STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (FDOT) TYPE 2 CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION DETERMINATION FORM

Transcription

1 STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (FDOT) TYPE 2 CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION DETERMINATION FORM 1. GENERAL INFORMATION County: Miami-Dade Project Name: SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study Project Limits: I-75 to Golden Glades Interchange (GGI) Project Numbers / / P (SR 826) ETDM (if applicable)/financial Management/Federal-Aid 2. PROJECT PURPOSE AND NEED a. Purpose and Need: See Section 2.1 and Section 2.2 b. Proposed Improvements: See Section 2.3 c. Project Planning Consistency: See below and attached pages from Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), 2014 State TIP (STIP), & 2035 Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) Cost Feasible Plan (CFP)* Currently Adopted CFP- LRTP Y PHASE PE (Final Design) COMMENTS SR 826 from NW 154 th Street to GGI ( ) with funding for PD&E. SR 826 from NW 154 th Street to NW 17 th Avenue ( ) with funding for Preliminary Engineering and Right-of-Way. SR 826 from NW 17 th Avenue to GGI ( ; ; ; ; ; ) included in LRTP with funding for Preliminary Engineering, Right-of-Way and Construction. Currently Approved TIP R/W Y Y Y Currently Approved STIP TIP/STIP $ : $3,100, : $6,050, : $6,500, : $5,500, : Y $6,900, : $11,388, $2,790, : $3,413, : $3,672, : $18,000,000 TIP/STIP FY N/A Construction N N N/A N/A N/A Pages from TIP/STIP/LRTP are included in Appendix A) COMMENTS TIP funding = STIP funding

2 3. CLASS OF ACTION a. Class of Action: b. Other Actions: [X] Type 2 Categorical Exclusion [ ] Section 4(f) Evaluation [X] Section 106 Consultation [X] Endangered Species Biological Assessment c. Public Involvement: 1. [ ] A public hearing is not required, therefore, approval of this Type 2 Categorical Exclusion constitutes acceptance of the location and design concept for this project. 2. [X] A public hearing was held on November 18, 2014 and a transcript is included. Approval of this determination constitutes location and design concept acceptance for this project. [ ] An opportunity for a public hearing was afforded and a certification of opportunity is included. Approval of this determination constitutes acceptance of the location and design concepts for this project. 3. [ ] A public hearing will be held and the public hearing transcript will be provided at a later date. Approval of this determination DOES NOT constitute acceptance of the project s location and design concepts. [ ] An opportunity for a public hearing will be afforded and a certification of opportunity will be provided at a later date. Approval of this determination DOES NOT constitute acceptance of the project s location and design concepts. d. Cooperating Agency: [ ] COE [ ] USCG [ ] FWS [ ] EPA [ ] NMFS [X] NONE 4. REVIEWERS' SIGNATURES FDOT Project Manager / / Date FDOT Environmental Administrator or Designee / / Date 5. FHWA CONCURRENCE (For) Division Administrator or Designee / / Date

3 6. IMPACT EVALUATION Impact Determination* S N N N Topical Categories i o o o Basis for Decision* g t n i S e n i v g A. SOCIAL & ECONOMIC 1. Land Use Changes [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] See Attachment 6.A.1 2. Community Cohesion [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] See Attachment 6.A.2 3. Relocation Potential [ ] [X] [ ] [ ] See Attachment 6.A.3 4. Community Services [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] See Attachment 6.A.4 5. Nondiscrimination Considerations [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] See Attachment 6.A.5 6. Controversy Potential [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] See Attachment 6.A.6 7. Scenic Highways [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] 8. Farmlands [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] B. CULTURAL 1. Section 4(f) [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] See Attachment 6.B.1 2. Historic Sites/Districts [ ] [X] [ ] [ ] See Attachment 6.B.2 3. Archaeological Sites [ ] [X] [ ] [ ] See Attachment 6.B.3 4. Recreation Areas [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] See Attachment 6.B.4 C. NATURAL 1. Wetlands [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] See Attachment 6.C.1 2. Aquatic Preserves [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] 3. Water Quality [ ] [X] [ ] [ ] See Attachment 6.C.3 4. Outstanding FL Waters [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] 5. Wild and Scenic Rivers [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] 6. Floodplains [ ] [X] [ ] [ ] See Attachment 6.C.6 7. Coastal Zone Consistency [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] See Attachment 6.C.7 8. Coastal Barrier Resources [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] 9. Wildlife and Habitat [ ] [X] [ ] [ ] See Attachment 6.C Essential Fish Habitat [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] See Attachment 6.C.10 D. PHYSICAL 1. Noise [ ] [X] [ ] [ ] See Attachment 6.D.1 2. Air Quality [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] See Attachment 6.D.2 3. Construction [ ] [X] [ ] [ ] See Attachment 6.D.3 4. Contamination [ ] [X] [ ] [ ] See Attachment 6.D.4 5. Aesthetic Effects [ ] [ ] [X] [ ] See Attachment 6.D.5 6. Bicycles and Pedestrians [ ] [X] [ ] [ ] See Attachment 6.D.6 7. Utilities and Railroads [ ] [X] [ ] [ ] See Attachment 6.D.7 8. Navigation [ ] [ ] [ ] [X] a. [X] FHWA has determined that a USCG Permit IS NOT required in accordance with 23 CFR 650, Subpart H. b. [ ] FHWA has determined that a USCG Permit IS required in accordance with 23 CFR 650, Subpart H. * Impact Determination: Sig = Significant; NotSig = Not significant; None = Issue present, no impact; NoInv = Issue absent, no involvement. Basis of decision is documented in the referenced attachment(s).

4 E. PERMITS REQUIRED United States Army Corps of Engineers (COE) - Section 404 Dredge and Fill Permit - Nationwide Permit 14 (Linear Transportation Facilities) - Section 408 Determination South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) - Environmental Resource Permit (ERP) - Right-of-Way (R/W) Occupancy Permit - Water Use Permit (Construction Dewatering) Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) - National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit Railroad Permits (Required for flagging operations due to bridge work over tracks) 7. COMMITMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The following commitments and recommendations have been made by the FDOT and will be adhered to during the final design and/or construction phases: 1. The proposed improvements will provide a clear envelope over the South Florida Rail Corridor (SFRC) when placing bridge piers in order to accommodate the future planned Miami-Dade County Gold Coast Trail. Further coordination with Miami- Dade County Park and Recreation staff regarding the status of this proposed greenway will occur during final design. 2. Further coordination with Miami-Dade County Park and Recreation staff regarding the status of the Gold Coast Trail will occur during final design. 3. The most current version of the Standard Protection Measures for the Eastern Indigo Snake will be included in the construction documents and implemented during construction.

5 4. The most current version of the Standard Manatee Conditions for In-Water Work will be included in the construction documents and adhered to during construction for any canal work. 5. The loss of Wood Stork foraging habitat in the affected stormwater features will be mitigated through construction of new stormwater features within the project area and implementation of construction Best Management Practices (BMPs), or purchase of mitigation credits from an appropriate mitigation bank. This will be coordinated with the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) during final design. 6. Coordination with the Seminole Tribe of Florida and the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida will occur to notify them of the results of the Cultural Resources Assessment Survey (CRAS). In addition, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) will provide copies of this document to each of the Tribes. 7. The FDOT will carry out a Right-of-Way and Relocation Program in accordance with Florida Statute and the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (Public Law as amended by Public Law ). 8. The FDOT will reevaluate the feasibility and reasonableness of noise abatement measures during Final Design if warranted by changes to the project's design. 9. A reassessment of the project corridor for additional sites particularly sensitive to construction noise and/or vibration will be performed during design to ensure that impacts to such sites are minimized. 10. Construction noise and vibration impacts will be minimized by adherence to the controls listed in the latest edition of the FDOT s Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction. Coordination between the FDOT and the operators of any construction noise/vibration sensitive locations identified during design will occur. If construction activities are to occur near the Jackson North Medical

6 Center, alternative construction methods should be considered to reduce construction-related noise or vibration. These methods could include the following: a. Avoid impact pile-driving where possible in vibration-sensitive areas through the use of drilled piles or a sonic/vibratory pile driver where the geological conditions permit their use. b. Avoid vibratory rollers and packers near sensitive areas. c. Select demolition methods not involving impact, where possible. For example, sawing bridge decks in sections that can be loaded onto trucks results in lower vibration levels than impact demolition by pavement breakers. 11. Construction activities for the proposed action may potentially have short-term air quality impacts within the immediate vicinity of the project. Construction activities may generate temporary increases in air pollutant emissions in the form of dust from earthwork and unpaved roads. Such emissions and potential impacts will be minimized by adherence to all applicable State and local regulations and to the latest edition of the FDOT Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction. 12. A Level II Contamination Assessment investigation is warranted during the final design phase for the High and Medium Risk sites adjacent to the proposed construction areas, including any proposed drainage areas outside the FDOT rightof-way, to confirm the existence of soil and/or groundwater contamination at these sites. Additionally, these sites pose a dewatering concern based on their proximity to the project corridor. 13. The FDOT is committed to coordinate with the appropriate regulatory agencies as required throughout the design and permitting phases of the project, as well as during and after construction. Any indirect (secondary) effects to Other Surface Waters located within and outside the project limits, which include turbidity from

7 construction activities, sedimentation resulting from erosion associated with soil disturbance, use of heavy equipment, and staging or stockpiling of materials and equipment, will be minimized. The FDOT will comply with the current National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit criteria, including preparation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Also, Best Management Practices (BMPs) typically associated with road and bridge construction projects will be implemented and maintained throughout all construction activities. 14. Water quality impacts resulting from erosion, sedimentation, and turbidity reduction will also be controlled through measures outlined in the latest edition of the FDOT Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction. The removal of structures and debris will be in accordance with local and State regulation agencies permitting this operation. The Contractor is responsible for methods of controlling pollution on haul roads, in borrow pits, other material pits, and areas used for disposal of waste materials from the project. Temporary erosion control features as specified in Section 104 of the FDOT Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction may consist of temporary grassing, sodding, mulching, sandbagging, slope drains, sediment basins, sediment checks, artificial coverings, and berms. 15. The FDOT will coordinate with Miami-Dade County Public Schools regarding the project schedule at least six months prior to construction, to avoid disruption to school bus transportation routes. 16. The sequence of construction will be planned in such a way as to minimize traffic delays. The project will involve the development and use of a Maintenance of Traffic (MOT) Plan. This Plan will include traffic management and signage, access to local businesses and residences, detour routes, public notification of alternate routes, emergency services coordination and project scheduling. The local news media will be notified in advance of road closings and other construction-related activities, which could excessively inconvenience the community so that business

8 owners, residents, and/or tourists in the area can plan travel routes in advance. A sign providing the name, address, and telephone of an FDOT contact person will be displayed on-site to assist the public in obtaining answers to questions or complaints about project construction. 17. The FDOT will coordinate with both Miami-Dade County Transit and Broward County Transit regarding any temporary deviation of existing bus routes during the construction phase of this project. 18. The FDOT will coordinate with the City of Miami Gardens to participate in a Job Fair in order to facilitate interaction between potential contractors and small and/or disadvantaged business enterprises and encourage local participation on the proposed construction project. 19. The Florida Gas Transmission (FGT) Utility Relocation Assessment Technical Memorandum prepared as part of this PD&E Study identified and evaluated potential routes for the relocation of the existing 24-in. and 18-in. gas mains along the north and south side of SR 826. The FDOT will work with FGT to address the final disposition of the gas mains. As per the FGT Global Settlement Agreement with FDOT, FGT is responsible for the pipe installation cost while FDOT is responsible for the right-of-way cost.

9 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE TYPE 2 CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION DETERMINATION FORM TABLE OF CONTENT... i 1.0 SUMMARY OF PROJECT Project Description Purpose and Need Need for Project Proposed Improvements ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT EVALUATION (ATTACHMENTS) A.1 Land Use Changes A.2 Community Cohesion A.3 Relocation Potential A.4 Community Services A.5 Nondiscrimination Considerations A.6 Controversy Potential B.1 Section 4(f) B.2 Historic Sites/Districts B.3 Archaeological Sites B.4 Recreation Areas C.1 Wetlands C.3 Water Quality C.6 Floodplains C.7 Coastal Zone Consistency C.9 Wildlife and Habitat C.10 Essential Fish Habitat D.1 Noise D.2 Air Quality D.3 Construction SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #: i

10 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion 6.D.4 Contamination D.5 Aesthetic Effects D.6 Bicycles and Pedestrians D.7 Utilities and Railroads FIGURES LIST OF FIGURES PAGE 1-1 Location Map Recommended Typical Sections SR Recommended Typical Sections SR GGI Ultimate C.1 Waterways Map TABLES LIST OF TABLES PAGE 6.A.2-1 Summary of Past PIP Briefings and Presentations A.3-1 Summary of Relocation APPENDICES Appendix A Pages from TIP/STIP/LRTP Appendix B ETDM Summary Report Appendix C CRAS Concurrence Letter Appendix D EPA Sole Source Aquifer Letter SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #: ii

11 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion 1.0 SUMMARY OF PROJECT 1.1 Project Description The Palmetto Expressway is one of the most traveled transportation corridors in Miami- Dade County. This multi-lane expressway extends from US-1 to the Golden Glades Interchange (GGI) for a distance of approximately 25 miles. The project is located along a segment of SR 826 in northern Miami-Dade County, Florida. The overall Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study limits extend from the SR 93/I-75 Interchange (Mile Post ) to the GGI (Mile Post ) a distance of approximately 9.2 miles. Project limits on I-95 extend from NW 135 th Street (Mile Post 10.90) to NW 183 rd Street/Miami Gardens Drive (Mile Post 14.30) for a distance of 3.4 miles; and Florida s Turnpike from SR 826 (Mile Post 0.000) to the existing toll plaza (Mile Post 0.584) a distance of 0.6 miles. Figure 1-1 illustrates the location and limits of the project. The project study corridor passes through or lies immediately adjacent to six governmental jurisdictions: Hialeah Gardens, Miami Lakes, Miami Gardens, North Miami Beach, North Miami and Unincorporated Miami-Dade County. Within the project study limits, the Palmetto Expressway is a six-lane divided limited access facility from I-75 to NW 27 th Avenue; and, from NW 27 th Avenue to the GGI this corridor widens to an eight-lane divided expressway. From I-75 to NW 67 th Avenue, a one-way northbound/eastbound frontage road (NW 167 th Street) runs along the east/south side of the corridor; and from NW 67 th Avenue to the GGI, a one-way frontage road (NW 167 th Street) runs along each side of the facility, providing access to businesses located along the corridor. The Palmetto Expressway provides system-level SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

12 441 NW 12 AVE NW 17 AVE NW 27 AVE NW 37 AVE NW 47 AVE NW 57 AVE NW 67 AVE NW 175 ST MIAMI GARDENS DR N INTERSTATE 95 NW 167 ST NW 32 AVE 826 INTERSTATE NW 151 ST NW 27 AVE OPA LOCKA AIRPORT NW 37 AVE NW 57 AVE 826 NW 67 AVE NW 154 ST END PROJECT NW 135 ST NW 135 ST INTERSTATE 95 BEGIN PROJECT NW 127 ST NW 119 ST RS&H, Inc Blue Lagoon Drive, Suite 200 Miami, Florida SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study From SR93/I-75 to Golden Glades Interchange Project Location Map ETDM NO: FM NO: Figure 1-1

13 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion connections to I-75, Florida s Turnpike, and I-95. In addition to the interchanges with I- 75 and the GGI, there are eight service interchanges along the corridor at the following crossroads: NW 154 th Street, NW 67 th Avenue, NW 57 th Avenue, NW 47 th Avenue, NW 37 th Avenue, NW 27 th Avenue, NW 17 th Avenue, and NW 12 th Avenue. The Golden Glades Interchange is of regional importance providing connectivity to six major principal arterials and/or limited access expressway facilities including Palmetto Expressway, I-95, Florida s Turnpike, SR 9, SR 7/US 441 and NW 167 th Street. The GGI also supports the I-95 Express Lanes System and the future Golden Glades Multimodal Facility, which provides access to inter-county transit service including the existing GGI to Downtown Miami express bus service. The GGI has a direct impact on inter-county travel between Miami-Dade, Broward and Palm Beach Counties and is the backbone for the transportation of goods and services, as well as passenger trips in the northeast region of Miami-Dade County. This interchange is bordered by the City of Miami Gardens to the north and west, the City of North Miami Beach to the east and the Golden Glades Census Designated Place (CDP) and City of North Miami to the south. The South Florida Rail Corridor (SFRC) also traverses the interchange area. This Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study focused on the development and evaluation of Active Traffic Management and Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) strategies, lane additions, express lanes, interchange modifications, express bus transit, as well as the Ultimate GGI Master Plan improvements developed as part of the GGI PD&E Study (FPID: ). The detailed examination of these issues through the PD&E process assures that the FDOT has identified the most cost-feasible, constructible improvements in the final recommended package. SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

14 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion 1.2 Purpose and Objective The primary purpose of this project is to relieve congestion on the SR 826 corridor by increasing capacity, enhance safety by addressing operational, structural and functional deficiencies, and provide additional travel options by improving system connectivity. The improvements consist of the addition of two express lanes and auxiliary lanes, enhanced access to the adjacent frontage roads and improvements to the existing interchanges. One or two lanes would be added in each direction within the existing right-of-way and function as express lanes with a system-to-system connection to the northbound I-95 express lane system at the GGI. The project also includes a direct connection from southbound Florida s Turnpike to the southbound I-95 express lane system. As part of the SR 826 North-South Express Lanes PD&E Study (FPID: ), express lanes would be added to SR 826 between SR 836 and I-75 with a direct connection to/from I-75. On I-75, express lanes would be added from SR 826 in Miami-Dade County to I-595 in Broward County. The existing I-95 express lane system (95 Express) is being extended to Broward Boulevard in Broward County with planned future extensions through Palm Beach County. This project would provide continuity with the planned express lanes on SR 826 south of I-75 and 95 Express as envisioned in the emerging Southeast Florida Express Lanes Network. The overall objectives of this project include the following elements: Enhance safety, mobility and circulation Improve critical access to the Strategic Intermodal System (SIS) Facilities, Freight Activity Centers, Local and Regional Businesses/Hubs of Economic Importance Support and provide an east-west connection for the emerging Southeast Florida Express Lanes Network Incorporate express bus service and multimodal options Address Transportation Systems Management and Operations concerns Address operational and physical deficiencies of the existing interchanges Minimize environmental impacts SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

15 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion In obtaining these objectives, the Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study would satisfy National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) procedures. These measures are a prerequisite for receiving Location Design Concept Acceptance (LDCA) from Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), an essential step in qualifying for the federal funds needed to implement the proposed improvements. The PD&E phase also assures that federal, state and local input have been incorporated into its recommendations. The same is true of the design standards and technologies considered for application or implementation in the corridor. The detailed examination of these issues through the PD&E process assures that the FDOT has identified the most cost-feasible, constructible improvements in the final recommended package. 1.3 Need for Project The need for improvements along the SR 826 relates to traffic congestion, systems continuity/connectivity, safety and existing design criteria deficiencies. The proposed improvements would be designed to meet current FDOT criteria, provide system continuity with adjoining segments of SR 826 and new/improved system-to-system connectivity to adjacent facilities (I-95, I-75 and Florida s Turnpike). The SR 826/Palmetto PD&E Study will evaluate Active Traffic Management and Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) strategies, lane additions, express lanes, major interchange modifications, and express bus transit. The study will determine the number and type of travel lanes and interchange improvements required to accommodate anticipated traffic volumes and improve safety conditions throughout the project corridor. 1.4 Proposed Improvements Based on the results of the alternatives analysis as well as input received from the public, the FDOT identified a Recommended Alternative for the mainline of SR 826 and for each interchange including the GGI. The Recommended Alternative includes: Three general purpose lanes in each direction. Reconstruct and widen the SR 826 SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

16 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion mainline to include three 12-foot general purpose lanes in each direction (See Figure 1-2) One auxiliary lane in each direction. To improve traffic safety and operations, one 12-foot auxiliary lane would be added in each direction between interchanges. The auxiliary lane is typically introduced as a lane add at an upstream interchange followed by a lane drop at the adjacent downstream interchange. Two express lanes in each direction. The express lanes would be separated from the general purpose lanes by a 4-foot buffer. At the western and eastern project limits, the express lanes transition from two lanes to one with a connection to the planned SR 826 North-South Express Lane System and a direct connect ramp to 95 Express at the GGI. Express lane connections. The recommended alternative for the express lanes access points includes one ingress and two egress points in the NB/EB direction and two ingress and one egress points in the WB/SB direction. Access to and from the express lanes would typically be via slip ramps to/from the general purpose lanes. Direct connect ramps will be provided at the GGI (See Figure 1-3). Interchange improvements. Several existing interchanges are proposed to be modified including the GGI. In addition, interchange modifications are proposed for NW 154 th Street, NW 67 th Avenue, NW 57 th Avenue, NW 47 th Avenue, NW 37 th Avenue, NW 27 th Avenue, NW 17 th Avenue, and NW 12 th Avenue. With the exception of NW 154 th Street, all SR 826 overpass bridges will be replaced and the SR 826 mainline will be raised to satisfy current FHWA standards for vertical clearance over cross streets. New stormwater drainage system. The project will include a new stormwater drainage system to satisfy South Florida Water Management District water quantity and quality requirements. SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

17 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion Figure 1 2 Proposed Typical Section SR 826 From I 75 to NW 17 th Avenue Figure 1 3 Proposed Typical Section SR 826 From NW 17 th Avenue to GGI GGI Ultimate Build Alternative (See Figure 1-4) Provide express lane connections between SR 826 and I-95 to and from the north only with modifications to SR 826 mainline between GGI and NW 17 th Avenue to accommodate four general use lanes in each direction SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

