IV. CHANGES IN IMPACT STATUS OR DOCUMENT COMPLIANCE · CHANGES IN IMPACT STATUS OR DOCUMENT COMPLIANCE ... the interchange at Crystal Oaks Drive to a ... Sec 1 Ramp D Sec 1 S Gordon

2

IV. CHANGES IN IMPACT STATUS OR DOCUMENT COMPLIANCE

YES / NO COMMENTS A. NATURAL ENVIRONMENT

1. Air Quality [ ] [X] 2. Coastal and Marine [ ] [X] 3. Contamination Sites [X] [ ] See Attachment.1.A.3 4. Farmlands [ ] [X] 5. Floodplains [X] [ ] See Attachment.1.A.5 6. Infrastructure [X] [ ] See Attachment.1.A.6 7. Navigation [ ] [X] 8. Special Designations [X] [ ] See Attachment.1.A.8 9. Water Quality/Quantity [ ] [X] 10. Wetlands [X] [ ] See Attachment.1.A.10 11. Wildlife and Habitat [X] [ ] See Attachment.1.A.11

B. CULTURAL IMPACTS

1. Historic/Archaeological [X] [ ] See Attachment.1.B.1 2. Recreation Areas [X] [ ] See Attachment.1.B.2 3. Section 4(f) Potential [ ] [X] Not Applicable

C. COMMUNITY IMPACTS

1. Aesthetics [ ] [X] 2. Economics [ ] [X] 3. Land Use [ ] [X] 4. Mobility [ ] [X] 5. Relocation [X] [ ] See Attachment.1.C.5 6. Social [ ] [X]

D. OTHER IMPACTS

1. Noise [X] [ ] See Attachment 1.D.1 2. Construction [ ] [X]

3

V. EVALUATION OF MAJOR DESIGN CHANGES AND REVISED DESIGN CRITERIA (e.g., Typical Section Changes, Alignment Shifts, Right of Way Changes, Bridge to Box Culvert, Drainage Requirements, revised design standards). The approved 1998 SEIR addressed the impacts associated with the proposed Suncoast Parkway 2 from US 98 to US 19 through Citrus and Hernando Counties, Florida. The proposed mainline consisted of four 12-foot wide mainline lanes, two in each direction, separated by a 64-foot median. The facility is a new alignment in a northerly direction through Hernando and Citrus Counties and connects the existing Suncoast Parkway 2 with US 19 north of Crystal River, Florida. This reevaluation is being conducted to evaluate design changes that have occurred since the SEIR was approved on February 6, 1998. These changes are summarized in the following bullets and discussed in detail below.

• Alignment Modifications, • Typical Sections (including the multi-use trail), • Design Criteria, • Interchanges, • Right-of-Way Requirements, • Access Road Requirements, • Cross Street Laneage, and • Over/Under Analysis.

A series of technical memoranda are included in the project files that support the attachments. A. Alignment Modifications The project includes three alignment revisions within the 26-mile corridor. The first alignment revision runs from south of the US 98 interchange to north of the US 98 interchange. The approved 1998 SEIR alignment was located further to the east and resulted in isolating a portion of land that is now part of the Annutteliga Hammock tract purchased by the State of Florida. To minimize the impacts to the protected lands, the alignment has been moved west, closer to the existing Progress Energy right-of-way, Progress Energy easement, and the Florida Gas Transmission easement. This minimizes the impacts to the conservation lands and will be addressed in the update to the existing Memorandum of Understanding with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. Figure V.A.1 illustrates the general alignment revision. The second alignment revision is through the Lecanto Sandhills area. The approved 1998 SEIR alignment included a mainline toll plaza in this area. The land was subsequently purchased by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) as conservation land with the full knowledge that the Suncoast Parkway 2 could potentially impact a portion of the site. Citrus County also sent letters to FDEP and the Governor stating they only supported this acquisition if Suncoast Parkway 2 was allowed to traverse the site. The toll plaza has been removed from this portion of the alignment and the alignment has been relocated to the west to run parallel and

4

Figure V.A.1 – US 98 Alignment Revision

5

immediately adjacent to the existing Progress Energy right-of-way. As with the alignment through the Annuttilega Hammock tract, this minimizes the impacts to this conservation area. Figure V.A.2 illustrates the general alignment revision. The third alignment revision is from south of the SR 44 interchange to north of the SR 44 interchange. Heavy traffic from westbound SR 44 southbound Suncoast Parkway 2 requires a reconfiguration of the interchange. This reconfiguration relocates the southbound on-ramp in the southwest quadrant of the interchange at Crystal Oaks Drive to a loop ramp adjacent to the southbound off-ramp in the northwest quadrant, reducing impacts to the Crystal Oaks neighborhood. The realignment of the Suncoast Parkway 2 mainline north of SR 44 eliminates the realignment of North Maylen Road and associated impacts to the properties east of North Maylen Road. Figure V.A.3 illustrates the general alignment revision. B. Typical Sections The approved 1998 SEIR provided a four-lane Suncoast Parkway 2 with two 12-foot lanes in each direction separated by a 64-foot median within a 400-foot right-of-way. The typical section has been modified to provide the same four-lane mainline with the median modified to 88 feet. The right-of-way for the proposed improvement remains 400 feet; however, it is modified to provide 350 feet of limited access right-of-way for Suncoast Parkway 2 (typically centered in the right-of-way) and 50 feet of right-of-way for a multi-use trail. The multi-use trail is a continuation of the multi-use trail provided on Suncoast Parkway 1 south of US 98 and provides potential connections to proposed local and state trails. Figure V.B.1 illustrates the proposed mainline typical section.

Figure V.B.1 – Mainline Typical Section

6

Figure V.A.2 – Lecanto Sandhills Alignment Revision

7

Figure V.A.3 – SR 44 Alignment Revision

8

C. Design Criteria Table V.C.1 lists the design criteria from the Preliminary Engineering Report submitted as part of the approved 1998 SEIR. Table V.C.2 lists the current design criteria used in the design of Suncoast 2. These differences are due to changes in FDOT’s design criteria from 1998 to 2009.

Table V.C.1 – Design Criteria

DESIGN ELEMENT MAIN LINE RAMPS CROSSROADS Design speed (mph) 70 30 Loop

45 Diamond 50 Direct

Connection

30 Local 45 Urban

50 Rural Collector 60 Rural Arterial

Horizontal Alignment Max Curvature [minimum radius in ft]

1919

246 Loop 525 Diamond

689 Direct Connection

246 Local 705 Urban

689 Rural Collector 1181Rural Arterial

Max Superelevation (ft/ft) 0.10 0.10 0.10 Rural 0.05 Urban

Vertical Alignment Maximum Grade

3%

5% System 7% Service

7% Local 7%Urban

6% Rural Collector 3% Rural Arterial

Stopping Sight Distance (ft) 738 Vertical Curve Length (ft) In accordance with Section 2 8 2 FDOT Plans Prep

Manual (1995) Freeway (Interstate) criteria is desirable Freeway (Other) criteria is minimum

Cross Section Lane Width (ft)

12

12 Multi-lane 15 Single-Lane

12

Shoulder Width Right (ft) 12 with 10 paved

6 with 4 paved 10 with 4 paved or 5 paved for des

bike lane Shoulder Width Left (ft) 8 with 4 paved 6 with 2 paved 8 2-Lane Ramp Right (ft) 12 with 10 paved 2-Lane Ramp Left (ft) 8 with 4 paved Auxiliary Shoulder Right (ft) 8 with 6 paved Bridge Shoulder Right (ft) 10 6 1-Lane

10 2-Lane 10

Bridge Shoulder Left (ft) 6 4 -Lane 10 6-Lane

6 6 4 -Lane 10 6 -Lane

Cross Slope Traffic Lanes (ft/ft)

0.02 0.02 0.02 4-Lane 0.03 6-Lane

Cross Slope Right Shoulder (ft/ft)

