ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PARQUE CUSCATLÁN TRANSFORMATION COMPONENT by Parque Cuscatlán

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PARQUE CUSCATLÁN TRANSFORMATION COMPONENT USAID / SolucionES PROJECT

January 30, 2017

Cover photo by J.P. Domínguez: El Salvador’s National Bird: Torogoz (Eumomota superciliosa), Parque Cuscatlán Document Photos by Gerald Bauer

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PARQUE CUSCATLÁN TRANSFORMATION COMPONENT USAID / SolucionES PROJECT

January 30, 2017 For review and approval by USAID – El Salvador

Prepared by: BioSistemas Network

Prepared under: USAID / SolucionES Project / FEPADE / FUSADES / FUNDE / FUSAL / Glasswing International Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component / Glasswing International

DISCLAIMER Until and unless this document is approved by USAID as a 22 CFR 216 PEA, the contents may not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United States Government.

iii

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

USAID’s SolucionES Project (SolucionES) started in October 2012, and is being implemented by a consortium of five local NGOs: FUSADES, FUNDE, FUSAL, Glasswing, and FEPADE (who is the primary contractor). SolucionES seeks the active, coordinated, and complementary involvement of central and municipal governments, private sector, NGOs, and civil society in the control of delinquency and the prevention of violence, which are two of the most significant factors affecting El Salvador’s economic development and quality of life. Based on the success of similar initiatives in other countries, SolucionES is rehabilitating and improving public spaces as a strategy to promote coexistence, empower citizens, and alleviate social tensions. Due to its historic value, strategic location, and emotional significance for a large part of the city’s adult population, SolucionES chose Parque Cuscatlán (the Park) as a pilot initiative to trigger a positive local socio-economic change through urban green space renewal. In accordance with Title 22 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 216 (22 CFR 216) (USAID’s environmental procedures), an Initial Environmental Examination, including a Threshold Determination, was prepared for the Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component (PCTC), after which it was decided that an environmental assessment was needed to identify and evaluate any reasonably foreseeable significant effects, both beneficial and adverse, of the SolucionES proposed interventions on the Park’s environment. Although no construction will be funded by USAID under SolucionES at this time, this Environmental Assessment (EA) is being done in preparation for potential future USAID financed construction under separate awards. This EA is being shared with the municipality and other partners who are financing part of the infrastructure needs and construction identified within the EA. A six week Scoping Phase was conducted to identify key issues that provided alternative actions for this EA. The scoping process was documented in a Scoping Statement that was approved by the USAID El Salvador mission in November, 2016, and by the LAC BEO on December 1, 2016. The environmental assessment process was completed in 17 weeks (119 days), and performed in compliance with all guidelines and formats established by USAID regulations and standards, including: (a) USAID Environmental Guidelines for Development Activities; (b) ADS Chapter 204 Environmental Procedures; (c) USAID Regulation 216 – Environmental Procedures; and (d) Guidelines for Implementing Partners on the USAID/LAC Environmental Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (EMMP). This report presents the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the EA process. A multidisciplinary Assessment Team was responsible for the environmental assessment process. This team included four local and international experts with sound knowledge and experience in: (i) environment and ecology; (ii) biodiversity; (iii) civil engineering; (iv) urban development; (v) hydrology; (vi) sociology; (vii) participatory processes; (viii) youth and gender; and (ix) urban ecology. The Assessment

January 30, 2017

Team was supported by four technical assistants with: (a) logistics; (b) social surveys; (c) plants; (d) butterflies; and (e) avian parataxonomy. Parque Cuscatlán is one of the most significant remaining patches of vegetation within San Salvador’s Metropolitan Area (SSMA). It is 7.3 hectares and located near the center of the city. It is bordered to the north by Alameda Roosevelt, to the south by 6ª–10ª Calle Poniente, to the east by 25 Av. Sur, and to the west by the Gimnasio Nacional (Figure 2). The Assessment Team identified, contacted and interviewed twenty-five stakeholders, 11 actively and 14 that may be involved with the Park in the future. The Assessment Team also conducted a stratified survey of 210 Park users. The results show that visitors average 34.491 years old, 62.86 percent are men, 37.14 percent are women, most hold a high-school (50 percent) or university degree (32.86 percent). 37.14 percent of users are single, 29.05 percent are married, 27.14 percent are in a common law relationship, and the average number of children is 1.702. Park visitors are employees (48.57 percent), students (23.81percent) or entrepreneurs (12.86 percent); they visit the Park in groups that average 3.033 people, occasionally (38.57 percent) or weekly (32.86 percent), for about 2.604 hours at a visit. Their reasons to visit include to spend time with their families (28.10 percent), to relax (23.81percent), or to practice sports/fitness (18.57 percent). Some 35 five micro-businesses (25 “comedores” and about 10 itinerant vendors5) work in the Park and support the same number of households. The Assessment Team surveyed 14 of them and found that their average weekly sales were about $1556, while their costs were about $1047, which included an $8 monthly fee to the municipality, leaving a profit of about $51 a week. As in the rest of SSMA, the Park’s most significant social problem is insecurity/delinquency. The average security perception of current users is 6.29 in a scale of 0–10 (Table 2), which could be interpreted as: “the Park is relatively secure, but attention should be kept at all time.” Forty percent of the survey participants rated it as secure (over 7 points), and 25 percent as insecure (equal or below 5).

The main

limitations related to socio-economic aspects are: (a) the general state of abandonment/lack of park maintenance; (b) the circulation of motor vehicles inside the Park; (c) the low quality of food and drinks being offered; and (d) the presence of socially marginalized groups (drunks, drug addicts, and homeless). Ecologically, the Park is a mixed collection of flora species in an open forest-type habitat. There are 830 trees (About 97 trees/ha), representing 70 species (49 or 70 percent native and 21or 30 percent exot-

(± 13.67 Standard Deviation –SD) (± 2.38 SD) 3 (± 3.62 SD) 4 (± 1.57 SD) 5 “Itinerant vendors” refer to vendors that are in the Park on a regular basis, but that can move in and outside the Park, carrying their merchandise with them. 6 (± $22 SD) 7 (± $19 SD) 1 2

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

ic/introduced), as well as 23 shrubs species1, 20 species of herbs2, and four native orchids. This vegetation provides habitat for a significant number of local faunal species. The Park provides environmental services such as: (a) removal of air pollutants; (b) climate change mitigation; (c) oxygen production; (d) control of rainwater runoff; (e) temperature control; (f) sound control; (g) relaxation and aesthetic services; (h) environmental education and awareness; and (i) benefits to other species and their associated environmental services (pollination, pest control, etc.), among others. Using i-Tree methodology, the Assessment Team was able to calculate that all trees within the Park store 696.7 tons of carbon (with a total current market price over $100K) and sequester 38.28 tons annually (worth $5,614.21/year). The reduction of other atmospheric pollutants (O3, CO, NO2, SO2, and PM2.5) is 24,000 gr/year (worth $3,680/year). Runoff control is 340.94 m3/year (worth $801.23/year). Oxygen production is 96 tons/year (with no economic value in the current market). Among the Park’s quantifiable socio-economic benefits are the previously mentioned businesses that sell products to Park visitors, as well as others more difficult to measure, such as relaxation, introspection, etc. Main environmental problems are: (i) pollution (noise and air pollutants) coming from surrounding city areas, and (ii) the accumulation of solid waste inside the Park. The PCTC focuses on rehabilitating the Park, transforming it into an area that is safe, valued, widely used, accessible and inclusive. The fundamental concept of PCTC interventions is unrestricted pedestrian access for all potential users, including people with physical handicaps and members of socioeconomically disadvantaged groups. PCTC rehabilitation interventions are also expected to motivate the participation of public and private stakeholder groups and to trigger other major urban investments that will eventually improve social tolerance and more peaceful coexistence among groups now in conflict, restoring pride, ownership, and peace of mind to the citizens of San Salvador and the chance to improve their well-being without the fear of being exiled from their own city. All of this is expected to be achieved by implementing eight main components described in the original PCTC Master Plan and its conceptual design documents (see Chapter 4): (1) renovation of trails, benches and other related facilities; (2) construction of elevated walkways; (3) improvement of the amphitheater, called the “Cultural Leaf”; (4) expansion of the “Sala Nacional de Exposiciones Salarrué”; (5) construction of the civic education center for youth and children, called “Concejo de los Niños”; (6) expansion of the “Museo de los Niños Tin-Marín”; (7) other significant interventions, such as “el Portal de las Delicias” and “el Portal de las Flores”; and (8) Infrastructure Maintenance and Improvement. The PCTC Master Plan documents did not include two additional components that the Assessment Team considered essential: (9) facilities for people with disabilities and reduced mobility, and (10) management of demolition material. The Assessment Team compared the proposed PCTC interventions with the natural and socioeconomic aspects that currently characterize the Park. Through this comparison, the Assessment Team 1 2

9 native and 14 exotic 13 native and 7 exotic

January 30, 2017

identified 14 issues, which could potentially cause significant both negative (-) and positive (+) environmental effects and needed, therefore, to be analyzed as part of a valid EA. The issues are: 1. Potential impacts to the existing vegetation and associated environmental benefits (+/-); 2. Potential impacts to fauna populations and their associated environmental benefits (+/-); 3. Aesthetic and visual improvement of the total area (+); 4. Increased opportunities for public education and awareness of environmental as well as socioeconomic issues (+); 5. Increased options for relaxation and leisure, which improves individual and public mental health, and thus supports violence prevention (+); 6. Sales of local “comedores” could be affected due to their relocation and changes in the number and profile of potential clients (+/-); 7. Sales of itinerant vendors may increase, due to the increase in the number of visitors (+); 8. The lack of enough parking space might affect the traffic’s dynamics in the Park’s nearby areas (-); 9. Increase in security and its perception (+); 10. Risk of infrastructure failure due to lack of financial resources and technical capacity for maintenance and replacement (-); 11. Improvements in infrastructure will most probably increase the visitation to the Park, and thus the demand of services like toilets, running water, sewage, waste management, etc., which in turn could exceed current municipal response capacities and resources (-); 12. Handling and disposal of demolition debris (-); 13. Access for people with disabilities (+/-); and 14. The Ministry of Health and Social Care (MINSAL) could be reluctant to open the south sector of Hospital Rosales to accommodate the northern steps and walkway of the proposed extended elevated walkway and exhibition hall over Roosevelt Avenue (-).

Three more issues were considered, but dismissed from further review, either because they are unlikely to occur or because the effects in case they occur are considered not significant. Those issues were: 1. Potential negative changes in the flow and infiltration patterns of rainfall. Proposed materials to be used to improve the paths surface (permeable concrete and paver stones) have an infiltration coefficient similar to the currently existing compacted dirt. The design also includes the construction of

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

under-the-surface infiltration channels filled with gravel, as well as gravel filled boxes around trees located on the edges of the paths. These measures will improve the infiltration of rain. 2. The risk of damage to cultural goods and patrimony is very unlikely to occur if the instructions and vision of the conceptual designs are closely followed, a responsibility that should be assumed by the corresponding supervision. 3. Risks associated with the demolition, handling, and disposal of materials containing asbestos, since in consultation with the Municipality, as well as from observations during evaluation visits, it was possible to establish that no asbestos-containing materials are found in any of the existing buildings, nor any of the service-related infrastructures within the Park, including underground water, drainage, and sewage systems. As part of the EA methodology, the Assessment Team evaluated three different implementation alternatives or scenarios for the number, nature, and intensity of their negative or positive environmental effects. These alternatives were: a. The No-Action Alternative - what happens if the project is not implemented; b. The Proposed Action Alternative - as it is in the PCTC conceptual design documents; and c. The Proposed Modified Action Alternative – modified PCTC conceptual design with changes to minimize negative and enhance positive effects. The Assessment Team used Relevant Integrated Criteria (RIC, Chapter 7) to establish the nature and relative magnitude of negative (-) and positive (+) effects of proposed PCTC interventions. This yielded an Environmental Qualification (EQ) value for each effect in the context of each alternative (Tables 18 to 23). Individual and combined EQ values for each alternative allowed the Assessment Team to compare implementation alternatives objectively (Tables 24 and 25). Of the alternatives, the “Proposed Modified Action Alternative” had the best net balance with a summed negative EQ of -7.4 (average -0.9) and summed positive EQ of +55.1 (average 6.1). The Assessment Team concluded, therefore, that the modified PCTC is the best implementation alternative. The Assessment Team ranked seven potentially negative intervention effects in the “Proposed Modified Action Alternative” according to their EQ values: (1) the lack of enough parking space might affect the traffic dynamics in the Park’s nearby areas = 1.4; (2) the Ministry of Health and Social Care (MINSAL) could be reluctant to open the south sector of Hospital Rosales’ property = 1.2; (3) sales of local “comedores” could decrease, due to relocation and changes in the number and profile of potential clients = 1.1; (4) risk of infrastructure failure due lacking of financial resources and technical capacity for maintenance and replacement = 1.1; (5) increased demand in services provided by the municipality = 1.0; (6) potential detriment of existing vegetation and associated environmental benefits = 0.4; and (7) poten