18 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion Provide direct express lane connections between Florida s Turnpike and I-95 express southbound lanes and reconstruct I-95 southbound to accommodate new ramp Provide a new ramp for the SR 9/SR 7/US 441 northbound to I-95 northbound movement that merges with the SR 826 eastbound (EB) to I-95 northbound flyover ramp before joining I-95 as a two lane on-ramp Provide an auxiliary lane along I-95 northbound between Golden Glades Interchange and Miami Gardens Drive to increase capacity along mainline Widen the existing I-95 express flyover ramps from one to two lanes in each direction north of the merge/diverge locations with the new SR 826 express lanes flyover ramps Widen SR 826 connector to NW 167 th Street to accommodate two lanes from SR 826 eastbound to NW 167 th Street eastbound Combine and realign the I-95 northbound to SR 7/US 441 northbound and NW 167 th Street eastbound exit ramps Provide NW 2 nd Avenue and NW 167 th Street intersection improvements An extensive Public Involvement Plan (PIP) has been conducted as part of the SR 826 PD&E Study. Regular project briefings were given to elected officials, Homeowners Associations, neighborhood organizations and various area stakeholders throughout the project. The project alternatives evaluation was coordinated with the Project Advisory Committee (PAC) at meetings conducted on June 28, 2012 and August 22, The SR 826 mainline alternatives along with the interchange modification alternatives were discussed in detail with the PAC and the public at the Alternatives Public Meeting conducted on August 21, SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

19 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion Figure 1-4 GGI Ultimate Improvements SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

20 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT EVALUATION Attachment 6.A.1 Land Use Changes The project is surrounded by a mix of land use types. Commercial and residential land uses make up the majority of use proximate to the roadway. Fixed single-family units make up the largest percentage of land use within the quarter-mile buffer (953 acres/31.71%), and less than 5% of the total identified use is presently open land. According to the Miami-Dade County Future Land Use Map, the character of the study area is to remain relatively unchanged. The project's potential adverse effects on land use are anticipated to be minimal. Attachment 6.A.2 Community Cohesion During the ETDM programming screen review, the FDOT District Six assigned to Social issues a degree of effect of Moderate for SR 826 and Minimal for GGI, while the Florida Department of Community Affairs (FDCA) assigned a degree of effect of None to SR 826 and GGI, and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) assigned a degree of effect of Moderate to SR 826 and None to GGI. The FDOT noted that proximate cultural resources, residential use, and the presence of a historically disadvantaged population within the immediate area of SR 826, and adverse impacts to the surrounding GGI neighborhoods and businesses are not anticipated because the improvements are contained within the existing footprint of the interchange. No significant changes are anticipated in community cohesion as a result of this project. The project will not divide neighborhoods, cause social isolation or separate residences from community facilities as the improvements are executed on existing facilities. The proposed improvements are anticipated to enhance access to, and mobility between, the surrounding residential, institutional, and industrial/ commercial areas from the I-95, Florida s Turnpike, SR 826, and Tri-Rail as well as to the local street network, SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

21 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion such as SR 7/US-441/NW 7 th Avenue and SR 9. It is important to note that the project is improving the function of the Golden Glades Park-n-Ride lot for a multimodal transportation center to integrate various transportation modes in the vicinity of the interchange. Positive impacts are anticipated through improvements to local and regional transportation mode interfaces. Possible negative impacts may be direct, such as visual or noise, or indirect, such as induced traffic, and will involve adjacent communities. The proposed improvements will fall within the same footprint of the existing interchange; therefore, impacts to community cohesion are not anticipated. During the PD&E Study, an extensive PIP was conducted to coordinate with all Federal, State and local agencies as well as municipalities and other interest groups. A Public Kickoff Meeting was held for elected/appointed officials and the public in October 2011, and elected officials have been briefed on the status of the project regularly since this time (see matrix below). In August of 2012, the Alternatives Public Workshop (APW) was held to provide interested members of the community the chance to provide feedback on several possible alternatives for the project. The project team also made a presentation about the project at the Norwood Crime Prevention Meeting in October Throughout the life of the project, the team has utilized the Project Advisory Committee (PAC) to gauge public opinion on the project at different phases. The PAC meetings were held in January 2012; June 2012; August 2013; and September In addition to these meetings, the Town of Miami Lakes held a Town Hall Meeting in April 2014 to discuss the addition of noise walls to the project. Below is a summary of all past briefings and presentations for this project: SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

22 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion Table 6.A.2-1 Summary of Past PIP Briefings and Presentations DATE June 20, 2011 June 28, 2011 June 28, 2011 October 27, 2011 October 27, 2011 August 4, 2011 September 1, 2011 MEETING Briefing with North Miami Beach Mayor George Vallejo Briefing with Miami Gardens Mayor Shirley Gibson Briefing with Miami Gardens Commissioner Andre Williams Elected Officials/Agencies Kick-Off Meeting Public Kick-Off Meeting Briefing with Miami-Dade County Commissioner Jean Monestime Briefing with Miami-Dade County Commissioner Jose Pepe Diaz January 31, 2012 Project Advisory Committee (PAC) Meeting #1 June 28, 2012 Project Advisory Committee (PAC) Meeting #2 June 28, 2012 August 21, 2012 October 8, 2012 October 31, 2012 October 29, 2012 Briefing with Town of Miami Lakes Mayor Michael Pizzi Alternatives Public Workshop Presentation at Norwood Crime Prevention Meeting, Miami Gardens Briefing with State Representative Barbara Watson Briefing with State Representative Cynthia Stafford August 22, 2013 Project Advisory Committee (PAC) Meeting #3 April 1, 2014 Miami Lakes Town Hall Meeting September 11, 2014 Project Advisory Committee (PAC) Meeting #4 SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

23 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion Attachment 6.A.3 Relocation Potential The Recommended Alternative for the SR 826 mainline from I-75 to NW 12 th Avenue would impact a total of 108 commercial and residential properties. The majority of impacts would be for lane additions at ramp terminal intersections with only one anticipated full acquisition with relocation. A parcel is generally considered a full acquisition if the construction impact limits encroach on a structure, remove all reasonable access, or require more than 20 percent of the parcel. The Recommended GGI Ultimate improvements require right-of-way acquisition along the west side of I-95, to accommodate the proposed improvements along the Turnpike Connector and I-95 southbound. The reduced roadway footprint would impact 18 total properties, of which, 14 residential properties require full acquisition. Table 6.A.3-1 summarizes the relocations for the Recommended Build Alternative. Table 6.A.3-1 Summary of Relocation Parcel Number Folio Number Property Address Land Use NW 27 Ave Office Building Biscayne Blvd Residential Single Family NE 165 St Residential Single Family NW 6 Ct Residential Single Family NW 6 Ct Residential Single Family NW 6 Ct Residential Single Family NW 6 Ct Residential Single Family NW 6 Ct Residential Single Family NW 6 Ct Residential Single Family NW 6 Ct Residential Single Family NW 6 Ct Residential Single Family NW 6 Ct Residential Single Family NW 6 Ct Residential Single Family NW 147 St Residential Single Family NW 146 St Residential Single Family SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

24 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion In order to minimize the unavoidable effects of R/W acquisition and displacement of people, the FDOT will carry out a R/W and relocation program in accordance with Florida Statute and the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (Public Law as amended by Public Law ). The FDOT provides advance notification of impending R/W acquisition. Before acquiring R/W, all properties are appraised on the basis of comparable sales and land use values in the area. Owners of property to be acquired will be offered and paid fair market value for their property rights. No person lawfully occupying real property will be required to move without at least 90 days written notice of the intended vacation date, and no occupant of a residential property will be required to move until decent, safe and sanitary replacement housing is made available. Made available means that the affected person has either by himself obtained and has the right of possession of replacement housing, or that the FDOT has offered the relocatee decent, safe and sanitary housing which is within his financial means and available for immediate occupancy. At least one relocation specialist is assigned to each highway project to carry out the relocation assistance and payments program. A relocation specialist will contact each person to be relocated to determine individual needs and desires, and to provide information, answer questions, and give help in finding replacement property. Relocation services and payments are provided without regard to race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. All tenants and owner-occupant displacees will receive an explanation regarding all options available to them, such as (1) varying methods of claiming reimbursement for moving expenses; (2) rental replacement housing, either private or publicly subsidized; (3) purchase of replacement housing; and (4) moving owner-occupied housing to another location. SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

25 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion Financial assistance is available to the eligible relocatee to: 1. Reimburse the relocatee for the actual reasonable costs of moving from homes, businesses, and farm operations acquired for a highway project. 2. Make up the difference, if any, between the amounts paid for the acquired dwelling and the cost of a comparable decent, safe and sanitary dwelling available on the private market. 3. Provide reimbursement of expenses, incidental to the purchase of a replacement dwelling. 4. Make payment for eligible increased interest cost resulting from having to get another mortgage at a higher interest rate. Replacement housing payments, increased interest payments, and closing costs are limited to $22,500 combined total. A displaced tenant may be eligible to receive a payment, not to exceed $5,250, to rent a replacement dwelling or room, or to use as down payment, including closing costs, on the purchase of a replacement dwelling. The brochures that describe in detail the FDOT s relocation assistance program and R/W acquisition program are Your Relocation: Residential, Your Relocation: Business, Farms and Nonprofit Organizations, Your Relocation: Signs and The Real Estate Acquisition Process. All of these brochures are distributed at the public hearing and made available upon request to any interested persons. Attachment 6.A.4 Community Services Many community services and employers are located in the immediate vicinity of the existing project corridor likely due to their ease of access to and from the existing expressway network in Southeast Florida. These community services include all grades of schools, colleges, emergency services, medical services, social services, personal services, grocery stores, gasoline stations, shopping centers, libraries, religious SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

26 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion institutions and employers. The proposed improvements would reduce traffic congestion on the existing expressway network and improve access to all of these community services. No community services will be directly impacted by the project. However, the building in which a small tattoo shop is located at NW 27 th Avenue (Parcel 1 in Table 6.A.3-1) would be acquired, possibly resulting in the local loss of employment to up to 3 individuals and a small adverse effect to the community if the tattoo shop is not relocated within it. During the ETDM programming screen review, the FDOT District Six assigned a degree of effect of Minimal to Social issues, while the FDCA and the EPA assigned a degree of effect of None. Based on the proposed improvements, no adverse impacts to community facilities and services are anticipated. There will be temporary impacts in the form of noise, dust, emissions, and traffic disruptions during construction, but traffic will be maintained in the project area. Many of the impacts of the project are anticipated to be positive to the adjacent communities through improvements to local and regional transportation mode interfaces. These improvements will facilitate access to the current community services for the residents, commuters, and service providers. Attachment 6.A.5 Nondiscrimination Considerations The existing demographics along the project area are a heterogeneous mix that is largely composed of African-American and Hispanics, where the majority of the African- Americans are from the Caribbean islands. As a result, outreach efforts using Creole, Spanish and English media such as newsletters, newspaper advertisements and a project website were used as part of the PIP. During the ETDM programming screen review, the FDOT District Six assigned to Social issues a degree of effect of Moderate for SR 826 and Minimal for GGI, while the FDCA assigned a degree of effect of None to SR 826 and GGI, and the EPA assigned a degree of effect of Moderate to SR 826 and None to GGI. SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

27 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion The project has been developed in accordance to Executive Order Improving Access to Services for Persons with Limited English Proficiency (LEP), which serves to ensure that people with limited English proficiency can meaningfully access programs and activities of agencies receiving federal financial assistance. The local population will benefit from the project by the improved access to and from I- 75, I-95, Florida s Turnpike, SR 826, and Tri-Rail as well as the local network of streets such as SR 7/NW 7 th Avenue and SR 9, along with enhanced multimodal features, safety, and aesthetic improvements. This project has been developed in compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and other federal and state nondiscrimination authorities. Neither FDOT nor this project will deny the benefits of; exclude from participation in, or subject to discrimination anyone on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, sex, religion, disability, or family status Attachment 6.A.6 Controversy Potential A PIP was developed for this project to obtain comments and input from the public, government officials, and affected parties and agencies. The major elements of this program to date consist of the AN, the ETDM process, presentations to the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) and subcommittees, coordination with local, county and other state agencies, meetings with area commissioners, Public Kick-Off Meeting, Public Alternatives Workshop, and Project Advisory Committee Meetings (4). The PIP includes a listing of the outreach activities that were performed during the PD&E Study. The prime concerns during these public involvement activities have been the potential noise impacts associated with the addition of traffic lanes and relocation of several properties. During the ETDM programming screen review, the FDOT District Six assigned to Social issues a degree of effect of Moderate for SR 826 and Minimal for GGI, while the FDCA assigned a degree of effect of None to SR 826 and GGI, and the EPA assigned a SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

28 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion degree of effect of Moderate to SR 826 and None to GGI. The proposed improvements also minimize the need for additional right-of-way and associated impacts. Based on this, the PIP, and various environmental analyses, the project is considered to pose little or no controversy potential. Attachment 6.B.1 Section 4(f) The FHWA assigned a degree of effect of Minimal to Section 4(f) Potential through the ETDM review process, and requested that any potential Section 4(f) resources in the area be identified, particularly addressing the potential for National Register of Historic Places (NRHP)-eligible historic sites in the vicinity of the project. The Miami-Dade County Park and Recreation Department provided an AN response letter (dated August 18, 2011), in which they noted there would be no direct impacts to any County parks. They also provided information on the future Gold Coast Trail, contained within the County s (1987) North Dade Greenways Master Plan. According to this Plan, this 20.8-mile trail is to be located within an easement along the SFRC. In the project area, the Master Plan identifies the opportunity for creation of an intermodal access point at the GGI Park-n-Ride Facility, which would offer the opportunity for transfer to other available modes of transit. In their letter, the County requested that the FDOT consider creating an access point, as design plans for the interchange are developed. Coordination regarding the status of this Trail occurred with Miami-Dade County Park and Recreation staff on November 21, 2012 and with Miami-Dade County MPO staff on November 27, The County confirmed that the Trail was still in the conceptual stage, but that it was hoped it could be eventually incorporated as part of the future commuter rail project (South Florida East Coast Corridor Study) during its PD&E Study phase in As of October 2014 this PD&E Study had not commenced. Based on a review of the input obtained from Miami-Dade County staff with FDOT s Central Office, it appears that use under Section 4(f) would not be applicable to the SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

29 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion undertaking with regard to the Gold Coast Trail. On May 16, 2013, a Section 4(f) Determination of Applicability (DOA) was submitted to the FHWA for review, requesting concurrence that Section 4(f) would not apply to the Gold Coast Trail. On May 17, 2013, the FHWA provided concurrence that the proposed GGI project will have no transportation use of the potential Gold Coast Trail and, as a result, Section 4(f) does not apply. Several crossings/ramps over the SFRC currently exist in the project area: SR 826, Florida s Turnpike, and SR 7/US-441. The proposed project improvements related to the SFRC crossing consist of replacement of the Turnpike Connector SB bridge and construction of an additional flyover bridge for the new direct connect ramp for the express lanes. The FDOT has made a commitment that the proposed interchange improvements will provide a clear envelope (i.e., adequate horizontal and vertical clearances) over the SFRC when placing bridge piers in order to accommodate the future planned trail. Therefore, no Section 4(f) impacts to this planned trail are anticipated. The City of North Miami s Milton Littman Park, located at the corner of NE 6 th Avenue and NE 180 th Street, is adjacent to NB I-95 near the northern end of the project limits. Only limited activities are available within this low-activity, neighborhood passive park, consisting 0.3 acres of open green space, a tot lot/equipped play area, and two picnic shelters (with tables and benches). This small park is bounded on nearly all sides by local roads or I-95; the parking area and access is at the local street level, i.e., below elevated I-95. Any potential impacts (visual, noise, etc.) are existing, i.e., no project improvements are proposed that would further impact this site. Based on the noise study performed for the Recommended Alternative, noise impacts will not result from the project in this area. No project improvements (e.g., widening of I-95) are proposed in proximity to the park, and the existing low-level noise barrier on the elevated shoulder of the NB lanes of I-95 will not be modified. Therefore, no direct or constructive use of this park under Section 4(f) is anticipated. SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

30 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion No impacts are anticipated to any other public park or recreational land, wildlife and waterfowl refuge, or historic site. Note that Section 4(f) would apply to significant historic resources only if the Section 106 effects determination resulted in an adverse effect, which it did not (see Section 2.2.2, below). Attachment 6.B.2 Historic Sites/Districts Separate CRAS documents were prepared for the SR 826 PD&E Study and GGI PD&E Study. SR 826 Nine of the previously recorded resources located within the current project APE were also documented during the 2012 survey (8DA11165, 8DA11167, 8DA11613, 8DA12769, 8DA12770, 8DA12772, 8DA12773, 8DA12774, and 8DA12776). The Bunche Park Historic District (8DA11613) was also previously noted by Janus Research in the Miami-Dade County Comprehensive Historic Properties Assessment, the second phase of which was completed in On February 8, 2013, SHPO concurred with the findings of the 2012 study. Thus, two of the previously recorded historic resources, the Sunshine State Arch (8DA11167) and the Bunche Park Historic District (8DA11613) were determined by SHPO to be NRHP eligible. One resource that is located within the Bunche Park Historic District (8DA11613), 1700 NW 167th Street (8DA12769), was determined by SHPO to be a contributing resource to the historic district. In addition, six of the previously recorded resources documented during the 2012 study have also been determined by SHPO to be ineligible for listing in the NRHP individually or as part of a historic district (8DA11165, 8DA12770, 8DA12722, 8DA12773, 8DA12774, 8DA12776). Of the five remaining previously recorded historic resources (8DA6537, 8DA11220, 8DA11420, 8DA11681, 8DA11684), Kennedy Hall (8DA1116), located on the St. Thomas University Campus, is considered individually NRHP eligible. Kennedy Hall retains its historic form and function, and is an excellent example of the MiMo style. The three previously recorded canals (8DA6537, 8DA11420, and 8DA11681) were SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

31 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion determined by SHPO to be ineligible for listing in the NRHP. In addition, the previously recorded Senator Course at Don Shula s Hotel and Golf Club (8DA11684) was determined to be NRHP ineligible by SHPO in Mato s Auto Parts Corporation/ NW 37th Avenue (8DA11220), is still considered ineligible for listing in the NRHP. GGI The CRAS historic resources survey resulted in the identification of 187 historic resources within the Area of Potential Effect (APE). These resources include nine bridges, one canal, one railroad line segment, one parabolic arch, one gas pipeline facility, one historic district, and 173 buildings. Five previously recorded historic resources were identified: Seaboard Air Line (CSX) Railroad (8DA10753), Bunche Park Historic District (8DA11613), Sunshine State Arch (8DA11167), K&A Diagnostic Medical Centers (8DA5388), and Biscayne/C-8 Canal (8DA6537). One resource, K&A Diagnostic Medical Centers has been demolished. The remaining 183 resources identified are newly recorded. Of the 187 identified historic resources, three (3) are considered eligible for listing on the NRHP: CSX Railroad, Bunche Park Historic District, and Sunshine State Arch. In addition, 18 of the 26 buildings located within the portion of the historic district in the project APE are contributing resources to the historic district. The CSX Railroad segment within the project APE was constructed circa This segment of intact railroad line still follows its historic route, and also retains its historic appearance as a single set of tracks on gravel ballast. This segment was not previously recorded, but was given the same site file number as adjacent parts of the railroad line in Miami-Dade County that are not located within the project APE. The CSX Railroad was previously determined to be NRHP eligible by the SHPO in 2010 due to its contributions to the patterns of development and transportation in Florida. The Bunche Park Historic District contains approximately 1,300 contributing buildings and 400 non-contributing buildings. Twenty-six buildings are located within the SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

32 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion boundaries of the historic district and the project APE, 18 of which are contributing resources. Bunche Park is a good example of Post-World War II housing in Miami- Dade County, and further, the neighborhood retains its historic character. It is also significant in the area's African American history, as the neighborhood was one of the first and largest developed specifically for African American veterans. The Sunshine State Arch, located in the Sunshine State International Park, is a parabolic arch (reminiscent of the Gateway Arch in St. Louis). Erected in 1964, the arch reflects the Miami Modern (MIMO) style, is reflective of the industrial boom in South Florida during the 1950s and 1960s, and was built as a means to enhance and create a striking entrance to the Sunshine State Industrial Park. The arch retains its physical integrity as well as its integrity of setting, as it remains located in an industrial area. It is a monumental resource which served as the gateway and branded the industrial park, and also became a symbol for the greater community. The remainder (166) of the newly recorded resources, as well as the previously recorded Biscayne/C-8 Canal, are considered ineligible for listing in the NRHP, either individually or as part of a historic district. The buildings/houses located within the APE represent a common style, do not possess sufficient significance, and many have been subject to exterior modifications. The majority of commercial buildings located within the portion of the Sunshine State International Park within the project APE have construction dates extending through the 1970s. The historic FDOT highway bridges (constructed in 1963) located within the project APE are of a common design (e.g., multi-beam, multi-girder and girder-floorbeam) with a low level of engineering significance. Coordination with the Miami-Dade County Historic Preservation Chief occurred, regarding the project area and CRAS. No concerns regarding the project were noted, and she provided input on October 23, 2012 regarding proceeding with a local designation (by the City of Miami Gardens) for the Sunshine State International Park, but not a NRHP nomination. The CRAS was submitted to the FHWA/SHPO for review and eligibility concurrence on SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

