Project Name: / Enter Project Name. / FPN: / Enter FPN. / MPMS: / Enter MPMS. /
SELECT ONE: / ☐EIS / ☐EA / ☐CE / ☐EER / ☐ED
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
(Provide a concise but thorough description of the proposed action.)
Click here to enter text.
PROJECT PURPOSE AND NEEDS:
(Include the project’s purpose and need(s), which are the same as those included in the project’s NEPA documentation. Needs are problem statements, not solutions.)
Click here to enter text.
IDENTIFICATION OF SECTION 4(f) PROPERTY:
(List the property and provide a description of the property as per Chapter 6 of the Section 4(f)/Section 2002 Handbook. Attach a map, photo(s), etc. as appropriate.)
Click here to enter text.
FOR PARKS, IDENTIFY KEY COMPONENTS OF ANY EXISTING MANAGEMENT PLAN (if it exists):
Click here to enter text.
OFFICIAL WITH JURISDICTION OVER SECTION 4(f) PROPERTY:
1. Identify agency with jurisdiction:
Click here to enter text.
2. Name and title of contact person at agency:
Click here to enter text.
APPLICABILITY DETERMINATION:
1.The project will use one or more of the following Section 4(f) property(ies): (check)
☐Publicly-owned Park, Recreation Area, Wildlife or Waterfowl Refuge
☐Historic Property
Describe the use for each affected property: (attach plan sheets, maps, photos as needed to describe the impacts:
Click here to enter text.
2.This project and/or associated mitigation directly benefits the Section 4(f) property being “used”. / ☐YES
3.The project does not involve any uses that would require an individual Section 4(f) evaluation. (It is acceptable if there are other Section 4(f) uses that are de minimis or covered by one of the other nationwide programmatic Section 4(f) evaluations or meet temporary occupancy criteria.) / ☐YES
If there are other Section 4(f) properties used, list them here, briefly describe the use, and identify which form(s) will be completed to address the use:
Click here to enter text.
Parks, Recreation Area, Wildlife or Waterfowl Refuge
4.The project does not require major alteration of the characteristics of the
Section 4(f) property? (Refer to management plan if applicable):
Describe any alterations: / ☐YES
Click here to enter text.
5.All appropriate measures to minimize harm and subsequent mitigation that
preserves and enhances those activities, features, and attributes of the Section 4(f) property that originally qualified the resource for Section 4(f) protection have been
incorporated into the project’s design.
List/describe the mitigation/minimization measures that enhance the Section 4(f) property that have been incorporated into the project’s design. / ☐YES
Click here to enter text.
6.The official with jurisdiction over the Section 4(f) property has concurred
(or conditionally concurred), in writing, that the proposed project (with mitigation) will
result in a benefit to the Section 4(f) property. / ☐YES
☐The official with jurisdiction has signed this form, or provided or other evidence of their concurrence as included in the following Attachment:Enter Attachment number and description.
Include any additional information related to the use and mitigation/enhancement of the park/recreation area/refuge here:
Click here to enter text.
Historic Properties
Structures or above ground features
7. The project does not require major alteration of the characteristics that qualify the property for the National Register of Historic Places such that the property would no longer retain sufficient integrity to be considered eligible for listing. / ☐YES
Archaeology
8. The project does not require the disturbance or removal of archaeological resources
that have been determined important for preservation in-place rather than for information that can be obtained through data recovery. / ☐YES
9. ☐The official with jurisdiction (SHPO) has concurred (or conditionally concurred) with a signed MOA/PA/LOA, signature on this form or other correspondence
☐Signed MOA/PA/LOA or other correspondence is included in the following Attachment:
Enter Attachment number and description.
Include any additional information related to the use and mitigation/enhancement of the historic property here:
Click here to enter text.