January 30, 2017

tial detriment of faunal populations and their associated environmental benefits = 0.4. (Tables 22, 24 and 26) The Assessment Team recommends 14 control and mitigation measures to prevent or reduce the potential environmental and socio-economic consequences of negative intervention effects: (1) implement environmental supervision; (2) minimize vegetation removal, or replace existing vegetation with recommended species; (3) establish a trust fund and find sponsors for specific interventions and/or operational costs; (4) establish a Maintenance and Improvement Program; (5) habilitate Tin-Marín’s parking area to serve both the Museum and the Park; (6) protect relevant cultural patrimony elements; (7) obtain MINSAL’s approval for the extension of the National Art Gallery; (8) maintain an open dialog with all key stakeholders; (9) expedite construction of the food court “Portal de las Delicias” and relocation of existing “comedores”; (10) implement a training program for “comedor” owners and itinerant vendors; (11) develop and implement a solid waste management and recycling program; (12) build new toilets; (13) redesign and construct all originally proposed facilities and services allowing access to people with physical disabilities; and (14) properly manage demolition material. (Tables 28 and 30) The Assessment Team ranked eight potentially positive intervention effects in the “Proposed Modified Action Alternative” according to their EQ values: (1) aesthetic and visual improvement of the whole area = 6.8; (2) increased opportunities for public education and awareness = 6.8; (3) increased options for relaxation and leisure, which improves individual and public mental health, and thus supports violence prevention = 6.3; (4) potential increase in number and diversity of existing vegetation and associated environmental benefits = 6.0; (5) potential increase in number and diversity of fauna populations and associated environmental benefits = 6.0; (6) sales of local “comedores” may increase, due to relocation and changes in the number and profile of potential clients = 5.4; (7) sales of itinerant vendors may increase, due to the increase in the number of visitors = 5.4; and (8) increase in security and its perception = 5.1. (Tables 23, 25 and 27) The Assessment Team recommends nine enhancement measures to increase the chances of occurrence and boost the beneficial consequences of positive effects: (1) improve gardening: plant recommended species in suited areas; (2) place structures to favor the reproduction and presence of bird and bat species; (3) design, produce and install interpretative signs and exhibits; (4) implement environmental art workshops; (5) maintain a program of cultural and educational events; (6) design and construct new proposed educational-recreational facilities; (7) design and Build new CAM/PNC facility; (8) design and construct all new structures considering access to people with physical disabilities; and (9) train and organize itinerant vendors (Tables 29 and 31). Finally, the Assessment Team offers a series of general recommendations (Chapter 9) that will contribute to the overall effectiveness, efficiency, and sustainability of the Project.

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................................... 14 LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................................................... 15 LIST OF ACRONYMS ................................................................................................................. 17 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 21 1.1. Background ........................................................................................................................................................... 22 1.1.1. USAID / SolucionES Project and its Transformation of Parque Cuscatlán Component .............. 22 1.1.2. USAID’s Environmental Procedures ......................................................................................................... 23 1.1.3. Environmental Assessment Objectives .................................................................................................... 24 1.1.4. Status of the Proposed Activities in Relation to the Environmental Assessment Process .......... 25 1.1.5. General Methodology of the Environmental Assessment Process .................................................... 26 2. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT ................................................................................................ 29 2.1. Socio-economic Aspects and Dynamics ......................................................................................................... 30 2.1.1. Local stakeholders......................................................................................................................................... 30 2.1.2. Users profile ................................................................................................................................................... 33 2.1.3. Main social dynamics..................................................................................................................................... 38 2.1.4. Economics ....................................................................................................................................................... 39 2.1.5. Current social problems, and limitations................................................................................................. 40 2.2. Natural Resources............................................................................................................................................... 40 2.2.1. Soils................................................................................................................................................................... 40 2.2.2. Climate and air quality ................................................................................................................................. 41 2.2.3. Hydrology and surface water quality ........................................................................................................ 44 2.2.4. Ecosystems and ecosystem services ......................................................................................................... 45 2.2.5. Native and exotic species ............................................................................................................................ 46 2.2.6. Current environmental problems, and limitations ................................................................................ 47 2.3. Infrastructure ........................................................................................................................................................ 48 2.3.1. Roads/Trails .................................................................................................................................................... 48 2.3.2. Buildings ........................................................................................................................................................... 48 2.3.3. Basic services: electricity, water, toilets, sewage sanitation, and solid waste management ......... 49 2.3.4. Other infrastructure ..................................................................................................................................... 50 2.3.5. Cultural and Historic Resources ............................................................................................................... 50

January 30, 2017

2.4. San Salvador´s Metropolitan Area (SSMA) .................................................................................................... 51 2.4.1. SSMA main socio-economic aspects ......................................................................................................... 51 2.4.2. SSMA main environmental aspects ............................................................................................................ 53 3. PURPOSE AND NEEDS......................................................................................................... 61 4. ACTIONS PROPOSED BY THE PARQUE CUSCATLÁN TRANSFORMATION COMPONENT ......................................................................................................................... 63 4.1. Renovation of Trails, Benches and other Related Facilities ....................................................................... 63 4.2. Construction of Elevated Walkways ............................................................................................................... 67 4.3. Amphitheater – Cultural Leaf ........................................................................................................................... 67 4.4. Expansion of the “Sala Nacional de Exposiciones Salarrué” ..................................................................... 68 4.5. Construction of the Civic Education Center for Youth and Children “Concejo de los Niños” ...... 70 4.6. Expansion of the “Museo de los Niños Tin Marín” ..................................................................................... 71 4.7. Other Significant Interventions ........................................................................................................................ 71 4.8. Infrastructure Maintenance and Improvement ............................................................................................. 72 4.9. Facilities for People with Disabilities ............................................................................................................... 73 4.10. Demolitions ........................................................................................................................................................ 73 5. ISSUES ANALIZED OR DISMISSED FROM FURTHER REVIEW .................................... 75 5.1. Identification of Potentially Significant Issues ................................................................................................ 75 5.2. Climate Change Related Issues ........................................................................................................................ 78 5.3. Issues Eliminated from Further Review .......................................................................................................... 79 6. EVALUATED ALTERNATIVES ............................................................................................ 81 6.1. “No Project Alternative” ................................................................................................................................... 81 6.2. “Proposed Action Alternative” ....................................................................................................................... 81 6.3. “Modified Proposed Action Alternative” ....................................................................................................... 82 6.4. Comparison of Alternatives (Similarities and Differences) ........................................................................ 87 7. VALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ACCORDING TO EACH ALTERNATIVE........................................................................................................................ 93 7.1. Environmental Impacts Corresponding to the No Action Alternative ................................................... 94

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

7.2. Environmental Impacts Corresponding to the Proposed Action Alternative ....................................... 97 7.3. Environmental Impacts Corresponding to the Proposed Modified Action Alternative .................... 101 7.4. Alternatives Comparison (Environmental Qualification Values) ............................................................ 104 7.5. Recommended Alternative and Justification for Selection ....................................................................... 107 8. ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION, ENHANCEMENT, AND MONITORING PLANS .................................................................................................................................... 109 8.1. Environmental Mitigation Plan ........................................................................................................................ 109 8.2. Environmental Enhancement Plan .................................................................................................................. 112 8.3. Environmental Monitoring Plan ...................................................................................................................... 114 9. GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................................... 117 REFERENCES

ANNEXES Annex 1. Key stakeholder’s directory. Annex 2. User´s survey questionnaire format. Annex 3. User´s survey complete generated database. Annex 4. i-Tree methodology complete report. Annex 5. Complete inventory of trees found at Parque Cuscatlán. Annex 6. Complete inventory of shrubs, orchids and herbs found at Parque Cuscatlán. Annex 7. List of bird species observed at Parque Cuscatlán. Annex 8. List of butterfly species found at Parque Cuscatlán. Annex 9. REDCA station at Centro de Gobierno, complete data sets between January 2009 and August 2016. Annex 10. List of suggested plant species for forestation purposes. Annex 11. Vendors survey complete generated database. Annex 12. Considerations used to establish estimated costs of mitigation and enhancement measures. Annex 13. Considerations for the construction of toilets for wheelchairs. Annex 14. General scheme of a typical biodigester system for toilets.

January 30, 2017

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1.

Diagram of the EA Process ..................................................................................................................... 28

Figure 2.

Location of Parque Cuscatlán in San Salvador .................................................................................... 29

Figure 3.

Distribution of visitors along the seven days of a week, and the time of the day ...................... 33

Figure 4.

Monthly variation of temperature in the SSMA (averages 48 years, 1965 – 2012).................... 41

Figure 5.

Variation of average temperatures in the SSMA during the period 1965 – 2012 ...................... 42

Figure 6.

Monthly rainfall averages from 1985 – 2003 ....................................................................................... 43

Figure 7.

Tree species found in Parque Cuscatlán, and their absolute abundance ...................................... 46

Figure 8.

Vegetation distribution map of Parque Cuscatlán and surrounding areas ................................... 53

Figure 9.

Percentage of days per ICCA category, according to the PM2.5 values reported by the Centro de Gobierno REDCA station, during the period January 2009 – August 2016 ........... 57

Figure 10. Basic zoning of Parque Cuscatlán ........................................................................................................... 64 Figure 11. Path improvements in Sector 2 of the Park ........................................................................................ 65 Figure 12. Path and benches along the stone wall that borders the Park on the north ............................... 65 Figure 13. Continuous concrete bench that divides Sectors 1 and 2, and serves as a retention wall for the upper slope ........................................................................................................................... 66 Figure 14. Proposed elevated walkways in Parque Cuscatlán............................................................................. 67 Figure 15. Conceptual view of the amphitheater “Cultural Leaf” ..................................................................... 68 Figure 16. Projected renewed façade of the National Art Gallery “Salarrué”................................................ 69 Figure 17. Projected extension of the National Art Gallery as an elevated walkway over Roosevelt Avenue. ..................................................................................................................................... 69 Figure 18. Conceptual view of the tower at “Concejo de los Niños” and expanded “TinMarín” Museum .......................................................................................................................................... 70 Figure 19. Projected view of the renewed “Tin-Marín” Museum from the “Monument to Memory and Truth” .................................................................................................................................. 71 Figure 20. Conceptual view of the “Portal de las Flores”, main entrance to the Park ................................. 72

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

LIST OF TABLES Table 1.

Local stakeholders currently and potentially involved with the PCTC in the future ................ 30

Table 2.

Number of visitors during the course of the week, and the course of the day ......................... 34

Table 3.

Summary of results from Park user’s survey ....................................................................................... 35

Table 4.

Yearly management costs, Parque Cuscatlán ...................................................................................... 39

Table 5.

Monthly rainfall averages from 1985 – 2003 ....................................................................................... 43

Table 6.

Main environmental services contributed by Parque Cuscatlán, and their values ...................... 45

Table 7.

Human population in the SSMA by municipality ................................................................................. 51

Table 8.

Number of crimes registered in the SSMA, from January through August 2016 ....................... 52

Table 9.

Annual values of NOx, PM10, PTS, and O3 in the SSMA during 2004 – 2007 ............................. 54

Table 10. Monthly mean value concentrations of PM2.5 recorded at “Centro de Gobierno” between 2009 and 2016 ........................................................................................................................... 55 Table 11. Color scale use by the Central American Air Quality Index (Índice Centroamericano de Calidad del Aire – ICCA) ......................................................................................................... 56 Table 12. Number and percentage of days per ICCA category, according to PM2.5 values reported by the Centro de Gobierno REDCA station, during the period January 2009 – August 2016 .................................................................................................................................. 56 Table 13. Total amounts of GEG and OAP produced by the public transportation system in the SSMA during 2012 and 2014 ............................................................................................................ 58 Table 14. Results of analysis performed in three samples of water from the Acelhuate River in the monitoring period 2012 – 2013 ................................................................................................. 59 Table 15. Potentially Significant Issues addressed in the Environmental Assessment .................................. 75 Table 16. Issues eliminated from further review in the Environmental Assessment ................................... 79 Table 17. Main differences and similarities of the three evaluated alternatives ............................................ 87 Table 18. Potential adverse or negative environmental impacts of the “No-Action Alternative” ............ 95 Table 19. Potential positive environmental impacts of the “No-Action Alternative” ................................. 96 Table 20. Potential adverse or negative environmental impacts of the “Proposed Alternative” .............. 97 Table 21. Potential positive environmental impacts of the “Proposed Alternative” .................................... 99

January 30, 2017

Table 22. Potential adverse or negative environmental impacts of the “Proposed Modified Alternative” ............................................................................................................................................... 101 Table 23. Potential positive environmental impacts of the “Proposed Modified Alternative” ................ 103 Table 24. Comparison of Potential Adverse or Negative Environmental Impacts of each considered alternative ................................................................................................................................... 104 Table 25. Comparison of potential positive environmental impacts of each considered alternative..... 106 Table 26. Prioritization of potential negative impacts ....................................................................................... 107 Table 27. Prioritization of potential positive impacts ........................................................................................ 108 Table 28. Control and mitigation measurements for identified negative impacts ...................................... 109 Table 29. Enhancement measurements for identified positive impacts ......................................................... 112 Table 30. Environmental Monitoring Plan (Table 3 of the USAID Guidelines for Implementing Partners, 2015): Mitigation Measures.................................................................................................. 114 Table 31. Environmental Monitoring Plan (Table 3 of the USAID Guidelines for Implementing Partners, 2015): Enhancement Measures ........................................................................................... 116