33 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion December 26, 2012; concurrence was provided by FHWA on January 28, 2013 and by the SHPO on February 8, The Section 106 Determination of Effects case study has been prepared to evaluate the Recommended Alternative s proposed improvements in proximity to the NRHP-eligible resources identified during the CRAS. The Determination of Effects case study concluded that the Recommended Alternative would not adversely affect the NRHP-eligible resources. Through the application of the Criteria of Adverse Effect, the FHWA in consultation with the SHPO determined that the Recommended Alternative did not constitute an adverse effect on any of the properties. Attachment 6.B.3 Archaeological Sites SR 826 No previously unrecorded archaeological sites were identified within the archaeological APE. Background research noted the presence of one archaeological site, Golden Glade 1 (8DA46), recorded within the archaeological APE on the north side of NW 167 th Street, at the intersection of NW 167 th Street with NW 20 th Avenue. The site file describes this site as a Glades-period black dirt midden with associated burials that were excavated as part of the WPA program in The site file information notes that a house was built on the location of the site in 1946 and that test excavations conducted by Goggin and Griffin in 1947 were unable to find any remaining evidence of the site. No evidence of the rise associated with the site or any associated cultural mater was visible within the archaeological APE during the current survey but remnants of the site may exist beneath the pavement or existing structure. This site has not been previously evaluated for NRHP eligibility by the SHPO. However, due to the potential for human remains, it is recommended that an archaeologist monitor any subsurface activities conducted within the recorded location of this site. GGI As a result of the CRAS, no previously recorded archaeological sites were identified within the APE. The two previously recorded archaeological resources (8DA46 and 8DA47), neither of which have been previously evaluated by the SHPO, are located SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

34 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion outside of the archaeological APE, approximately 1,700 feet to the west of the project area. Although the Florida Master Site File (FMSF) lists 8DA46 as having potential or confirmed human remains, no impacts to these resources are anticipated. Background research determined the archaeological APE to have a low site potential, which was confirmed by the archaeological pedestrian survey. Analysis of the soils, drainage and vegetation (e.g., no hammocks or tree islands) revealed that the project area has been heavily disturbed, subjected to filling, grading and land shaping for construction of roads and buildings. All areas examined during the survey proved to be heavily developed, and no natural soils could be observed. In the rare instances where this was not the case, or adjacent to the larger expressways, the areas immediately adjacent to the R/W were found to contain utilities, pavement, or evidence of heavy landscaping, making meaningful subsurface testing within the APE impossible. Based on this information, no impacts are anticipated to archaeological resources from this project. In addition, no locally-designated archaeological sites or zones are located within one mile of the project s archaeological APE. This was confirmed by the Miami-Dade County Archaeologist on May 29, 2012, who also stated he had no archaeological concerns relative to the project area. As noted above in Section 2.2.2, the CRAS was submitted to the FHWA/SHPO for review and eligibility concurrence on December 26, 2012; concurrence was provided by FHWA on January 28, 2013 and by the SHPO on February 8, Attachment 6.B.4 Recreation Areas Based on comments received from the Miami-Dade County Park and Recreation Department as part of the AN process, there would be no direct impacts to any County park sites. However, they note that Amelia Earhart Park is located east of the intersection of I-75 and SR 826 and suggest that appropriate signage be provided for motorists using SR 826 who access the park facility. SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

35 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion Recreational facilities located within the project area consist of the Don Shula Golf Course, Miami-Dade County s Gold Coast Trail and the City of North Miami s Milton Littman Park. The FDOT has committed to accommodate the future planned Trail, i.e., providing a clear envelope over the SFRC when placing bridge piers as part of the interchange improvements. Also, no project improvements are to occur in proximity to the Golf Course or the Park. Therefore, no impacts to these recreational facilities are anticipated. No other public conservation lands or recreational areas/trails are located in the vicinity of the project. Attachment 6.C.1 Wetlands The proposed project will not result in any impacts to jurisdictional wetlands. However, impacts to Other Surface Waters (OSWs) are anticipated. The OSWs include stormwater treatment areas (i.e., maintained and unmaintained drainage ditches, swales and wet retention pond) located throughout the corridor and four canals: the C- 8/Biscayne Canal, Graham s Dairy Canal, Marco/NW 17 th Avenue Canal and the Peter s Pike Canal. The C-8 Canal is managed by the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) and runs east-west, south of SR 826. The southbound Turnpike Connector/I-95 southbound system crosses the C-8 Canal approximately 600 feet south of NW 157 th Street, south of the GGI, and SR 826 crosses the C-8 Canal approximately 1800 feet north of Miami Lakes Drive. The Marco Canal is managed by Miami-Dade County and runs north-south on the east side of NW 17 th Avenue to a culvert under NW 167 th Street and SR 826 (which is elevated and separates the east- and west- bound lanes of NW 167 th Street). The Marco Canal connects with the C-8 Canal southwest of the GGI. The Graham s Dairy Canal is managed by Miami-Dade County and runs northsouth on the west side of SR 826. The Graham s Dairy Canal connects to Peter s Pike Canal on the south side of the Interstate I-75 Interchange. The Peter s Pike Canal is also managed by Miami-Dade County and runs north-south on the west side of SR 826. These canals are depicted in Figure 6.C.1 Waterways Map. A SFWMD control structure (S-28) is located on the C-8/Biscayne Canal, approximately 3.7 miles east of the proposed project area. The S-28 is a gated spillway located in the vicinity of the SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

36 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion Miami Shores golf course, between the Florida East Coast Railway and the US-1 bridges. The proposed project will include new stormwater treatment areas, and the net loss of OSWs, if any, will not be known until the Final Design Phase. Figure 6.C.1 Waterways Map Attachment 6.C.3 Water Quality A Water Quality Impact Evaluation Checklist was prepared for the SR 826 PD&E Study and is available at the FDOT District Six Office. SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

37 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion SR 826 The FDEP and EPA commented that stormwater runoff from the proposed improvements may impact water quality and alter adjacent surface waters through increased pollutant loading. While the project is located within the vicinity of the Biscayne Sole Source Aquifer, the proposed stormwater facility design will include the water quantity requirements for the water quality impacts as required by Chapter 24, Section of the Miami-Dade County code. The Miami-Dade County requirements meet or exceed the State of Florida's water quality and water quantity requirements. Therefore, it is anticipated that water quality within the project area will improve due to the proposed stormwater treatment measures. In addition, all necessary permits will be obtained in accordance with federal, state, and local laws and regulations. During Project Development, coordination was conducted with SFWMD and Miami- Dade County concerning the necessary studies, documentation and commitments needed to adequately address all identified resources. All necessary permits (including an Environmental Resources Permit) will be obtained during the Design Phase in accordance with federal, state, and local laws and regulations. GGI The preliminary drainage analysis, which documents the existing drainage conditions, the proposed drainage concept (including the basins and pond size requirements), and the location analysis and recommendations are included in the Stormwater Management Report prepared as part of the GGI PD&E Study. The proposed roadway improvements under the Recommended Alternative will require major drainage improvements along the freeways and interchange ramps, including new drainage structures, pipes, and stormwater treatment facilities. In addition to the existing stormwater management facilities that will be impacted from the reconstruction, the project will result in an increase in impervious area. The Recommended Alternative increases the impervious area by approximately 3.3-acre and 4.4-acre in the C-8 and C- 9 Basins, respectively. Using the current SFWMD water quality criteria, this will require SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

38 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion 0.38 acre-feet of treatment in the C-8 Basin and 0.45 acre-feet of additional treatment in the C-9 Basin. The required treatment volume for the C-8 Basin can be provided by creating dry retention areas along the drainage swales within the individual or adjacent drainage systems. Right-of-Way acquisition of several parcels is anticipated in Basin C-8 to accommodate the I-95 roadway improvements. These parcels are located west of I-95 and near the C-8/Biscayne Canal. They are ideally situated to capture and treat runoff from the I-95 increase in impervious area. Together, the parcels have an available area of approximately 7 acres that can be used for dry retention. A total of 2.62 acre-feet of dry retention is provided for water treatment within this basin. For the C-9 Basin, the required treatment volume can be provided by creating dry retention area in the FDOT-owned vacant lot located just north of the railroad and bordered by both the SR 826 and Turnpike Connectors. This vacant lot can accommodate a 3.5-acre dry retention pond while avoiding impacting the existing Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) building on the site. A depth of 0.5 foot will be needed to create the 1.8 acre-feet of dry retention required for Basin C-9. Right-of-Way acquisition of four parcels is anticipated in Basin C-9 to accommodate the SR 826 roadway improvements while maintaining the NW 12 th Avenue on-ramp to I-95 SB. The parcels are located in the Sunshine Industrial Park south of SR-826. It can provide an appropriate location for water quality treatment. This potentially acquired area can accommodate a 4.2-ac dry-retention pond. In addition, the proposed widening improvements to the I-95 SB lanes will move the travel lanes towards the west, which will result in the double 72-inch outfall pipes located between the GGI and the C-8/Biscayne Canal, and corresponding manholes, being in the travel lanes. Relocation of the double 72-inch outfall pipes (approximately 1,400-feet) is recommended to avoid having manholes in the travel lanes. The Biscayne Aquifer underlies all of Miami-Dade County. This aquifer is a designated Sole Source Aquifer, i.e., it is the sole or principal drinking water source for a populated area. On May 3, 2013, the FDOT requested that the EPA review the project s effects on SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

39 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion the Biscayne Sole Source Aquifer. The EPA s concurrence that the project was not expected to cause significant impacts to the aquifer system, as long as proper protection measures were followed, was provided on August 5, In this letter, the EPA provided recommendations (e.g., BMPs) and requested that coordination occur during design and construction (e.g., stormwater design, Wellhead Protection Plans) with appropriate and State and County officials. The issues identified in the EPA letter are addressed in the GGI PD&E Study Stormwater Management Report. Also, there are no wellfields located within the project limits. Water quality impacts resulting from erosion and sedimentation during construction activities will be controlled in accordance with FDEP s NPDES Permit (including the preparation of a SWPPP), the latest edition of the FDOT Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction, and through the use of BMPs including temporary erosion control features. Turbidity will be appropriately addressed through established permit conditions and appropriate BMPs to control erosion and sedimentation during construction. According to State water quality standards, no degradation of water quality, increased turbidity of the waters and/or the discharge of any foreign material into the water is permitted. Turbidity is not allowed to exceed 29 Nephelometric Turbidity Units (NTUs) above background beyond the turbidity controls. The FDOT will continue to coordinate water quality and quantity impacts and stormwater management with the appropriate regulatory agencies as required throughout the design and permitting phases of the project, as well as during and after construction. Attachment 6.C.6 Floodplains During the ETDM review process, the degree of effect assigned by the EPA to Floodplains was None, and no comments were provided. Also, no review comments were provided by FDEP or FHWA. SR 826 Based on information provided in the 2011 Digital Flood Insurance Rate Map (DFIRM) SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

40 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion Flood Hazard Zones data, acres (38.26%) of Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Zone AE, acres (26.82%) of FEMA Flood Zone X, 0.2 acres of Flood Zone AH (0.03%) and acres (34.89%) of 0.2 Percent Annual Chance Flood Hazard Zone occur within the 200-foot project buffer. Floodplain impacts will be assessed further during Project Development and the proposed improvements design will be adjusted so as to avoid or minimize impacts to this resource. All necessary permits will be obtained in accordance with federal, state, and local laws and regulations. GGI During the PD&E Study, potential floodplain impacts were assessed and a Location Hydraulics Memorandum was prepared. As part of this assessment, potential 100-year (base) floodplain encroachments resulting from the proposed roadway improvements were addressed. In accordance with Executive Order Floodplain Management, USDOT Order , Floodplain Management Protection, and Federal-Aid Policy Guide 23 CFR 650A, floodplains must be protected. The intent of these regulations is to avoid or minimize highway encroachments within the base floodplains, and to avoid supporting land use development incompatible with floodplain values. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) website was reviewed to find the latest (2009) Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) for the project area in Miami-Dade County. This map indicates that a portion of the project area is located in the 100-year floodplain. The section of I-95 from just south of NE 151 st Street to SR 9, and the remaining portion of SR 9 within the project area, are mostly in Zone AE, with an average elevation of 7 feet. Just north of SR-9, I-95 is mostly in Zone X, areas determined to be outside the 0.2% annual chance floodplain. Likewise, SR-826 east of NW 11th Avenue is in Zone X, as well as Florida s Turnpike north of its intersection with the railroad. West of NW 10 th Avenue, SR 826 is under Zone X-500, with a 1% annual chance of flood, with average depths of less than one foot or with drainage areas less than 1 square mile. All elevations are based on the NGVD29 (National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929) datum. It was confirmed that the proposed roadway edge of SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

41 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion pavement is at a minimum 9.0 feet NGVD29, which meets the requirements to ensure that the roadway remains open to traffic during a 100-year flood event. At the local level, the project does not have defined floodplains established by the SFWMD. No adverse impacts are anticipated to the floodplain, as required by the SFWMD permitting process. Encroachments due to the proposed roadway improvements are being compensated within the proposed stormwater management system, mostly through the use of dry-retention ponds. Stormwater management systems proposed by this study meet existing water quality standards set forth in Chapter of the Florida Administrative Code. This project will avoid causing adverse impacts to off-site properties by limiting the post development off-site discharge so that it does not exceed predevelopment rates. Water quality is to be provided for the increase in impervious area. The project study area west of NW 17 th Avenue is within a contamination plume called the Anodyne Superfund Site. The FDEP discourages use of wet ponds or exfiltration trenches within one mile of an EPA Superfund site. The one-mile buffer around this contamination plume covers most of the project study area. Consequently, proposed water treatment facilities will consist of dry-retention and/or dry-detention. This is suitable, as existing facilities currently employ the same method of treatment. A Phase II Contamination Assessment is recommended to further quantify impacts to the project due to potential contamination from this site. The following floodplain statement, a slightly modified version of statement 5, Projects on existing alignment involving replacement of drainage structures in heavily urbanized floodplains, applies: Replacements of drainage structures for this project are limited to hydraulically equivalent structures. The limitations to the hydraulic equivalency being proposed are basically due to restrictions imposed by the geometrics of design, existing development, cost feasibility, or practicability. An alternative encroachment location is not considered in this category since it defeats the project purpose or is economically unfeasible. Since flooding conditions in the project area are inherent in the topography or are a result of SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

42 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion other outside contributing sources, and there is no practical alternative to totally eradicate flood impacts or even reduce them in any significant amount, existing flooding will continue, but not be increased. The proposed structures will be hydraulically equivalent to or greater than the existing structure, and backwater surface elevations are not expected to increase. As a result, the project will not affect existing flood heights or floodplain limits. This project will not result in any new or increased adverse environmental impacts. There will be no significant change in the potential for interruption or termination of emergency service or emergency evacuation routes. Therefore, it has been determined that the floodplain encroachment is not significant. There is no change in flood risk or adverse floodplain impacts associated with this project. In addition, there are no designated regulated floodways within Miami-Dade County, thus there is no involvement with regulatory floodways. Attachment 6.C.7 Coastal Zone Consistency The FDEP is responsible for the coordination of the review of federal activities for consistency with the Coastal Zone Management Act and its implementing regulations, 15 CFR 930. Based on comments provided by Florida Coastal Management Plan (FCMP) agencies, FDEP makes a determination (on behalf of the State of Florida) regarding the consistency of a proposed federal action with the policies in the FCMP. On October 13 th, 2011 for SR 826, and on August 31, 2011 for GGI, during the ETDM Programming Screen review, this project was determined to be consistent with the Coastal Zone Management Program. Therefore (as per the FDOT PD&E Manual, Part 2, Chapter 25), the State of Florida has determined that this project is consistent with the Florida Coastal Zone Management Plan. A separate Coastal Zone Consistency determination will be provided during the final design phase, in which the permitting process (e.g., issuance of SFWMD ERP) serves as the State s consistency decision. SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

43 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion Attachment 6.C.9 Wildlife and Habitat The SR 826 and GGI Ultimate Improvements were evaluated for impacts to protected wildlife species using a review of existing literature, GIS resources and field reviews. After careful analysis of the species preferred habitats and accounting for the protective measures to be implemented during construction, the FDOT and FHWA have determined that minimal impacts to Federal or State-listed species are anticipated to occur in association with the proposed project. The FDOT and FHWA made the following determinations for the project: Florida bonneted bat: may affect, not likely to adversely affect West Indian manatee: may affect, not likely to adversely affect Wood stork: may affect, not likely to adversely affect Eastern indigo snake: no effect In addition, no adverse effect to the gopher tortoise, burrowing owl, bald eagle, or any other protected species is anticipated as a result of the SR 826 and GGI Ultimate Improvements. There will be no impacts to Federal or State listed species associated with the No Build Alternative. Attachment 6.C.10 Essential Fish Habitat This project is not located within, and/or will not adversely affect areas identified as Essential Fish Habitat. On September 28 th, 2011, the National Marine Fisheries Service concluded the proposed work would not directly impact areas that support Essential Fish Habitat or National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration trust fishery resources. SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

44 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion Attachment 6.D.1 Noise Through a review of the Aesthetics ETDM issue, the FHWA assigned a degree of effect of Moderate, noting that residential areas were in proximity to the project and that the existing noise levels are likely high. The FHWA stated that a noise analysis meeting the requirements of the July 13, 2011 [sic] (2010) regulations was needed to identify noise sensitive receptors and the potential for noise attenuation needs. A traffic noise study was performed in accordance with the Code of Federal Regulations Title 23, Part 772, Procedures for Abatement of Highway Traffic Noise and Construction Noise dated July 13, 2010 and with Title XXVI Chapter of the Florida Statutes using the methodology established in the FDOT s PD&E Manual, Part 2 Chapter 17 (May 24, 2011). FHWA s Traffic Noise Model (TNM) version 2.5 was used to predicted noise levels and to analyze the effectiveness of noise barriers. Noise Study Reports (NSRs) documenting the traffic noise analysis for SR-826/Palmetto and GGI were prepared for this study and are available under separate cover and on file at the FDOT District Six ISP Office. Noise levels developed for this analysis are expressed in decibels (db) using an A scale [db(a)] weighting. This scale most closely approximates the response characteristics of the human ear. All predicted noise levels represent hourly equivalent levels (LAeq1h) consistent with the noise metric established in the Federal regulation. The developed lands along the project corridor were evaluated to identify the noise sensitive receptor sites that may be impacted by traffic noise associated with the proposed improvements. Noise sensitive receptor sites represent any property where frequent exterior human use occurs and where a lowered noise level would be of benefit. This includes residential units (FHWA s Noise Abatement Activity Category B), other noise sensitive areas including parks and recreational areas, medical facilities, schools, and places of worship (Category C), and commercial properties with exterior areas of use (Category E). Noise sensitive sites also include interior use areas where no exterior activities occur for facilities such as auditoriums, day care centers, hospitals, SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

45 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion libraries, medical facilities, places of worship, public meeting rooms, recording studios, schools, and television studios (Category D). Category F includes land uses such as industrial and retail facilities that are not considered noise sensitive. For each of Noise Abatement Activity Categories, FHWA has established Noise Abatement Criteria (NAC). These criteria determine when an impact occurs and when consideration of noise abatement analysis is required. For Categories B and C (i.e., residential and other sensitive exterior land uses), the abatement criteria level is 67.0 decibels db(a). For noise sensitive commercial properties (Category E), the abatement criteria level is 72.0 db(a). For sensitive interior use areas (Category D), the abatement criteria level is 52.0 db(a). FDOT requires that noise abatement and mitigation measures also be considered whenever predicted project noise levels approach (i.e., within one decibel) the FHWA criteria (i.e., 66.0, 71.0, or 51.0 db(a), respectively). In addition, even when project noise levels are below the NAC, abatement considerations may also be needed if the predicted levels show a substantial increase, i.e., 15 db(a), over existing levels. As presented below for SR 826 and GGI, traffic noise levels were predicted for noise sensitive locations along the project corridor for the existing conditions and the design year (2040) No-Build and Recommended/Ultimate Build Alternatives. Predicted design year traffic noise levels for the Recommended/Ultimate Build Alternative were compared to the FDOT s NAC and to the noise levels predicted for the existing conditions to assess potential noise impacts associated with the proposed improvements. In accordance with FHWA requirements, noise abatement was considered for all noise sensitive locations where design year traffic noise levels were predicted to equal or exceed the FDOT NAC. The most common and effective noise abatement measure for projects such as this is the construction of noise barriers. Noise barriers reduce noise by blocking the sound path between a roadway and a noise sensitive area. To be effective, noise barriers must be long, continuous (i.e., with no intermittent openings), and have sufficient height to block the path between the noise source and the receptor site. Conceptual noise barrier designs were evaluated for each impacted area to SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

46 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion determine the most effective location, length, and height that would achieve the maximum noise level reduction at reasonable cost. A 7-dB(A) noise level reduction for one or more impacted receptors with a minimum reduction of 5.0 db(a) was used as the noise reduction design goal for the development and evaluation of noise barriers. FDOT s cost guideline of $42,000 per benefited receiver site was used to determine the cost reasonableness. SR 826 The noise sensitive sites identified along this segment of the project include single and multi-family residences in 20 residential areas, one recreational area (Don Shula s Golf Club), three public and private schools, four places of worship, and one restaurant with outdoor seating areas. The project corridor also includes retail shopping centers, office buildings, and car dealerships, but these are not considered noise sensitive (i.e., Category F). With the Recommended Build Alternative, design year traffic noise levels are predicted to range from 38.1 to 47.9 db(a) at interior locations and from 61.1 to 78.1 db(a) at exterior locations. Traffic noise levels are predicted to approach or exceed the FHWA NAC at 508 residences within 18 residential areas, at Don Shula s Golf Club, and a restaurant with outdoor seating. No other noise sensitive sites within the project study area are predicted to experience traffic noise levels equal to or exceeding the FDOT NAC. Also, no sites are expected to experience any substantial noise level increases as defined by the FDOT [i.e., greater than 15.0 db(a) over existing levels] with the Build Alternative. For the 508 residential receptor sites impacted by traffic noise, noise barriers were evaluated at 11 locations. See the NSR for the results of the noise barrier analyses and recommendations for each of the 11 locations where barriers were evaluated. Based upon this assessment, noise barriers at four locations which encompasses 11 of the 18 residential communities impacted by traffic noise are recommended for further consideration and public input. The recommended noise barriers are expected to reduce traffic noise by at least 5 db(a) at 404 residences along the project corridor SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