0.06 0.06 0.06

9

DESIGN ELEMENT MAIN LINE RAMPS CROSSROADS Cross Slope Left Shoulder (ft/ft)

0.05 0.05 0.05

Cross Slope Bridges (ft/ft)

0.02 0.02 0.02

Median Width Depressed 64 40 Rural Median Width Raised 30 Urban Clear Zone (ft) 36 24 6 Urban

20- 24 Rural Collector

30- 36 Rural Arterial

Horizontal Clearance to Bridge Abutment or Pier From Edge of Pavement From Centerline of Railroad

36

16 Urban 24 Local and Rural

Collector 36 Rural Arterial

25 Vertical Clearance Over Roadway Over Railroad Under Powerline Overhead Signs

16.5 24 35

17.5

16.5 24 35

17.5

16.5 24 - -

Right-of-way 300-400 typical - As Needed Interchange Spacing 3 mi Access

Class 1, Area Type 3

Ramp Operations Spacing Between Ramps (ft) Between Entrance and Exit Ramps Between Entrance and Entrance or Exit and Exit Ramps

3000

1500

- -

- -

Border Edge (ft) 82-132 Typical 82-132 Typical 12-14 Urban 32.8-40 Rural

10

Table V.C.2 – Design Criteria

Design Features Turnpike Mainline

Ramps Crossroads

Loop Diamond Direct Connection Local Urban Rural

Collector Rural

Collector Rural

Arterial Functional Classification Interstate Ramp Ramp Ramp Rural Rural Design Criteria PPM PPM PPM PPM PPM Green Book Green Book Green Book PPM PPM PPM PPM Street Names Sec 3 Ramp G-

1 Sec 1 Ramp A Sec 3 Ramp E Gum St Sec 1 Access Rd F W Jennifer Ct West Glen St Cardinal 4 lane (Fut) CR 480 Cardinal 2 lane US 98

Sec 3 Ramp G-2 Sec 1 Ramp B Sec 3 Ramp F Summerwind Av Sec 1 Sunnyview Pt W Nickel Ct CR 488 West US 19

Sec 1 Ramp C Sec 1 S Hilltop Rd Ferwerda Ct W Emerald Oaks CR 495 Sec 1 Ramp D Sec 1 S Gordon Pt Tom Mason Dr CR 488 E Sec 1 Ramp E (Fut) W Farhills Ln Sec 1 Ramp F (Fut) N Basewood Av Sec 1 Ramp G (Fut) N Reynolds Av Sec 1 Ramp H (Fut) N BitterRoot Dr Sec 3 Ramp A Frontage Rd A Sec 3 Ramp B Frontage Rd C Sec 3 Ramp C Sec 3 Ramp D Lane Width on Tangent (PPM Table 2.1.2 & 2.1.3) One Lane Roadway Multi Lane Roadway

12’ 12’

15’ 12’

15’ 12’

15’ 12’

12’ 12’

N/A 11’

10’ Table 3-7 24’ Table 3-6

N/A 24’ Table 3-8

12’ 12’

12’ 12’

12’ 12’

12’ 12’

Design Speed (V) 70 mph 30 mph 45-50 mph 50 mph 30 mph 20 mph 30 mph 35 mph 45 mph 45 mph 55 mph 60 mph Posted Speed 30 mph 35 mph 45 mph 55 mph 60 mph Horizontal Alignment Max o of Curve Using Max Super PPM Table 2.8.3 3o 0' 24o 45' 10o 15' 8o 15' 24o 45' 57° 45' 24o 45' Table 3-3

17°45' Table 3-3 8o 15' 8° 15' *5° 00' 5o 15'

Max o of Curve Using Normal Cross Slope PPM Table 2.8.4 0o15' 1o30' 0o30' 0o30' 1o30' 7°15' 1o30' 1o30' 2o45' 0˚30' 0° 30' 0o15' Max Deflection w/o Curve PPM Table 2.8.1a 0o 45' 00" 2o 00' 00" 0o 45' 00" 0o 45' 00" 2o 00' 00" 2o 00' 00" 2o 00' 00" 2o 00' 00" 1o 00' 00" 0˚ 45' 00" 0o 45' 00" 0o 45' 00" Desirable Length of Curve Min PPM Table 2.8.2a

2100' [1050'] 450' [400'] 675' [400'] 750' [400'] 450' [400'] 300 450' [400'] 525' [400'] 675' [400'] 675 [400'] 825' [400'] 900' [400']

Max Superelevation (ft/ft) PPM Table 2.9.1 & 2.9.2 0.10’/’ 0.10’/’ 0.10’/’ 0.10’/’ 0.10’/’ 0.10’/’ 0.10’/’ 0.10’/’ 0.05’/’ 0.10’/’ 0.05’/’** 0.10’/’

Superelevation Runoff Rate PPM Table 2.9.3 & 2.9.4

1:200 1:100 1:150 1:150 1:100 1:100 1:100 1:125 1:200 1:200 1:225 1:225

Max Vertical Grade PPM Table 2.6.1 3% 5-7% 3-5% 3-5% 7% 8% Table 3-4 7% Table 3-4 7% Table 3-4 8% 7% 6% ** 3%

Min Vertical Grade PPM Table 2.6.4 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.30% 0.00% 0.30% 0.00% 0.30% 0.00% 0.30% 0.00%

Max Change in Grade W/O Vertical Curve 0.20% 1.00% 0.70% 0.60% 1.00% 1.20% Table 3-5 1.00% Table 3-5 0.9% Table 3-5 0.70% 0.70% 0.50% 0.40%

11

Design Features Turnpike Mainline

Ramps Crossroads

Loop Diamond Direct Connection Local Urban Rural

Collector Rural

Collector Rural

Arterial PPM Table 2.6.2 Clear Zone PPM Table 2.11.11 36' 10' 14' 14' 10' 6' Table 3-12 6' Table 3-12 6' Table 3-12 4' from Face of Curb 24' Table 3-12 30' Table 3-12 36' Table 3-12

Lane Reduction Tapers 70:1 50:1 50:1 50:1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Min Vertical Clearance PPM Table 2.10.1

Roadways 16'-6" 16'-6" 16'-6" 16'-6" 16'-6" 16'-6" 16'-6" 16'-6" 16'-6" 16'-6" 16'-6" 16'-6" Railroad 23'-6" 23'-6" 23'-6" 23'-6" 23'-6" 23'-6" 23'-6" 23'-6" 23'-6" 23'-6" 23'-6" 23'-6" Powerline 33' (500Kv) 27' (230Kv/150 Kv) Vertical Curve Criteria Stopping Sight Distance PPM Table 2.7.1 820’ 200' 360' 425' 200' 115' Table 3-6 200' Table 3-6 250' Table 3-6 360' 360' 495' 570'

K Value PPM Table 2.8.5 & 2.8.6

Sag Curve 206 37 79 96 37 17 Table 3-6 37 Table 3-6 49 Table 3-6 79 79 115 136 Crest Curve 506 31 98 136 31 10 Table 3-6 31 Table 3-6 47 Table 3-6 98 98 185 245 Min Length of Vertical Curve PPM Table 2.8.5 & 2.8.6

Sag Curve 800' 90' 135' 200' 90' 60' 90' 105' 135' 135' 250' 300' CrestCurve 1000' 90' 135' 300' 90' 60' Table 3-6 90' 105' 135' 135' 350' 400' Median Width PPM Table 2.2.1 88' N/A N/A N/A 22' 60' Table 3-6 22' Table 3-11 N/A 22' N/A N/A 40'

Border Widths PPM Table 2.5.1 & 2.5.2 94' 94' 94' 94' 33’ 19' C.7.i 33’ 33’ 14' 40' 40' 40'

Interchange Spacing 3 Miles N/A N/A N/A N/A 13' Chap.3.C.7.i N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Ramp Operations Spacing Between Entrance and Exit Ramps

