1 / 13

Environmental Assessment Public Information Meeting – September 2010

Realignment of a Portion of a Utah Lake Drainage Basin Water Delivery System (ULS) Pipeline through Provo and Orem. Realignment of a Portion of a Utah Lake Drainage Basin Water Delivery System (ULS) Pipeline through Provo and Orem. Environmental Assessment

zahur
Download Presentation

Environmental Assessment Public Information Meeting – September 2010

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Realignment of a Portion of a Utah Lake Drainage Basin Water Delivery System (ULS) Pipeline through Provo and Orem Realignment of a Portion of a Utah Lake Drainage Basin Water Delivery System (ULS) Pipeline through Provo and Orem Environmental Assessment Public Information Meeting – September 2010

  2. What is NEPA? • National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 • Requires that any project using federal funds must be environmentally and sociologically reviewed • Provides detailed project description • Describes multiple alternatives • Discusses existing environmental and sociological setting • Evaluates impacts on resources

  3. 2004 Plan Utah Lake System Proposed Action

  4. Environmental Assessment (EA) Process for Provo Realignment

  5. Project History • The ULS EIS was completed in September 2004. • The No Action Alternative in the current EA was the preferred alternative in the EIS.

  6. Current Project Process • Value Engineering Study Workshop completed in December 2009 with the following recommendations • 1)  Avoid the geological slide area hazards along 1450 East and Foothill Drive. • 2)  Minimize the length of pipeline in 900 East and avoid the reach south of University Parkway if possible. • 3)  Reduce costs by using the shortest alignment that avoids (1) and (2) concerns. • 4) Alignments evaluated in this EA are a combination of alignments recommended in the VE Study Report.

  7. No Action Alignment/Geological Hazards

  8. Purpose and Need • Have not changed from those stated in the ULS EIS. • However, the proposed realignment would: • Avoid active and historical landslides • Reduce the risk associated with geologic faults • Shorten the overall pipeline length

  9. AlternativeAlignments

  10. Key Resources • Applicable to entire alignment • Specifically discussed South of 2200 North • Geologic Hazards • Traffic • Utilities • Schools and Residences

More Related