47 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion including 245 of the 508 impacted residences. The estimated cost of these barriers is $9,427,200 or $23,335 per benefited receptor. FDOT is committed to the construction of feasible noise abatement measures at the locations where noise barriers have been recommended for further consideration during the final design phase, contingent upon the following conditions: Detailed noise analyses during the final design process supports the need for abatement; Reasonable cost analyses indicate that the economic cost of the barrier(s) will not exceed the cost reasonable criterion; Safety and engineering aspects as related to the roadway user and the adjacent property owner have been reviewed and any conflicts or issues resolved; Community input regarding desires, types, heights, and locations of barriers has been solicited by the FDOT; and Any other mitigating circumstances found in Section of FDOT s PD&E Manual have been analyzed. It is likely that the noise abatement measures for the identified locations will be constructed if found feasible based on the contingencies listed above. If, during the Final Design phase, any of the contingency conditions listed above cause abatement to no longer be considered reasonable or feasible for a given location(s), such determination(s) will be made prior to requesting approval for construction advertisement. Commitments regarding the exact abatement measure locations, heights, and type (or approved alternatives) will be made during project reevaluation and at a time before the construction advertisement is approved. Noise barriers at seven residential communities and two special land use areas were determine to not be feasible or cost reasonable. At these locations either the cost to construct noise barriers exceeded FDOT s reasonable cost criteria of $42,000 per benefited site and/or noise barriers were unable to reduce noise levels by the FDOT s SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

48 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion noise reduction design goal [7.0 db(a) for at least one benefitted receptor]. Therefore, noise barriers are not recommended for further consideration or construction at these locations. Based on the noise analyses performed to date, there appears to be no apparent solutions available to mitigate the noise impacts at these locations representing 198 residences or at the two special land use areas where noise barriers were not recommended. The traffic noise impacts to these noise sensitive sites are an unavoidable consequence of the project. GGI Approximately 167 residences, all single-family homes, were identified along I-95, Florida s Turnpike and NW 17 th Avenue within the project study area. Also, eight nonresidential noise sensitive sites were identified within the project study area which includes three churches, a school, two outdoor areas at an educational center, a hospital, and a hotel. Under the existing conditions, the primary source of noise at the nearby noise sensitive sites is traffic on the nearby expressways (I-95, Florida s Turnpike and SR 826) and on NW 17 th Avenue. During the design year, the primary source of noise in the area is expected to remain traffic on the nearby expressways. With the Ultimate Build Alternative, design year traffic noise levels are predicted to range from 37.1 to 44.8 db(a) at interior locations and from 53.5 to 70.0 db(a) at exterior locations. Traffic noise levels are predicted to approach or exceed the FHWA NAC at 10 homes, a church playground and a school playground along I-95, three homes along Florida s Turnpike and four homes along NW 17 th Avenue. In total, 17 homes, one church playground and one school playground are expected to be impacted by this project. No other noise sensitive sites within the project study area are predicted to experience traffic noise levels equal to or exceeding the FDOT NAC. Also, no sites are expected to experience any substantial noise level increases as defined by the FDOT [i.e., greater than 15.0 db(a) over existing levels] with the Build Alternative. Traffic noise levels with the Recommended Alternative are expected to range from 37.1 to 44.9 db(a) at interior locations and from 57.0 to 70.9 db(a) at exterior locations. Traffic noise levels are predicted to approach or exceed the FHWA NAC at 11 homes, SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

49 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion one church playground and one school playground along I-95; 52 condominiums in one condominium complex along SR 7/US-441; and three homes along Florida s Turnpike. In total, 66 residences, one church playground and one school playground are expected to be impacted by this project. Therefore, based on the FHWA and FDOT methodologies used to evaluate traffic noise levels in this study, modifications proposed with this project were determined to generate noise impacts at noise sensitive sites within the project study area. Consideration of noise abatement is required to mitigate these impacts. Although a number of sites approach or exceed the NAC, the proposed improvements do not result in any substantial noise increases (i.e., greater than 15 db(a) over existing levels). A total of five noise barriers were evaluated for feasibility and reasonableness. Many of the locations where noise impacts are predicted to occur are near existing noise barriers. In these cases, alternatives such as increasing the length of an existing noise barrier or filling in gaps in noise barrier coverage were selected since increasing the height of an existing noise barrier is not possible without replacing the noise barrier completely with a new taller noise barrier. The results of the noise barrier analysis indicate that construction of the noise barriers appears feasible. However, none of the noise barriers are considered reasonable since they were unable to reduce noise levels by the FDOT s noise reduction design goal [7.0 db(a) for at least one benefitted receptor]. Thus, none of the noise barriers evaluated for this study are recommended for further consideration and there are no apparent solutions available to mitigate the noise impacts at the impacted locations. The traffic noise impacts to the 17 nearby homes and the playgrounds at Evangel Church International and Small World Montessori are considered to be an unavoidable consequence of the project. Construction Noise and Vibration During construction of the project, there is the potential for noise impacts to be substantially greater than those resulting from normal traffic operations because heavy SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

50 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion equipment is typically used to build roadways. In addition, construction activities may result in vibration impacts. Therefore, early identification of potential noise/vibration sensitive sites along the project corridor is important in minimizing noise and vibration impacts. The project area does include residential, institutional and commercial areas including hotels, schools and nearby churches. Construction noise and vibration impacts to these sites will be minimized by adherence to the controls listed in the latest edition of the FDOT s Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction. Since delicate medical procedures are performed at Jackson North Medical Center, this facility should be considered particularly sensitive to construction noise and vibration. If construction activities are to occur near the medical center, alternative construction methods should be considered to reduce construction-related noise or vibration. These methods could include the following: Avoid impact pile-driving where possible in vibration-sensitive areas through the use of drilled piles or a sonic/vibratory pile driver where the geological conditions permit their use. Avoid vibratory rollers and packers near sensitive areas. Select demolition methods not involving impact, where possible. For example, sawing bridge decks in sections that can be loaded onto trucks results in lower vibration levels than impact demolition by pavement breakers. A reassessment of the project corridor for additional sites particularly sensitive to construction noise and/or vibration will be performed during design to ensure that impacts to such sites are minimized. Coordination between the FDOT and the operators of any construction noise/vibration sensitive locations identified during design should occur in order to ensure that impacts to such businesses are minimized. SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

51 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion Attachment 6.D.2 Air Quality Potential air quality impacts were evaluated and separate Air Quality Technical Memoranda were prepared for the SR 826 and GGI PD&E studies. The project is located in Miami-Dade County which is currently designated as being in attainment for the following criteria air pollutants: ozone, nitrogen dioxide, particulate matter (2.5 microns in size and 10 microns in size), sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, and lead. The project alternatives were subjected to a carbon monoxide (CO) screening model that makes various conservative worst-case assumptions related to site conditions, meteorology and traffic. The FDOT s screening model, CO Florida 2012, uses the latest EPA-approved software (Motor Vehicle Emission Simulator and CAL3QHC) to produce estimates of one-hour and eight-hour CO concentrations at default air quality receptor locations. The one-hour and eight-hour estimates can be directly compared to the oneand eight-hour National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for CO that are 35 parts per million (ppm) and 9 ppm, respectively. For the No Build and Build Alternatives, the roadway interchange forecasted to have the highest total intersection approach traffic volumes was NW 27 th Avenue. The Build and No Build scenarios were evaluated for both the opening year 2018 and the design year Estimates of CO were predicted for the default receptors which are located 10 feet to 150 feet from the edge of the roadway. Based on the results from the screening model, the highest project-related CO one- and eight-hour levels are not predicted to meet or exceed the one- or eight-hour NAAQS for this pollutant with either the No-Build or Build Alternatives. As such, the project passes the screening model. The project is located in an area which is designated attainment for all of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards under the criteria provided in the Clean Air Act. Therefore, the Clean Air Act conformity requirements do not apply to the project. SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

52 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion Attachment 6.D.3 Construction Construction activities for the proposed improvements may generate air, noise, vibration, water quality, and visual impacts of a temporary nature for those businesses and residents within the immediate project vicinity. As discussed in Sections Noise and Air Quality, the Contractor will adhere to the measures outlined in the latest edition of the FDOT Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction. Water quality impacts resulting from erosion, sedimentation, and turbidity reduction will also be controlled through measures outlined in the latest edition of the FDOT Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction. The removal of structures and debris will be in accordance with local and State regulation agencies permitting this operation. The Contractor is responsible for methods of controlling pollution on haul roads, in borrow pits, other material pits, and areas used for disposal of waste materials from the project. Temporary erosion control features as specified in Section 104 of the FDOT Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction may consist of temporary grassing, sodding, mulching, sandbagging, slope drains, sediment basins, sediment checks, artificial coverings, and berms. During construction, the safety and mobility of both vehicular and pedestrian traffic must be ensured, and impacts to transit and businesses must be minimized. As part of the PD&E Study, a preliminary traffic control plan for the construction of the proposed improvements was prepared. Due to the high traffic volume along the freeways and interchange ramps, the existing number of travel lanes should be maintained during each construction phase. However, temporary lane closures may be required in some locations such as overhead construction over existing roadways and should be limited to off-peak hours. This temporary traffic control plan can be accomplished in three phases, the details of which are included in the PD&E Study s conceptual design plans. An AN response was received from MDT (August 26, 2011), who provided input related to use of the Park-n-Ride Lots during construction (e.g., Jitney access, transit patrons) and avoidance of impacts to bus operations in the area. They requested that coordination with MDT s Service Planning Division occur regarding temporary deviation SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

53 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion of bus routes, and also recommended that coordination with BCT occur regarding their bus routes. The sequence of construction will be planned in such a way as to minimize traffic delays, including the development of a Maintenance of Traffic Plan. The local news media will be notified in advance of road closings and other construction-related activities, which could excessively inconvenience the community so that business owners, residents, and/or tourists in the area can plan travel routes in advance. A sign providing the name, address, and telephone number of an FDOT contact person will be displayed on-site to assist the public in obtaining answers to questions or complaints about project construction. Attachment 6.D.4 Contamination During the ETDM review process, comments were received from both the EPA and FDEP for the Contaminated Sites issue. The EPA assigned a degree of effect of Substantial, and the FDEP assigned a degree of effect of Moderate. Both indicated that numerous Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) regulated facilities existed within the 500-ft buffer zone, and recommended that site-specific investigations occur to determine the presence of soil and groundwater contamination. The EPA also stated that a large number of biomedical waste facilities existed within 500 ft of the project. The FDEP noted that one Superfund site, Anodyne, Inc., was present within 500 ft. The FHWA did not comment on this issue, but did state under the Special Designations issue that the project was located within a Brownfield area. Separate Contamination Screening Evaluation Reports (CSERs) were prepared for the SR 826 and GGI PD&E studies in accordance with the FDOT PD&E Manual, Part 2, Chapter 2;, and are on file at the FDOT District Six ISD Office. The reports summarize the data gathered from site visits, review of historic aerials, review of various regulatory agencies GIS layers, site history investigations of agencies databases, and review of Miami-Dade County Department of Regulatory and Economic Resources permits. The CSERs provide the results of a detailed Level I evaluation of the project area, and SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

54 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion define the potential for contamination impacts. The SR 826 CSER identified twenty-three (23) High Risk, twenty-six (26) Medium Risk, two-hundred and fifteen (215) Low Risk, and twenty-three (23) No Risk sites. The GGI CSER identified nine (9) High Risk, six (6) Medium Risk, thirty-five (35) Low Risk, and sixty-eight (68) No Risk sites; however, a few of these sites were also included in the SR 826 CSER. No right of way acquisition is anticipated from these properties; however, work is proposed to occur adjacent to most of the high and medium risk sites. One of the High Risk sites, Anodyne, Inc. is a designated EPA Superfund Site. The CSER confirmed that a groundwater contamination plume consisting of organic compounds, inorganic compounds, and metals is known to extend into the SR 826/Palmetto Expressway right of way from this site. The former Anodyne, Inc. site is located in the southeast quadrant of the NW 165th Street and NW 13th Avenue intersection, approximately 1,000 ft southwest of the proposed project. The contamination plume, as estimated in 2010, extends north to SR 826, east to I-95, south to SR 7/US 441 and the C-8/Biscayne Canal, and west to the residential area. This site has a history of soil and groundwater contamination, with a groundwater plume that extends off-site and continues to expand due to influences of groundwater recharge and local area wellheads. Although no right of way acquisition is anticipated from this property, the documented plume could be a risk to the construction of the project s Build Alternatives, including the Recommended Alternative. It is also a dewatering concern since the site is located within 500 ft of the project corridor. Additionally, FDEP discourages the use of wet ponds or exfiltration trenches within one mile of a superfund site. As such, water treatment facilities proposed by this study, which fall within the 1- mile Anodyne buffer, will consist of dry-retention and/or dry-detention. Because a High or Medium Risk for soil and/or groundwater contamination has been documented for six sites in the vicinity of Interim Build Alternative 4, a Level II Contamination Assessment investigation is warranted during the final design phase for the High and Medium Risk sites adjacent to the proposed construction areas of the Recommended Alternative, including any proposed drainage areas outside the FDOT SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

55 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion right of way, to confirm the existence of soil and/or groundwater contamination at these sites. Additionally, these sites pose a dewatering concern based on their proximity to the project corridor. If dewatering will be necessary during construction, a SFWMD Water Use Permit will be required. The Contractor will be responsible for obtaining and ensuring compliance with any necessary dewatering permit(s). Any dewatering operations in the vicinity of potentially contaminated areas shall be limited to low-flow, short-term. A dewatering plan may be necessary to avoid potential contamination plume exacerbation. All permits will be obtained in accordance with Federal, state, and local laws and regulations. Additionally, Section 120 Excavation and Embankment Subarticle Unidentified Areas of Contamination of the FDOT Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction will be provided in the project construction contract documents. This specification requires that in the event that any hazardous material or suspected contamination is encountered during construction, or if any spills caused by construction related activities should occur, the Contractor shall be instructed to stop work immediately and notify the District Six ISD Office as well as the appropriate regulatory agencies for assistance. The proposed project contains no known significant contamination. This standard statement is in accordance with the FDOT PD&E Manual, Part 2, Chapter 22, and is based upon the NEPA definition of significance as defined in 40 CFR (and the FDOT PD&E Manual, Part 1, Chapter 2). Attachment 6.D.5 Aesthetic Effects The visual impacts of an area are ascertained by establishing the visual environment and identifying the key visual resources within the area. The evaluation of the visual and aesthetics impacts is based on two perspectives: 1) the view from the road and 2) the view of the road. The view from the road is the driver s perspective and leaves a lasting impression of the community or area on the driver or resident, while the view of SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

56 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion the road by the driver or resident contributes to the feeling of community value and pride. SR 826 (Palmetto Expressway) is one of the most traveled transportation corridors in Miami-Dade County. The proposed widening of the Expressway, currently a 6-lane facility, from I-75 to the Golden Glades Interchange is planned to alleviate the increasing levels of traffic congestion observed within the study area. The segment of SR 826 between NW 42 nd Avenue and NW 17 th Avenue forms the northern boundary of the state-designated Opa-Locka Front Porch Community. As a Front Porch Community, Opa-Locka is a focal point for state-mandated efforts and financial investments directed towards the redevelopment of distressed communities. The GGI is also known as the Spaghetti Bowl to drivers due to the numerous twists and turns required to navigate from one roadway to another. The view from the major roadways and interchange ramps is comprised mainly of noise barriers, Mechanically Stabilized Earth (MSE) walls, and overhead bridge structures. Noise barriers are located along Florida s Turnpike and I-95. The interchange area includes several green spaces with some isolated landscaping along SR 826, I-95 and Florida s Turnpike. During the ETDM programming screen review, both the FDOT District Six and the FHWA assigned a degree of effect of Moderate to the Aesthetics issue. The proposed improvements provide an opportunity for additional landscaping within the project study area. This may include the area located within the proposed right-of-way acquisition at interchanges or the properties adjacent to the western right-of-way line along I-95, between the Golden Glades Park-n-Ride lot and the C-8/Biscayne Canal. Attachment 6.D.6 Bicycles and Pedestrians Pedestrians and bicycles are prohibited from operating and/or traveling on any limited access facilities, as per FS As such, no pedestrian or bicycle facilities are planned as part of the proposed improvements under the Recommended Alternative SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

57 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion along the expressways (I-95, SR 826 and Florida s Turnpike) and ramp connectors within the interchange area. The existing sidewalks along some of the non-limited access roadways within the project study area will be maintained. These include: 5-foot sidewalks adjacent to the northern and southern right-of-way lines along the SR 826 frontage roads; 5-foot sidewalk with a landscape buffer along both sides of NW 12 th Avenue north of SR 826 and 6-foot sidewalks adjacent to the roadway curb and gutter along both sides of NW 12 th Avenue south of SR 826; 5-foot sidewalks adjacent to the roadway curb and gutter on both sides of NW 17 th Avenue north of SR 826; 5-foot sidewalks adjacent to the roadway curb and gutter along both sides of NW 167 th Street east of the GGI; and 6-foot sidewalks adjacent to the curb and gutter on both sides of NW 2 nd Avenue south of the GGI. The replacement of the Turnpike Connector SB Bridge over the SFRC as well as construction of the new SR 826 EB to I-95 NB flyover bridge will provide adequate horizontal and vertical clearance necessary to accommodate the proposed Gold Coast Trail, which would run along the SFRC easement. The proposed Gold Coast Trail will provide the opportunity to create a multimodal access point at the Golden Glades Parkn-Ride facility and also provide bicycle and pedestrian access into Broward County. The existing pedestrian overpass on SR 826 just west of NW 27th Avenue would be impacted by the Recommended Alternative but would be replaced in kind. The proposed improvements under the Recommended Alternative would not impact the existing pedestrian bridge located across SR-9 that provides access from the GGI Parkn-Ride facility on the east to the Tri-Rail station on the west of SR 9 nor the existing pedestrian bridge located across I-95 just south of NW 151 st Street. Attachment 6.D.7 Utilities and Railroads There are approximately 25 utility crossings noted within the study limits, most commonly found in and around interchanges and overpasses. Seven utility companies SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

58 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion could potentially be impacted by the proposed improvements or at least will require further coordination during the design and construction phases. Coordination with the utility companies described in this section will continue during the PD&E phase. Further refinement of the proposed design and utility field verification will be carried out during the final design phase. Special construction equipment and techniques may be utilized to avoid utility conflicts. In unique locations, where the special construction equipment and techniques cannot avoid utility relocations, the need for relocation of the particular utility and the cost will be determined during the design phase. Florida Gas Transmission (FGT) currently owns and operates two gas transmission mains along Florida s Turnpike and SR 826 connecting to local distribution company facilities in the Opa-Locka area. These mains consist of an 18-in. pipe and a 24-in. pipe installed in an easement within Florida s Turnpike which terminates approximately 145- ft, north of SR 826. The portions of the gas mains which continue to the west within the SR 826 were originally installed and granted a permit by the FDOT allowing them to be placed within FDOT s Right-of-Way. The 24-in. FGT gas main runs along the westbound NW 167 th Street while the 18-in. FGT gas main crosses beneath SR 826 and runs along eastbound NW 167 th Street within the embankment between SR 826 and NW 167 th Street. At or about the interchange of NW 67 th Avenue, the 24-in. line crosses beneath SR 826 and runs along eastbound NW 167 th Street adjacent to the 18- in gas main. On August 21, 2013 the Florida Department of Transportation entered into a global settlement agreement with Florida Gas Transmission regarding potential impacts to FGT facilities (on a statewide basis) and guidance procedures to address their disposition within FDOT Right-of-ways. Under permitted scenario s which is the case for the facilities located within FDOT s R/W along SR 826 and its frontage roads along NW 167 th Street: if relocation is warranted, alternative space for the relocation of the facility within FDOT s R/W is accommodated where practical. In the event that suitable space is not available within existing R/W; FDOT is responsible for acquiring suitable replacement R/W and FGT is responsible for the cost of relocation of those facilities to the available right-of-way. In the event that FDOT cannot secure the R/W, FGT has the SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

