ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT / IMPLEMENTING CITYARCHRIVER INITIATIVE ELEMENTS
This chapter describes the various actionsthat could be implemented to fulfill thegoal of revitalizing the park and the CentralRiverfront. NEPA requires federal agencies toexplore a range of reasonable alternatives thataddress the purpose of and need for the action.The alternatives under consideration mustinclude a “no action” alternative as prescribedby 40 CFR 1502.14. Action alternatives mayoriginate from the proponent agency, localgovernment officials, or members of the publicat public meetings or during the early stagesof project development. Alternatives may alsobe developed in response to comments fromcoordinating or cooperating agencies.The NPS and Great Rivers Greenway District(GRG) explored and objectively evaluatedthree alternatives in this plan/EA. A no-actionalternative (alternative 1) and two actionalternatives (alternatives 2 and 3) are describedin this chapter. Alternative 1, the no-actionalternative, is a continuation of current NPSmanagement with no major modificationsor improvements to the park or the CentralRiverfront. On park lands, the overalldesign approach of the action alternativeswas guided by the 2009 Final JeffersonNational Expansion Memorial GeneralManagement Plan and Environmental ImpactStatement and the analysis and treatmentrecommendations included in the 2010update to the Jefferson National ExpansionMemorial Cultural Landscape Report. Forthe two action alternatives, the preliminaryconcepts and schematic designs for the parkand the Central Riverfront were informed bythe goals established in Framing a ModernMasterpiece | The City + The Arch + The River2015 design competition, as well as extensive
stakeholder and public input. The findingsand recommendations of NPS Value Analysisworkshops, undertaken during the summer of 2011, further refined and developed conceptsfrom the design competition. These alternativesare the result of internal scoping and publicscoping, and in accordance with NEPA, theymeet the overall purpose of and need for theproject, and the objectives, as described inchapter 1.In this chapter, the alternatives are describedby parkwide strategies that address the overallpark, seven distinct project areas within thepark, and an eighth project area that includesland within, adjacent to, and outside the park(the Central Riverfront). Parkwide strategiesinclude proposed changes to security,accessibility, topography and grading, planting,and parking. Descriptions of the eight projectareas are provided below. Actions that arecommon to the two action alternatives (2 and 3) for all project areas are also presented. Inaddition, this chapter describes mitigationmeasures, construction approaches, theenvironmentally preferred alternative, theNPS preferred alternative, and provides acomparison of environmental consequences.Both action alternatives share the sameframework of project areas. However, eachalternative is distinct from the other basedon the scope and character of proposedimprovements within the framework of projectareas.
depicting project elementsare provided for illustrative purposes toconvey the design concepts. As designwork continues during the detaileddesign process, changes could occur.