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

LIST OF ACRONYMS ALGES

Asociación de Lisiados de Guerra de El Salvador (Association of Disabled War Veterans of El Salvador)

ANDA

Administración Nacional de Acueductos y Alcantarillados (National Aqueducts and Sewage Administration)

BEO

Bureau Environmental Officer

CAESS

Compañía de Alumbrado Eléctrico de San Salvador (San Salvador’s Electric Power Company)

CAM

Cuerpo de Agentes Municipales (Municipal Police)

CARSI

Central American Security Initiative

CCAD

Comisión Centroamericana de Ambiente y Desarrollo (Central American Commission on Environment and Development)

CDCS

Country Development Cooperation Strategy

Centro de Gobierno (Government Center)

CHSS

Centro Histórico de San Salvador / San Salvador’s Historic District

CPTED

Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design

Development Objective

Environmental Assessment for Parque Cuscatlán’s Transformation (this document)

EAP

Economic Active Population

EIS

Environmental Impact Statement

FEPADE

Fundación Empresarial para el Desarrollo Educativo (Entrepreneurial Foundation for Educative Development)

FIAES

Fondo de la Iniciativa para las Américas, El Salvador (Fund of the Initiative for the Americas, El Salvador)

FONAES

Fondo Ambiental de El Salvador (Environmental Fund of El Salvador)

FUNDE

Fundación Nacional para el Desarrollo (National Foundation for Development)

FUSADES

Fundación Salvadoreña para el Desarrollo Económico y Social (Salvadoran Foundation for Economic and Social Development)

January 30, 2017

FUSAL

Fundación Salvadoreña para la Salud y el Desarrollo Humano (Salvadoran Foundation for Health and Human Development)

GEG

Greenhouse Effect Gases

GMSS

Gobierno Municipal de San Salvador (San Salvador’s Municipal Government)

GOES

Gobierno de El Salvador (Government of El Salvador)

GDP

Gross Domestic Product

ICA

Índice de Calidad de Agua General (General Index of Water Quality)

ICCA

Índice Centroamericano de Calidad del Aire (Central American Air Quality Index)

INDES

Instituto Nacional de los Deportes (National Sports Institute)

LED

Light Emission Diode

MARN

Ministerio del Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources)

µg

Microgram (millionth of a gram)

MIDES

Manejo Integral de Desechos Sólidos (Integral Solid Waste Management Company)

MINSAL

Ministerio de Salud Pública y Asistencia Social (Ministry of Public Health and Social Assistance)

m.a.s.l.

Meters above sea level

NGO

Non-Governmental Organization

OAP

Other Atmospheric Pollutants

OPAMSS

Oficina de Planificación del Área Metropolitana de San Salvador (San Salvador’s Metropolitan Area Planning Office)

OSN

Organismo Salvadoreño de Normalización (Salvadorian Normalization Entity)

PAIP

Program Assistance Initial Proposal

PCTC

Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

PID

Project Identification Document

Particulate Matter

PNC

Policía Nacional Civil (National Civil Police)

REDCA

Red de Monitoreo de la Calidad del Aire (Air Quality Monitoring Net)

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

Standard Deviation

SNET

Servicio Nacional de Estudios Territoriales (National Service of Territorial Studies)

SITRAMSS

Sistema Integrado de Transporte del Área Metropolitana de San Salvador (SSMA Transport Integrated System)

SSHC

San Salvador’s Historic Centre

SSMA

San Salvador’s Metropolitan Area

SWISSCONTACT Independent Swiss Foundation of Economic Promotion for International Cooperation USAID

United States Agency for International Development

USG

US Government

January 30, 2017

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

1. INTRODUCTION

The USAID SolucionES Project (SolucionES), implemented by the National Foundation for Development (FUNDE), the Salvadoran Foundation for Health and Human Development (FUSAL), the Salvadoran Foundation for Economic and Social Development (FUSADES), the Business Foundation for Educational Development (FEPADE), and Glasswing International, in close collaboration with the Municipal Government of San Salvador, has identified Parque Cuscatlán as having the required prerequisites to become a national model for how increased social investment from the private sector can fund violence prevention initiatives. Throughout this document, Parque Cuscatlán will also be referred to as the Park. The activities to transform Parque Cuscatlán will be referred to as the Project. SolucionES builds on a proven model of municipal-led crime prevention based on close cooperation between municipal councils, local non-profit organizations, and residents. Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED), one of the most tested, studied and disseminated crime prevention methodologies, rests on four main principles1: a. Natural surveillance: placing legitimate ‘eyes on the street’; b. Territorial reinforcement: generating identification among the population with the public space; c. Natural access control: more than building walls, aims to socially build security; and d. Maintenance: to vigorously pursue maintenance, including cleaning and gardening, to convey the message that the community cares and has control over the public space. These strategies have been implemented mainly in cities of Canada, the United States, Chile, Colombia, the United Kingdom, and Mexico. In Latin America, the city of Medellín is an internationally recognized case of CPTED success, where the most marginalized areas have not only been improved and transformed into important public spaces, but also education facilities and mobility systems have been enhanced and police presence in strategic areas increased. Based on these successful examples, SolucionES developed the Parque Cuscatlán Master Plan, which includes: (i) renewal/renovation of internal paths and facilities; (ii) construction of aerial walkways; (iii) renovation of the “Cultural Leaf”, the existing amphitheater; (iv) expansion of the National Art Gallery, “Salarrué”; (v) creation of the Civic Education Center for Youth and Children, “Concejo de los Niños”; and (vi) expansion of the Tin-Marín Children’s Museum. To fulfill USAID’s environmental requirements and regulations, and given the relevance of Parque Cuscatlán as one of the most significant patches of vegetation that remain within San Salvador’s urban core, 1

CPTED Guidelines, International Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design Association (ICA)

January 30, 2017

SolucionES hired BioSistemas Network to conduct an Environmental Assessment (EA) of the PCTC, that will be implemented by Glasswing and the Municipality of San Salvador. The EA analyzes the environmental effects of the original PCTC and its architectural designs and recommends enhanced actions for a more sustainable and environmentally sound project.

1.1. Background 1.1.1. USAID / SolucionES Project and its Transformation of Parque Cuscatlán Component USAID’s SolucionES Project (SolucionES) was designed to support efforts to combat delinquency and violence, two of the most significant factors affecting El Salvador’s economic development and its citizens’ quality of life. Funded through the Central American Security Initiative (CARSI), SolucionES started in 2012, and is being implemented by a consortium of five of the most reputable and recognized local NGOs: the Salvadoran Foundation for Economic and Social Development (Fundación Salvadoreña para el Desarrollo Económico y Social – FUSADES); the National Foundation for Development (Fundación Nacional para el Desarrollo – FUNDE); the Salvadoran Foundation for Health and Human Development (Fundación Salvadoreña para la Salud y el Desarrollo Humano – FUSAL); Glasswing International (Fundación Crisálida); and the Entrepreneurial Foundation for Educative Development (Fundación Empresarial para el Desarrollo Educativo – FEPADE), which is the primary contractor. SolucionES seeks the active, coordinated, and complementary involvement of central and municipal governments, the private sector, NGOs, and civil society in this effort to control delinquency and prevent violence. SolucionES has three main work axes: (a) building municipal capacity; (b) increasing involvement and social investment from the private sector; and (c) generating, analyzing, and publicizing information to support decision-making. SolucionES adopts the rehabilitation and improvement of public spaces as a strategy to promote coexistence, citizen appropriation, and the alleviation of social tensions, based on the success of this strategy in other countries. Due to its historic value, strategic location (the area in which the Park is found roughly corresponds to the transition between the historic downtown and the relatively new uptown of San Salvador), and emotional bonds to a large part of the city’s adult population who fondly remember the Park as a weekend destination including for children to go horseback riding; SolucionES chose Parque Cuscatlán as a pilot initiative to demonstrate how the transformation of a public space can trigger positive local socio-economic change. If USAID is involved in Parque Cuscatlán development through future awards, this EA will help shape that involvement. Glasswing International – a Salvadoran-born NGO working with children and youth in 13 Latin American and Caribbean countries, which defines its general goal as “to foster change by investing in a community’s existing strengths and resources, its infrastructure and its people” – is currently implementing PCTC. The re

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

nowned Columbian architect Felipe Uribe developed a conceptual design between 2015 and the first half of 2016 with five documents: (i) Plan Maestro del Parque Cuscatlán y su Área de Influencia (Uribe, 2015a); (ii) Anteproyecto Pasarelas Aéreas (Uribe, 2015b); (iii) Anteproyecto Senderos y Mobiliario (Uribe, 2016a); (iv) Anteproyecto La Hoja Cultural (Uribe, 2016b); and (v) Anteproyecto Sala Nacional Salarrué (Uribe, 2016c). Following USAID regulations, in June 2016 Glasswing solicited proposals to conduct an environmental assessment of the PCTC. The contract was awarded to BioSistemas Network – an international environmental consulting company based in San Salvador – and it was signed on August 10, 2016. Interventions proposed by the PCTC would improve the Park and enhance its multiple environmental and socioeconomic benefits. But any proposed change has greater or lesser, positive or negative effects on current conditions and functions of the system. The purpose of the PCTC EA is to identify all potential effects of planned interventions, propose solutions or mitigating measures for all significant negative impacts, and provide recommendations on how positive effects can be encouraged and expanded.

1.1.2. USAID’s Environmental Procedures In accordance with sections 118(b) and 621 of the Foreign Assistance Act (FAA) of 1961, as amended, USAID uses a set of general procedures to ensure that environmental factors and values are integrated into USAID’s decision-making process. USAID’s environmental procedures are given in Title 22 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 216 (22 CFR 216). These regulations assign responsibility within USAID for assessing the environmental effects of its actions. They are consistent with Executive Order 12114, issued January 4, 1979, entitled Environmental Effects Abroad of Major Federal Actions, and the purposes of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1970 as amended (42 U.S.C. 4371 et seq.). [§216.1(b)] (USAID,1980). In §216.2 of these regulations, it is made clear that such environmental “procedures apply to all new projects, programs or activities authorized or approved by AID and to substantive amendments or extensions of ongoing projects, programs, or activities,” with the exception of (i) disaster assistance, (ii) emergency circumstances, or (iii) circumstances involving exceptional foreign policy sensitivities. None of these exceptions apply to PCTC. Once a given action to be financed by USAID is deemed potentially to have significant environmental effects, an initial environmental examination, including a threshold determination, must be prepared by the originator of the action, as part of or after the submission of the Project Identification Document (PID) or the Program Assistance Initial Proposal (PAIP), for review by the Bureau Environmental Officer (BEO). If the BEO concludes that the proposed action(s) could have a significant effect on the environment, a positive threshold decision is issued, and either (a) an environmental assessment, if the foreseeable effects would occur in the jurisdiction of a foreign country or countries, or (b) an environmental im

January 30, 2017

pact statement, if the foreseeable effects would occur in the United States, the global environment, or areas outside the jurisdiction of any nation, is prepared. [§216.3(a)(2)] The first step of the process is to describe the existing and desired conditions which lead to the purpose and need for the activity, identify proposed actions that improve existing conditions, identify the significant issues relating to the proposed action, and determine the scope of the issues to be addressed in the environmental assessment or environmental impact statement. This information is summarized in a scoping statement document [§216.3(a)(4)(i)], reviewed and approved by the BEO [§216.3(a)(4)(ii)]. The ultimate goals of USAID’s environmental policy [§216.1(b)] are to: (1) Ensure that the environmental consequences of USAID financed activities are identified and considered by USAID and the host country prior to a final decision to proceed, and that appropriate environmental safeguards are adopted; (2) Assist developing countries to strengthen their capabilities to appreciate and effectively evaluate the potential environmental effects of proposed development strategies and projects, and to select, implement, and manage effective environmental programs; (3) Identify impacts resulting from USAID's actions upon the environment, including those aspects of the biosphere which are the common and cultural heritage of all mankind; and (4) Define environmental limiting factors that constrain development and identify and carry out activities that assist in restoring the renewable resource base on which sustained development depends.

1.1.3. Environmental Assessment Objectives §216.1(c)(4) defines an environmental assessment as: “A detailed study of the reasonably foreseeable significant effects, both beneficial and adverse, of a proposed action on the environment of a foreign country or countries.” … “The purpose of the Environmental Assessment is to provide Agency and host country decision-makers with a full discussion of significant environmental effects of a proposed action. It includes alternatives, which would avoid or minimize adverse effects or enhance the quality of the environment so that the expected benefits can be weighed against any adverse impacts upon the human environment or any irreversible or irretrievable commitment of resources.” [§216.6(a)] From USAID’s guidelines and procedures, an environmental assessment process is developed to cover the following specific objectives: a. Ensure that environmental factors are considered in the decision-making process; b. Understand and characterize the existing socio-economic and natural environments in which the project would be developed; c. Gain appropriate knowledge of the project’s proposed interventions/actions, and summarize them;

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

d. Determine the main aspects potentially affected, based on the interventions/actions proposed by the project and the existing socio-economic and natural conditions, and express them in terms of environmental impacts, both negative and positive; e. Identify and justify the suppression from further analysis of issues not considered to be significant or already appropriately dealt with; f.