59 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion ability to secure the R/W on FDOT s behalf including use of condemnation rights through the federal eminent domain process. FGT has this ability through the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) issuance of a certificate of public convenience and necessity. It is anticipated that the proposed Recommended Alternative for SR 826 and the GGI Ultimate would result in both the existing 18-in. and 24-in. gas mains being relocated to a more accessible location. Based on coordination with FGT, the replacement route must have unencumbered and unobstructed space of 30 ft. plus the width of the pipe plus 25 ft. of temporary work space for the line. Also, it is more customary to have both lines on the same side of the roadway running parallel to one another separated by 15 ft. which would require a total 70-ft. wide utility corridor. The Recommended Alternative footprint including 18-in. and 24-in. drainage pipes along NW 167 th Street would occupy the complete SR 826 right-of-way. This would indicate that the relocation of the FGT gas mains would require right-of-way acquisition in order to keep the lines within the general SR 826 corridor. As part of this PD&E Study, potential routes were identified and evaluated for the relocation of the existing 24-in. and 18-in. gas mains The FDOT will work with FGT to address the final disposition of the gas mains. As per the FGT Global Settlement Agreement with FDOT, FGT is responsible for the pipe installation cost while FDOT is responsible for the right-of-way cost. The FDOT District Six Utility Office will maintain coordination with all the utility providers throughout subsequent final design phase regarding any potential impacts As noted previously, the SFRC traverses the GGI area. CSX Transportation currently owns two sets of tracks within the GGI project corridor. Both tracks cross GGI running parallel to SR-9 in a northeasterly / southwesterly direction. There is a Tri-Rail station located along this track close to the GGI Park-n-Ride lot. These rail lines are currently operated for passenger transportation by Tri-Rail and freight transportation by CSX Transportation to carry limerock and construction materials from quarries located in south and west Miami-Dade. SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

60 Type 2 Categorical Exclusion It is anticipated that this project can be accomplished with no disruption of rail service. The proposed project interchange improvements in proximity to the SFRC (e.g., replacement of the Turnpike Connector SB bridge, construction of the new SR 826 EB to I-95 NB flyover bridge) can be constructed so as to provide adequate horizontal and vertical clearance over the SFRC. SR 826/Palmetto Expressway PD&E Study FM #: / FAP #: P / ETDM #:

61 APPENDIX A Pages from TIP/STIP/LRTP

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82 APPENDIX B ETDM Summary Report

83 ETDM Summary Report Project # SR 826/Palmetto Expressway East-West Corridor Programming Screen - Published on 10/30/2012 Printed on: 10/08/2014 Table of Contents Chapter 1 Overview 2 Chapter 2 Alternative #1 3 Chapter 3 Project Scope General Project Commitments 26 Appendices GIS Analyses Degree of Effect Legend 27

84 Screening Summary Reports Introduction to Programming Screen Summary Report The Programming Screen Summary Report shown below is a read-only version of information contained in the Programming Screen Summary Report generated by the ETDM Coordinator for the selected project after completion of the ETAT Programming Screen review. The purpose of the Programming Screen Summary Report is to summarize the results of the ETAT Programming Screen review of the project; provide details concerning agency comments about potential effects to natural, cultural, and community resources; and provide additional documentation of activities related to the Programming Phase for the project. Available information for a Programming Screen Summary Report includes: Screening Summary Report chart Project Description information (including a summary description of the project, a summary of public comments on the project, and community-desired features identified during public involvement activities) Purpose and Need information (including the Purpose and Need Statement and the results of agency reviews of the project Purpose and Need) Alternative-specific information, consisting of descriptions of each alternative and associated road segments; an overview of ETAT Programming Screen reviews for each alternative; and agency comments concerning potential effects and degree of effect, by issue, to natural, cultural, and community resources. Project Scope information, consisting of general project commitments resulting from the ETAT Programming Screen review, permits, and technical studies required (if any) Class of Action determined for the project Dispute Resolution Activity Log (if any) The legend for the Degree of Effect chart is provided in an appendix to the report. For complete documentation of the project record, also see the GIS Analysis Results Report published on the same date as the Programming Screen Summary Report.

85 #11241 SR 826/Palmetto Expressway East-West Corridor District: District 6 Phase: Programming Screen County: Miami-Dade From: I-75 Planning Organization: FDOT District 6 To: Golden Glades Interchange Plan ID: Not Available Financial Management No.: Federal Involvement: Maintain Federal Eligibility Federal Action Contact Information: Dat Huynh (305) Dat.Huynh@dot.state.fl.us Snapshot Data From: Project Re-Published 10/30/2012 Issues and Categories are reflective of what was in place at the time of the screening event. Natural Cultural Community Air Quality Coastal and Marine Contaminated Sites Farmlands Floodplains Infrastructure Navigation Special Designations Water Quality and Quantity Wetlands Wildlife and Habitat Historic and Archaeological Sites Recreation Areas Section 4(f) Potential Aesthetics Economic Land Use Mobility Relocation Social Secondary and Cumulative Effects Alternative #1 From: I-75 To: Golden Glades Interchange Re-Published: 10/30/2012 Reviewed from 08/23/2011 to 10/07/2011) N/A

86 Alternative #1 Project Effects Overview for Alternative #1 Issue Degree of Effect Organization Date Reviewed Natural Air Quality 0 None US Environmental Protection Agency 10/05/2011 Coastal and Marine 0 None National Marine Fisheries Service 09/28/2011 Contaminated Sites 3 Moderate US Environmental Protection Agency 10/05/2011 Contaminated Sites 3 Moderate Federal Highway Administration 10/07/2011 Contaminated Sites 3 Moderate Farmlands 0 None Floodplains 2 Minimal FL Department of Environmental Protection Natural Resources Conservation Service US Environmental Protection Agency 10/06/ /25/ /05/2011 Navigation N/A N/A / No Involvement US Coast Guard 08/24/2011 Navigation 0 None US Army Corps of Engineers 09/23/2011 Special Designations 0 None Water Quality and Quantity 2 Minimal Water Quality and Quantity 2 Minimal US Environmental Protection Agency FL Department of Environmental Protection US Environmental Protection Agency 10/05/ /06/ /05/2011 Wetlands 0 None National Marine Fisheries Service 09/28/2011 Wetlands 2 Minimal US Army Corps of Engineers 09/23/2011 Wetlands 0 None Wetlands 0 None Wetlands 0 None FL Department of Environmental Protection US Environmental Protection Agency South Florida Water Management District 10/06/ /05/ /04/2011 Wetlands 2 Minimal US Fish and Wildlife Service 08/31/2011 Wildlife and Habitat 2 Minimal FL Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission 10/04/2011 Wildlife and Habitat 2 Minimal US Fish and Wildlife Service 08/31/2011 Cultural Historic and Archaeological Sites 3 Moderate FL Department of State 08/29/2011 Historic and Archaeological Sites 0 None Federal Highway Administration 10/07/2011 Historic and Archaeological Sites 3 Moderate Seminole Tribe of Florida 09/26/2011 Recreation Areas 0 None Federal Highway Administration 10/07/2011 Recreation Areas 0 None Recreation Areas 0 None Community FL Department of Environmental Protection US Environmental Protection Agency 10/06/ /05/2011 Aesthetics 3 Moderate FDOT District 6 10/05/2011

87 Economic 1 Enhanced FDOT District 6 10/05/2011 Land Use 0 None FL Department of Community Affairs 09/30/2011 Land Use 2 Minimal FDOT District 6 10/05/2011 Mobility 1 Enhanced FDOT District 6 10/05/2011 Relocation 3 Moderate FDOT District 6 10/05/2011 Social 3 Moderate FDOT District 6 10/05/2011 Social 3 Moderate Federal Highway Administration 10/07/2011 Social 3 Moderate US Environmental Protection Agency 10/05/2011 Social 0 None FL Department of Community Affairs 09/30/2011 Secondary and Cumulative ETAT Reviews and Coordinator Summary: Natural Air Quality Project Effects Coordinator Summary Degree of Effect: 0 None assigned 12/05/2011 by FDOT District 6 Comments: As of June 2005, Miami-Dade County is an area designated as attainment for all of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) under the criteria provided in the Clean Air Act. Therefore, the Clean Air Act conformity requirements do not apply to this project. Note, however, that potential air quality impacts will be assessed during Project Development. Degree of Effect: 0 None assigned 10/05/2011 by Maher Budeir, US Environmental Protection Agency Coordination Document: No Selection Direct Effects Identified Resources and Level of Importance: Comments on Effects to Resources: Additional Comments (optional): CLC Commitments and Recommendations: Coastal and Marine Project Effects Coordinator Summary Degree of Effect: 0 None assigned 12/05/2011 by FDOT District 6 Comments: NMFS noted that the canals in the vicinity of the project are located upstream of South Florida Water Management District water control structures, which makes the site inaccessible to federally managed fishery species. As such, the NMFS concluded that the proposed work would not directly impact areas (including wetland areas) that support essential fish habitat (EFH) or NOAA trust fishery resources. This project will not require an EFH assessment, nor is further consultation with NMFS necessary unless any future proposed modifications to the project are anticipated to result in adverse impacts to EFH. Degree of Effect: 0 None assigned 09/28/2011 by Brandon Howard, National Marine Fisheries Service Coordination Document: No Involvement Coordination Document Comments:Magnuson-Stevens Act: Comments were provided for the Planning Screen on May 4, Our comments remain the same. The proposed expansion will be within FDOT's right-of-way. The project is in an urban area and there appear to be no wetlands adjacent to the roadway. The project corridor crosses and is adjacent to several canals. These canals are upstream of SFWMD water control structures and inaccessible by federally managed fishery species. Based on the project location, information provided in the ETDM website, and GIS-based analysis of impacts, NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) concludes the proposed work would not directly impact areas that support essential fish habitat (EFH) or NOAA trust fishery resources. NMFS has no comments or recommendations to provide pursuant to the EFH requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (P.L ); and this project will not require an EFH Assessment. Further consultation on this matter is not necessary unless future modifications are proposed and you believe that the proposed action may result in adverse impacts to EFH. Endangered Species Act: We are not aware of any threatened or endangered species or critical habitat under the purview of NMFS that occur within the

88 project area. However, it should be noted that a "no effect" determination must be made by the action agency and the reasoning underlying the determination should be documented in a project file. Please coordinate closely with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for other species listed under the Endangered Species Act that may require consultation. Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act: No impacts to wetlands are proposed; hence NMFS offers no comments under the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act. Direct Effects Identified Resources and Level of Importance: None. Comments on Effects to Resources: None. Additional Comments (optional): Magnuson-Stevens Act: Comments were provided for the Planning Screen on May 4, Our comments remain the same. The proposed expansion will be within FDOT's right-of-way. The project is in an urban area and there appear to be no wetlands adjacent to the roadway. The project corridor crosses and is adjacent to several canals. These canals are upstream of SFWMD water control structures and inaccessible by federally managed fishery species. Based on the project location, information provided in the ETDM website, and GIS-based analysis of impacts, NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) concludes the proposed work would not directly impact areas that support essential fish habitat (EFH) or NOAA trust fishery resources. NMFS has no comments or recommendations to provide pursuant to the EFH requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (P.L ); and this project will not require an EFH Assessment. Further consultation on this matter is not necessary unless future modifications are proposed and you believe that the proposed action may result in adverse impacts to EFH. Endangered Species Act: We are not aware of any threatened or endangered species or critical habitat under the purview of NMFS that occur within the project area. However, it should be noted that a "no effect" determination must be made by the action agency and the reasoning underlying the determination should be documented in a project file. Please coordinate closely with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for other species listed under the Endangered Species Act that may require consultation. Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act: No impacts to wetlands are proposed; hence NMFS offers no comments under the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act. CLC Commitments and Recommendations: Contaminated Sites Project Effects Coordinator Summary Degree of Effect: 3 Moderate assigned 12/05/2011 by FDOT District 6 Comments: The EST GIS analysis results identified forty-four RCRA regulated facilities, two brownfield sites, twenty-one Super Act Risk Sources, three Super Act Wells, and two Toxic Release Inventory Sites within 500-foot project buffer. Contamination (including any required permits) will be evaluated during Project Development in accordance with federal, state and local laws and regulations to assess the potential involvement with contaminated sites during project construction. A Contamination Screening Evaluation Report (similar to a Phase I Audit) will be prepared for documentation of impacts. "Special Provisions for Unidentified Areas of Contamination" shall be included in the project's construction contract documents. These provisions will specify procedures to follow in the event any hazardous material or suspected contamination is encountered during construction, including groundwater -monitoring wells, or should there be any construction-related spills. In addition, staging areas will be identified and maintained in accordance with FDOT Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction. Degree of Effect: 3 Moderate assigned 10/05/2011 by Maher Budeir, US Environmental Protection Agency Coordination Document: No Selection Direct Effects Identified Resources and Level of Importance: Soil, Biscayne Aquifer, Biscayne Canal and Little River Comments on Effects to Resources: The EST identified several RCRA regulated sites, biomedical waste sites and DERM contaminated sites within 500 feet of the subject site. Potential subsurface contamination should be verified by a site specific survey. Subsurgface construction activities should have the capacity of identifying subsurface contamination when necessary. Contigencied to manage contaminated media and possibly hazardous waste should be in place around areas that have subsurface contamination. Additional Comments (optional): CLC Commitments and Recommendations: Degree of Effect: 3 Moderate assigned 10/07/2011 by Cathy Kendall, Federal Highway Administration Coordination Document: PD&E Support Document As Per PD&E Manual Direct Effects Identified Resources and Level of Importance: Two brownfield areas within close proximity.

89 Comments on Effects to Resources: Contamination assessment needed to determine areas that may require additional costs to address contamination, which could affect the overal project cost estimates. Additional Comments (optional): CLC Commitments and Recommendations: Degree of Effect: 3 Moderate assigned 10/06/2011 by Lauren P. Milligan, FL Department of Environmental Protection Coordination Document: No Selection Direct Effects Identified Resources and Level of Importance: GIS data indicates that there are 44 RCRA regulated facilities within the 500-ft. project buffer zone. Comments on Effects to Resources: A Contamination Screening Evaluation (similar to Phase I and Phase II Audits) may need to be conducted along the project right-of-way in considering the proximity to potential hazardous material handling facilities. The Contamination Screening Evaluation should outline specific procedures that would be followed by the applicant in the event drums, wastes, tanks or potentially contaminated soils are encountered during construction. Special attention should be made in the screening evaluation to historical land uses (such as solid waste disposal) that may have an affect on the proposed project, including storm water retention and treatment areas. -- In the event contamination is detected during construction, DEP and Miami-Dade County DERM need to be notified and the FDOT may need to address the problem through additional assessment and/or remediation activities. Please note that revisions to Chapters , , , , F.A.C., and a new rule, Chapter , F.A.C., all involving contamination assessment and cleanup along with other notification requirements, took effect on April 17, Groundwater monitoring wells (and possibly water production wells) are likely present at/near the project corridor. Arrangements need to be made to properly abandon (in accordance with Chapter , F.A.C.) and or replace any wells that may be destroyed or damaged during construction. These wells may also be used to gather data for the Contamination Screening Evaluation report. -- Depending on the findings of the Contamination Screening Evaluation and the proximity to known contaminated sites, projects involving "dewatering" should be discouraged, since there is a potential to spread contamination to previously uncontaminated areas and affect contamination receptors, site workers and the public. Dewatering projects would require permits/approval from the South Florida Water Management District, Water Use Section and coordination with DERM. -- Any land clearing or construction debris must be characterized for proper disposal. Potentially hazardous materials must be properly managed in accordance with Chapter , F.A.C. In addition, any solid B76wastes or other non-hazardous debris must be managed in accordance with Chapter , F.A.C. -- Staging areas, with controlled access, should be planned in order to safely store raw material paints, adhesives, fuels, solvents, lubricating oils, etc. that will be used during construction. All containers need to be properly labeled. The project managers should consider developing written construction Contingency Plans in the event of a natural disaster, spill, fire or environmental release of hazardous materials stored / handled for the project construction. Additional Comments (optional): CLC Commitments and Recommendations: Farmlands Project Effects Coordinator Summary Degree of Effect: 0 None assigned 12/05/2011 by FDOT District 6 Comments: NRCS identified that there are no Prime, Unique, or Locally Important Farmland soils located within any of the project buffers. Therefore, no impacts to farmlands are anticipated as part of the project. Degree of Effect: 0 None assigned 08/25/2011 by Rick Allen Robbins, Natural Resources Conservation Service Coordination Document: No Selection Direct Effects Identified Resources and Level of Importance: The USDA-NRCS considers soil map units with important soil properties for agricultural uses to be Prime Farmland. In addition, the USDA-NRCS considers any soils with important soil properties and have significant acreages that are used in the production of commodity crops (such as, cotton, citrus, row crops, specialty crops, nuts, etc.) to be considered as Farmlands of Unique Importance. Nationally, there has been a reduction in the overall amount of Prime and Unique Farmlands through conversion to non-farm uses. This trend has the possibility of impacting the nation's food supply and exporting capabilities. Comments on Effects to Resources: Conducting GIS analysis of Prime Farmland (using USDA-NRCS data) and Important (Unique) Farmland Analysis (using existing 2004 SFWMD land use data and 2010 SSURGO data) has resulted in the determination that there are no Prime, Unique, or Locally Important Farmland soils within any buffer width within the Project Area. Therefore, no degree of effect to agricultural resources. Additional Comments (optional):

90 CLC Commitments and Recommendations: Floodplains Project Effects Coordinator Summary Degree of Effect: 2 Minimal assigned 12/05/2011 by FDOT District 6 Comments: Based on information provided in the 2011 DFIRM Flood Hazard Zones data, acres (38.26%) of FEMA Flood Zone AE, acres (26.82%) of FEMA Flood Zone X, 0.2 acres of Flood Zone AH (0.03%) and acres (34.89%) of 0.2 Percent Annual Chance Flood Hazard Zone occur within the 200-foot project buffer. Floodplain impacts will be assessed further during Project Development and the proposed project design will be adjusted so as to avoid or minimize impacts to this resource. All necessary permits will be obtained in accordance with federal, state, and local laws and regulations. Degree of Effect: 2 Minimal assigned 10/05/2011 by Maher Budeir, US Environmental Protection Agency Coordination Document: No Selection Direct Effects Identified Resources and Level of Importance: Flood Plain Comments on Effects to Resources: Specific project design criteria will determine the actual flood plain impact. Currently the EST is showing that over 100 acres are in the 100-year flood plain. Since this is a road widening project, it is likely that existing roadway is in the same flood plain. Project development should address impact on flood plain and potential mitigation. Additional Comments (optional): CLC Commitments and Recommendations: Infrastructure Project Effects Coordinator Summary Degree of Effect: 1 Enhanced assigned 12/05/2011 by FDOT District 6 Comments: According to the EST GIS analysis results, one Federal Aviation Administration Obstruction (tower) is located within the 200-foot buffer of this project. However, no negative direct impacts to this facility are anticipated. None found Navigation Project Effects Coordinator Summary Degree of Effect: N/A N/A / No Involvement assigned 12/05/2011 by FDOT District 6 Comments: The US Army Corps of Engineers and US Coast Guard commented that no navigable waters are identified through the EST GIS analysis results. Therefore, no impacts to navigation are anticipated as a result of the proposed project and no further involvement on this issue is required from the Corps or Coast Guard. Degree of Effect: N/A N/A / No Involvement assigned 08/24/2011 by Evelyn Smart, US Coast Guard Coordination Document: No Involvement Direct Effects Identified Resources and Level of Importance: Navigable Waters of the United States. Comments on Effects to Resources: There are no navigable waters of the United States in the project vicinity. Additional Comments (optional): CLC Commitments and Recommendations: Degree of Effect: 0 None assigned 09/23/2011 by Garett Lips, US Army Corps of Engineers Coordination Document: No Involvement Direct Effects

91 Identified Resources and Level of Importance: Based on the EST GIS review, no navigable waterways were identified; however, the Corps recommends the FDOT verify during the study that no navigable waters will be affected. The eastern portion of 826 crosses the Miami Canal/River but uncertainty exists if the limits of the project extends past the Miami River. Comments on Effects to Resources: possibly none Additional Comments (optional): CLC Commitments and Recommendations: Special Designations Project Effects Coordinator Summary Degree of Effect: 2 Minimal assigned 12/05/2011 by FDOT District 6 Comments: During Project Development, potential impacts to special designations will be evaluated in accordance with the FDOT PD&E Manual. FDOT will coordinate with the appropriate agencies concerning the necessary studies, documentation and commitments needed to adequately address all identified resources. All necessary measures will be taken to avoid and/or minimize impacts to all cited resources to the greatest extent practicable during project design. All necessary permits (including ERP) will be obtained in accordance with federal, state, and local laws and regulations. Degree of Effect: 0 None assigned 10/05/2011 by Maher Budeir, US Environmental Protection Agency Coordination Document: No Selection Direct Effects Identified Resources and Level of Importance: Comments on Effects to Resources: Additional Comments (optional): CLC Commitments and Recommendations: Water Quality and Quantity Project Effects Coordinator Summary Degree of Effect: 2 Minimal assigned 12/05/2011 by FDOT District 6 Comments: FDEP and USEPA commented that stormwater runoff from the proposed project may impact water quality and alter adjacent surface waters through increased pollutant loading. While the project is located within the vicinity of the Biscayne Sole Source Aquifer, the proposed stormwater facility design will include the water quantity requirements for the water quality impacts as required by Chapter 24, Section of the Miami-Dade County code. The Miami-Dade County requirements meet or exceed the State of Florida's water quality and water quantity requirements. Therefore, it is anticipated that water quality within the project area will improve due to the proposed stormwater treatment measures. In addition, all necessary permits will be obtained in accordance with federal, state, and local laws and regulations. During Project Development, FDOT will coordinate with the appropriate agencies concerning the necessary studies, documentation and commitments needed to adequately address all identified resources. All necessary permits (including ERP) will be obtained in accordance with federal, state, and local laws and regulations. Degree of Effect: 2 Minimal assigned 10/06/2011 by Lauren P. Milligan, FL Department of Environmental Protection Coordination Document: Permit Required Direct Effects Identified Resources and Level of Importance: Stormwater runoff from the highway widening project may alter adjacent wetlands and surface waters through increased pollutant loading. Increased runoff carrying oils, greases, metals, sediment, and other pollutants from the increased impervious surface will be of concern. Comments on Effects to Resources: Every effort should be made to maximize the treatment of stormwater runoff from the proposed highway widening project to prevent ground and surface water contamination. Stormwater treatment should be designed to maintain the natural predevelopment hydroperiod and water quality, as well as to protect the natural functions of adjacent wetlands. We recommend that the PD&E study include an evaluation of existing stormwater treatment adequacy and details on the future stormwater treatment facilities. Retro-fitting of stormwater conveyance systems would help reduce impacts to water quality. Additional Comments (optional): CLC Commitments and Recommendations: Degree of Effect: 2 Minimal assigned 10/05/2011 by Maher Budeir, US Environmental Protection Agency