2000' N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Spacing Between Entrance and Entrance or Exit and Exit Ramps

1000' N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Shoulders PPM Tables 2.3.1, 2.3.3 & 2.3.4

Inside Full Width (Paved Width)

One Lane N/A 6' (2') 6' (2') 6' (2') N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Multiple Lanes 8' (4') 8' (4') 8' (4') 8' (4') N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 8' (5') Outside Full Width (Paved Width)

One Lane N/A 6' (4') 6' (4') 6' (4') N/A N/A 8' Table 3-8 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Multiple Lanes 12' (10') 12' (10') 12' (10') 12' (10') 10' (5') 6' (0) 10' (5') 8' (0) N/A 8' (0) 8' (5') 10' (5')

12

D. Interchanges The approved 1998 SEIR provided interchanges at US 98, Cardinal Street, SR 44, CR 495 and the termini at US 19. The interchange locations and the proposed staging of the interchanges remain the same (the interchanges at US 98, SR 44 and US 19 are part of the initial construction and the interchanges at Cardinal Street and CR 495 are to be constructed when the travel demand warrants the additional access). The interchange configurations at Cardinal Street and SR 44 are modified as described below. The approved 1998 SEIR had a diamond interchange at Cardinal Street with Suncoast Parkway 2 overpassing Cardinal Street. The Cardinal Street interchange is proposed to remain as a diamond interchange with Cardinal Street overpassing the Suncoast Parkway 2. The existing topography in the area generally rises from south to north. By lowering the profile of Suncoast Parkway 2 below the existing grade, Cardinal Street can overpass the Suncoast Parkway. This significantly reduces the cost of the facility as less embankment material is required. In addition, the view shed along Cardinal Street will not be interrupted by the Suncoast Parkway. The revised Cardinal Street interchange concept can be seen on the Preliminary Concept Plans, included as Attachment 2 to this document.

The modifications at the interchange with SR 44 were developed to provide improved traffic operations at this interchange. Updated traffic projections indicate that the westbound SR 44 to southbound Suncoast Parkway 2 movement is projected to be substantially higher than the projections developed for the approved 1998 SEIR. This increase is due to the revisions in the future land use plan for the area. To accommodate the increased traffic volume, the direct diamond ramp for eastbound and westbound SR 44 to southbound Suncoast Parkway 2 has been revised to be a loop ramp located in the northwest quadrant of the interchange. This configuration allows the westbound SR 44 to southbound Suncoast Parkway 2 traffic to make a right-turn rather than a left-turn, significantly improving traffic operations. The right-of-way required for the proposed interchange is approximately the same as the previous interchange; however, it involves different properties. The revised SR 44 interchange concept can be seen on Figure V.A.3 and the Preliminary Concept Plans, included as Attachment 2 to this document. E. Right-of-way Requirements The approved 1998 SEIR identified approximately 1,500 acres of right-of-way for the improvements. The 1998 Preliminary Engineering Report prepared in concert with the approved 1998 SEIR identified 1,797.1 acres of right-of-way required for the improvements. With the proposed alignment and interchange configuration revisions, the right-of-way requirements for Suncoast Parkway 2 are currently 1,754 acres. The acreage includes the right-of-way required for the roadway (mainline Suncoast Parkway 2, interchange ramps and cross street improvements), stormwater management areas, access roadways and the multi-use trail.

13

F. Access Road Requirements The approved 1998 SEIR included a series of local frontage or access roadways to provide access to adjacent parcels that were impacted by the implementation of Suncoast Parkway 2. With the modification to the roadway alignment and interchange modifications, some revisions to the frontage/access roads are necessary. Table V.F.1 lists the differences between the access roads included in the approved 1998 SEIR and the reevaluation access roads. Access is provided to all properties outside the Suncoast Parkway 2 right-of-way.

Table V.F.1 – Access Road Modifications

Cross Street Location Concept

Plan Sht Approved 1998

SEIR Access Road Reevaluation Access

Road US 98 Northwest

quadrant 3 & 4 Parallel to US 98 to

provide access to Sugarmill Woods parcel.

Interchange realigned. Access roads not required as no remnant parcels remain.

US 98 Southwest quadrant

62 No access road indicated

Parallel to south side of US 98 to provide access to existing trailhead from outside limits of limited access right-of-way.

Cardinal Street Interchange

Northwest quadrant

13 & 14 Parallel to Cardinal Street and north along Suncoast Parkway 2 to provide access to parcels west of interchange.

Access road not required as no remnant parcels remain.


Northeast quadrant

14 Parallel to Cardinal Street from South Wanderlust Point to South Georgian Road to provide access to parcels east of interchange. Additional access road provided from Hilltop Road south along east side of Suncoast Parkway 2 to provide access to remnant parcels.

Access road connecting South Georgian Road to South Wildermuth Point west of Cardinal Street provides access. Access road at Hilltop Street to remain.

14




Road Cardinal Street Interchange

Southwest quadrant

12 & 13 Parallel to Cardinal Street and south along west side of Suncoast Parkway 2 to provide access to parcels west of interchange.



Southeast quadrant

12 & 64 Parallel to Cardinal Street and south along east side of Suncoast Parkway 2 to provide access to parcels east of Suncoast Parkway.

Access Road shortened to connect to South Rudolph Point. Additional access roadway provided between South Rudolph Point and South Gordon Point.

West Oaklawn Street

Suncoast Parkway 2 crossing

16 No access changes indicated

Cul-de-sac West Oaklawn Street east and west of Suncoast Parkway 2

Warbler Street



Cul-de-sac Warbler Street east of Suncoast Parkway 2 as no parcels remaining requiring access

Whippoorwill Street



Cul-de-sac Whippoorwill Street east of Suncoast Parkway 2

Journey Point

Existing cul-de-sac

18 No access changes indicated.

Shorten existing cul-de-sac east of Suncoast Parkway 2

Gambler Point

Existing cul-de-sac

18 No access changes indicated.

Shorten existing cul-de-sac east of Suncoast Parkway 2

Corbett Avenue

South of Grover Cleveland

18 & 19 Realign and reconstruct Corbett Avenue from W. Whippoorwill Street to Grover Cleveland Boulevard.

Realign north end of Corbett Avenue near Grover Cleveland Boulevard.

SR 44 Interchange

Northwest quadrant

27 Parallel to SR 44 east to interchange.

Access road not required due to interchange reconfiguration.

15




Road SR 44 Interchange

Northeast quadrant

60 None. Cul-de-sac Lee Ann Lane.

SR 44 Interchange

Southwest quadrant

59 Parallel to SR 44 and south on the west side of SR 44 to South Sandy Hill Street.

Realignment of Crystal Oaks Drive at ramp terminal intersection. Access road parallel to west side of Suncoast Parkway 2 from Seahock Court to Sandy Hill Street.

West Sandy Hill Street

East side 26 Access road not required.

Cul-de-sac east side of Suncoast Parkway 2.

West Old Citrus Road

East side 27 Access road not required.

Cul-de-sac east side of Suncoast Parkway 2

Sanction Road West

West side of Suncoast Parkway 2

28 & 29 South from Sanction Road West on west side of Suncoast Parkway.

Access Road relocated to follow new Suncoast Parkway 2 alignment

Sanction Road West

East side of Suncoast Parkway 2

28 & 29 South from Sanction Road West on east side of Suncoast Parkway 2 to S. Maylen Avenue.

Access Road not required. Realignment eliminates the realignment of Maylen Road

South Maylen Avenue


30 & 31 From North Hajik Path (east-west section) to Ziggy Street and Ziggy Street north to Damron Auto.

From north terminus of North Hajik Path (north-south section) to east terminus of Ziggy Street. Cul-de-sac Ziggy Street at Suncoast Parkway 2.

North Carney Avenue

West side 30 Access road not required.