Determine project’s alternatives or scenarios that might affect the outcomes of potential negative and positive environmental impacts;

g. Objectively evaluate and compare potential environmental impacts and their consequences, as related to identified alternatives; h. Ensure that pertinent measures are taken into consideration, and applied as needed to avoid or minimize adverse consequences of potential negative impacts, and enhance desired consequences of potential positive impacts; and i.

Appropriately inform the public.

An environmental assessment, if well executed, should not only be useful for anticipating, preventing, mitigating and/or compensating the negative impacts derived from a given project, but moreover provide specific data, recommendations, and other inputs to support a better overall design, implementation, and management, thus contributing to the effectiveness, efficiency, and sustainability of the corresponding project.

1.1.4. Status of the Proposed Activities in Relation to the Environmental Assessment Process This EA describes seven main PCTC elements in Chapter 4: 4.1. Renovation of Trails, Benches and other Related Facilities; 4.2. Construction of Elevated Walkways; 4.3. Amphitheater – Cultural Leaf; 4.4. Expansion of the “Sala Nacional de Exposiciones Salarrué”; 4.5. Construction of the Civic Education Center for Youth and Children “Concejo de los Niños”; 4.6. Expansion of the “Museo de los Niños Tin Marín”; and 4.7. Other Significant Interventions. As of the date of this EA, all elements and their corresponding activities exist only as part of a general conceptual design outlined in five conceptual documents: (i) “Plan Maestro del Parque Cuscatlán y su Área de Influencia” (Uribe, 2015a); (ii) “Anteproyecto Pasarelas Aéreas” (Uribe, 2015b); (iii) “Anteproyecto Senderos y Mobiliario” (Uribe, 2016a); (iv) “Anteproyecto La Hoja Cultural” (Uribe, 2016b); and (v) “Anteproyecto Sala Nacional Salarrué” (Uribe, 2016c). These design documents include the proposed location of element activities and their general characteristics and purpose but, with the exception of Renovation of Trails, Benches and other Related Facilities activities (Section 4.1), they do not include dimensions nor materials to be used, a fact that limits this EA. In the last two months, the Alcaldía Municipal de San Salvador has installed new lights as a temporary measure for security and workers’ safety, but they are different from ones the conceptual design documents pro

January 30, 2017

pose, although based on the same LED technology. When asked about the new lighting system, the Municipality’s Projects Manager said the newly installed lights will be replaced next year by the lamps specified in the conceptual design (Ramírez, 2016. Personal communication1).

1.1.5. Methodology of the Environmental Assessment This Environmental Assessment was performed taking into consideration all guidelines and formats established by USAID regulations and standards (see Section 1.1.2) including: (a) USAID Environmental Guidelines for Development Activities; (b) ADS Chapter 204 Environmental Procedures; (c) USAID Regulation 216 – Environmental Procedures; (d) Guidelines for Implementing Partners on the USAID/LAC Environmental Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (EMMP); and (e) the comments and inputs from USAID/El Salvador Mission Environmental Officer (MEO), USAID/Central America/Mexico Regional Environmental Advisor (REA), and the USAID/LAC Bureau Environmental Officer (BEO), as well as the PCTC implementing partner, Glasswing. Once the EA Work Plan was agreed upon, the first phase of the process was the preparation of a Scoping Statement, which included an in-depth review of all existing documents pertinent to the Park and the interventions proposed by PCTC, the gathering of environmental and socio-economic baseline information, and first contacts with key local stakeholders. Baseline information on environmental aspects was collected through a combination of literature search, flora and reference fauna groups (birds and butterflies) inventories, as well as i-Tree2 samplings. Socio-economic baseline information was collected from literature searches, surveys to park users, and meetings and interviews with key local stakeholders. Significant existing and potential environmental and socio-economic issues were identified by analyzing the effects of the Project’s proposed actions, as described in Chapter 4, on current existing conditions, as described in Chapter 2, including direct and indirect, negative and positive, synergistic, and cumulative effects, as summarized in Chapter 5. Chapter 6 defines three alternatives or scenarios for the implementation of the Project to test the behavior of potential impacts and allow the selection of the most favorable: (a) the “No Project Alternative”, (b) the “Proposed Action Alternative”, and (c) the “Proposed Modified Action Alternative”. The completed Scoping Statement was submitted to USAID and Glasswing for review. After adjustments in response to their comments, USAID officially approved the Scoping Statement and gave its authorization to proceed to the EA phase of the process.

Edwin Ramírez, Historic Centre Office, Municipality of San Salvador.

2 “i-Tree is a state-of-the-art, peer-reviewed software suite from the USDA Forest Service that provides urban and rural forestry analysis and benefits assessment tools. The i-Tree Tools help communities of all sizes to strengthen their forest management and advocacy efforts by quantifying the structure of trees and forests, and the environmental services that trees provide.” (https://www.itreetools.org)

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

Potential negative and positive effects of the significant issues identified in the Scoping Statement, were assigned Environmental Qualification (EQ) values in the context of the three defined alternatives, using the Relevant Integrated Criteria method (RIC, Chapter 7). Individual and combined impacts’ EQ values (Tables 18 to 23) were compared between alternatives, to allow for an objective valuation of each proposed alternative (Tables 24 and 25), and impacts ranked according to their corresponding EQ values (Tables 26 and 27). Based on bibliographic research, and after consulting with USAID and Glasswing, the Assessment Team recommended measures to prevent, control, or mitigate each identified potential adverse environmental and socio-economic effect (Table 28), and measures to increase the chances of and beneficial consequences of positive effects (Table 29). Finally, Chapter 9 offers a series of general recommendations to contribute to the overall effectiveness, efficiency, and sustainability of the Project. The Assessment Team completed the following sequence of tasks during the EA process: a. In-depth bibliographic review of all conceptual design documents, and other pertinent existing information related to Parque Cuscatlán and the San Salvador Metropolitan Area (SSMA), as well as USAID guidelines and formats for the preparation of environmental assessments. b. Bilateral meetings and talks with key local stakeholders. c. Site visits to the Park and surrounding areas. d. Inventories of vegetation – particularly trees –, and related environmental services (using i-Tree methodology), as well as preliminary inventories of birds, and butterflies. e. A stratified survey to 210 visitors to the Park (3 groups of 10, morning, noon and afternoon, over 7 days of the week). f.

Identification of potentially significant issues, and their corresponding potential negative and positive environmental and socio-economic effects.

g. Development and selection of the Project’s alternatives for evaluation and comparison. h. Identification of gaps in the information needed to complete the EA. i.

Search for missing information, including through additional bibliographic review, further meetings and interviews with key stakeholders, and an additional survey of permanent and itinerant1 Park vendors.

Valuation and comparison of all negative and positive environmental and socio-economic effects of the implementation of each of the three Project alternatives, using RIC methods.

k. Identification of measures to prevent or diminish negative environmental and socio-economic effects and measures to secure and enhance beneficial environmental and socio-economic effects. 1 “Itinerant

vendors” refer to vendors that are in the Park on a regular basis, but that can move in and outside the Park, carrying their merchandise with them.

January 30, 2017

Preparation and presentation of a draft Environmental Assessment document and a final document responsive to comments.

Figure 1. Diagram of the EA Process.

Preven5on)

Project’s'IntervenDon'AcDviDes'

Preven5on) Mi5ga5on)

PARQUE'CUSCATLÁN'

Biophysical'Aspects:'

' E' A' '

d a t a)

•  •  •  •  •  •

Topography) Soils) Climate) Inﬁltra5on) Flora)and)Fauna) etc.)

+'&'@'Impacts'

Environmental'Beneﬁts:' •  Climate)regula5on) •  Rain)inﬁltra5on) i@tree' Inventories' •  CO2)sequestra5on) Bibliographic'Research' •  O2)produc5on) M •  PM)reten5on) E •  etc.)

Socioeconomic'Aspects:'

T H O D S'

Socioeconomic'Beneﬁts:'

•  Experience/expectancies) •  Educa5on)&)consciousness) •  Stakeholders) •  Lower)stress) ParDcipatory'MeeDngs' •  Ac5vi5es)

•  Management)

•  Improved)health)

Surveys' Interviews'

•  Public)involvement)

•  Nº)and)type)of)users)

•  Economic)ac5vi5es)

•  etc.)

feedback)

d a t a)

' E' A' '

M)o)n)I)t)o)r)I)n)g)))&)))E)v)a)l)u)a)t)I)o)n)

+'&'@'Impacts'

A)d)a)p)t)i)v)e)))M)a)n)a)g)e)m)e)n)t)

Mi5ga5on)

feedback)

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

2. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT SolucionES will focus its intervention in Parque Cuscatlán, which is one of the most significant remaining patches of vegetation within San Salvador’s urban core. The Park comprises 7.3 hectares, located near the center of the metropolitan area. The Park is limited to the north by the Alameda Roosevelt, to the south by the 6ª–10ª Calle Poniente, to the east by the 25 Av. Sur, and to the west by the Gimnasio Nacional. (Figure 2) Figure 2. Location of Parque Cuscatlán in San Salvador.

January 30, 2017

The Park is characterized by a number of biophysical and socioeconomic aspects, such as soil, climate, vegetation coverage, plant and animal species, and the number and type of visitors, their needs, experiences, and expectations. These aspects generate a number of environmental and socio-economic benefits, such as climate regulation, rain infiltration, CO2 sequestration, O2 production, retention of urban atmospheric pollutants, healthier and lower-stress conditions, and the potential to develop economic activities, environmental education, civil awareness and involvement, among others. The following sections offer a general description of the current baseline status of the main natural and socio-economic aspects of the Park and its influence region (San Salvador’s Metropolitan Area – SSMA).

2.1. Socio-economic Aspects and Dynamics 2.1.1. Local stakeholders Defining a stakeholder as any social grouping that has or could have a direct role in a program, process, project or activity, this EA used visits, meetings, and talks to identify 11 stakeholders that are already involved with the Park and/or the PCTC, and 14 others that may be involved in the future. Table 1 lists these 25 stakeholders, summarizes their missions/roles, and their current or potential involvement with the PCTC. Annex I provides more complete information (web site; level of incidence, and contact information, etc.). Table 1. Local stakeholders currently and potentially involved with the PCTC in the future. NAME

MISSION / ROLE

RELATION TO THE PROJECT

CURRENTLY INVOLVED STAKEHOLDERS 1. Alcaldía de San Salvador Municipal government. Responsible for the management of municipal parks and other public green areas.

Management of Parque Cuscatlán.

2. Oficina de Restauración y Desarrollo del Centro Histórico de la Ciudad de San Salvador

Promotes the restoration of San Salvador's Historic Centre (SSHC) through promoting public and private initiatives and investments, planning and coordinating actions and projects, and supervising norms and regulations.

Coordinating focal point for different institutions, projects, and initiatives related to the transformation of SSHC. Support for completing investments in the Park and its surrounding area.

3. Glasswing International

“To foster change by investing in a community’s existing strengths and resources, its infrastructure and its people.”

Part of the Consortium implementing the USAID SolucionES Project, and implementer of the PCTC.

4. Secretaría de Cultura de Support, promotion, and conservation of Salvala Presidencia de la Repú- doran national culture and art. blica – SECULTURA

Responsible for the administration of the "Sala Nacional de Exhibiciones Salarrué" located inside the Park.

5. Group of concessionaires and itinerant vendors of Parque Cuscatlán

Vendors who make a living by selling diverse products and services, particularly food and drinks, to Park visitors.

Food vendors inside the Park. Not formally organized as a group.

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

NAME 6. Asociación de Lisiados de Guerra de El Salvador – ALGES

MISSION / ROLE

RELATION TO THE PROJECT

Supports the rehabilitation of handicapped veterans from the 80's civil war, and promotes their interests and needs by auditing the implementation of their social benefits, as provided for by the "Ley de Beneficio para la Protección de los Lisiados y Discapacitados a Consecuencia del Conflicto Armado (Decreto 416).”

This entity currently administers the Park's sanitation facilities (toilets and showers).

7. Mara members and oth- Not applicable. er socially excluded groups

Their presence compromises security and increases concern in present and future visitors.

8. Museo de Niños TinMarín

Learning facility for children that serves as a tool for students and teachers to interact and reinforce the content of study plans by encouraging creativity and the acquisition/transmission of knowledge in an entertaining manner.

In the long-term vision of the Project’s conceptual design, the Tin-Marin Museum will expand, improve, and become the core of the public use area. It is part of the Park (the land is public property and the museum holds a concession), but is physically separated from it by a fence and gate.