92 Coordination Document: No Selection Direct Effects Identified Resources and Level of Importance: Biscayne aquifer, Biscayne Canal, Little River Comments on Effects to Resources: The additional impervious surface for the 4 lanes proposed will add a substantial impact to water flow and quality as it generate a substantial amount of additional storm water. Storm water management must be optimized to minimize that impact. Water treatment must meet all State and local stormwater treatment criteria. Mitigation of the stormwater flow is necessary in light of the size of the flood zone areas within the project vicinity. Additional Comments (optional): CLC Commitments and Recommendations: Wetlands Project Effects Coordinator Summary Degree of Effect: 2 Minimal assigned 12/05/2011 by FDOT District 6 Comments: During Project Development, potential wetland impacts will be evaluated in accordance with Part 2, Chapter 18 of the FDOT PD&E Manual. All necessary measures will be taken to avoid and/or minimize impacts to wetlands to the greatest extent practicable during project design. Should avoidance and/or minimization not be practicable, a Mitigation Plan will be prepared. In addition, all applicable permits (including ERP) will be obtained in accordance with federal, state, and local laws and regulations. Degree of Effect: 0 None assigned 09/28/2011 by Brandon Howard, National Marine Fisheries Service Coordination Document: No Involvement Coordination Document Comments:Magnuson-Stevens Act: Comments were provided for the Planning Screen on May 4, Our comments remain the same. The proposed expansion will be within FDOT's right-of-way. The project is in an urban area and there appear to be no wetlands adjacent to the roadway. The project corridor crosses and is adjacent to several canals. These canals are upstream of SFWMD water control structures and inaccessible by federally managed fishery species. Based on the project location, information provided in the ETDM website, and GIS-based analysis of impacts, NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) concludes the proposed work would not directly impact areas that support essential fish habitat (EFH) or NOAA trust fishery resources. NMFS has no comments or recommendations to provide pursuant to the EFH requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (P.L ); and this project will not require an EFH Assessment. Further consultation on this matter is not necessary unless future modifications are proposed and you believe that the proposed action may result in adverse impacts to EFH. Endangered Species Act: We are not aware of any threatened or endangered species or critical habitat under the purview of NMFS that occur within the project area. However, it should be noted that a "no effect" determination must be made by the action agency and the reasoning underlying the determination should be documented in a project file. Please coordinate closely with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for other species listed under the Endangered Species Act that may require consultation. Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act: No impacts to wetlands are proposed; hence NMFS offers no comments under the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act. Direct Effects Identified Resources and Level of Importance: None. Comments on Effects to Resources: None. Additional Comments (optional): Magnuson-Stevens Act: Comments were provided for the Planning Screen on May 4, Our comments remain the same. The proposed expansion will be within FDOT's right-of-way. The project is in an urban area and there appear to be no wetlands adjacent to the roadway. The project corridor crosses and is adjacent to several canals. These canals are upstream of SFWMD water control structures and inaccessible by federally managed fishery species. Based on the project location, information provided in the ETDM website, and GIS-based analysis of impacts, NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) concludes the proposed work would not directly impact areas that support essential fish habitat (EFH) or NOAA trust fishery resources. NMFS has no comments or recommendations to provide pursuant to the EFH requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (P.L ); and this project will not require an EFH Assessment. Further consultation on this matter is not necessary unless future modifications are proposed and you believe that the proposed action may result in adverse impacts to EFH. Endangered Species Act: We are not aware of any threatened or endangered species or critical habitat under the purview of NMFS that occur within the project area. However, it should be noted that a "no effect" determination must be made by the action agency and the reasoning underlying the determination should be documented in a project file. Please coordinate closely with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for other species listed under the Endangered Species Act that may require consultation. Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act: No impacts to wetlands are proposed; hence NMFS offers no comments under the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act. CLC Commitments and Recommendations: Degree of Effect: 2 Minimal assigned 09/23/2011 by Garett Lips, US Army Corps of Engineers Coordination Document: PD&E Support Document As Per PD&E Manual

93 Direct Effects Identified Resources and Level of Importance: the EST identified less than 10 acres of palustrine wetlands within 200 feet of the corridor. However, the full extent of all jurisdictional waters onsite was not determined so the Corps recommends the study to include identification of all aquatic features within the project area that may be affected by the project. The requests FDOT to verify the abscence of CERP proejcts along the corridor or project related activities which may affect adjacent CERP activities. Furthermore, the corps recommends a review of the adjacent properties includes verification that no compensatory mitigation sites authorized by the Department of the Army sites will be directly or indirectly affected. Comments on Effects to Resources: The Corps recommends avoidance of wetlands, and minimization of impacts to jurisdictioal waters to the extent practical. If imapcts are unavoidable the Corps will require mitigation bank credits to be purchased as opposed to other types of mitigation. Additional Comments (optional): CLC Commitments and Recommendations: Degree of Effect: 0 None assigned 10/06/2011 by Lauren P. Milligan, FL Department of Environmental Protection Coordination Document: Permit Required Direct Effects Identified Resources and Level of Importance: Although wetlands are not likely to be affected, an Environmental Resource Permit from the South Florida Water Management District may be required for the proposed highway widening project. Comments on Effects to Resources: Additional Comments (optional): CLC Commitments and Recommendations: Degree of Effect: 0 None assigned 10/05/2011 by Maher Budeir, US Environmental Protection Agency Coordination Document: No Selection Direct Effects Identified Resources and Level of Importance: Comments on Effects to Resources: Additional Comments (optional): CLC Commitments and Recommendations: Degree of Effect: 0 None assigned 10/04/2011 by Barb Conmy, South Florida Water Management District Coordination Document: Permit Required Direct Effects Identified Resources and Level of Importance: Comments on Effects to Resources: Based on a review of the information describing the proposed project, it appears that no wetlands exist on the proposed site; however, it appears that surface waters may be impacted. As such, the proposed project will require an Environmental Resource Permit (ERP) from the District, which must address both surface water management as well as any work in wetlands and/or other surface waters, including any impacts to wetlands/other surface waters, and mitigation to offset those impacts not addressed in the submittal. Additionally, the surface waters being impacted may be accessible by manatees and a review by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) may be required as part of the review process. As part of an ERP application submitted for the proposed project, the applicant must demonstrate reasonable assurances that the project meets all applicable conditions for issuance of an ERP, such as demonstrating that the project will not cause secondary impacts to the water resources, and will not violate applicable water quality standards. Please refer to Rule 40E and 40E-4.302, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.) and the Basis of Review for ERP applications. Additional Comments (optional): CLC Commitments and Recommendations: Degree of Effect: 2 Minimal assigned 08/31/2011 by John Wrublik, US Fish and Wildlife Service Coordination Document: To Be Determined: Further Coordination Required Direct Effects Identified Resources and Level of Importance: Wetlands Comments on Effects to Resources: Wetlands provide important habitat for fish and wildlife. Data in the environmental screening tool indicate that wetlands may occur within the project

94 area. We recommend that the project be designed to avoid and minimize impacts to wetland resources to the greatest extent practicable. If impacts to wetlands are unavoidable, we recommend that the FDOT provides mitigation that fully compensates for the loss of wetland resources. Additional Comments (optional): CLC Commitments and Recommendations: Wildlife and Habitat Project Effects Coordinator Summary Degree of Effect: 2 Minimal assigned 12/05/2011 by FDOT District 6 Comments: The final design of the project will avoid and/or minimize impacts to wetlands/wildlife & habitat to the greatest extent possible and appropriate mitigation will be provided for unavoidable impacts. An Endangered Species Biological Assessment (ESBA) will be prepared in compliance with Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 USC 1531 et seq) and in accordance with Part 2, Chapter 27 of the FDOT PD&E Manual. Degree of Effect: 2 Minimal assigned 10/04/2011 by Scott Sanders, FL Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Coordination Document: No Selection Direct Effects Identified Resources and Level of Importance: No significant fish or wildlife resources were identified in the project area. Comments on Effects to Resources: Minimal impacts to fish or wildlife resources are anticipated to result from this project. Additional Comments (optional): CLC Commitments and Recommendations: Degree of Effect: 2 Minimal assigned 08/31/2011 by John Wrublik, US Fish and Wildlife Service Coordination Document: To Be Determined: Further Coordination Required Direct Effects Identified Resources and Level of Importance: Federally-listed species and fish and wildlife habitat Comments on Effects to Resources: Federally-listed species - The Service has reviewed our Geographic Information Systems (GIS) database for recorded locations of federally listed threatened and endangered species on or adjacent to the project study area. The GIS database is a compilation of data received from several sources. Wood Stork The project corridor is located in the Core Foraging Areas (CFA)(within 18.6 miles ) of two active nesting colonies of the endangered wood stork (Mycteria americana). The Service believes that the loss of wetlands within a CFA due to an action could result in the loss of foraging habitat for the wood stork. To minimize adverse effects to the wood stork, we recommend that any lost foraging habitat resulting from the project be replaced within the CFA of the affected nesting colony. Moreover, wetlands provided as mitigation should adequately replace the wetland functions lost as a result of the action. The Service does not consider the preservation of wetlands, by itself, as adequate compensation for impacts to wood stork foraging habitat, because the habitat lost is not replaced. Accordingly, any wetland mitigation plan proposed should include a restoration, enhancement, or creation component. In some cases, the Service accepts wetlands compensation located outside the CFA of the affected wood stork nesting colony. Specifically, wetland credits purchased from a "Service Approved" mitigation bank located outside of the CFA would be acceptable to the Service, provided that the impacted wetlands occur within the permitted service area of the bank. For projects that impact 5 or more acres of wood stork foraging habitat, the Service requires a functional assessment be conducted using our "Wood Stork Foraging Analysis Methodology"(Methodology) on the foraging habitat to be impacted and the foraging habitat provided as mitigation. The Methodology can found in the Service's November 9, 2007, Eastern Indigo Snake and Wood Stork Key (Service Federal Activity Code Number FA-1494) provided to the Corps to guide their effect determinations for these two species (available upon request). The Service believes that the following federally listed species have the potential to occur in or near the project site: wood stork, and the eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon corais couperi). Accordingly, the Service recommends that the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) prepare a Biological Assessment for the project (as required by 50 CFR ) during the FDOT's Project Development and Environment process. Fish and Wildlife Resources - Wetlands provide important habitat for fish and wildlife. Data in the environmental screening tool indicate that wetlands may occur within the project area. We recommend that the project be designed to avoid and minimize impacts to wetland resources to the greatest extent practicable. If impacts to wetlands are unavoidable, we recommend that the FDOT provides mitigation that fully compensates for the loss of wetland resources. Additional Comments (optional): CLC Commitments and Recommendations:

95 ETAT Reviews and Coordinator Summary: Cultural Historic and Archaeological Sites Project Effects Coordinator Summary Degree of Effect: 3 Moderate assigned 12/05/2011 by FDOT District 6 Comments: During Project Development, a Cultural Resource Assessment Survey (CRAS) will be conducted in accordance with Part 2, Chapter 12 of the FDOT PD&E Manual to determine the presence of historic, cultural and archeological resources in the area. Any potential impacts to such resources will be avoided and/or minimized during the process. Coordination with the SHPO will take place prior the initiation of any activities. Degree of Effect: 3 Moderate assigned 08/29/2011 by Ginny Leigh Jones, FL Department of State Coordination Document: PD&E Support Document As Per PD&E Manual Coordination Document Comments:The project area has been surveyed, but some previous surveys are inadequate for the current project. Therefore, this office recommends that prior to initiating any project-related land clearing or ground disturbing activities within the project area it should be subjected to a systematic archaeological and architectural survey. All historic-age resources, including potential historic districts, within the area of potential effects should be documented and assessed for NRHP eligibility. The resultant survey report shall conform to the specifications set forth in Chapter 1A-46 Florida Administrative Code and need to be forwarded to this agency for review and comment. Direct Effects Identified Resources and Level of Importance: Historic Bridges: GIS analysis reveals 12 historic-age FDOT bridges that intersect or consist of a portion of the project area. Ten of the bridges (FDOT Nos: /870252, , , , , , , , , ) carry SR 826 over various roads and one waterway (Canal C-8). The final two bridges (FDOT Nos: , ) carry SR 91 over SR 826. One bridge is located between 200 and 500 ft from the project corridor. This bridge, FDOT No , was constructed in Six historic-age bridges are located between 500 and 1320 ft from the project corridor. Finally, 17 historic-age bridges are located between 1320 and 5280 ft from the project corridor. One of these bridges, FDOT No , is recorded in the Florida Master Site File (FMSF No. 8DA11725). The bridge, DA11725, was determined not eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) by the Florida State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) in Resource Groups: GIS analysis reveals two resource groups located immediately adjacent to the project corridor. One of the resources, the SR 826 Canal (8DA11681) has had a section determined not significant by the SHPO. The second adjacent resource, the Senator Course at Don Shula's (8DA11684) has also been determined not significant by the SHPO. The next closest resource group to the project corridor - the Graham Dairy Canal (8DA11420) -- has had sections determined not significant by the SHPO. This resource is located between 100 and 200 ft from the project corridor. The next closest resource, the CSX Railroad (8DA10753) is located between 500 and 1320 ft from the project corridor. This resource has not been evaluated for its significance by the SHPO. The remaining five resource groups are located between 1320 and 5280 ft from the project corridor. One of the resources, the Opa Locka Airport Runway (8DA10000) has been determined potentially eligible for the NRHP by the SHPO. The rest of the resources have either been determined not eligible for the NRHP or have not been evaluated for their significance by the SHPO. Historic Structures: GIS analysis reveals the closest recorded historic structure is located between 100 and 200 ft from the proposed project area. This structure (8DA11167), the Sunshine State Arch, has not been evaluated for its significance by the SHPO. The next closest three structures are located between 200 and 500 ft from the proposed project corridor. Two of these structures (8DA6321, 8DA6322) have been determined not significant by the SHPO. One of the structures (8DA11165) has not been evaluated for their significance by the SHPO. The next 17 closest structures are located between 500 and 1320 ft from the project corridor. Thirteen of the structures have not been evaluated for their significance and four have been determined not eligible for the NRHP by the SHPO. There are 55 structures recorded between 1320 and 5280 ft from the proposed project area. Fifty-four of the structures have not been evaluated for their significance by the SHPO. The last structure located at this distance has been determined not eligible for the NRHP by the SHPO. Archaeological Sites: GIS analysis reveals the presence of one archaeological site located between 100 and 200 ft of the proposed project area. This site (8DA46) has not been evaluated by the SHPO. There are six archaeological sites located between 1320 and 5280 ft of the proposed project area. Five of the sides have not been evaluated by the SHPO and the last site has been evaluated as not eligible for the NRHP. Comments on Effects to Resources: Bridges: Although there are numerous historic-age bridges that intersect with the project corridor, it is unlikely that the proposed project will impact them. However, further research will need to be conducted to make a final determination of significance and effect. Resource Groups: It is unlikely that any significant resource groups will be impacted by the proposed project. Historic Structures: It is unlikely that the proposed project will impact the recorded historic structures due to the nature of the proposed work. Archaeological Sites: There is a slight possibility that the proposed project will impact recorded archaeological sites. There is also a possibility that there are unrecorded archaeological sites. Additional Comments (optional): The project area has been surveyed, but some previous surveys are inadequate for the current project. Therefore, this office recommends that prior to initiating any project-related land clearing or ground disturbing activities within the project area it should be subjected to a systematic archaeological and architectural survey. All historic-age resources, including potential historic districts, within the area of potential effects should be documented and

96 assessed for NRHP eligibility. The resultant survey report shall conform to the specifications set forth in Chapter 1A-46 Florida Administrative Code and need to be forwarded to this agency for review and comment. CLC Commitments and Recommendations: Degree of Effect: 0 None assigned 10/07/2011 by Cathy Kendall, Federal Highway Administration Coordination Document: PD&E Support Document As Per PD&E Manual Direct Effects Identified Resources and Level of Importance: No cultural resources indicated on the GIS tool that are in close proximity to the project. Comments on Effects to Resources: Additional Comments (optional): CLC Commitments and Recommendations: Degree of Effect: 3 Moderate assigned 09/26/2011 by Elliott York, Seminole Tribe of Florida Coordination Document: No Selection Direct Effects Identified Resources and Level of Importance: Due to the absence of a systematic Cultural Resources Assessment Survey for the proposed project corridor, the STOF-THPO would like to request a CRAS be conducted in order to determine effects, if any, to archaeological sites within the project area. Comments on Effects to Resources: The STOF-THPO would like to review a CRAS before commenting on possible effects to archaeological sites in the project area. Additional Comments (optional): CLC Commitments and Recommendations: Recreation Areas Project Effects Coordinator Summary Degree of Effect: 0 None assigned 12/05/2011 by FDOT District 6 Comments: Based on comments received from the Miami-Dade County Park and Recreation Department as part of the Advance Notification process, there would be no direct impacts to any County park sites. However, they note that Amelia Earhart Park is located east of the intersection of I-75 and SR 826 and suggest that appropriate signage be provided for motorists using SR 826 who access the park facility. An assessment of potential impacts to recreation areas will be conducted during Project Development. Future environmental documentation will include an evaluation of the primary, secondary, and cumulative impacts of the proposed interchange improvements and construction on any public lands and any proposed acquisition sites. FDOT will coordinate with the appropriate agencies concerning the necessary studies, documentation and commitments needed to adequately address all identified resources in accordance with federal, state, and local laws and regulations. Impacts will be avoided and/or minimized during the process. Degree of Effect: 0 None assigned 10/07/2011 by Cathy Kendall, Federal Highway Administration Coordination Document: PD&E Support Document As Per PD&E Manual Direct Effects Identified Resources and Level of Importance: No recreation areas identified within 200 feet of project using the GIS mapping. Please verify. Comments on Effects to Resources: Additional Comments (optional): CLC Commitments and Recommendations: Degree of Effect: 0 None assigned 10/06/2011 by Lauren P. Milligan, FL Department of Environmental Protection Coordination Document: No Selection Direct Effects Identified Resources and Level of Importance: Comments on Effects to Resources: Additional Comments (optional):

97 CLC Commitments and Recommendations: Degree of Effect: 0 None assigned 10/05/2011 by Maher Budeir, US Environmental Protection Agency Coordination Document: No Selection Direct Effects Identified Resources and Level of Importance: Comments on Effects to Resources: Additional Comments (optional): CLC Commitments and Recommendations: Section 4(f) Potential Project Effects Coordinator Summary Degree of Effect: 2 Minimal assigned 12/05/2011 by FDOT District 6 Comments: An assessment of potential impacts to Section 4(f)/Section 106 resources will be conducted during Project Development in accordance with Part 2, Chapter 12 of the FDOT PD&E Manual. FDOT will coordinate with the appropriate agencies concerning the necessary studies, documentation and commitments needed to adequately address any identified resources in accordance with federal, state, and local laws and regulations. Impacts will be avoided and/or minimized during the process. None found ETAT Reviews and Coordinator Summary: Community Aesthetics Project Effects Coordinator Summary Degree of Effect: 3 Moderate assigned 12/05/2011 by FDOT District 6 Comments: Potential aesthetic effects will be assessed further during Project Development as more detailed information becomes available. Noise and vibration effects will be evaluated per Part 2, Chapter 17 of the FDOT PD&E Manual. Throughout the process, public outreach will be conducted by FDOT District 6 (in coordination with the Miami-Dade Metropolitan Planning Organization) to solicit input from the community. Throughout the process, FDOT District 6 will ensure that public commentary collected as a result of such efforts is documented in the EST. Degree of Effect: 3 Moderate assigned 10/05/2011 by Megan McKinney, FDOT District 6 Coordination Document: No Selection Direct Effects Identified Resources and Level of Importance: 100-Foot Buffer: 2004 SFWMD FL Land Use and Land Cover Land Use / Acres / Percent CHANNELIZED WATERWAYS, CANALS / 0.3 / 0.14% COMMERCIAL AND SERVICES / 5.6 / 2.54% EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES / 0.4 / 0.18% FIXED SINGLE FAMILY UNITS / 3.8 / 1.72% INSTITUTIONAL / 0.8 / 0.37% MULTIPLE DWELLING UNITS, LOW RISE / 0.0 / 0.01% OTHER LIGHT INDUSTRY / 0.3 / 0.12% ROADS AND HIGHWAYS / / 94.91% Front Porch Communities - OPA-LOCKA (25.48 Acres) 500-Foot Buffer: 2004 SFWMD FL Land Use and Land Cover Land Use / Acres / Percent BRAZILIAN PEPPER / 6.1 / 0.55% CHANNELIZED WATERWAYS, CANALS / 16.9 / 1.52% COMMERCIAL AND SERVICES / / 27.21% COMMERCIAL AND SERVICES UNDER CONSTRUCTION / 2.8 / 0.25% EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES / 25.3 / 2.27%

