02-18-2002 Port of Houston Expansion Review Committee Meeting

Browse Search

2/15/2002 ~ • 8.30 am Draft • The DEIS lacks reference to ongoing projects and water quality results from current studies that address dioxin and bacteria, which could help, determine whether or not the Bayport Ship Channel will be added to the state list of impaired waters. • The DEIS lacks discussion on the impact of dredging on water quality for the short or long term. If dredging causes re-suspension of contaminants, the channel would be placed on a list that would require Total Maximum Daily Load studies. • The DEIS lacks discussion on the potential impact of increased shipping activity and storm water runoff on water quality. • The DEIS lacks discussion on the effects of ballast water on the Galveston Bay System. WETLANDS/HABTTAT~ • Wetlands in the Galveston Bay watershed provide treatment of storm water runoff and buffer floods to reduce storm surges and additionally serve as habitat for wildlife and commercially valuable species. • The DEIS describes 2.5 acres of wetlands under the jurisdiction of the Corps that will be destroyed and require mitigation and 103.5 acres ofnon-jurisdictional wetlands. The DEIS lacks adequate discussion on the impact of losing these wetlands. • The DEIS lacks adequate discussion on the value of wetlands, specific mitigation requirements, or the location of mitigation. BAYFRONT DEVELOPMENT/RECREATION The permit is silent in addressing the impact that Bayport development will have on future recreation and bayfront developments in La Porte. In 1993, the City adopted a Bayfront Master Plan. The primary aims of this study are to stimulate economic development within the City, to diversify the City's economic base through the stimulation of its tourist industry, and to create a more desirable physical em~ironment through the enhancement of its waterfront assets. A copy of this report was given to the Port of Houston Authority consultants. They indicated that it was good ive had plans for waterfront development and that they would study what impact the Bayport development would have on our vision and respond to us. No response has been afforded to us. The Corps should look at all plans which were adopted before Bayport was