9. Instituto Nacional de Los Deportes – INDES

“To promote unrestricted access to sports, fitness, and recreation, as a fundamental right of human development, facilitating the resources needed for a proper healthy culture in all social strata, by the quality management of sport facilities and infrastructure.”

INDES is the legal owner of the land on which Parque Cuscatlán, the Tin-Marín Museum, the Adolfo Pineda Gym, and other sport facilities are located.

10. Ministerio del Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales – MARN

Central government ministry responsible for the protection, conservation, and restoration of the natural environment. Regulates all environmentrelated actions, public and private, and oversees the implementation of national and international environmental laws and regulations.

Although MARN has no current activities in the Park, it has recently started a program of ecological restoration of the abandoned ravines that traverse SSMA that host important native species and natural resources. MARN has also participated and supported the development of the PCTC.

11. +Ubeß Arquitectos

Architectural design and construction firm with experience in the development of public projects as means for positive social change.

Responsible for the conceptual design of the PCTC.

STAKEHOLDERS THAT MAY BE INVOLVED WITH THE PROJECT IN THE FUTURE 12. Fondo Ambiental de El Salvador – FONAES

“To support plans, programs, projects, and general actions pertaining the protection, conservation, improvement, restoration, and sustainable use of natural resources, through fundraising and canalization of resources.”

FONAES could play a significant role by helping provide labor and other support through its Private Social Responsibility program, as well as its Environmental Guardians Program (Programa Guardianes Ambientales).

13. Fondo de la Iniciativa para las Américas de El Salvador – FIAES

“To secure the conservation of the country's natural resources, by supporting activities with the central and local governments, NGOs, and private sector, to promote social education, awareness and positive changes to secure El Salvador's natural heritage.”

FIAES has expressed interest in financing a set of interpretative exhibits on El Salvador's natural heritage, the ecology of the SSMA, and the activities it supports at a national level.

14. Asociación Comunal Pro-Rescate de la Flor Blanca

“To develop and promote solutions and projects that benefit users and residents of La Flor Blanca neighborhood.”

Link between La Flor Blanca neighborhood and the Project. Glasswing foresees potential involvement in the establishment of a patrimonial fund to manage and maintain the Project long-term.

15. Grupo de Empresarios “To promote the integral development and ecodel Centro Histórico nomic reactivation of San Salvador's Historic Centre, protecting the historic and cultural patrimony, and securing a dignified life for its inhabitants.”

Link between the private sector and the project. Glasswing foresees potential involvement in the establishment of a patrimonial fund to help maintain and administer the Project long-term.

January 30, 2017

NAME

MISSION / ROLE

RELATION TO THE PROJECT

16. Hospital Nacional Rosales

“To provide emergency, hospitalization, and outpatient health services, with efficiency, effectiveness, quality, and gentleness, in the areas of internal medicine, surgery and their specializations, in order to satisfy the necessities of Salvadorian citizens over 12 years old, as well as functioning as the country's primary school hospital.”

Hospital visitors and staff currently use the Park as a resting and waiting area. The conceptual design for the expansion of the National Gallery proposes the opening and use of the hospital's south border, and later the creation of the "Plaza de la Salud" (Uribe, 2015a). This would require the inclusion and cooperation of Hospital Rosales as part of the Project.

17. Universidad Tecnológica – UTEC

“To offer a wide range of innovative educational services, and to promote the development of a critical and responsible society, through proper academic resources and methodologies, developing pertinent research and social projection.”

UTEC could become an academic supporter and sponsor of the Project.

18. Club Sherpas (Opus Dei)

“To support parents to achieve the integral development of their children, promoting Christian values and human virtues, so that they can contribute to a positive transformation of society.”

The Sherpas Club could become a civil society supporter and sponsor of the Project.

19. Universidad de El Salvador - UES (La Rotonda)

“To lead national superior education, supporting the formation of professionals with high ethic standards and capacities; to warrant the development of science, art, culture, and sports; to be a critic institution, capable of proposing solutions to national problems, through philosophic, scientific, artistic and technologic universal research.”

The UES is the owner and administrator of the educational facilities known as "La Rotonda", which under the Master Plan (Uribe, 2015a) will become part of the "Plaza de la Salud" (Uribe, 2015a). This would require the inclusion and cooperation of UES as part of the Project.

20. Fundación Benjamín Bloom

“To support public providers of health services – particularly, but not only, the Hospital de Niños Benjamin Bloom – through the donation of medicines, material and equipment necessary to properly perform their functions.”

The foundation is owner of a group of historical houses near the Park, which could be restored as part of the long-term vision to transform the whole area. They might also play a role in the creation and administration of the Park's patrimonial fund.

21. La Asunción Community

Slum community near Parque Cuscatlán

Home to children and youth at risk (lacking socioeconomic alternatives, and as such prone to become gang members or excluded citizens), who might become part of the Project as employees and users.

22. Tutunichapa Community

Slum community near Parque Cuscatlán

Home to children and youth at risk (lacking socioeconomic alternatives, and as such prone to become gang members or excluded citizens), who might become part of the Project as employees and users.

23. Administración Nacional de Acueductos y Alcantarillados – ANDA

To construct, administer, and maintain the water intake and distribution system, as well as the sewage system.

ANDA could support the Project by funding educational awareness exhibits and/or activities on the responsible use of water and water-saving devices.

24. AES – El Salvador

To provide conventional and alternative electric energy services, through its distribution companies: CAESS, CLESA, EEO, DEUSEM and AES Solutions.

AES is migrating the current aerial electricity distribution net to an underground system in SSHC, something also needed in the Park neighborhood. AES has expressed its willingness to consider financing educational energy-related exhibits and/or activities. They could also eventually be considered a potential patrimonial fund sponsor.

25. Foro Permanente para el Desarrollo Integral del Centro Histórico de San Salvador – FPDICHSS

“To support the integral development of San Salvador's Historic Centre, by promoting the consultation, agreement, debate and permanent incidence in different sectors.”

This could be a platform to establish contacts and coordinate among different social sectors and government agencies, and to promote the implementation of the Project long-term.

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

2.1.2. Users profile During the Scoping Phase the Assessment Team conducted a survey of Parque Cuscatlán’s users for one week to establish the number and main characteristics (age, gender, educational level, occupation, family status, and place of residency) of current park users, their motivations, means of transportation, time of visit, frequency, expectations, comments, and suggestions related to their current and past visits to Parque Cuscatlán. A total of 210 questionnaires (format given in Annex 2) were completed in groups of ten interviewees early in the morning, ten around noon, and ten late afternoon. This distribution over the course of the day and for each day of the week allowed compensation for systematic patterns within the day or the week due to work/study schedules. Annex 3 gives the complete survey database. A fast total count at the beginning of each survey (morning, noon and afternoon) established the total number of users in the Park (Figure 3 and Table 2). The total number of visitors in one week was 2,172; Sunday and Saturday were the most crowded, accounting for 34.53 percent and 25.32 percent of visitors. Weekdays use was less, varying between 5.99 percent on Monday, to 9.21 percent on Friday. This weekly pattern seems more related to the day than to other variables such as the weather, since Friday (9th of September), besides being a gray and rainy day, had a higher visitation than Wednesday and Thursday, which were sunny days. Visits averaged higher around noon (43.6 percent), a little less in the afternoons (32.02 percent), and lowest in the morning (24.39 percent). Besides jogging, which mainly occurs early in the morning, the surveys showed no significant trends in the types of park use during the course of the day. Figure 3. Distribution of visitors along the seven days of a week and the time of the day. 350#

750 (34.53%)

350"

550 (25.32%)

300"

TOTAL: 2,172

250# 200#

200#

07:00")"10:30"h"

14:00")"18:00"h"

250" 200#

200"

100#

157 (7.23%)

Tuesday"(20th)"

Wednesday"(21st)"

Friday"(9th)"

Saturday"(10th)"

14:00")"18:00"h"

10:30")"14:00"h"

60#

07:00")"10:30"h"

10:30")"14:00"h"

07:00")"10:30"h"

14:00")"18:00"h"

Thursday"(8th)"

70#

52#

14:00")"18:00"h"

70#

56#

10:30")"14:00"h"

49#

07:00")"10:30"h"

14:00")"18:00"h"

10:30")"14:00"h"

20#

35#

07:00")"10:30"h"

40#

200 (9.21%) 100#

60#

50#

14:00")"18:00"h"

50"

Monday"(12th)"

100#

10:30")"14:00"h"

195 (8.98%)

07:00")"10:30"h"

60#

50#

14:00")"18:00"h"

190 (8.75%)

100"

10:30")"14:00"h"

130 (5.99%)

150"

07:00")"10:30"h"

Sunday"(11th)"

January 30, 2017

Table 2. Number of visitors during the course of the week, and the course of the day. DAY

Monday (12th)

Tuesday (20th)

Wednesday (21st)

Thursday (8th)

Friday (9th)

Saturday (10th)

Sunday (11th)

Nº OF VISITORS

TIME

TOTAL Nº OF VISITORS

WEATHER

07:00 - 10:30 h

15.38%

10:30 - 14:00 h

38.46%

14:00 - 18:00 h

46.15%

Drizzling

07:00 - 10:30 h

26.32%

Sunny

10:30 - 14:00 h

100

52.63%

14:00 - 18:00 h

21.05%

Light rain

07:00 - 10:30 h

17.95%

Sunny

10:30 - 14:00 h

100

51.28%

14:00 - 18:00 h

30.77%

07:00 - 10:30 h

31.21%

10:30 - 14:00 h

35.67%

14:00 - 18:00 h

33.12%

07:00 - 10:30 h

35.00%

10:30 - 14:00 h

35.00%

14:00 - 18:00 h

30.00%

07:00 - 10:30 h

100

18.18%

10:30 - 14:00 h

250

45.45%

14:00 - 18:00 h

200

36.36%

Light rain

07:00 - 10:30 h

200

26.67%

Sunny

10:30 - 14:00 h

350

46.67%

14:00 - 18:00 h

200

26.67% TOTAL:

DAILY %

Drizzling 130

190

195

8.75%

8.98%

Drizzling

Cloudy

Sunny Sunny Sunny

157

7.23%

Sunny Sunny Drizzling

200

9.21%

Light rain Light rain Sunny

550

750

25.32%

34.53%

Cloudy

Sunny Sunny

2,172.00

AVERAGE:

103.43

310.29

SD:

83.79

222.56

5.99%

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

Table 3 summarizes the personal profile of the Park’s current users, and the characteristics of their visits (Annex 3 givers the complete database). Table 3. Summary of results from Park user’s survey. PARAMETERS

CATEGORIES / OPTIONS

TOTAL / AVERAGE

34.49 ± 13.67 SD1

Age (average years) Gender

Female Male

78 132

37.14% 62.86%

Educational Level

Primary (1st – 6th grade) Secondary (7th – 9th grade) High school (10th – 12th grade) University Didn’t answer

13 21 105 69 2

6.19% 10.00% 50.00% 32.86% 0.95%

Family Status

Single Common law Married Divorced Widowed Didn’t answer

78 57 61 11 2 1

37.14% 27.14% 29.05% 5.24% 0.95% 0.48%

Nº of Children (average number) Current Occupation

1.70 ± 2.38 SD Student Employee Own business Housekeeper Unemployed Retired Didn’t answer

Length of Current Visit (hours, average) Current Main Activity

50 102 27 15 10 4 2 2.60 ± 1.57 SD

Sport / Fitness Study / Read Relaxation Family Time Shared time (couples) Waiting Time Meeting Point Visit Monument

39 14 50 59 34 9 1 1

NA 23.81% 48.57% 12.86% 7.14% 4.76% 1.90% 0.95% NA 18.57% 6.67% 23.81% 28.10% 16.19% 4.29% 0.48% 0.48%

“The standard deviation (SD) measures how concentrated the data are around the mean; the more concentrated, the smaller the standard deviation”. “A large standard deviation isn’t a bad thing; it just reflects a large amount of variation in the group that is being studied.” (Rumsey, 2016)

January 30, 2017

PARAMETERS

CATEGORIES / OPTIONS Didn’t answer

Nº of People in the Group (average Nº)

TOTAL / AVERAGE

% 3

3.03 ± 3.62 SD

1.43% NA

Relation to Group Members

Family Friends Couple Workmates Classmates Sport mates Non applicable Didn’t answer

78 25 44 11 10 11 30 1

37.14% 11.90% 20.95% 5.24% 4.76% 5.24% 14.29% 0.48%

Transportation Means

Public transport Private vehicle By foot Bicycle Motorcycle Didn’t answer

69 67 38 5 30 1

32.86% 31.90% 18.10% 2.38% 14.29% 0.48%

Time from Last Visit (average days)

248 ± 984.69 SD

Main Activity During Last Visit

Sport / Fitness Study / Read Relaxation Family Time Shared time (couples) Waiting time Meeting point Visit monument Does not apply Didn’t answer

39 10 52 66 28 3 1 1 8 2

18.57% 4.76% 24.76% 31.43% 13.33% 1.43% 0.48% 0.48% 3.81% 0.95%

Frequency of Visits

Daily Weekly Monthly Annual Occasional Non applicable

16 69 36 4 81 4

7.62% 32.86% 17.14% 1.90% 38.57% 1.90%

Perceived Park Security (scale from 0 – 10 / no secure – totally secure) Knows About the Park’s Project