98 ELECTRICAL POWER FACILITIES / 3.0 / 0.27% ELECTRICAL POWER TRANSMISSION LINES / 2.1 / 0.19% FIXED SINGLE FAMILY UNITS / / 19.80% GOLF COURSE / 28.1 / 2.53% INSTITUTIONAL / 27.9 / 2.51% MEDIUM DENSITY UNDER CONSTRUCTION / 0.5 / 0.04% MULTIPLE DWELLING UNITS, LOW RISE / 47.7 / 4.30% OPEN LAND / 14.6 / 1.32% OTHER LIGHT INDUSTRY / 24.4 / 2.20% RESERVOIRS / 7.7 / 0.69% ROADS AND HIGHWAYS / / 32.33% SHOPPING CENTERS / 7.5 / 0.67% UPLAND HARDWOOD FOREST / 14.7 / 1.33% Front Porch Communities - OPA-LOCKA ( Acres) Geocoded Health Care Facilities (4) - MIAMI GARDENS DIALYSIS - FARMERS MEDICAL CENTER, INC. - HOLLISTIC MEDICAL CENTER - NORTH DADE HEALTH CENTER Group Care Facilities (22) Florida Site File Historic Standing Structures (4) - CADILLAC CLASSIC MOTORS LAMPPOSTS - CADILLAC MOTOR CARS ENTRANCE OFFICE NW 13TH AVENUE - SUNSHINE STATE ARCH List of Florida Site File Archaeological or Historic Sites (1) 1320-Foot Buffer: 2004 SFWMD FL Land Use and Land Cover Land Use / Acres / Percent BRAZILIAN PEPPER / 7.8 / 0.26% CHANNELIZED WATERWAYS, CANALS / / 3.59% COMMERCIAL AND SERVICES / / 22.99% COMMERCIAL AND SERVICES UNDER CONSTRUCTION / 13.1 / 0.44% EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES / 80.8 / 2.69% ELECTRICAL POWER FACILITIES / 8.9 / 0.30% ELECTRICAL POWER TRANSMISSION LINES / 8.0 / 0.27% FIXED SINGLE FAMILY UNITS / / 31.71% GOLF COURSE / / 3.64% INSTITUTIONAL / 68.9 / 2.29% MEDIUM DENSITY UNDER CONSTRUCTION / 5.8 / 0.19% MULTIPLE DWELLING UNITS, HIGH RISE / 11.7 / 0.39% MULTIPLE DWELLING UNITS, LOW RISE / / 5.23% OPEN LAND / 75.4 / 2.51% OTHER LIGHT INDUSTRY / / 3.47% RESERVOIRS / 28.7 / 0.95% ROADS AND HIGHWAYS / / 17.05% SHOPPING CENTERS / 28.6 / 0.95% TRANSPORTATION / 0.4 / 0.01% UPLAND HARDWOOD FOREST / 32.6 / 1.08% 2000 Census Designated Places - Bunche Park - Carol City - Country Club - Golden Glades - Hialeah - Miami Lakes - Norland - North Miami Beach - Opa-locka North - Scott Lake Front Porch Communities - OPA-LOCKA ( Acres) Geocoded Health Care Facilities (5) - MIAMI GARDENS DIALYSIS - SIERRA MEDICAL CENTER INC. - FARMERS MEDICAL CENTER, INC. - HOLLISTIC MEDICAL CENTER - NORTH DADE HEALTH CENTER

99 Group Care Facilities (54) Florida Site File Historic Standing Structures (21) List of Florida Site File Archaeological or Historic Sites (1) Comments on Effects to Resources: SR 826 (Palmetto Expressway) is one of the most traveled transportation corridors in Miami-Dade County. The proposed widening of the Expressway, currently a 6-lane facility, from I-75 to the Golden Glades Interchange is planned to alleviate the increasing levels of traffic congestion observed within the study area. According to EST GIS analysis, several community features potentially sensitive to noise and vibration are present within the study area. There is one archaeological site (likely eligible for listing on the NRHP) within the 200-foot buffer, while four healthcare facilities and twenty-two group care facilities are identified within the 500-foot buffer. EST analysis also identified a mix of residential and commercial land use within the 1320-foot project buffer. The residential portion consists of a combination of multi-family and single-family development. Much of the development within the study area abuts the SR 826 right-of-way line. The segment of SR 826 between NW 42nd Avenue and NW 17th Avenue forms the northern boundary of the state-designated Opa-Locka Front Porch Community. As a Front Porch Community, Opa-Locka is a focal point for state-mandated efforts and financial investments directed towards the redevelopment of distressed communities. Due to the presence of an archaeological site, several healthcare and group care facilities, proximate residential uses, and the Opa-Locka Front Porch Community, the aesthetic impacts resulting from this project are anticipated to be moderate. Additional Comments (optional): CLC Commitments and Recommendations: Potential aesthetic effects will be assessed further during Project Development as more detailed information becomes available. Noise and vibration effects will be evaluated per Part 2, Chapter 17 of the PD&E Manual. Throughout the process, FDOT District 6 will conduct public outreach to solicit input on the project from the community. Economic Project Effects Coordinator Summary Degree of Effect: 1 Enhanced assigned 12/05/2011 by FDOT District 6 Comments: During Project Development, public outreach will be conducted by FDOT District 6 (in coordination with the Miami-Dade Metropolitan Planning Organization) to solicit input from the community. Throughout the process, FDOT District 6 will ensure that public commentary collected as a result of such efforts is documented in the EST. As more detailed and finalized information regarding potential economic enhancements and impacts becomes available, the proposed project will be adjusted so as to avoid and/or minimize impacts to the identified social, cultural, and natural features within the vicinity of the interchange. Degree of Effect: 1 Enhanced assigned 10/05/2011 by Megan McKinney, FDOT District 6 Coordination Document: No Selection Direct Effects Identified Resources and Level of Importance: 100-Foot Buffer: 2004 SFWMD FL Land Use and Land Cover Land Use / Acres / Percent CHANNELIZED WATERWAYS, CANALS / 0.3 / 0.14% COMMERCIAL AND SERVICES / 5.6 / 2.54% EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES / 0.4 / 0.18% FIXED SINGLE FAMILY UNITS / 3.8 / 1.72% INSTITUTIONAL / 0.8 / 0.37% MULTIPLE DWELLING UNITS, LOW RISE / 0.0 / 0.01% OTHER LIGHT INDUSTRY / 0.3 / 0.12% ROADS AND HIGHWAYS / / 94.91% Air Transportation Facilities - CAPELETTI Enterprise Zones - MIAMI/DADE COUNTY (19.0 Acres) Brownfield Location Boundaries - CAROL CITY AREA (0.4 Acres) - DADE-OPA-LOCKA AREA (34.4 Acres) 500-Foot Buffer: 2004 SFWMD FL Land Use and Land Cover Land Use / Acres / Percent BRAZILIAN PEPPER / 6.1 / 0.55%

100 CHANNELIZED WATERWAYS, CANALS / 16.9 / 1.52% COMMERCIAL AND SERVICES / / 27.21% COMMERCIAL AND SERVICES UNDER CONSTRUCTION / 2.8 / 0.25% EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES / 25.3 / 2.27% ELECTRICAL POWER FACILITIES / 3.0 / 0.27% ELECTRICAL POWER TRANSMISSION LINES / 2.1 / 0.19% FIXED SINGLE FAMILY UNITS / / 19.80% GOLF COURSE / 28.1 / 2.53% INSTITUTIONAL / 27.9 / 2.51% MEDIUM DENSITY UNDER CONSTRUCTION / 0.5 / 0.04% MULTIPLE DWELLING UNITS, LOW RISE / 47.7 / 4.30% OPEN LAND / 14.6 / 1.32% OTHER LIGHT INDUSTRY / 24.4 / 2.20% RESERVOIRS / 7.7 / 0.69% ROADS AND HIGHWAYS / / 32.33% SHOPPING CENTERS / 7.5 / 0.67% UPLAND HARDWOOD FOREST / 14.7 / 1.33% Air Transportation Facilities - CAPELETTI Enterprise Zones - MIAMI/DADE COUNTY (208.8 Acres) Brownfield Location Boundaries - CAROL CITY AREA (5.9 Acres) - DADE-OPA-LOCKA AREA (145.3 Acres) 1320-Foot Buffer: 2004 SFWMD FL Land Use and Land Cover Land Use / Acres / Percent BRAZILIAN PEPPER / 7.8 / 0.26% CHANNELIZED WATERWAYS, CANALS / / 3.59% COMMERCIAL AND SERVICES / / 22.99% COMMERCIAL AND SERVICES UNDER CONSTRUCTION / 13.1 / 0.44% EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES / 80.8 / 2.69% ELECTRICAL POWER FACILITIES / 8.9 / 0.30% ELECTRICAL POWER TRANSMISSION LINES / 8.0 / 0.27% FIXED SINGLE FAMILY UNITS / / 31.71% GOLF COURSE / / 3.64% INSTITUTIONAL / 68.9 / 2.29% MEDIUM DENSITY UNDER CONSTRUCTION / 5.8 / 0.19% MULTIPLE DWELLING UNITS, HIGH RISE / 11.7 / 0.39% MULTIPLE DWELLING UNITS, LOW RISE / / 5.23% OPEN LAND / 75.4 / 2.51% OTHER LIGHT INDUSTRY / / 3.47% RESERVOIRS / 28.7 / 0.95% ROADS AND HIGHWAYS / / 17.05% SHOPPING CENTERS / 28.6 / 0.95% TRANSPORTATION / 0.4 / 0.01% UPLAND HARDWOOD FOREST / 32.6 / 1.08% Air Transportation Facilities - CAPELETTI Enterprise Zones - MIAMI/DADE COUNTY (532.1 Acres) Brownfield Location Boundaries - CAROL CITY AREA (17.2 Acres) - DADE-OPA-LOCKA AREA (381.2 Acres) Comments on Effects to Resources: SR 826/Palmetto Expressway is one of the most traveled transportation corridors in Miami-Dade County. The multi-lane expressway extends from US-1 to the Golden Glades Interchange. SR 826 connects south Miami-Dade County to north Miami-Dade County and serves as a feeder route to the County's busiest east-west transportation corridor (SR 836), as well as provides system-to-system connections to I-75, Florida's Turnpike, SR 874, and I -95. In addition, SR 826 is designated as a Florida Intrastate Highway System (FIHS) and Strategic Intermodal System (SIS) facility. Based upon 2010 FDOT Florida Traffic Information Software, the highest existing Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) volume for SR 826 is 149,500 vehicles per day (vpd) on the six-lane section (from NW 154th Street to NW 27th Avenue) and 164,000 vpd on the eight-lane section (from NW 27th Avenue to the Golden Glades Interchange). These volumes equate to a daily Level of Service (LOS) F and E, respectively. Throughout most of the east-west corridor, the mainline facility currently operates at LOS F during peak traffic conditions. Additionally, during existing peak traffic conditions, the off-ramps at NW 67th Avenue, NW 57th Avenue and NW 27th Avenue queue back into the mainline and in many instances, impede through traffic in the outside lane. The signalized intersections within the interchanges at NW 67th Avenue and NW 57th Avenue operate at LOS F during the PM peak period. The widening of the Palmetto Expressway is expected to improve traffic circulation in the area. The increased capacity of the roadway is expected to

101 improve mobility for commuters and improve access to commercial uses located along the roadway. SR 826 also serves a significant role in the regional movement of traffic and goods. As a facility that functions as part of the FIHS and SIS, SR 826 links hubs of economic activity within the state, and serves as a corridor for freight traffic and movement. Based on the foregoing, the proposed widening of SR 826 is anticipated to increase capacity and improve mobility along the project corridor and within the region. Therefore, a degree of effect of enhanced is assigned for the economic issue. Additional Comments (optional): CLC Commitments and Recommendations: During Project Development, FDOT District 6 will conduct public outreach to solicit input on the project from the community. Land Use Project Effects Coordinator Summary Degree of Effect: 2 Minimal assigned 12/05/2011 by FDOT District 6 Comments: According to comments received from the Miami-Dade Metropolitan Planning Organization, this project is not listed in the 2035 LRTP Cost Feasible Plan approved by the MPO Governing Board in October of 2009 because it is not fully funded (only has funding for the Planning and Design phases). Only those projects that are fully funded are identified in the 2035 LRTP Cost Feasible Plan. Once the PD&E Study is complete, and the preferred alternative and final alignments are defined, FDOT will need to request a LRTP amendment from the MPO Board that includes the funding mechanisms for the construction phase, hence being able to move the project into the 2035 LRTP Cost Feasible Plan. During Project Development, public outreach will be conducted by FDOT District 6 (in coordination with the Miami-Dade Metropolitan Planning Organization) to solicit input from the community. Throughout the process, FDOT District 6 will ensure that public commentary collected as a result of such efforts is documented in the EST. Degree of Effect: 0 None assigned 09/30/2011 by Amie Longstreet, FL Department of Community Affairs Coordination Document: No Selection Direct Effects Identified Resources and Level of Importance: Miami-Dade County and Miami Gardens Comprehensive Development Master Plans, and the Miami Lakes Comprehensive Plan Comments on Effects to Resources: Comment: City of Miami Gardens The proposed project is within TCMA #1 through TCMA 4 which is depicted on MAP TRAN I - 6: 2016 Level of Service Standards of the Transportation Element of the City of Miami Gardens Community Development Master Plan (December 2006). Also, the project is consistent with the Transportation Element Goals, Objectives and Policies: Goal 1, Objective 1.1 and Policies 1.5.7, and of the Community Development Master Plan (amended February 8, 2001). Miami-Dade County The proposed project makes up the boundary of the northwest corner of the Urban Infill Boundary depicted I Figure 1 of the Miami-Dade Community Development Master Plan Capital Improvements Element (amended April 2009) and is consistent with Objectives TC-3 and TC-4 of the Transportation Element. Comment: The allocation of construction fund for the proposed project is not included in the current Five Year Schedule of Capital Improvements for the City of Miami Gardens, or the Town of Miami Lakes. As the project moves forward, the project coordinator should also remind the City of Miami Gardens, and the Town of Miami Lakes that the Construction phase of this project must be included in their respective Five-year Schedule of Capital Improvements Elements pursuant to Section (3)(a)5, F.S. Comment: Town of Miami Lakes The proposed project is consistent with following Transportation Element GOPs from the Town of Miami Lakes 2003 Community Development Master Plan: Goal1, Objective 1.1, Policy 1.1,1, Policy , Policy 1.5.7, and Policy Miami-Dade County The proposed project is consistent with Policies TC-1A, TC-1B, Objective TC-3, Objective TC-4 and Policies TC-4B and TC-4D of the Miami-Dade County Community Development Master Plan (amended April 28, 2010). Comment: Currently, the east-west corridor operates at a Level of Service F during peak hours within a densely urbanized area that transverses several TCMAs. The inclusion of a general use lane or Managed lane would enhance mobility within the project area and is consistent with the Community Development Master Plans and Comprehensive Plans of the City of Miami Gardens, the Town of Miami Lakes and Miami-Dade County. Additional Comments (optional): CLC Commitments and Recommendations: Degree of Effect: 2 Minimal assigned 10/05/2011 by Megan McKinney, FDOT District 6

102 Coordination Document: No Selection Direct Effects Identified Resources and Level of Importance: 100-Foot Buffer: 2004 SFWMD FL Land Use and Land Cover Land Use / Acres / Percent CHANNELIZED WATERWAYS, CANALS / 0.3 / 0.14% COMMERCIAL AND SERVICES / 5.6 / 2.54% EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES / 0.4 / 0.18% FIXED SINGLE FAMILY UNITS / 3.8 / 1.72% INSTITUTIONAL / 0.8 / 0.37% MULTIPLE DWELLING UNITS, LOW RISE / 0.0 / 0.01% OTHER LIGHT INDUSTRY / 0.3 / 0.12% ROADS AND HIGHWAYS / / 94.91% 500-Foot Buffer: 2004 SFWMD FL Land Use and Land Cover Land Use / Acres / Percent BRAZILIAN PEPPER / 6.1 / 0.55% CHANNELIZED WATERWAYS, CANALS / 16.9 / 1.52% COMMERCIAL AND SERVICES / / 27.21% COMMERCIAL AND SERVICES UNDER CONSTRUCTION / 2.8 / 0.25% EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES / 25.3 / 2.27% ELECTRICAL POWER FACILITIES / 3.0 / 0.27% ELECTRICAL POWER TRANSMISSION LINES / 2.1 / 0.19% FIXED SINGLE FAMILY UNITS / / 19.80% GOLF COURSE / 28.1 / 2.53% INSTITUTIONAL / 27.9 / 2.51% MEDIUM DENSITY UNDER CONSTRUCTION / 0.5 / 0.04% MULTIPLE DWELLING UNITS, LOW RISE / 47.7 / 4.30% OPEN LAND / 14.6 / 1.32% OTHER LIGHT INDUSTRY / 24.4 / 2.20% RESERVOIRS / 7.7 / 0.69% ROADS AND HIGHWAYS / / 32.33% SHOPPING CENTERS / 7.5 / 0.67% UPLAND HARDWOOD FOREST / 14.7 / 1.33% 1320-Foot Buffer: 2004 SFWMD FL Land Use and Land Cover Land Use / Acres / Percent BRAZILIAN PEPPER / 7.8 / 0.26% CHANNELIZED WATERWAYS, CANALS / / 3.59% COMMERCIAL AND SERVICES / / 22.99% COMMERCIAL AND SERVICES UNDER CONSTRUCTION / 13.1 / 0.44% EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES / 80.8 / 2.69% ELECTRICAL POWER FACILITIES / 8.9 / 0.30% ELECTRICAL POWER TRANSMISSION LINES / 8.0 / 0.27% FIXED SINGLE FAMILY UNITS / / 31.71% GOLF COURSE / / 3.64% INSTITUTIONAL / 68.9 / 2.29% MEDIUM DENSITY UNDER CONSTRUCTION / 5.8 / 0.19% MULTIPLE DWELLING UNITS, HIGH RISE / 11.7 / 0.39% MULTIPLE DWELLING UNITS, LOW RISE / / 5.23% OPEN LAND / 75.4 / 2.51% OTHER LIGHT INDUSTRY / / 3.47% RESERVOIRS / 28.7 / 0.95% ROADS AND HIGHWAYS / / 17.05% SHOPPING CENTERS / 28.6 / 0.95% TRANSPORTATION / 0.4 / 0.01% UPLAND HARDWOOD FOREST / 32.6 / 1.08% Comments on Effects to Resources: As indicated in the EST data, the segment of SR 826 from I-75 to the Golden Glades Interchange is surrounded by a mix of land use types. Commercial and residential land uses make up the majority of use proximate to the roadway. Fixed single-family units make up the largest percentage of land use within the quarter-mile buffer (953 acres/31.71%), and less than 5% of the total identified use is presently open land. According to the Miami-Dade County Future Land Use Map, the character of the study area is to remain relatively unchanged. Based on the foregoing, the project's potential adverse effects on land use are anticipated to be minimal. Plan Consistency:

103 The proposed project is included in the Miami-Dade 2035 Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) and is listed under the Partially Funded Projects as a Priority IV for funding of Planning and Design between the years 2026 and The project has funding in the amount of $5,050,000 allocated for PD&E in FY 2011/2012 of the latest Miami-Dade County MPO Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and $4,883,444 (2011) and $126,178 (2012) in the latest adopted FDOT Five-Year Work Program. Additionally, the project is funded for PD&E in the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). Note that this project is not included in the 2035 LRTP Cost Feasible Plan approved by the MPO Governing Board in October 2009 because it is not fully funded. Only fully-funded projects are identified in the 2035 LRTP Cost Feasible Plan. As stated above, this project only has assigned funding for the Planning and Design phases. Once a preferred alternative is identified during Project Development, FDOT District 6 will coordinate with the Miami- Dade MPO to amend the LRTP and identify the funding mechanisms for construction of the project. Additional Comments (optional): CLC Commitments and Recommendations: During Project Development, FDOT District 6 will conduct public outreach to solicit input from the community. Mobility Project Effects Coordinator Summary Degree of Effect: 1 Enhanced assigned 12/05/2011 by FDOT District 6 Comments: During Project Development, public outreach will be conducted by FDOT District 6 (in coordination with the Miami-Dade Metropolitan Planning Organization) to solicit input from the community. Throughout the process, FDOT District 6 will ensure that public commentary collected as a result of such efforts is documented in the EST. As more detailed and finalized information regarding potential mobility enhancements and effects becomes available, the proposed project will be adjusted so as to avoid and/or minimize impacts to the identified social, cultural, and natural features within the vicinity of the interchange. Degree of Effect: 1 Enhanced assigned 10/05/2011 by Megan McKinney, FDOT District 6 Coordination Document: No Selection Direct Effects Identified Resources and Level of Importance: 500-Foot Buffer: Bus Transit Route (33) - 17, 21, 22, 27, 32, 42, 75, 77, 83, 95, , 122, 241, 246, Foot Buffer: Bus Transit Routes (60) - 2, 17, 18, 21, 22, 27, 28, 29, 32, 42, 73, 75, 77, 83, 95, ,107, 122, 241, 246, 267, 441, Trail Fixed-Guideway Transit and Ferry Network - TRI-COUNTY COMMUTER RAIL Comments on Effects to Resources: The section of SR 826 from I-75 to the Golden Glades Interchange serves the major northwest Miami-Dade County growth area along NW 154th Street, NW 67th Avenue and NW 57th Avenue, provides access to Sun Life Stadium and Calder Casino and Race Course on NW 27th Avenue and connects to Florida's Turnpike and I-95 at the Golden Glades Interchange. SR 826 in this area is a six-lane divided limited access facility from NW 154th Street to NW 27th Avenue and an eight-lane divided expressway from NW 27th Avenue to the Golden Glades Interchange. A one-way frontage road (NW 167th Street) runs along each side of the SR 826 mainline facility that intersects the cross streets and provides access to businesses located along the corridor. Based upon 2010 FDOT Florida Traffic Information Software, the highest existing Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) volume for SR 826 is 149,500 vehicles per day (vpd) on the six-lane section (from NW 154th Street to NW 27th Avenue) and 164,000 vpd on the eight-lane section (from NW 27th Avenue to the Golden Glades Interchange). These volumes equate to a daily Level of Service (LOS) F and E, respectively. Throughout most of the east-west corridor, the mainline facility currently operates at LOS F during peak traffic conditions. Additionally, during existing peak traffic conditions, the off-ramps at NW 67th Avenue, NW 57th Avenue and NW 27th Avenue queue back into the mainline and in many instances, impede through traffic in the outside lane. The signalized intersections within the interchanges at NW 67th Avenue and NW 57th Avenue operate at LOS F during the PM peak period. Though SR 826 does not currently support transit routes, it does provide access to the Golden Glades Multimodal Terminal which is located at the eastern terminus of the project. This terminal provides a regional link connecting Tri-Rail, Miami-Dade County Transit and Broward County Transit and supports a park and ride lot, Tri-Rail access, and bus service (Routes 22, 49, 77, 95X, E, 246, and 277). SR 826 serves as part of the evacuation route network established by the Florida Division of Emergency Management. Designated as a primary evacuation route of Miami-Dade County, this facility is critical in evacuating residents of the cities of Miami Lakes, Opa-Locka and surrounding areas in Miami-Dade County. The proposed capacity improvement is anticipated to enhance evacuation capacity and traffic circulation during emergency events which, in turn, will lead to improved evacuation and response times. Currently, there are multiple projects along or connecting to SR 826 that are under construction or planned for construction in the near future. The