Cul-de-sac west side of Suncoast Parkway 2

CR 486 West side of Suncoast Parkway 2 south of CR 486

Parallel to west side of Suncoast Parkway 2 south of CR 486 to provide access to parcels.

Access road removed and access provided from North Knoll Road

CR 486 West side of Suncoast Parkway 2 north of CR 486

32 & 33 New access to West Costa Mesa Lane from CR 486.


16




Road CR 486 East side of

Suncoast Parkway 2 north of CR 486

32 & 33 Access Road not required.

Access road connecting N. Trample Terrace to N. Stampede Drive to access parcels.

Reynolds Road


35 & 36 Provide access roadway on east side of Suncoast Parkway 2 from West Skink Lane to parcels east of Brookshire Point.

Provide access roadway on east side of Suncoast Parkway 2 from West Cyrus Street to North Iguana Path.

West Gum Street

West side of Suncoast Parkway 2

39 Extend Timberwood Point to adjacent parcel.

Access road not required as existing access serves parcels.

West Easy Goer Court

South of Suncoast Parkway 2

40 Extend Easy Goer Court parallel to Suncoast Parkway 2 to access remnant parcels.

Cul-de-sac Easy Goer Court as no remnant parcels remain.

Satin Terrace

North of Suncoast Parkway 2

40 Extend Satin Terrace to access remnant parcels.


Summerwind Avenue

Northwest quadrant

41 Parallel to Summerwind Avenue and north on west side of Suncoast Parkway 2 to serve adjacent parcels.


Summerwind Avenue

Northeast quadrant

41 Parallel to Summerwind Avenue on north side.


Summerwind Avenue

Southwest quadrant

41 Extend Ferwerda Court to adjacent parcels.


CR 495 Northwest quadrant

42 & 43 Parallel to CR 495 Access road not required as no remnant parcels remain.

CR 495 Southeast quadrant

57 Parallel to CR 495 and east along Suncoast Parkway 2 to remnant parcels.

Access road shortened to provide access outside the limited access right-of-way.

17




Road North Flame Vine Street

South of Suncoast Parkway 2

50 Access road not required.

Cul-de-sac south side of Suncoast Parkway 2.

North Jetbead Way

North of Suncoast Parkway 2 at US 19 Interchange

54& 55 Access road to connect North Jetbead Way to North Bachelor Button way

Access road not required. Local access provided to all parcels through existing roadway network.

The proposed access roads can be seen on the Preliminary Concept Plans, included as Attachment 2 to this document. G. Cross Street Laneage Table V.H.1 lists the surface streets in the project area that will cross the proposed Suncoast Parkway 2. The cross street laneage indicated is the ultimate condition. The cross street laneage remains the same for all roadways in the study area except for West Emerald Oaks Drive, which changed from a two-lane facility to a four-lane facility.

Table V.H.1 – Cross Street Laneage Revisions

Cross Street Laneage Approved 1998 SEIR Re-evaluation

US 98 4L 4L CR 480 4L 4L Cardinal Street 4L 4L West Glen Street 2L 2L West Grover Cleveland 4L 4L CR 490 4L 4L West Southern 2L 2L SR 44 6L 6L Sanction Road West 2L 2L North Knoll Road 2L 2L CR 486 4L 4L Reynolds Ave 2L 2L West Gum Street 2L 2L Summerwind Avenue 2L 2L CR 495 4L 4L West Emerald Oaks Drive 2L 4L CR 488 4L 4L North Bitterroot Drive 2L 2L US 19 4L 4L

H. Over/Under Analysis The approved 1998 SEIR documented an over/under analysis for each of the streets crossing the Suncoast Parkway 2. The over/under analyses were updated and all

18

locations remained the same except for Cardinal Street and Bitterroot Drive. In the approved 1998 SEIR, the Suncoast Parkway 2 overpassed Cardinal Street. The proposed improvements include Cardinal Street overpassing Suncoast Parkway 2. This will reduce the overall costs of the interchange and provide improved access to adjacent development. The approved 1998 SEIR had Suncoast Parkway 2 overpassing Bitterroot Drive. The proposed improvements include Bitterroot Drive overpassing Suncoast Parkway 2. With Bitterroot Drive overpassing Suncoast Parkway 2, the cost of the improvement is reduced, access is maintained to all adjacent development and constructibility is improved. VI. Mitigation Status and Commitment Compliance The following documents the specific commitments included in the approved 1998 SEIR and their current status. (completed, modified, appended, deleted)

1. Wetland and Natural Systems Minimization Measures A number of concepts will be considered during the design phase which will minimize impacts to wetlands and other natural systems. Where appropriate, the following concepts will be evaluated on a site by site basis in the design of the Suncoast Parkway – Project 2 1) steeper side slopes, 2) retaining walls, 3) guardrails, 4) bridging wetlands or longer bridges and/or oversized culverts for ecosystem management purposes, 5) locating water management facilities out of wetland areas or sensitive upland areas, and 6) limiting clearing and grubbing only to those areas necessary to construction. Status: This commitment remains unchanged. 2. Upland Habitat Mitigation Through coordination with the environmental agencies and organizations involved in the Suncoast Parkway – Project 2 Environmental Advisory Committee (EAC) Partnering process, it has generally been agreed that the best concept for mitigation of impacts to upland habitat will involve purchasing or contributing funds for the preservation and management of upland habitats in public ownership. The primary upland habitat which would be impacted by the proposed Suncoast Parkway – Project 2 is sandhill. Through field investigations and literature review, it has been determined that several state or federally listed species occur in the sandhills of the project study area such as the Southeastern American kestrel, the Sherman’s fox squirrel, the gopher tortoise, the gopher frog, the Florida mouse, the Eastern indigo snake, the Florida pine snake and the short-tailed snake. By utilizing the granture process which assumes that these species do occur in the suitable habitat areas which would be impacted by the proposed project, extensive surveys for these species as part of the PD&E Study were not required. With granture, the next step entails determining the best possible way to mitigate for the impacts to these species. Preservation of upland habitats on a type-for-type basis has been determined to be the best option by the Suncoast Parkway – Project 2 EAC. Through discussions with the EAC at the Partnering meetings, it appears that lands such as the proposed Annutteliga Hammock Conservation and Recreational Lands (CARL) purchase would be most suitable as preservation areas to serve as

19

mitigation for this project. The area of the Annutteliga Hammock within Citrus County is primarily sandhill which would be the predominant habitat impacted by the proposed project. The main body of the Annutteliga Hammock lies in Hernando County. The Annutteliga Hammock CARL purchase, totaling over 28,000 acres is currently ranked fourth on the list of priority projects. The Florida Department of Transportation, (FDOT) Turnpike District will contribute funds toward this purchase equivalent to the value of the acreage of land necessary to mitigate the habitat impacts in accordance with the replacement value. The Annutteliga Hammock CARL purchase area has many of the beneficial qualities important in identifying a mitigation area such as connectivity to publicly owned lands, management potential, good quality natural community of the same type impacted, and the area provides habitat for many listed species. A second mitigation option for impacts to upland natural communities could be the Lecanto Sandhills. This area has been submitted for inclusion in the CARL program but has not passed the initial phases of approval. The Lecanto Sandhill area, though not as large as the Annutteliga Hammock, is approximately 777 ha (3 sq mi) in size. Logging of the turkey oaks through this area has kept the mid-story from becoming overgrown. A prescribed burning program would return this property to good quality sandhill. Species recorded to occur on this property include the gopher tortoise, the gopher frog, short-tailed snake and eastern indigo snake. Additional upland mitigation options may be discovered during the design phase of this project. Upland mitigation concepts will be finalized at that time. Status: The FDOT, Turnpike District is now known as the Florida’s Turnpike Enterprise (FTE). This commitment is modified to reflect the purchase of the Annutteliga Hammock and the Lecanto Sandhills by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and these lands no longer being available for mitigation for Suncoast Parkway 2. Mitigation of impacts to upland habitat will involve purchasing additional lands for placement into public ownership or contributing funds for the preservation and management of upland habitats in public ownership. Coordination with the state and federal regulatory and resource agencies will continue through the permitting phase of this project. Constructive input from these agencies will be incorporated into the project planning to maximize the effectiveness of the land acquisition for the greatest ecological benefit. 3. Wetland Mitigation The primary wetland impacts are in the northern portion of the project area. The majority of the wetlands in this area are small isolated marshes. Most impacts are to the edge of the wetland and are less than one acre in size. Recent legislation has passed regarding wetland mitigation for FDOT projects. This new legislation (FS 373.4137, as created by SB 1986) essentially requires that DOT will pay a total of $75,000 (adjusted periodically for inflation) to the FDEP and the Water Management Districts for each acre of wetland impacted by a project. Conceptual mitigation plan options are proposed through the Suncoast Parkway – Project 2’s partnering process, for the FDEP and SWFWMD’s consideration in preparing their mitigation plan under FS 373.4137. Three options are suggested at this time.