Yes No

6.29 ± 2.43 SD 78 132

NA 37.14% 62.86%

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

The five most frequent positive aspects of the Park visitors mentioned were: a. Green and fresh environment, the presence of animals, and the clean air (mentioned 81 times); b. The open space (mentioned 44 times); c. The still, relaxing environment (mentioned 29 times); d. The food and its price (mentioned 15 times); and e. The opportunity for social contact (mentioned 14 times). Other positive aspects mentioned were: (f) playgrounds for kids; (g) location and easy access; (h) the basketball/soccer fields; (i) the possibility to drive and park within the park; (j) the existing facilities (including toilets); (k) the amphitheater; and (l) cultural and special events. The five most frequent negative aspects of the Park visitors mentioned were: a. The poor maintenance and decline of the Park (mentioned 86 times); b. The amount of trash and general lack of cleanliness (mentioned 63 times); c. The poor or lack of gardening, including the lack of flowers (mentioned 34 times); d. The need for more facilities, such as trash cans, drinking water dispensers, toilets, benches and tables, etc. (mentioned 29 times); and e. Insecurity/not enough police presence (many park users do not see CAM as a police body) (mentioned 24 times). Other negative aspects mentioned were: (f) the presence of suspicious people (gang members, drunks, drug addicts); (g) bad drainage, which causes mud when it rains; (h) not enough playgrounds for kids; (i) poor aesthetic and hygienic conditions in the “comedores”; (j) immoral acts by young couples; (k) occasional lack of water; (l) the fee to use the toilets; (m) lack of gazebos to get out of the rain; (n) not enough basketball/soccer fields; (o) poor visitor behavior; (p) vehicles driving and parking inside the park; (q) no riding horses for rent; and (r) noise and pollution coming from surrounding neighborhoods. The five most frequent suggestions made by users were to: a. Improve green zones, plant more trees, bushes and flowers (mentioned 42 times); b. Increase and improve playgrounds for kids, diversify and include creative ideas (mentioned 34 times); c. Improve overall sanitation, better solid wastes management, place separation trashcans (mentioned 28 times); d. Improve security, including constructing a clean and accessible PNC post (mentioned 27 times); and e. Improve paths, using pavestones or cement, better conditions for jogging and cycling (mentioned 27 times).

January 30, 2017

Other suggestions made by the users were: (f) get rid of all suspicious people; (g) improve the “comedores”; (h) build more toilets in different sectors; (i) fix rainwater drainages; (j) establish fines for littering, unattended pets, immoral acts, etc.; (k) improve the drinking water service; (l) improve and increase the number of basketball/soccer fields, including some for children; (m) organize more family, social, educational, and cultural events; (n) build swimming pools for children; (o) organize vehicular traffic, including building a parking lot; (p) build an exercises/fitness area; (q) install more seats and tables, including playing tables; (r) build gazebos for rain protection; (s) install bird and squirrel cages; (t) add signage; (u) build a skating field; (v) build ramps for wheelchair access; (w) establish a petting zoo; (x) fence the Park perimeter; (y) build water fountains; (z) restrict access to pets; (aa) start a soccer school; (ab) establish a reading area; (ac) zone the Park; and (ad) advertise the Park.

2.1.3. Main social dynamics At least four general social categories of users can be found in the Park: a. Users coming to enjoy what the Park offers (nature, climate, peace, sports, food, etc.), as described in Section 2.1.2; b. People that are there but not because of what characterizes the Park, which means their presence is circumstantial, and they would most probably be at that location even if the Park wasn’t there: people meeting there as a reference point, waiting for hospital patients, drivers waiting (particularly taxi drivers), people just crossing the Park from the 6ª–10ª Av. to Alameda Roosevelt or vice versa, etc.; c. People working or making a living: food service concessionaires, itinerant vendors, maintenance personnel, municipal policemen and policewomen (CAM), national policemen and policewomen (PNC); and d. Socially marginalized groups that seek “refuge” in the Park: gang members and other delinquents, drunks, drug users, homeless people, etc. Most common social interactions occur among members of the first three categories, mainly Park users buying goods and/or services from stationary and/or itinerant vendors. Occasionally socially marginalized group members make contact with park users, passersby, and/or workers, mainly to require or demand something – generally money. The stationary vendors reported that a couple of years ago gang members demanded a “rent” (an obligatory regular payment for “protection” services). As a result, they were relocated and grouped together in the area in front of the CAM station. There is not much interaction between these socially marginalized groups – particularly delinquents – and CAM, who let them be. In fact, most of Parque Cuscatlán is relatively secure, except for the northeast quadrant – with the exception of the basketball/soccer field found in that sector – where the socially marginalized groups have their territory. Although people can usually circulate there, now and then they would be “asked” for a contribution, which happened to the Assessment Team while taking photos, and again when conducting the i-Tree inventory.

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

2.1.4. Economics Some 35 households currently make a living within the Park by selling products and services – mostly food and drinks – to the public. Based on a survey of 14 out of 25 “comedor” owners, it was possible to establish that average weekly sales add to $155.361, while costs add to $103.572 (including a $8 monthly fee – about $2/week – to the municipality). The Assessment Team considers this information quite accurate, given that it was consistent among all independently interviewed people (which shows in the relatively small standard deviation accompanying each average). It can be inferred that these “comedores” are only making around $51.79 profit a week ($7.40/day) (complete data en Annex 11). All of these businesses are basically offering the same products: pupusas, tortas, hamburgers, hotdogs, French fries, cold (sodas and juices) and hot (coffee and chocolate) drinks. They are located one next to the other, which means “they are all getting a very small piece of the same pie.” The other 10 households correspond to itinerant vendors, who were also interviewed. Based on 4 surveys, on average they sell around $71.253 per week, and invest $41.254, leaving an average net profit of $30/week5. But in contrast to “comedores”, not all itinerant vendors work in the Park every day. They average 5.886 (± 1.7 SD) days working in the Park, which implies a mean daily income from the Park of $5.327 (complete data en Annex 11). Although some of them sell the same or similar products as offered by the “comedores” (coffee and sandwiches), itinerant vendors’ products also include ice cream, candies, balls, and other toys. The maintenance of the Park costs the municipal government about $32,000 a year, including $30,030 for maintenance (3 people) and security (2 CAM people) personnel. Table 4. Yearly management costs, Parque Cuscatlán. COST ITEMS

QUANTITY

UNITARY COST

A. Salaries

YEARLY COST

$ 30,030 $568.75/month

$ 13,650

3 people

$455.00/month

$ 16,380

B. Electricity

Indet.

$137/month

C. Water

Indet.

No charge

Indet. T O T A L

Unknown

$? $ 31,674

• CAM Personnel • Maintenance Personnel

D. Expendables 1Including

2 people

social benefits

Source: San Salvador’s Municipal Government

± $21.83 SD ± $19.50 SD 3 ± $28.80 SD 4 ± $16.72 SD 5 ± $12.25 SD 6 ± 1.7 SD 7 ± $2.57 SD 1 2

$ 1,644

January 30, 2017

The Park in return produces environmental services to the city worth at least $10,000 a year, a stored carbon value of more than $102,000 as calculated using USFS’s i-Tree methodology (see Table 6, Section 2.2.4 and Annex 4), and the value of other environmental services, such as the conditions for relaxation, introspection, contact with nature, education and awareness, etc, which are more difficult to define and be assigned an economic value.

2.1.5. Current social problems, and limitations The main social problem in Parque Cuscatlán, just as in the rest of SSMA, is insecurity/delinquency. The average security perception of current users is 6.29 in a scale of 0–10 (Table 3), which could be interpreted as: “The Park is relatively secure, but attention or personal awareness of possible threats is needed at all times”, while 40 percent of the participants in the survey rated it as secure (over 7 points), and 25 percent as insecure (equal or below 5). The main limitations related to socio-economic aspects are: a. The general state of abandonment, reflected in the decline of facilities, services, and gardening; b. The circulation of motor vehicles inside the Park; c. Existing circulation barriers between the Park and the Museum, and the Museum and the gym/sport fields; d. The low quality and potential unhealthiness of food and drinks being offered; e. The high number of vendors, particularly stationary vendors/”comedores” (of which there are 35!); f.

The presence of socially marginalized groups (drunks, drug addicts, and homeless); and

g. The current location of basketball/soccer fields on both sides of the main pedestrian entrance to the Park, which deters some potential visitors from entering the Park.

2.2. Natural Resources 2.2.1. Soils The SSMA is located in a valley surrounded by volcanic structures that determine its topography and soils. There are three main geologic zones: (i) “Picacho”, in the north; (ii) “Boquerón”, in the central part, and (iii) “Bálsamo”, in the south. Parque Cuscatlán is found in the “Boquerón” Geologic Zone, which is characterized by the following profile: (a) a surface layer of young volcanic tephra or ashes, locally called “tierra blanca” (white soil), some 3.5 m deep; (b) a layer of gray pumice mixed with pluvial wastes from the San Salvador Volcano, of about 3 m depth; (c) a layer of andesitic rocks, about 3.8 m

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

deep; (d) a 1.8 m layer of breccia, composed of broken fragments of mineral rocks cemented together by a fine-grained matrix; and (e) a relatively thin layer of ancient volcanic ashes (more “tierra blanca”). Volcanic tephra, like the one found in the Park’s superficial layer, has very low cohesion values, which contributes to high erosion rates when the vegetation cover is lost, which can cause landslides during strong rains and earthquakes. (Galdámez & Kattan, 2007)

2.2.2. Climate and air quality Most of the SSMA (below 800 m.a.s.l.), including Parque Cuscatlán, lies within the “warm tropical savanna” or “warm land” climate zone of the Köppen climate classification (Köppen & Geiger, 1936). In Holdridge’s Climatic Regionalization (Holdridge, 1975), SSMA falls within Humid Subtropical Forest transitional to Tropical Forest, characterized by an annual average biotemperature of more than 24ºC. There are no weather data for Parque Cuscatlán or its immediate area, so the data from the weather station at Ilopango Airport – S-10 (located at 13°41.9’ N; 89°07.1’ W), located 9 km west of the Park at a similar altitude (615 m.a.s.l.), were used to build the data sets showed below.

Temperature Usually mean temperature of the climatic zone of the Park falls to its lowest levels (~ 20ºC) in December and starts rising until it reaches its highest in April (around 26ºC) (Figure 4). Figure 4. Monthly variation of temperature in the SSMA (averages of 48 years, 1965 – 2012). Data from the Ilopango Airport weather station – S-10. 27#

26#

24.9#

25#

26#

25#

23#

22.8#

23# 22#

22#

23#

24#

23.8# 23.8#

23.4# 23#

23.9#

24.1#

24#

25#

24.5#

24#

23.3# 23#

23#

23.2#

22.8# 22.6#

22#

21#

24#

21#

20# ENE#

FEB#

MAR#

ABR#

Average#Maximun#Temperature#

MAY#

JUN#

JUL#

AGO#

Average#Mean#Temperature#

SEP#

OCT#

NOV#

Average#Minimun#Temperatur#

DIC#

20#

January 30, 2017

Mean annual temperature has averaged 23.6 ± 0.4ºC between 1965 and 2012 (Figure 5). Although the mean annual temperature appears stable during that period, the average in the last 10 years of the series (24.0 ± 0.2ºC) is 0.5ºC higher compared to the average of the last 38 years (23.5 ± 0.38ºC). That slight tendency is even more noticeable when looking at the annual average of maximum temperatures in the same period of time (Figure 5). Figure 5. Variation of annual average temperatures in the SSMA during the period 1965 – 2012. Records from the Ilopango Airport weather station – S-10. 33.0% 32.3%

31.0%

31.0% 30.8%

31.2%

30.8%

30.4%

30.8%

30.7%

30.2%

29.8%

30.0%

30.3%

30.2%

29.9% 30.1% 29.7%

29.5%

29.0%

31.1% 30.8%

29.8%

30.4%

30.4% 30.4% 30.4%

30.0%

30.5%

31.0%

31.1%

30.9% 30.5%

30.8%

30.3%

31.1%

31.3%

31.2%

31.3%

31.2%

30.8%

31.8%

31.6%

31.3%

30.8% 30.8% 30.3%

30.4%

29.8%

27.0%

Temperatura%Máxima%Anual%Promedio%

Temperatura%Media%Anual%Promedio%

Temperatura%Mínima%Anual%Promedio%

25.0%

23.7% 23.0%

23.6%

23.4%

23.8% 23.3%

23.6% 23.0%

24.0%

23.8% 23.2%

23.1% 22.9%

23.6%

23.5%

23.3%

23.3% 23.3%

22.8% 22.8%

23.4%

23.7%

23.4%

24.2% 23.8% 23.9% 23.8%

24.0%

24.1% 24.1% 24.2% 24.2%

23.8%

23.6% 23.1%

22.8%

24.0%

23.7%

23.2%

23.3%

24.1%

23.9%

23.6%

23.3%

21.0% 19.8%

19.6% 19.2% 19.0%

19.1% 19.1%

19.0% 18.9%

18.6%

18.8% 18.7% 18.7%

18.0%

18.8% 18.6%

18.6% 18.3%

18.3%

18.8% 18.9%

18.1%

19.1%

18.9% 18.3%

17.9%

19.5%

19.1%

18.8%

19.0%

19.6% 19.6%

19.9%

19.4%

19.5%

19.0%

18.8% 17.8%

19.7%

19.2% 19.1%

17.8%

Rainfall El Salvador in general has a monsoon-type climate, with sharply differentiated wet and dry seasons. Both seasons last about six months each, with the wet season lasting from mid-April through mid-October when about 95 percent of annual rainfall occurs, and the dry season lasting from mid-October to midApril. Precipitation has an approximately normal distribution throughout the year, with a peak in September. As with temperature, rainfall data from the Ilopango station (S-10) probably is a reasonable re