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED/FINDINGS:
1.The Do Nothing Alternative must be examined, and documented NOT to be feasible and prudent. Verify that this is true, and indicate the reasoning by checking all that apply. (A minimum of one conclusion must be selected for this programmatic agreement to be applicable):
☐The Do Nothing Alternative would not solve existing transportation, safety, or maintenance problems (i.e. it would not address the project needs). (Not Prudent)
☐The Do Nothing Alternative would result in severe adverse social, economic, or environmental impacts, and/or costs which would be truly unusual or unique, or of a magnitude that substantially outweighs the importance of protecting the Section 4(f) property(s). (Not Prudent)
Explain how the needs would not be addressed and/or describe the severe impacts to other resources that would occur if the Do Nothing Alternative is chosen. (Provide traffic data, attach maps, tables etc. as needed to document the evidence that led to the conclusion.):
Click here to enter text.
2. Avoidance Alternative(s) on new alignment must be examined and found not feasible and prudent under this programmatic agreement. Verify that this is true, and indicate all that apply below.
(A minimum of one must be selected for this programmatic to be applicable):
☐The alternative cannot be constructed in accordance with sound engineering practices.
(Not feasible)
☐It would not solve existing transportation, safety, or maintenance problems (i.e. would not
address the project needs). (Not Prudent)
☐It would result in severe adverse social, economic, or environmental impacts, and/or costs
which would be truly unusual or unique, or of a magnitude that substantially outweighs the importance of protecting the Section 4(f) property(ies). (Not Prudent)
☐It would result in a substantial missed opportunity to benefit a Section 4(f) property.
(Not Prudent)
Explain how the alternative could not be engineered in accordance with sound engineering practices, or how the needs would not be addressed, and/or describe the severe impacts to other resources that would occur if the Avoidance Alternative on new alignment is chosen, or the opportunity that would be missed. (Provide traffic data, attach maps, tables etc. as needed to document the evidence that led to the conclusion(s).):
Click here to enter text.
3.It must be verified that the Build Alternative cannot be modified to include a feasible and prudent alteration in order to avoid the use a Section 4(f) property by using engineering design or transportation system management techniques such as minor location shifts, changes in engineering design standards, use of retaining walls and/or other structures and traffic diversion or other traffic management measures. Verify that this is true, and indicate all that apply below.(A minimum of one must be selected for this programmatic to be applicable.):
☐The alternative cannot be constructed in accordance with sound engineering practices.
(Not Feasible)
☐It would not solve existing transportation, safety, or maintenance problems (i.e. project needs).
(Not Prudent)
☐It would result in severe adverse social, economic, or environmental impacts, and/or costs which would be truly unusual or unique, or of a magnitude that substantially outweighs the importance of protecting the Section 4(f) property(s). (Not Prudent)
☐It would result in a substantial missed opportunity to benefit a Section 4(f) property. (Not Prudent)
Explain how a modification of the Build Alternative could not be engineered in accordance with sound engineering practices, or how the needs would not be addressed, and/or describe the severe impacts to other resources that would occur if the modified Build Alternative is chosen, or the opportunity that would be missed. (Provide traffic data, attach maps, tables etc. as needed to document the evidence that led to the conclusion(s).):
Click here to enter text.
Mitigation and Measures to Minimize Harm:
1.Mitigation measures include one or more of the following (Check all that apply):
☐Replacement of lands used with lands of reasonably equivalent usefulness and location, and of comparable value.
☐Replacement of facilities impacted by the project including sidewalks, paths, benches, lights, trees, and other facilities.
☐Restoration and landscaping of disturbed areas.
☐Special design features. (Describe).
Click here to enter text.
☐Improvements to the remaining Section 4(f) property equal to the fair market value of the lands.
☐Other measures (List the minimization/mitigation measures that enhance the resource).
Click here to enter text.
Provide any additional information regarding the mitigation measures to be implemented and how they minimize harm/enhance the Section 4(f) property:
Click here to enter text.
In accordance with PA Act 120 Section 2002 requirements, briefly summarize the impacts to other Section 2002 areas of concern that would occur if the use of the historic site was avoided. Other Section 2002 areas of concern to be discussed could include the following:
(1) residential and neighborhood character and location, (2) conservation including air, erosion, sedimentation, wildlife and general ecology of area, (3) noise, and air and water pollution, (4)multiple use of space, (5) replacement housing, (6) displacement of families and business, (7)aesthetics, (8) public health and safety, (9) fast, safe and efficient transportation, (10) civil defenses, (11) economic activity, (12) employment, (13) fire protection, (14) public utilities, (15)religious institutions, (16) conduct and financing of government including the effect on the local tax base and social service costs, (17) property values, (18) education, including the disruption of school district operations, (19) engineering, right-of-way and construction costs of the project and related facilities, (20) maintenance and operating costs of the project and related facilities, and (21)operation and use of existing transportation routes and programs during construction and after completion.