20

One option for wetland mitigation would be the establishment of a mitigation bank or the use of an existing mitigation bank within the Suncoast region. A second option would be restoration of altered wetland systems within the project vicinity. Restoration is often preferred over creation based on the greater likelihood of success. Field review of the project area did not readily identify any potential areas for restoration. Since the wetlands in the project vicinity are primarily isolated, restoration would be scattered and for this reason may not be feasible. A third option would be similar to the upland mitigation concept, consisting of preservation. Though it would be advantageous to mitigate for wetland impacts at the same location as the upland mitigation, this may not be feasible as the two best upland mitigation locations, the Annutteliga Hammock and the Lecanto Sandhills, lie on the Brooksville Ridge with few to no existing wetlands. The Cross Florida Greenway (Phase II) proposed CARL purchase contains wetland areas and it may be possible to work out a wetland mitigation agreement by contributing funds toward the purchase of this CARL project. Status: The Florida’s Turnpike Enterprise (FTE), (formerly the FDOT, Turnpike District) proposed the project’s impact for inclusion under F.S. 373.4137 to SWFWMD. The SWFWMD originally deferred development of a suitable mitigation plan until a time closer to the expected permit submittal. In 2008, SWFWMD delisted the project from F.S. 373.4137. FTE will develop an appropriate mitigation plan to offset the unavoidable wetland impacts during the permitting process. All options remain viable. 4. Additional Species – Specific Mitigation Additional mitigative measures will be taken during the design phase on a species-specific basis to avoid and minimize impacts to listed species. These measures are discussed below. Gopher Tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus) – Some special fencing will be evaluated for the length of the project within suitable habitat to prevent the gopher tortoises, which are abundant in the sandhills and particularly concentrated in areas of the power line corridor, from entering the right-of-way and potentially being killed. The fencing should be in place prior to the onset of construction. The Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission (FGFWFC) will determine the type of permit and mitigation that will be utilized prior to construction. Status: The FGFWFC is now known as Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC). This commitment remains unchanged. Florida Gopher Frog (Rana capito aesopus) – In accordance with FS 373.4137, as created by SB 1986, the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD) and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) will develop a mitigation plan for wetland dependant listed species during the design phase of this project. One option to mitigate potential impacts to the gopher frog could involve an analysis of seasonal ponds potentially utilized for breeding by the gopher frog and the impacts of the project on these wetlands either directly or through elimination of

21

access. Based on this analysis, additional suitable breeding ponds could be created at appropriate location to benefit the gopher frog. Status: The Florida Gopher Frog now has the scientific name Rana capito. The FTE will avoid potential gopher frog seasonal ponds to the greatest extent practical. Impacts to this species will be permitted by Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC) and SWFWMD. In 2008, SWFWMD delisted the project from F.S. 373.4137. Appropriate mitigation for the impacts will be provided. FTE will evaluate opportunities to create replacement habitat within the project area. Southeastern American Kestrel (Falco sparverius paulus) – Impacts to the Southeastern American kestrel can be partially compensated for through establishing and maintaining suitable nest boxes in the mitigation/preservation area. Research shows that kestrels readily utilize nest boxes and may even prefer these artificial dwellings. It is recommended that these nest boxes be located adjacent to the power line. Kestrels seem to prefer the openness of the power line and nest boxes located along power lines have been successful. Maintenance of the nest boxes will be turned over to the FGFWFC or a local agency or group with appropriate interests and resources. Status: The FGFWFC is now known as Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC). The status of this commitment remains unchanged. Florida black bear (Ursus americanus floridanus) – The inclusion of a wildlife crossing in the Suncoast Parkway – Project 2 just north of US 98 has been discussed with the EAC and is included in the design concept. This crossing would accommodate wildlife movements between Chassahowitzka National Wildlife Refuge, Annutteliga Hammock and the Withlacoochee State Forest, though only the Chassahowitzka National Wildlife Refuge currently supports a black bear population. Status: The status of this commitment remains unchanged. Florida scrub jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens coerulescens) – Additional surveys in the vicinity of Scrub Jay Groups #2 and #4 are recommended closer to the time of construction to better define the territorial boundaries and to document changes which may occur over time. The territory of Scrub Jay Group #3 may extend to near the proposed right-of-way for the CR 495 interchange. Since the CR 495 interchange would not be constructed until later, continued monitoring of this group will provide a basis for finalizing the design of the interchange so that territorial impacts would be avoided. Determinations on mitigation for the Scrub Jay will be made based on the results of these additional surveys. The Rhoades tract, located west of US 19 and near the Withlacoochee River, has been identified as a potential area for off-site mitigation of impacts to the Florida Scrub Jay. Status: Scrub jay surveys were completed, for the Fall 2007, Spring 2008, Fall 2008 and the Spring 2009 seasons. Based on these data, the species no longer occurs in the project area and this commitment may no longer apply. The FTE will conduct scrub jay surveys during the future final design and construction phases to confirm presence.

22

Eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon corais couperi) – To minimize potential impacts to the Eastern indigo snake, provisions will be made in the construction contract advising the contractor of precautionary measures. Indigo snakes in the project area could be unintentionally killed during construction activities. Because their habits confound capture, no effort will be made to relocate indigo snakes prior to construction. The construction contract will include special provisions for supplying construction personnel with habitat and species descriptions and a warning of the penalties for intentional harm. Contact with any individuals discovered during construction will be avoided. If nests are discovered, FDOT biologists will be notified immediately and will coordinate with US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and FGFWFC in accordance with Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended through 1982. To address agency concerns, the FDOT Turnpike District has committed to implement the following protection measures:

• Provide eastern indigo snake educational information to employees prior to the initiation of any clearing, construction or tortoise relocation activities. An educational exhibit to be approved by the USFWS shall be posted at the site accessible to all employees and a handout will be distributed to all employees.

• The DOT Turnpike District will submit to the USFWS an education plan on how the impact will be minimized through employee education 90 days (or as soon as practicable) before any land clearing or construction activities begin. The FDOT Turnpike District shall post and distribute educational information to all its workers. The exhibit and brochure should include photographs of the eastern indigo snake, information on life history and legal protection of the species in Florida, how to avoid impact to the species, and agency telephone numbers.

• All construction activities shall cease if live indigo snakes are found within the project area. Work may resume after the snake or snakes are allowed to leave the area on their own.

• Locations of live sightings shall be reported to the USFWS Jacksonville Field Office at (904) 769-0552.

• If a dead eastern indigo snake is found on the project site, the snake shall be frozen as soon as possible and the FDOT Turnpike District shall notify the Jacksonville Field Office immediately for further instructions.