19.4%

1965% 1966% 1967% 1968% 1969% 1970% 1971% 1972% 1973% 1974% 1975% 1976% 1977% 1978% 1979% 1980% 1981% 1982% 1983% 1984% 1985% 1986% 1987% 1988% 1989% 1990% 1991% 1992% 1993% 1994% 1995% 1996% 1997% 1998% 1999% 2000% 2001% 2002% 2003% 2004% 2005% 2006% 2007% 2008% 2009% 2010% 2011% 2012%

18.0% 17.0%

18.3%

18.7%

19.1%

19.5%

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

flection of the weather conditions in Parque Cuscatlán. Recent precipitation data from the S-10 station were not publicly available at the time of this EA (only values corresponding 2012 = 1,353.0 mm, and 2013 = 1,770.09 mm were found). The Assessment Team took the data on 1985-2003 monthly precipitation averages presented in Table 5 and Figure 6 from a report by García et al. (year unknown). Table 5 and Figure 6. Monthly rainfall averages from 1985 – 2003. García et al. (YU)

January

1.7

February

1.0

March

5.3

April

23.5

May

153.1

June

286.8

July

318.5

August

332.1

September

335.8

October

185.0

November

57.0

December

9.0

1,708.8

TOTAL:

332.1$

350.0#

318.5$

300.0#

335.8$

286.8$

250.0#

185.0$

200.0# 153.1$ 150.0#

100.0# 57.0$ 50.0#

23.5$ 1.7$

1.0$

5.3$

9.0$

0.0#

Ju ly# Au gu st Se # pt em be r# Oc to be No r# ve m be r# De ce m be r#

UNIT

ar y# Fe br ua ry # M ar ch # Ap ril # M ay # Ju ne #

VALUE

Ja nu

MONTH

Pollution The same air quality/pollution data described in detail in Section 2.4.2 for the whole SSMA apply to the Park and its surrounding areas. The nearest REDCA (Air Quality Monitoring Net) station to the Park is located at the Centro de Gobierno – CG (Government Center), about 1km to the northeast and at almost the same mean elevation (674 m.a.s.l.). According to CG station data, out of an annual average of 269.881 days in which the concentration of PM2.5 was measured between 2009 and 20162, 51.943 days per year on average (19.25 percent) had concentrations between 40.5 and 65.4 µg/m3, a range considered “slightly prejudicial” to the human health; while 13.254 days a year (4.21 percent) had between 66 and 159 µg/m3, considered “prejudicial” (MARN, 2016). When combined, that accounts for 24.30 percent of the sampled days (see Section 2.4.2).

± 71.70 SD Data corresponding 2016 comprehend a period of 8 moths, January - August, and were thus normalized for comparison purposes, dividing the reported number of days by 8 and then multiplying it by 12 3 ± 36.07 SD 4 ± 17.28 SD 1 2

January 30, 2017

2.2.3. Hydrology and surface water quality Parque Cuscatlán is located in a ground depression, ranging 2 to 8 meters below the surrounding streets. Even though flooding problems would be expected in such topography, only small puddles (“charcos”) and mud appear after a heavy rain and persist for some hours after it stops raining. The Park lies within the Acelhuate River sub-watershed, which has an approximate extension of 622.47 km2, and is home to more than 25 percent of El Salvador’s population. Various micro-watersheds feed the Acelhuate sub-watershed, including the Montserrat, Tutunichapa, and La Mascota ravines, which surround the Park. The Acelhuate is part of the great watershed of the Lempa River, which includes about 50 percent of El Salvador’s territory. The Acelhuate River is the main surface hydrologic resource for the SSMA, which flows at a mean annual rate of about 32.7 m3/sec, and even during the dry season maintains a mean monthly flow of about 5.0 m3/sec. It is, however, also one of the most polluted rivers in El Salvador (MARN, 2015), falling within 20 – 22 on the General Index of Water Quality (Índice de Calidad de Agua General – ICA) (MARN, 2013) (see Section 2.4.2). Reflecting the pace of urban development in the sub-watershed, the Acelhuate River suffers from acute environmental degradation as it receives ineffectively treated or raw SSMA domestic and industrial sewage. In addition, tons of solid waste are either thrown directly into its tributary ravines and principal watercourse, or washed there by storm runoff. A signification portion of these pollutants finally drain into the Lempa River, which is the country’s main source of water for drinking, hydroelectric power, and the habitat for most of the freshwater fish Salvadorans consume. Precarious housing communities – like the Asunción and Tutunichapa communities found near the Park – have developed throughout the years along the Acelhuate River margins, in unsanitary areas with high risk of flooding and landslides. The Acelhuate regularly overflows, inundating various parts of San Salvador, particularly La Vega District and La Malaga Neighborhood. MARN’s Plan to Recover San Salvador’s Urban Rivers, announced in June 2016, is already active in the Acelhuate River on four main components: (a) education, culture, and communications to promote dialog and awareness in people; (b) a socio-economic component to provide orientation, access, and equipment for sustainable development; (c) a environment and risk component to restore existing sanitation infrastructure, construct at least two more sanitation plants, monitor water quality, reinforce the implementation of environmental actions by companies as part of their corresponding environmental impact assessments, and manage watershed risks; and (d) an institutional component to generate institutional arrangements for the effective implementation and long-term sustainability of the Plan. A aspect of the Plan relevant to the Park is to enhance existing green areas and establish new ones linked to the ravines being restored as part of an interconnected, extensive, urban ecology area; Parque Cuscatlán could and should play an important role in this scheme.

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

2.2.4. Ecosystems and ecosystem services The ecosystem of Parque Cuscatlán can be described as a mixed collection of species in an open forestlike arrangement. This means trees are the dominant stratus – shrubs and herbaceous plants other than grass are underrepresented – but they are dispersed, covering only about 49.7 percent of the Park’s area, in a density of about 97 trees per hectare. The ground cover is dominated by bare soil and grass, 49.1 percent and 42.1 percent, respectively. This ecosystem is inhabited and/or used by a relatively diverse biotic community of native and exotic/introduced flora and fauna species (see Section 2.2.5), which, though a highly artificial and disturbed system, still produces many benefits for the urban environment and its human population. The Assessment Team identified and partially quantified these environmental services using the USFS’s i-Tree methodology (Table 6). Table 6. Main environmental services contributed by Parque Cuscatlán, and their values (complete i-Tree report in Annex 4) AMOUNT

ESTIMATED VALUE

24,000 gr/year

$3,680/year

• Ozone (O3)

14,000 gr/year

• Carbon Monoxide (CO)

5,500 gr/year

• Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2 )

2,200 gr/year

• Sulfur Dioxide (SO2)

2,000 gr/year

300 gr/year

Unknown

Undetermined

ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES A. Removal of Air Pollutants

• 2.5µ Particulate Matter (PM2.5) B. Savings in Health Care to Patients Suffering from Respiratory Diseases C. Climate Change Mitigation

696.7 tons

$102,235.23

38.28 tons/year

$5,614.21/year

96 tons/year

Undetermined

340.94 m3/year

$801.23/year

F. Temperature Control

Unknown

Undetermined

G. Sound Control

Unknown

Undetermined

H. Relaxation and Aesthetic Services

Unknown

Undetermined

I. Environmental Education and Awareness

Unknown

Undetermined

J. Benefits to Other Species and their Associated Environmental Services (pollination, pest control, etc.) Source: Self-calculations (complete report in Annex 4)

Unknown

Undetermined

• Carbon Storage • Carbon Sequestration D. Oxygen (O2) Production E. Runoff Control

January 30, 2017

2.2.5. Native and exotic species The Assessment Team performed a complete inventory of trees in the Park. There are 837 trees (including seven dead) and 70 species (see complete list in Annex 5). Forty-nine species (70 percent) are native, and 21 (30 percent) are exotic/introduced (Figure 7). Maquilishuat (Tabebuia rosea) and Barío (Calophyllum brasiliense) both native, and Laurel de la India (Ficus benjamina) an exotic, are the dominant species, accounting for more than 34 percent of all individual trees in the Park (Figure 6). The next seven most common species (five native and two exotic) account for 30 percent of trees, while the remaining 35 percent of trees include 60 species (42 native and 18 exotic). Thirty-seven species have fewer than five individuals each (Figure 7). 120"

Figure 7: Tree species found in Parque Cuscatlán and their absolute abundance. 103" 100"

97"

86"

21#Introduced# Species#(30%)#

80"

49#Na&ve#Species# (70%)#

60"

51" 46"

44" 38"

40"

32" 25" 22" 19" 19" 19"

20"

13" 12"

11" 11" 10" 10" 10" 10" 10" 10" 7" 7" 7" 6" 6" 5" 5" 5" 5" 5" 4" 4" 4" 4" 3" 3" 3" 3" 2" 2" 2" 2" 2" 2" 2" 1" 1" 1" 1" 1" 1" 1" 1" 1" 1" 1" 1" 1" 1" 1" 1" 1" 1" 1" 1" 1" 1"

maquilishuat barío laurel0de0la0India calistemo mango almendro0de0río flor0amarilla0(Cassia) casuarina cedro arrayán palmera0de0abanico caoba aceituno conacaste0negro palmera0oriental jupiter0de0Jaba eucalipto palmera0real cortéz0blanco San0Andrés almendro0de0playa bálsamo guayabo araucaria aguacate carao Cguilote falsa0magnolia ceiba mangollano amate0(matapalo) cerezo0de0Belice mamón marañón palma0de0pescado palmera0Miami cañón jacaranda zunza papaturro teca ron0rón llama0del0bosque nance volador ciprés polvo0de0queso guarumo mano0de0leon Sheflera jiote mamey chilindrón tambor frijolillo paterna pepeto0cuadrado magnolia cola0de0pava paraiso amate amate0hoja0ancha hoja0pequeña0ficus palo0de0hule manzana0rosa coco pino mulato pacún zapote

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

The Park includes 23 species of shrubs; nine are native and 14 are exotic. There are four species of native orchids, and 20 species of herbaceous plants (13 native and 7 exotic) (see complete lists in Annex 6). As a reference on faunal diversity, the Assessment Team compiled lists of birds and butterfly species recorded from the Park. Sixty-nine species of birds have been reported, of which 49 are resident and 20 migrants (Annex 7). Adding other species known to occur in nearby areas, the Assessment Team estimates that there about 120 species of bird species in Parque Cuscatlán. The Assessment Team found no records of the butterfly species in the Park – or even for the SSMA – but they observed 13 butterfly species during the tree inventory (Annex 8). Based on the presence of species of plants that are known butterfly hosts, the Assessment Team estimates the total number of diurnal lepidopterans may be 60 to 70 species, and if nocturnal species (moths) are included, at least ten times more.

2.2.6. Current environmental problems, and limitations The principal current environmental problems in Parque Cuscatlán are: (i) noise and air pollution coming from the surrounding city, and (ii) the accumulation of solid waste inside the Park. Issues aggravating these environmental problems include: a. Lack of education and awareness about environmental problems among visitors to Parque Cuscatlán, and SSMA inhabitants in general; b. Limited knowledge of public officials and decision-makers about the importance of urban ecology and how to enhance its benefits; c. Lack of municipal government staff well-trained in park management and maintenance; and d. Lack of support and funding for the study and enhancement of urban green areas.

January 30, 2017

2.3. Infrastructure 2.3.1. Roads/Trails The Park is bound by major city roads. Its north flank is delimited by the Alameda Roosevelt; to the east its border is 25 Avenida Sur. Both are busy, four-lane, urban roads, with pedestrian access to the Park. The 6ª-10ª Calle Poniente, which forms the Park’s south border, is a two lane paved primary road giving vehicular entry to the Park. Two types of paths are found within the Park: (a) the original system, a neoclassic European style (see Section 4.1) on the Park’s leveled core, comprises some 1,400 m of dirt paths 10 meters wide, for a total estimated area of 14,000 m2; and (b) 400 m of more recently constructed, track-ballasted, 4 m wide paths on the south hilly sector of the Park, covering approximately 1,600 m2. Significant parts have lost their ballast.

