TRINITY PARKWAY LSS 4-47
The effective CDC hydraulic models for the Main Stem of the Trinity River, which are used to evaluateproject impacts for compliance with the 1988 USACE ROD criteria (USACE, 1988) and CDCrequirements (NCTCOG, 2009a), reflect the federally authorized DFE project (Cadillac Heights andLamar Levees) in the reach of the Trinity River downstream of the AT&SF Railroad bridge. Alternative 2Bwould be located within the levee protected area on the landside of the existing Dallas Floodway eastlevee and the proposed Lamar Levee, except for elevated bridge crossings in the southern segment thatwould be designed to avoid increases in flood elevations and loss of valley storage. Therefore, it hasbeen determined that Alternative 2B meets the 1988 ROD hydrologic and hydraulic criteria.
188.8.131.52 Risks Associated with Implementation of the Action
As discussed in
LSS Section 184.108.40.206
, the “risks” discussed in this section focus on levee stability issues.
Alternative 2B, as presented in the SDEIS, would cross the very south end of the Dallas Floodway eastlevee while crossing over the DART and AT&SF bridges. However, a design refinement developed sincethe publication of the SDEIS for avoidance of historic resources (see
LSS Chapters 2 and 5
) also avoidscontact with the levee at this location; therefore, there is no discussion of risk associated with thisparticular Build Alternative.
220.127.116.11 Incompatible Development
The potential for induced development resulting from Trinity Parkway is presented in
SDEIS Section4.24.1 (Indirect Impacts)
. The analysis identifies areas where natural, governmental, or other constraints would make future change in land use unlikely.
SDEIS Plate 4-38
is a “constraints map”
depicting areas that would be unsuitable or unlikely for future development or redevelopment activities.The constraints map identifies the Dallas Floodway in its entirety and the related landside sump areas asbeing unsuitable or unlikely for development. The Indirect Impacts analysis is based on the presumptionthat any 100-year floodplain areas in the study area (including areas in the Dallas Floodway and thesurrounding levee-protected lands) would be unavailable for development. Generally, the majority of thewetlands in the project area are within the Dallas Floodway and would unlikely be developed.The protection of the Dallas Floodway and the related sump areas from development would be expectedto be stringent because of the regulatory interest in the federal flood protection project. In the DallasFloodway, the City ownership generally extends at least to the landside levee toes on both sides of theDallas Floodway, and the regulatory interest may extend further landside based on actual publicownership or other development constraints, including building setbacks to assure levee stability. In thesump areas, the
land ownership extends at least from top of bank to top of bank. Accordingly,