Status: FTE will mitigate for potential impacts to the eastern indigo snake in accordance with the standard protection measures as outlined in the following website: http://www.fws.gov/northflorida/IndigoSnakes/indigo-snakes.htm. The FDOT, Turnpike District is now known as the Florida’s Turnpike Enterprise (FTE). The FGFWFC is now known as Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC). 5. Section 7 Consultation Section 7 Consultation will be initiated by the USACOE during the permitting process in the design phase. Please refer to the USFWS letter of December 13, 1996 included in Appendix A. Status: FTE will consult with USFWS under Section 10 of the ESA (1973) as amended. Please refer to the ACOE letter dated May 28, 2009.

23

6. Listed Plants There are a number of federal and state listed plants with the potential to occur within the project area. Listed plants are typically found in unique areas or rare natural habitats. Based on the list of plants introduced through the Partnering meetings, scrub areas and areas where the limestone is close to the surface were the most likely locations to encounter listed plants within the project area. As part of the PD&E Study, all wetland areas within the proposed right-of-way have been investigated for the presence of listed plants. During surveys for the Florida scrub jay, transects covered all scrub areas and the presence of listed plants were noted. Additionally, due to the high number of listed plants which typically occur near limestone outcrops or where limestone is near the surface, areas of this nature within the proposed right-of-way were investigated for the presence of listed plants. Though there are a few listed plants with the potential to occur in the sandhills, there were no organized surveys for these plants. Impacts to listed plants of the sandhills will be mitigated through preservation and management of sandhill areas such as the Annutteliga Hammock or the Lecanto Sandhills. Additional mitigation measures may be determined in the future if listed plants are found to occur within the proposed right-of-way that require specific habitat. There will be coordination with the Department of Agriculture in accordance with Chapter 581.185 F.S. The state-endangered pond spice has been observed within the proposed right-of-way. Special measures are recommended to minimize impacts for these plants. It is recommended that the areas surrounding the state-endangered pond spice be fenced during construction to reduce disturbance and Best Management Practices be utilized to minimize the effects of sedimentation and erosion. Appropriate measures should be taken to maintain the hydrology of the wetlands where the pond spice occurs. There will be coordination with the Department of Agriculture on the endangered pond spice in accordance with Chapter 581.185 F.S. Status: FTE will avoid impacts to pond spice and other listed species, as observed, to the greatest extent practical. If impacts are unavoidable, the FTE will consult with appropriate conservation organizations to potentially relocate individuals or collect various plant components for long term survival of the species. 7. General Wildlife Wildlife in general could benefit through utilization of oversize culverts in suitable locations that could serve as wildlife passages in addition to the wildlife underpass recommended to be located within the Annutteliga Hammock north of US 98. Through the partnering process, locations where oversized culverts would potentially benefit wildlife are being preliminarily investigated with the final decision on appropriate locations to be made during this project’s design phase. Status: This commitment remains unchanged. 8. General Vegetation The FDOT Turnpike District is committed to maintain as much native vegetation as possible in the vicinity of the wildlife crossing and oversized culverts.

24

Status: This commitment remains unchanged. The FDOT, Turnpike District is now known as the Florida’s Turnpike Enterprise (FTE). 9. Smoke Management A Draft Smoke Management Plan for the project was developed during the EAC/Partnering Process. The FDOT Turnpike District will continue to work with the Division of Forestry to finalize a Smoke Management Plan for this project. Status: This commitment remains unchanged. The FDOT, Turnpike District is now known as the Florida’s Turnpike Enterprise (FTE). 10. Continuation of the Partnering Process The FDOT Turnpike District is committed to the continuation of the EAC and the Partnering Process during the design phase of the project. Status: The commitment is modified to state as follows: “The Turnpike (FTE) is committed to coordinating with each appropriate environmental agency during the design phase of the project.“ The FDOT, Turnpike District is now known as the Florida’s Turnpike Enterprise (FTE). 11. National Geodetic Survey Monuments The FDOT Turnpike District will comply with the National Geodetic Survey’s request to coordinate the removal of any of their monuments during construction. Please refer to the National Geodetic Survey’s response letter provided in Appendix A. Status: The status of this commitment remains unchanged. The FDOT, Turnpike District is now known as the Florida’s Turnpike Enterprise (FTE). 12. Noise Abatement The FDOT Turnpike District is committed to the construction of feasible noise abatement measures at the interchange of SR 44 and Suncoast Parkway 2 contingent upon the following conditions:

• Detailed noise study during the final design process supports the need for abatement,

• Reasonable cost analyses indicate that the economic cost of the barrier will not exceed the guidelines,

• Community input and input from the owners of the property, regarding desires, types, heights, and location of the barrier has been solicited by the FDOT,

• Preferences regarding compatibility with adjacent land use, particularly as addressed by officials having jurisdiction over such land uses has been noted, and

• Safety and engineering aspects as related to the roadway user and the adjacent property owner have been reviewed.

Status: The FDOT, Turnpike District is now known as the Florida’s Turnpike Enterprise (FTE). A detailed design Noise Study Report was completed in February 2010. It was determined as part of this design phase noise study that the economic cost of noise barriers for the Lecanto Hills mobile home park at the interchange of

25

SR 44 exceeded FDOT guidelines. This design noise study evaluated varying lengths for noise barriers in order to determine if there was a feasible and reasonable design. There was no noise barrier design configuration that was cost reasonable for this project. 13. Meadowcrest Wastewater Treatment Plant The Meadowcrest Wastewater Treatment Plant’s sprayfields are proposed to be expanded to meet the future demand. Suncoast Parkway – Project 2 would impact 8.4 ha (20.8 ac) of these sprayfields. A preliminary mitigation plan has been developed between FDOT Turnpike District and Citrus County and is included as a project commitment. The Turnpike District will finalize the mitigation plan during the Design Phase through further coordination with the County. Status: The status of this commitment remains unchanged. The FDOT, Turnpike District is now known as the Florida’s Turnpike Enterprise (FTE). 14. Proposed Homosassa Wastewater Treatment Site The FDOT Turnpike District will mitigate for the 1.6 acre “corner clip” from the proposed Homosassa Wastewater Treatment Plant site, dependent upon Citrus County’s site plan for the facility. Status: The FDOT, Turnpike District is now known as the Florida’s Turnpike Enterprise (FTE). Preliminary coordination with Citrus County has indicated that the county is not planning to use this site for a wastewater treatment facility; however, the County may want to use this property or other nearby property for the county’s use. The commitment is modified to reflect FTE will continue to coordinate with Citrus County during the final design and right-of-way phases to either mitigate/purchase or swap property for the project’s impact to the county’s property. 15. Homosassa Special Water District Peach Orchard Well Site The proposed Suncoast Parkway – Project 2 is located outside the FDEP wellhead protection zone defined by its Rule 62-521, F.A.C. However, the Homosassa Special Water District’s (HSWD) wellhead protection planning process has identified five-year, ten-year, and ten degree expansion capture zones for its Peach Orchard wells, which are crossed by the preferred alignment. Although no local ordinance has been adopted as a result of HSWD’s wellhead protection planning process, the Turnpike District will consider enhancements to the project’s stormwater management system during the design phase to further minimize the risk of groundwater impacts in the area. Consideration during the design phase of the project will be given to enhancing this stormwater management system within the sub-basin that contains HSWD capture zones to provide special measures for protecting groundwater quality, beyond the minimum requirements of SWFWMD’s Rule 40D-4, F.A.C. The special measures to be considered during design would include location of stormwater retention pond(s) outside the 5-year capture zone and utilization of geo-fabric or other impermeable materials for stormwater conveyances across the capture zones. By directing all runoff via impermeable conveyances to ponds outside the 5year capture zone, the potential for contamination of the Peach Orchard wells is nearly eliminated.

