 66 However, the DEIS provides an incomplete picture regarding endangered and threatened species. We are pleased that GoTriangle carefully analyzed the occurrence of federally listed species in the project area, and that the DEIS includes preliminary measures to be taken in the event the species are observed in the area. Nonetheless, the DEIS lists many North Carolina state - listed endangered and threatened species, but does not include any information about their abundance in the project area or how to mitigate possible harm to the species. We understand that studies and coordination with North Carolina agencies are ongoing, and we encourage careful evaluation of possible harm to these species and implementation of necessary mitigation measures. The FEIS should include a more thorough discussion regarding these state - listed species. B. Water Resources While the NEPA Preferred route will have impacts to water resources in the project area particularly wetlands, streams, and floodplains —the impacts are relatively minor when considered in comparison with the sprawling, car - oriented development that would occur under a No Build scenario. 67 Nonetheless, we note that the NEPA Preferred Alternative will impact approximately .558 acres of wetlands, 68 and that the Little Creek project elements alternatives would actually impact .05 acres fewer than the NEPA Preferred Little Creek route (C2A).69 We have limited concerns about this as the acreage impact is so slight. Moreover, we understand that while the Little Creek alternatives may impact a smaller acreage of wetlands, these alternatives "would impact one or two more [discrete] wetlands .,,70 Nonetheless, GoTriangle 65 Id. at 4 -92. 66 Id. at 4 -138, 4 -142. 67 E.g. id. at 4 -290, 4 -292. 68 Id. at 4 -156. 69 Id. at 4 -159. 70 Id. at 4 -159. 12