Click here to enter text.
Coordination:
- The proposed project has been coordinated with the Federal, State,
and/or local official having jurisdiction over the Section 4(f) property.
2.Land encumbered by other federal or state actions or coordination with the
federal or state agency responsible for encumbrance has been completed?
[Land and Water Conservation Fund Act, 16, USC, 460/(8)(f)(3),
i.e., Section 6(f), Project 70, or Project 500] / ☐YES ☐N/A
3.The official(s) with jurisdiction agrees that the net result is an overall improvement and enhancement of the Section 4(f) property when compared to the future do-nothing alternative and the present condition of the Section 4(f) property. / ☐YES
Documentation supporting the checkmarks above can be found in the following
Attachment:
Enter Attachment number and description.
4.Public involvement activities, consistent with the specific requirements of
23 CFR 771.111, “early coordination, public involvement and project
development” have occurred. / ☐YES
5.For a project where one or more public meetings or hearings were held, was
information on the proposed use of and mitigation to the Section 4(f) property communicated at the public meeting(s) or hearing(s)? / ☐YES ☐N/A
Documentation of the public meeting/hearing and information presented on the
Section 4(f) use are included in the following Attachment:
Enter Attachment number and description.
6.Is there significant public opposition to the proposed use of or mitigation
to the Section 4(f) property? / ☐YES ☐NO
Describe the public comments received regarding the impacts to the Section 4(f) property:
Click here to enter text.
The Official with Jurisdiction (SHPO, park owner, other official with jurisdiction)
☐concurs:
name / date
☐conditionally concurs:
name / date
Contingent upon the following commitments (list/describe the commitments):
Click here to enter text.
DETERMINATION OF APPLICABLITY:
The applicability of the Net Benefit Section 4(f) Programmatic Section 4(f) Evaluation has been based on the contents of this form and other supporting documentation, as necessary, including field view(s) conducted on: Click here to enter text.
Field view(s) documentation can be found in the CEES: Click here to enter text.(link to package)
SUMMARY AND APPROVAL:
The project meets all of the applicability criteria set forth in the Final Nationwide Section 4(f) Evaluation issued on April 20, 2005. All alternatives set forth in the programmatic have been evaluated and the findings made are clearly applicable to this project. There is a net benefit to the Section 4(f) property after taking into account avoidance and minimization of harm to the Section 4(f) property.
The project includes all possible planning to minimize harm. FHWA will assure that the measures to minimize harm and reasonable mitigation that provide a net benefit to the Section 4(f) property are incorporated into the project through its oversight of the federal-aid highway program. PennDOT will include the mitigation and measures that minimize harm and provide a net benefit as environmental commitments in the applicable NEPA document and the Environmental Commitments and Mitigation Tracking System (ECMTS) for the project. PennDOT will also provide a copy of this evaluation to other parties upon request. This project and its involvement with the Section 4(f) property, fall within and satisfy all of the criteria as set forth in the Final Nationwide/Programmatic Section 4(f) Evaluation and Determination for Federal-Aid Transportation Projects that have a Net Benefit to a Section 4(f) Property dated April 20, 2005.
Name and Organization of Preparer: Click here to enter text. / Date: Click here to enter a date.
Project Manager: / Date:
Environmental Manager: / Date:
PennDOT, BOPD: / Date:
FHWA: / Date:
List Section 4(f) mitigation measures associated with this use that are part of this project:
Click here to enter text.
Typical attachments for this form include, but are not limited to:
- Project location map
- Map of affected Section 4(f) property and other Section 4(f) property(ies) in the project vicinity
- Photographs of the Section 4(f) property
- Project plan sheet to show impacts
- Correspondence with the official with jurisdiction
- Executed MOA/PA/LOA
- Public meeting/public involvement information
1 of 13