26

Status: The FDOT, Turnpike District is now known as the Florida’s Turnpike Enterprise (FTE). FTE has received a confirmation letter (signed April 13, 2009) from HSWD that the proposed design fulfills this commitment to locate ponds outside of the 5-year capture zone. 16. Interchange Spacing The conceptual design of the Preferred Alternative represents the “ultimate” facility, meaning the Suncoast Parkway – Project 2 would accommodate the projected traffic for the design year (2023). The FDOT Turnpike District is committed to initially constructing interchanges where state roads intersect the project at US 98, SR 44 and US 19. Construction of the interchanges at Cardinal Street and CR 495 would occur when traffic is sufficient to warrant their construction. The County and the FDOT Turnpike District will coordinate the timing and construction of the Cardinal Street and CR 495 interchanges. Status: This commitment remains unchanged. The FDOT, Turnpike District is now known as the Florida’s Turnpike Enterprise (FTE).

• No new commitments are required for the project. VII. PERMITS STATUS The following permits will be required prior to construction of the Suncoast Parkway:

• Environmental Resource Permit – Southwest Florida Water Management District • Standard Generic Construction Permit – Florida Department of Environmental

Protection • Gopher Tortoise Relocation Permit – Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation

Commission • Special Purpose Permit for impact to State Listed Species – Florida Fish and

Wildlife Conservation Commission • Section 7 or Section 10 Endangered Species Act Consultation – United States

Fish and Wildlife Service • State Historic Preservation Office Clearance

27

ATTACHMENT 1

28

Attachment 1.A.3 – Contamination The approved 1998 SEIR identified 23 potential contamination sites within the study area evaluated. Twelve of these 23 sites were assessed a potential contamination risk ranking of medium (11) or high (1). As part of the re-evaluation process, the project team evaluated the project corridor for areas with the potential for contamination. The evaluation encompassed the area extending 300 feet outside of the proposed right-of-way, for a total width of 1000 feet for the length of the proposed alignment. The evaluation process was performed pursuant to FHWA’s Technical Advisory T 6640.8A, FDOT’s PD&E Manual, Part 2, Chapter 22 and standard environmental assessment practices including regulatory agency records review, site reconnaissance, literature review and personal interviews of individuals and business owners within the project limits.

A total of 29 potential contamination sites were identified within the study area evaluated. These sites are comprised of 10 of the original 23 sites and 19 new sites. Of the original 23 potential contamination sites, 13 sites are outside the 1,000-foot wide study area evaluated, six (6) have reduced rankings (one high ranked site has been changed to a medium ranking, and five medium ranked sites have been changed to low rankings), and four (4) sites have remained unchanged (two medium rankings and two low rankings).

Of the 29 sites, nine of the sites were assessed a potential contamination risk ranking of medium (8) or high (1). Table A.3.1 summarizes all of the potential contamination sites within 300 feet of the proposed right-of-way. Of these sites, six are sites that have changed since the approved 1998 SEIR, 19 are new sites and four (4) are sites where the ranking remains the same as the approved 1998 SEIR.

Table A.3.1 – Potential Contamination Sites within 300 feet of the Proposed Right-of-Way

Map ID* Site Approved 1998 SEIR

Risk Ranking Reevaluation Risk Ranking

1 Closed Chicken Farm Medium Medium 4 C&D Landfill Medium Low 12 Lecanto Hills Mobile Home Park Low Low 15 Damrons Auto Salvage Medium Low 17 Citrus Sand and Debris Medium Low 19 Pine Ridge Illegal Dump Site Medium Low

21 Crystal River Quarries, Inc. (Red Level Dolomite)

Low Low

22 Basswood Avenue Illegal Dump Site Medium Medium

23 Maylen Ave. Cattle Dip Vat High Medium 24 Etna Turpentine Camp N/A Medium 25 Illegal Dump Site N/A High 26 RIP C&D and Sand Mine N/A Low 27 Sand Mine N/A No 28 Progress Energy Substation N/A Low

29

Map ID* Site Approved 1998 SEIR

Risk Ranking Reevaluation Risk Ranking

29 FGT Compressor Station 26 N/A Low

30 Crystal River Quarries (Maylen Mine)

N/A Low

31 Maylen Property N/A Medium 32 Allen Site RAF N/A Low 33 Former Limerock Mine N/A No

34 Meadowcrest Water Treatment Plant N/A Low

35 Meadowcrest Waste Water Treatment Plant N/A Low

36 Pig Farm/Residence N/A Medium

37 Crystal Acres Waste Water Treatment Plant N/A No

20 Iguana Path Illegal Dump Sites Medium Low 38 CSX Rail Corridor N/A Medium 39 Progress Energy Substation N/A Low

40 North Bull Townsend Point Illegal Dump Sites N/A Medium

41 Crystal River Precast Plant N/A No 42 Shell (former Texaco) N/A No

* Map IDs less than 24 reflect the identification number from the approved 1998 SEIR A Level II field screening should be conducted for the nine potential contamination sites with risk rankings of medium or high. This does not change the recommendations included in the approved 1998 SEIR.

Attachment 1.A.5 – Floodplains The approved 1998 SEIR identified an area of 21.4 acres of encroachment into the 100-year floodplain, with a volume of 31.52 acre-feet, all located north of CR 486. During the design process, more definitive data were obtained from field surveys of potential floodplain areas. These data have resulted in increased and different impacts to existing floodplains within the project area. Total floodplain impacts of the proposed Suncoast Parkway 2 project are 34.6 acres with a total volume of 80.91 acre-feet.

The difference in floodplain impact volumes between the approved 1998 SEIR and the current design is a result of updated contour information, survey data, and refined design of the roadway.

30

Attachment 1.A.6 – Infrastructure The approved 1998 SEIR identified the utility agencies owning facilities within the project area. Utility contacts have been initiated with all utilities located within the corridor. Table A.6.1 summarizes the utilities within the corridor.

Table A.6.1 – Utilities in the Study Area

Utility Type Approved 1998 SEIR Re-evaluation Electric Florida Power Corporation Progress Energy Florida Electric Withlacoochee Electric

Cooperative Withlacoochee River Electric Cooperative

Electric Synergetic Design, Inc. Water & Sewer Hernando County Utilities Water & Sewer Citrus County Water & Sewer Citrus County Utilities Division Water & Sewer Southern States Utilities Florida Governmental Utility

Authority Water & Sewer City of Crystal River Water &

Sewer No facilities

Water & Sewer Homosassa Special Water District Board

Homasassa Special Water District Board

Telephone Sprint/United Telephone of Florida

Embarq

Telecommunications N/A Level 3 Communications ITS N/A Florida Department of

Transportation Telephone N/A AT&T Florida Cable Television Time Warner Cable BrightHouse Networks Natural Gas Florida Gas Company Natural Gas N/A Florida Gas Transmission

Company Natural Gas N/A Central Florida Gas Natural Gas N/A Progress Energy Florida Mining N/A Florida Rock Industries,

Inc./Vulcan Materials, Inc. Water & Sewer N/A Florida Governmental Utility

Authority Water & Sewer N/A Severn Trent Services Progress Energy is currently conducting an evaluation to determine the location of a potential new transmission facility in the corridor. One potential location for the new transmission facilities is within and/or adjacent to the existing Progress Energy right-of-way and easements. Recent coordination with Florida’s Turnpike Enterprise indicates that this location may not be the preferred corridor for the new transmission facility. The location of the new transmission facility is being coordinated with the design of Suncoast Parkway 2.

31

Florida Gas Transmission is evaluating the installation of a second 36-inch natural gas line in the general vicinity of the existing pipeline. The location of the new gas transmission facility is being fully coordinated with the design of Suncoast Parkway 2. The utilities which are impacted by the Suncoast Parkway 2 will be relocated during the construction process. Attachment 1.A.8 – Special Designations In 2006, the Suncoast Parkway from Van Dyke Road in Hillsborough County to US 98 in Hernando County was designated as a Florida Scenic Highway. Attachment 1.A.10 – Wetlands The approved 1998 SEIR identified 16.50 acres of wetland impacts within the project area. During the design process, alignment revisions, pond and access road revisions, and wetland jurisdictional determinations by regulatory agencies, the wetland impacts have changed. Total direct wetland impacts of the proposed Suncoast 2 project are 28.22 acres and secondary impacts are 2.08 acres.