104 ongoing FDOT Palmetto Improvement Program includes a twelve-section phasing plan that consists of mainline widening and interchange improvements along the corridor. The last section scheduled for construction in 2010 is Section 5 that includes the SR 826/SR 836 interchange. Improvements required as part of the proposed East-West corridor project are needed to be consistent with the improvement program completed for the north-south section. Based on the foregoing, the proposed expansion of SR 826 is anticipated to alleviate traffic congestion along the corridor, improve access to the Golden Glades Multimodal Center, improve connectivity to adjacent FIHS and SIS facilities, facilitate freight movement and improve emergency evacuation and response times. Therefore, overall mobility within the area is anticipated to be enhanced as a result of the proposed improvement. Additional Comments (optional): CLC Commitments and Recommendations: During Project Development, FDOT District 6 will conduct public outreach to solicit input from the community. Relocation Project Effects Coordinator Summary Degree of Effect: 3 Moderate assigned 12/05/2011 by FDOT District 6 Comments: Potential relocation effects will be assessed further during Project Development as more detailed information becomes available. Degree of Effect: 3 Moderate assigned 10/05/2011 by Megan McKinney, FDOT District 6 Coordination Document: No Selection Direct Effects Identified Resources and Level of Importance: 100-Foot Buffer: 2004 SFWMD FL Land Use and Land Cover Land Use / Acres / Percent CHANNELIZED WATERWAYS, CANALS / 0.3 / 0.14% COMMERCIAL AND SERVICES / 5.6 / 2.54% EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES / 0.4 / 0.18% FIXED SINGLE FAMILY UNITS / 3.8 / 1.72% INSTITUTIONAL / 0.8 / 0.37% MULTIPLE DWELLING UNITS, LOW RISE / 0.0 / 0.01% OTHER LIGHT INDUSTRY / 0.3 / 0.12% ROADS AND HIGHWAYS / / 94.91% 500-Foot Buffer: 2004 SFWMD FL Land Use and Land Cover Land Use / Acres / Percent BRAZILIAN PEPPER / 6.1 / 0.55% CHANNELIZED WATERWAYS, CANALS / 16.9 / 1.52% COMMERCIAL AND SERVICES / / 27.21% COMMERCIAL AND SERVICES UNDER CONSTRUCTION / 2.8 / 0.25% EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES / 25.3 / 2.27% ELECTRICAL POWER FACILITIES / 3.0 / 0.27% ELECTRICAL POWER TRANSMISSION LINES / 2.1 / 0.19% FIXED SINGLE FAMILY UNITS / / 19.80% GOLF COURSE / 28.1 / 2.53% INSTITUTIONAL / 27.9 / 2.51% MEDIUM DENSITY UNDER CONSTRUCTION / 0.5 / 0.04% MULTIPLE DWELLING UNITS, LOW RISE / 47.7 / 4.30% OPEN LAND / 14.6 / 1.32% OTHER LIGHT INDUSTRY / 24.4 / 2.20% RESERVOIRS / 7.7 / 0.69% ROADS AND HIGHWAYS / / 32.33% SHOPPING CENTERS / 7.5 / 0.67% UPLAND HARDWOOD FOREST / 14.7 / 1.33% Comments on Effects to Resources: The purpose of this project is to widen the SR 826 mainline from I-75 to the Golden Glades Interchange to provide additional lanes in each direction that could function as general use lanes or managed lanes. Two lanes in each direction could most likely be added within existing right-of-way. Though EST analysis shows few listed features within the 100-foot project buffer, additional research shows that a fire station, Dade Christian School, St. Thomas University, and Golden Glades Elementary School all front the service roads located along SR 826. Residential land use comprises approximately 1/4 of the total area identified within the 500-foot project buffer, and is adjacent to both sides of SR 826 at multiple locations along the project corridor. The Opa-Locka Front Porch Community is located adjacent to the south side of SR 826 between NW 42nd Avenue and NW 17th Avenue.

105 Though limited impacts are anticipated to result from the project, the proximity of community facilities, residential land use, and the Opa-Locka Front Porch Community warrant a moderate degree of effect for the relocation issue. Additional Comments (optional): CLC Commitments and Recommendations: Potential relocation effects will be assessed further during Project Development as more detailed and finalized information regarding right-of-way needs becomes available. Social Project Effects Coordinator Summary Degree of Effect: 3 Moderate assigned 12/05/2011 by FDOT District 6 Comments: During Project Development, public outreach will be conducted by FDOT District 6 (in coordination with the Miami-Dade Metropolitan Planning Organization) to solicit input from the transportation disadvantaged, elderly, and low income populations to ensure that identified transportation needs are addressed through the project. Degree of Effect: 3 Moderate assigned 10/05/2011 by Megan McKinney, FDOT District 6 Coordination Document: No Selection Direct Effects Identified Resources and Level of Importance: 100-Foot Buffer: 2004 SFWMD FL Land Use and Land Cover Land Use / Acres / Percent CHANNELIZED WATERWAYS, CANALS / 0.3 / 0.14% COMMERCIAL AND SERVICES / 5.6 / 2.54% EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES / 0.4 / 0.18% FIXED SINGLE FAMILY UNITS / 3.8 / 1.72% INSTITUTIONAL / 0.8 / 0.37% MULTIPLE DWELLING UNITS, LOW RISE / 0.0 / 0.01% OTHER LIGHT INDUSTRY / 0.3 / 0.12% ROADS AND HIGHWAYS / / 94.91% Enterprise Zones - MIAMI/DADE COUNTY 19 Acres Front Porch Communities - OPA-LOCKA (25.48 Acres) Resource Groups (1) - THE SENATOR COURSE AT DON SHULA'S 500-Foot Buffer: 2004 SFWMD FL Land Use and Land Cover Land Use / Acres / Percent BRAZILIAN PEPPER / 6.1 / 0.55% CHANNELIZED WATERWAYS, CANALS / 16.9 / 1.52% COMMERCIAL AND SERVICES / / 27.21% COMMERCIAL AND SERVICES UNDER CONSTRUCTION / 2.8 / 0.25% EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES / 25.3 / 2.27% ELECTRICAL POWER FACILITIES / 3.0 / 0.27% ELECTRICAL POWER TRANSMISSION LINES / 2.1 / 0.19% FIXED SINGLE FAMILY UNITS / / 19.80% GOLF COURSE / 28.1 / 2.53% INSTITUTIONAL / 27.9 / 2.51% MEDIUM DENSITY UNDER CONSTRUCTION / 0.5 / 0.04% MULTIPLE DWELLING UNITS, LOW RISE / 47.7 / 4.30% OPEN LAND / 14.6 / 1.32% OTHER LIGHT INDUSTRY / 24.4 / 2.20% RESERVOIRS / 7.7 / 0.69% ROADS AND HIGHWAYS / / 32.33% SHOPPING CENTERS / 7.5 / 0.67% UPLAND HARDWOOD FOREST / 14.7 / 1.33% Enterprise Zones - MIAMI/DADE COUNTY Acres FDEM FIRE STATIONS (1) - MIAMI - DADE COUNTY FIRE RESCUE STATION 1

106 Florida Site File Historic Standing Structures (4) - CADILLAC CLASSIC MOTORS LAMPPOSTS - CADILLAC MOTOR CARS ENTRANCE OFFICE NW 13TH AVENUE - SUNSHINE STATE ARCH Group Care Facilities (22) Geocoded Community Centers (8) - MIAMI GARDENS JUNIOR CHAMBER OF COMMERCE - TEEM 2000 INC - T-MACK COMMUNITY TECH CENTER - LOCK TOWNS COMMUNITY MENTAL HEALTH CENTER - EMMANUEL COMMUNITY CENTER - JACKSON NORTH COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER TARGETED CASE MANAGEMENT - SOUTH FLORIDA COMMUNITY CARE NETWORK - SOUTH FLORIDA COMMUNITY CARE NETWORK Geocoded Cultural Centers (1) - GALLERY NORDSOUTH Geocoded Religious Centers (31) Geocoded Schools (6) - GOLIATH ACADEMY - A LITTLE COLLEGE CLUB - ST. THOMAS UNIVERSITY - MAIN CAMPUS - EMMANUEL CHRISTIAN SCHOOL AND KINDERGARTEN - GOLDEN GLADES ELEMENTARY SCHOOL - MOUNTAIN CLIMBERS INC List of Florida Site File Archaeological or Historic Sites (1) Front Porch Communities - OPA-LOCKA ( Acres) Resource Groups (3) - GRAHAM DAIRY CANAL - SR 826 CANAL - THE SENATOR COURSE AT DON SHULA'S 1320-Foot Buffer: 2004 SFWMD FL Land Use and Land Cover Land Use / Acres / Percent BRAZILIAN PEPPER / 7.8 / 0.26% CHANNELIZED WATERWAYS, CANALS / / 3.59% COMMERCIAL AND SERVICES / / 22.99% COMMERCIAL AND SERVICES UNDER CONSTRUCTION / 13.1 / 0.44% EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES / 80.8 / 2.69% ELECTRICAL POWER FACILITIES / 8.9 / 0.30% ELECTRICAL POWER TRANSMISSION LINES / 8.0 / 0.27% FIXED SINGLE FAMILY UNITS / / 31.71% GOLF COURSE / / 3.64% INSTITUTIONAL / 68.9 / 2.29% MEDIUM DENSITY UNDER CONSTRUCTION / 5.8 / 0.19% MULTIPLE DWELLING UNITS, HIGH RISE / 11.7 / 0.39% MULTIPLE DWELLING UNITS, LOW RISE / / 5.23% OPEN LAND / 75.4 / 2.51% OTHER LIGHT INDUSTRY / / 3.47% RESERVOIRS / 28.7 / 0.95% ROADS AND HIGHWAYS / / 17.05% SHOPPING CENTERS / 28.6 / 0.95% TRANSPORTATION / 0.4 / 0.01% UPLAND HARDWOOD FOREST / 32.6 / 1.08% Enterprise Zones - MIAMI/DADE COUNTY Acres FDEM FIRE STATIONS (1) - MIAMI - DADE COUNTY FIRE RESCUE STATION 1 Florida Site File Historic Standing Structures (21) Group Care Facilities (54) Geocoded Community Centers (11) - MEM TCL - CENTER FOR FAMILY & CHILD ENRICHMENT INC - MIAMI GARDENS JUNIOR CHAMBER OF COMMERCE - PARK CENTRE INVESTMENT ASSOCIATION LIMITED - TEEM 2000 INC - T-MACK COMMUNITY TECH CENTER - LOCK TOWNS COMMUNITY MENTAL HEALTH CENTER - EMMANUEL COMMUNITY CENTER - JACKSON NORTH COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER TARGETED CASE MANAGEMENT

107 - SOUTH FLORIDA COMMUNITY CARE NETWORK - SOUTH FLORIDA COMMUNITY CARE NETWORK Geocoded Cultural Centers (3) - MIAMI LAKES LIBRARY - GALLERY NORDSOUTH - SAINT THOMAS UNIVERSITY LAW LIBRARY Geocoded Religious Centers (53) Geocoded Schools (15) List of Florida Site File Archaeological or Historic Sites (1) Front Porch Communities - OPA-LOCKA ( Acres) Resource Groups (4) - CSX RAILROAD - GRAHAM DAIRY CANAL - SR 826 CANAL - THE SENATOR COURSE AT DON SHULA'S Comments on Effects to Resources: SR 826/Palmetto Expressway is one of the most traveled transportation corridors in Miami-Dade County. The multi-lane expressway extends from US-1 to the Golden Glades Interchange. Widening of the segment between I-75 and the Golden Glades Interchange is planned to alleviate congestion along SR 826. The EST GIS analysis results revealed the following features within the 100-foot project buffer: three social service facilities, one healthcare facility, one school, one resource group, the Opa-Locka Front Porch Community, and the Miami-Dade Enterprise Zone. Additionally, four historic structures, three resource groups, and one archaeological site (likely eligible for listing on the NRHP) were identified within the 500-foot buffer. The table below presents demographic data for the quarter-mile (1,320-foot) project buffer and Miami-Dade County. According to the EST GIS analysis results, the population within the quarter-mile buffer differs in race, ethnicity, and mobility from the overall population of Miami-Dade County. The White population within the buffer area (12.5%) is less than the county average (73.8%) by approximately 61.3%. The African-American population in the buffer area accounts for 81.2% of the population total; this figure is more than four times the county percentage of 18.9%. The Hispanic population within the buffer area is 53.3% less than the Hispanic population percentage of Miami-Dade County (65.0%). Table 1: Demographic / 1,320-Foot Buffer / Miami-Dade County White (Race) / 12.5% / 73.8% African-American (Race) / 81.2% / 18.9% "Other" (Race) / 6.4% / 7.3% Hispanic (Ethnic Group) / 11.7% / 65.0% *Source: EST and U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census. Minority Population and English Proficiency: Census data shows that approximately 293 Census Blocks within the study area contain a minority population that is greater than 40% (15,206 persons). Additionally, greater than 20% of the population in 27 Census Blocks identified that they spoke no English. A total of 411 individuals indicated that they spoke English "Not At All". Table 2 provides age, mobility and income data extracted from the 2000 U.S. Census for the quarter-mile (1,320-foot) project buffer and Miami-Dade County. The 2000 Census data represents the most recent data available within the EST for those demographic categories. According to the EST GIS analysis results, the population within the quarter-mile buffer differs slightly in age, mobility, and income from the overall population of Miami Dade County. The elderly population within the study area (9.9%) is less than that found within the County (13.3%). The population under age 18 accounts for 26.7% of the overall population within the project buffer, which is 1.9% greater than the average found within the County. The figure for households with no access to an automobile is 6.2% lower than the County average. Finally, the Median Family Income within the buffer area is approximately 19.5% or $7,862 greater than that generally seen in the County. Table 2: Demographic / 1,320-Foot Buffer / Miami-Dade County Age 65+ / 9.9% / 13.3% Under age 18 / 26.7% / 24.8% HH w/o car / 8.1% / 14.3% Median Family Income / $48,122 / $40,260 *Source: EST and U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Census Due to proximate cultural resources, residential use, and the presence of a historically disadvantaged population within the immediate project area, the overall project effects on community character and cohesion are anticipated to be moderate. Additional Comments (optional): CLC Commitments and Recommendations: Potential social impacts will be assessed further during Project Development as more detailed information becomes available. FDOT District 6 will conduct public outreach to solicit input from the community. Degree of Effect: 3 Moderate assigned 10/07/2011 by Cathy Kendall, Federal Highway Administration Coordination Document: PD&E Support Document As Per PD&E Manual

108 Direct Effects Identified Resources and Level of Importance: Several low income or minority communities and population with high percentage of disabilities within 200 feet of the project, creating potential noise, air quality or right-of-way impacts to populations that may be less mobile than the general population. Comments on Effects to Resources: Please ensure that the PD&E addresses Title VI/Environmental Justice issues, as well as noise and air toxic impacts. Additional Comments (optional): CLC Commitments and Recommendations: Degree of Effect: 3 Moderate assigned 10/05/2011 by Maher Budeir, US Environmental Protection Agency Coordination Document: No Selection Direct Effects Identified Resources and Level of Importance: Relocations Comments on Effects to Resources: Based on the field review, it is likely that a good numebr of residences and business will have to be relocated to add the four lanes proposed. Social impact of the relocation should be analyzed. Additional Comments (optional): CLC Commitments and Recommendations: Degree of Effect: 0 None assigned 09/30/2011 by Amie Longstreet, FL Department of Community Affairs Coordination Document: No Selection Direct Effects Identified Resources and Level of Importance: Miami-Dade County and Miami Gardens Comprehensive Development Master Plans, and the Miami Lakes Comprehensive Plan Comments on Effects to Resources: Comment: Town of Miami Lakes The proposed project is adjacent to the Don Shula's Golf Course, which is a privately operated recreation facility identified as Park and Recreation lands on Figure 1-3 of the Town of Miami Lakes 2003 Community Development Master Plan. The Purpose and Need of the project indicates that a determination of right-of-way requirements has not been completed and the project is within an urbanized area. Given that this golf course is privately owned and open to the general public, a Section 4(f) determination would not be required. However, if right-of-way for the proposed project includes parcels within or near this recreation facility, close coordination with the golf course management staff during project development would be necessary. Additional Comments (optional): CLC Commitments and Recommendations: ETAT Reviews and Coordinator Summary: Secondary and Cumulative Secondary and Cumulative Effects Project Effects Coordinator Summary Degree of Effect: 2 Minimal assigned 12/05/2011 by FDOT District 6 Comments: Potential secondary and cumulative effects will be assessed further during Project Development as more information regarding potential right-of-way needs become available. None found

109 Project Scope General Project Commitments There are no general project recommendations identified for this project in the EST.

110 Appendices GIS Analyses Since there are so many GIS Analyses available for Project # SR 826/Palmetto Expressway East-West Corridor, they have not been included in this ETDM Summary Report. GIS Analyses, however, are always available for this project on the Public ETDM Website. Please click on the link below (or copy this link into your Web Browser) in order to view detailed GIS tabular information for this project: Special Note: Please be sure that when the GIS Analysis Results page loads, the Project Re-Published 10/30/2012Milestone is selected. GIS Analyses snapshots have been taken for Project #11241 at various points throughout the project's life-cycle, so it is important that you view the correct snapshot. Degree of Effect Legend Color Code Meaning ETAT Public Involvement N/A 0 Not Applicable / No Involvement None (after 12/5/2005) 1 Enhanced 2 Minimal 2 Minimal to None (assigned prior to 12/5/2005) 3 Moderate 4 Substantial 5 5 Potential Dispute (Planning Screen) Dispute Resolution (Programming Screen) No ETAT Consensus No ETAT Reviews There is no presence of the issue in relationship to the project, or the issue is irrelevant in relationship to the proposed transportation action. The issue is present, but the project will have no impact on the issue; project has no adverse effect on ETAT resources; permit issuance or consultation involves routine interaction with the agency. The None degree of effect is new as of 12/5/2005. Project has positive effect on the ETAT resource or can reverse a previous adverse effect leading to environmental improvement. Project has little adverse effect on ETAT resources. Permit issuance or consultation involves routine interaction with the agency. Low cost options are available to address concerns. Project has little adverse effect on ETAT resources. Permit issuance or consultation involves routine interaction with the agency. Low cost options are available to address concerns. Agency resources are affected by the proposed project, but avoidance and minimization options are available and can be addressed during development with a moderated amount of agency involvement and moderate cost impact. The project has substantial adverse effects but ETAT understands the project need and will be able to seek avoidance and minimization or mitigation options during project development. Substantial interaction will be required during project development and permitting. Project may not conform to agency statutory requirements and may not be permitted. Project modification or evaluation of alternatives is required before advancing to the LRTP Programming Screen. Project does not conform to agency statutory requirements and will not be permitted. Dispute resolution is required before the project proceeds to programming. No community opposition to the planned project. No adverse effect on the community. Affected community supports the proposed project. Project has positive effect. Minimum community opposition to the planned project. Minimum adverse effect on the community. Minimum community opposition to the planned project. Minimum adverse effect on the community. Project has adverse effect on elements of the affected community. Public Involvement is needed to seek alternatives more acceptable to the community. Moderate community interaction will be required during project development. Project has substantial adverse effects on the community and faces substantial community opposition. Intensive community interaction with focused Public Involvement will be required during project development to address community concerns. Community strongly opposes the project. Project is not in conformity with local comprehensive plan and has severe negative impact on the affected community. Community strongly opposes the project. Project is not in conformity with local comprehensive plan and has severe negative impact on the affected community. ETAT members from different agencies assigned a different degree of effect to this project, and the ETDM coordinator has not assigned a summary degree of effect. No ETAT members have reviewed the corresponding issue for this project, and the ETDM coordinator has not assigned a summary degree of effect.

111 APPENDIX C CRAS Concurrence Letter

112

113

114

115