Attachment 1.A.11 – Wildlife and Habitat The approved 1998 SEIR identified several flora and fauna species which may be impacted by the proposed project. The impacted species were identified as gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus), Southeastern American kestrel (Falco sparverius paulus), Eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon corais couperi), Sherman’s fox squirrel (Sciurus niger shermani), Florida pine snake (Pituophis melanoleucus), gopher frog (Rana capito), Florida mouse (Podomys floridanus), Florida scrub jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens), Florida burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia), short-tailed snake (Stilosoma extenuatum), bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), Florida black bear (Ursus americanus floridanus), Florida sandhill crane (Grus canadensis pratensis), American alligator (Alligator mississippiensis), wading birds including the wood stork (Mycteria americana), little blue heron (Egretta caerulea), snowy egret (Egretta thula), tri-colored heron (Egretta tricolor), reddish egret (Egretta rufescens), limpkin (Aramus guarauna), roseate spoonbill (Platalea ajaja) and white ibis (Eudocimus albus), and pond spice (Litsea aestivalis). Additional surveys for threatened and endangered species and species of special concern as well as their habitat indicated there has been minimal change to the existing habitat available for these species. As part of the design process, surveys have been conducted for the species cited above as well as the black skimmer (Rynchops niger), brown pelican (Pelicanus occidentalis), Homosassa shrew (Sorex longirostris eionis), least tern (Sterna antillarum), Peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus) and the red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis). Extensive surveys were conducted for the Florida scrub jay, gopher tortoise and pond spice. These surveys indicated that the Florida scrub jays located when the approved 1998 SEIR was completed are no longer resident in the study area. The results of these surveys are included in the project files. Gopher tortoise surveys were conducted during the same period as the Florida scrub jay surveys, resulting in a number of burrows and animals being located. The gopher tortoise has been elevated by the state of Florida from a species of special concern to a threatened species and mitigation will

32

be required during the permitting process for the project. Additional listed species such as Sherman fox squirrel, eastern indigo snake, Florida pine snake, gopher frog, Florida mouse, Florida burrowing owl, short-tailed snake, and the Florida black bear, will be permitted using the FFWCC granture permit process. Three state-listed protected plant species have been identified within the Sugarmill Woods portion of the Withlacoochee State Forest. Two species, trailing milkvine (Matelea pubiflora) and showy dawnflower (Stylisma abdita), are listed as Endangered, and one species, garberia (Garberia heterophylla), is listed as Threatened. While these species have not been observed within the project corridor, additional field activities will be conducted to determine their presence/absence. If listed species are impacted by construction, Florida’s Turnpike Enterprise will notify the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services prior to construction initiation. Preliminary surveys completed in the fall of 2007 indicate pond spice exists within seven of the wetlands within the project corridor. Florida’s Turnpike Enterprise will notify the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services concerning potential pond spice impacts and mitigation. The approved 1998 SEIR indicated a Section 7 Consultation under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 as amended should be conducted for the listed species present in the study area. Coordination with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers indicates there are no wetlands under their jurisdiction and a Section 7 Consultation under the ESA is not the appropriate effort. A Section 10 Consultation under ESA will be undertaken with USFWS as part of the permitting process to identify the appropriate mitigation for these species. Attachment 1.B.1 – Historic/Archaeological The approved 1998 SEIR did not identify any historic or archaeological sites eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places due to the distance between the sites and the proposed roadway or due to the common design types, alterations, or loss of historic content. The Cultural Resource Assessment Survey was updated for the project as part of this reevaluation and identified the Etna Turpentine Camp as being eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. The Florida National Register Review Board met on September 6, 2009 and found that the Etna Turpentine Camp met the criteria for this listing. The State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) submitted the formal approved nomination to the Keeper of the National Register in Washington D.C. The nomination was subsequently approved on December 10, 2009 thereby placing the Etna Turpentine Camp on the National Register of Historic Places. An additional cultural resources assessment was completed as part of this reevaluation to include the proposed pond locations. One previously recorded archaeological site and a new archaeological site were located and evaluated during the assessment. Based on the results, the sites have been determined not to represent significant archaeological properties. This report was submitted to SHPO and a final concurrence letter dated June 15, 2010 (included at end of Attachment 1) was received. The concurrence letter included documentation of additional work that will need to take place

33

prior to project construction. The Turnpike Enterprise is committed to completing these additional studies. Attachment 1.B.2 – Recreation Areas The approved 1998 SEIR identified existing recreation areas including the Homosassa Tower in the Chassahowizka Wildlife Refuge and Bicentennial Park. These areas remain unchanged. In addition, the Annutteliga Hammock tract and the Lecanto Sandhills tract have been purchased as conservation land by the State of Florida. A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was executed on August 3, 1998 between Florida’s Turnpike Enterprise (then Florida’s Turnpike District) and the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund of the State of Florida. This MOU addressed the Suncoast Parkway construction through the Annutteliga Hammock tract. The MOU may be modified to address the construction through the Lecanto Sandhills tract. Attachment 1.C.5 – Relocation The approved 1998 SEIR stated that the proposed project would require right-of-way taken from 504 individual parcels, and would result in 100 residential relocations, two business relocations, and the acquisition of two billboard signs. Engineering design changes have reduced the number of impacted parcels from 504 to 392. The 392 impacted parcels include 121 improved parcels which were referred to as relocations in the 1998 approved SEIR. The 121 improved parcels are further categorized as 117 residential, two commercial and two billboards. These project impacts are required for construction of the Suncoast Parkway 2. Attachment 1.D.1 – Noise The approved 1998 SEIR committed to the construction of feasible noise abatement measures at the interchange of SR 44 (Lecanto Hills mobile home park) pending the outcome of a detailed design noise study. The design phase noise study was conducted in 2009. The noise study report was completed in February 2010. This traffic noise study included an analysis of the Lecanto Hills mobile home park to determine where traffic noise impacts occurred and to evaluate noise barriers. This design noise study report evaluated varying designs of noise barriers adjacent to Lecanto Hills mobile home park to determine if there was a feasible and reasonable configuration. In addition, the design noise study report included an analysis of the entire corridor to account for small alignment shifts, other design features that varied from the PD&E conceptual design and to assure that all noise sensitive sites that were present prior to the approved 1998 SEIR were evaluated using the latest criteria. It was determined that there is no cost reasonable design for noise barriers at Lecanto Hills mobile home park or any of the other impacted noise sensitive sites adjacent to the project area. In summary, noise levels were evaluated for 349 residences and a medical facility as part of this design noise study. Noise levels at three residences were predicted to reach or exceed the 66 decibel (dBA) level for the year 2036 Build Alternative. Compared to existing conditions, noise levels at 43 residences (includes the three residences that reached or exceeded 66 dBA) are expected to experience a substantial increase in

34

traffic noise (i.e. 15 dBA or more) above existing conditions as a result of this project. A noise barrier analysis was performed for the 43 residences identified as impacted. Noise barriers were determined not be cost reasonable primarily because the low density of residential development limits the number of residences that can be provided at least a 5 dBA reduction. At the impacted residential area with the highest density (Lecanto Hills mobile home park), noise barriers were ineffective primarily because of noise generated on nearby SR 44. Consequently, noise barriers were not determined to be reasonable and feasible and are not proposed at any location within the project limits. The design phase noise study report is on file at the FDOT Turnpike Enterprise office.

Documents

IV. CHANGES IN IMPACT STATUS OR DOCUMENT COMPLIANCE · CHANGES IN IMPACT STATUS OR DOCUMENT COMPLIANCE ... the interchange at Crystal Oaks Drive to a ... Sec 1 Ramp D Sec 1 S Gordon