2.3.2. Buildings The most relevant of the buildings found within Parque Cuscatlán’s boundaries is the National Art Gallery (Sala Nacional de Exposiciones Salarrué). It was originally built in 1939 in harmony with the Park’s neoclassic style, then restored in 1977 and 1996, and declared a cultural heritage on September 13, 2005. The Gallery is currently managed by the Cultural Secretariat (Secretaría de Cultura – SECULTURA), a dependency of the Presidency of El Salvador. Access to the building is free and unrestricted (although at the time of this EA it was closed, due to an infiltration problem). It hosts temporary exhibits, diverse cultural activities, an art conservation workshop, a library specialized in the plastic arts, and administrative offices. There are three other buildings within the Park, but these are merely utilitarian: (a) A battery of toilets found in the south-west limit of the Park (close to the fence that borders Museo Tin-Marín), within a building 10.40 m long by 7.60 m wide (79 m2), built with concrete blocks, metal structure, and zinc-aluminum roof. Both men's and women´s bathrooms have 2 sinks, 8 toilets – including a special toilet for disabled people –, and 2 showers, each; (b) A building known as “La Galera” is located immediately south of the toilets building. It is 23.10 m long by 12.30 m wide for an area of 284 m2, made out of concrete blocks, metal structure, and fibrocement roof (although it has the capacity to host eight spaces for food vendors, it is currently abandoned for unknown reasons); and (c) The Municipal Police (Cuerpo de Agentes Metropolitanos – CAM) quarters comprise a 7.2 m by 12.3 m building (88.5 m2) made out of bricks and concrete, and a metallic structure that holds the zinc

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

aluminum roof. The facility has electrical power, running water, 2 toilets and two showers for men. Next to the main building, in a 39 m2 (2.9 m x 13.4 m), zinc-aluminum walls and roof, extension is a toilet and a shower for women. Nearby are two closed storing facility (10 m by 6 m, and 7.5 m by 17 m), with walls made out of bricks and concrete up to 1.5 m, and finished with zinc-aluminum, which also makes for the roof material, hold by metal supports. Both of these buildings are used by municipal maintenance personnel (working inside the Park, as well as in surrounding areas), and both have electrical and water systems. The first one hosts three toilets, the second one two toilets and two showers. A new open (no walls) 77 m2 (7.2 m x 10.8 m) storing area, with metal tubular columns that support a zinc-aluminum roof, was recently added. In consultation with the Municipality, as well as from observations during evaluation visits to each of the above-mentioned buildings, it was possible to establish that no asbestos are found in any of the materials used for their construction.

2.3.3. Basic services: electricity, water, toilets, sewage sanitation, and solid waste management The National Aqueducts and Sewage Administration (Administración Nacional de Acueductos y Alcantarillados – ANDA) provides Park visitors drinking water through numerous public water fountains – although only about a fourth of them work. Toilets also have running water, but the “comedores” do not. There is also a network of rainwater drains feeding into the city’s sewage system, but many of the drainage pipes and their access covers are currently obstructed by sediment eroded from Park roads and trash carried by storm runoff. The San Salvador’s Electric Lightening Company (Compañía de Alumbrado Eléctrico de San Salvador – CAESS) provides electricity to the Park only for public lighting. “Comedores” have access to electricity. The municipality is currently changing from aerial to an underground electricity distribution network and substituting the Park’s old incandescent lamps for LED ones, but the new lights are not the type recommended in the PCTC’s conceptual design (see Section 1.1.4). The Park’s current sanitation facilities are concentrated in the southwest limits of the Park and offer urinals, toilets, and showers for men and women. These are managed, cleaned, and maintained in relatively good condition by the Association of Disabled War Veterans of El Salvador (Asociación de Lisiados de Guerra de El Salvador – ALGES). Use of the facilities is $0.15 per person. Solid waste management in the Park is deficient. There are not enough trashcans and those few are in very poor condition. There is no trash separation although there is an area within the Park that was prepared for that purpose. The Municipality collection the solid waste and disposes it in the Nejapa Landfill, which is administered by the Integral Solid Waste Management Company (Manejo Integral de Desechos Sólidos – MIDES).

January 30, 2017

Assessment Team consultations with the Municipality established that no asbestos-containing materials are found in any of the service-related infrastructure within the Park, including underground water, drainage, and sewage systems.

2.3.4. Other infrastructure There are other facilities and equipment dispersed throughout the Park, including metal and wood benches, picnic tables and seats made of concrete, and “traditional” metal playground furnishings for children. Their current condition is fair to poor. A noticeable element of Park infrastructure is the “Monument to Memory and Truth” (“Monumento a la Memoria y la Verdad”), an 85m-long wall running from west to east along the north-west limit of the Park, made of black granite and inscribed with the names of at least 25,000 victims of the civil war. This is a “Protected Cultural Heritage” according to a Hague Convention resolution published in El Salvador’s Official Newspaper on February 16, 2011. Other Park infrastructure/facilities include: (a) a small open amphitheater with a gallery of cement seats in the south-east sector of the Park; (b) two cement basketball courts and one dirt soccer field, located near the eastern border, next to the main pedestrian entrance; and (c) a 220m metal fence that divides the Parque Cuscatlán and the Tin-Marín Museum.

2.3.5. Cultural and Historic Resources The following list summarizes the elements within the Park that are considered protected cultural and/or historic resources, and cannot be legally damaged or modified. 1. Paths/trails in the Park’s core are “Sector 2”. The design and layout of the paths/trails correspond to a Neoclassic European geometry (Figure 8). It should be noted that only the path design is protected, not their ground or surface material. Protection was granted by national decree in 2005. 2. National Art Gallery (“Sala Nacional de Exposiciones Salarrué”). The architecture is Neoclassic European. Protection was granted by national decree in 2005. 3. “Monument to Memory and Truth” (“Monumento a la Memoria y la Verdad”). Contains the names of at least 25,000 victims of the civil war. Protection was granted by international resolution (Hague Convention) in 2011.

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

2.4. San Salvador´s Metropolitan Area (SSMA) 2.4.1. SSMA main socio-economic aspects San Salvador’s Metropolitan Area is El Salvador’s main urban area. SSMA covers an area of 610 km2, or approximately 3 percent of the country’s area, but includes 1,566,629 out of El Salvador’s 5,744,113 inhabitants, 27.27 percent of the population (Table 7). SSMA also produces 55 percent of the national Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Within SSMA fourteen municipalities are integrated into two departments. The municipalities with the highest populations are San Salvador, Soyapango, Mejicanos and Apopa, which together account for more than 56 percent of the SSMA population, one third of which live in San Salvador and Soyapango, considered the core of SSMA (Table 7). Only five of the 14 municipalities have any rural populations, and they account for just 3.4 percent of the total. The SSMA is a big and almost continuous urban area. Table 7. Human population in the SSMA by municipality.1 MUNICIPALITY

URBAN POPULATION

RURAL POPULATION

TOTAL POPULATION

1. Department of San Salvador 1.1. San Salvador

316,090

20.89%

0.00%

316,090

20.18%

1.2. Soyapango

241,403

15.95%

0.00%

241,403

15.41%

1.3. Mejicanos

140,751

9.30%

0.00%

140,751

8.98%

1.4 Apopa

131,286

8.68%

0.00%

131,286

8.38%

1.5. Ciudad Delgado

112,161

7.41%

8,039

15.02%

120,200

7.67%

1.6 Nejapa

16,530

1.09%

12,928

24.15%

29,458

1.88%

1.7. Ilopango

103,862

6.86%

0.00%

103,862

6.63%

1.8. Tonacatepeque

78,158

5.17%

12,738

23.80%

90,896

5.80%

1.9. Cuscatancingo

66,400

4.39%

0.00%

66,400

4.24%

1.10. San Martín

66,004

4.36%

6,754

12.62%

72,758

4.64%

1.11. San Marcos

63,209

4.18%

0.00%

63,209

4.03%

1.12. Ayutuxtepeque

34,710

2.29%

0.00%

34,710

2.22%

2.1. Antiguo Cuscatlán

33,698

2.23%

0.00%

33,698

2.15%

2.2. Santa Tecla

108,840

7.19%

13,068

24.41%

121,908

7.78%

1,513,102

100%

53,527

100%

1,566,629

100%

2. Department of La Libertad

TOTAL

Source: VI National Demographic Survey (El Salvador, 2007)

January 30, 2017

The main economic activities in SSMA are services, commerce and industry. The central government is the biggest employer, with an estimated 77,840 employees in San Salvador1. Up to 39.08 percent of the economic active population (EAP) are self-employed in the informal sector, mainly as street vendors. SSMA is also one of El Salvador’s most violent areas, accounting for close to 30 percent of all crimes registered in the country2. The number of crimes already reached 6,130 in the first eight months of 2016 (Table 8). Over 45 percent of these crimes took place in the San Salvador municipality, more than double any other SSMA municipality.

Extortion

Negligent homicides

Homicides

Injuries

Robberies

Rapes

Stolen Vehicles

Kidnappings

TOTAL

Thefts

Table 8. Number of crimes registered in the SSMA, from January through August 2016.

San Salvador

204

323

780

230

408

752

2,804

Santa Tecla

220

168

625

Soyapango

169

128

561

Mejicanos

161

411

Apopa

330

Antiguo Cuscatlán

112

235

Ilopango

227

Ciudad Delgado

219

San Martín

199

San Marcos

150

Tonacatepeque

118

Ayutuxtepeque

108

Cuscatancingo

Nejapa

441

198

1,054

1,452

464

829

118

1,573

6,130

MUNICIPALITY

TOTAL SSMA Aug-2016:

Source: Departamento de Información y Estadísticas Policiales, Policía Nacional Civil.

Poverty, lack of opportunities, the loss of social and moral values, immigration, and a culture of violence are commonly considered the main direct and indirect causes of the present local social crisis, while a poor education/upbringing is seldom included but should be.

Statistics on Human Resources, Gobierno de El Salvador, Portal de Transparencia Fiscal: www.transparenciafiscal.gob.sv

Policía Nacional Civil (PNC)

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

2.4.2. SSMA main environmental aspects Although the SSMA has continuously grown in size and density in an unplanned manner, at least until 1988 when the San Salvador’s Metropolitan Area Planning Office (Oficina de Planificación del Área Metropolitana de San Salvador – OPAMSS) was created, significant – although constantly shrinking – vegetation patches survive within the urban core, particularly along ravines, in parks, gardens, and other green areas. This is clear to see in the “environmental system” map of Parque Cuscatlán’s surrounding areas presented in the PCTC’s Master Plan (Uribe 2015, Figure 8). Figure 8. Vegetation distribution map of Parque Cuscatlán and surrounding areas (source: Uribe, 2015)

Even in the presence of these relatively large natural patches, the high-density population, the more-orless generalized low public education/consciousness, and the city’s accelerated economic rhythm have a direct negative impact on the SSMA natural and socio-cultural environment. Main environmental problems include: (a) the generation of great amounts of: (i) greenhouse effect gases (GEG), such as carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O); (ii) other atmospheric pollutants (OAP), such as carbon monoxide (CO), ozone (O3), mono-nitrogen oxides (NOx), sulphur dioxide (SO2), and

January 30, 2017

particulate matter (PM), all mostly originating from vehicles, industrial processes, sewage, and decomposition of solid organic wastes; (iii) solid wastes; and, (iv) untreated sewage and industrial waters; (b) reduction of green urban areas, their associated biodiversity and environmental services; (c) increased demand of water; and (d) non-sustainably harvested natural goods (wildlife pets, bush meat, fish, turtle eggs, etc.), among others.

Air Quality The earliest atmospheric contamination data for SSMA is from 1970 – 1978, when the Ministry of Public Health and Social Assistance (Ministerio de Salud Pública y Asistencia Social – MINSAL) implemented the PANAIRE project, which monitored total solid particles (TSP) and sulphur dioxide (SO2) in the urban area. This study identified motor vehicles as the main source of urban air pollution and raised awareness of the dangers to human health of particulate matter (PM), particularly that under 2.5µ in size (PM2.5), since these extremely small particles get into and damage lung tissues (PNUMA, 2007). From 1996 to 2001 the Independent Swiss Foundation of Economic Promotion for International Cooperation (SWISSCONTACT) and the Salvadoran Foundation for Economic and Social Development (Fundación Salvadoreña para el Desarrollo Económico y Social – FUSADES) conducted an air quality monitoring program in the SSMA that focused on NO2, O3, TSP, and PM10 and to a lesser extent on lead (Pb) and carbon dioxide (CO2) (Canjura et al., 2008). FUSADES and the Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources (Ministerio del Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales – MARN) continued monitoring NOx, O3, TSP y PM10 between 2004 and 2007 registering annual concentrations of more than 200 percent of safe norms (Fabián & Ayala, 2010, Table 9). Table 9. Annual values of NOx, PM10, TSP, and O3 registered in the SSMA during 2004 – 2007. POLLUTANT

LOCATION

MEAN ANNUAL VALUE (µg/m3) 2005 2006

2004

2007

NOx (annual norm: 100 µg/m3)

 Santa Elena  Hospital Maternidad  Soyapango  Colonia Escalón

36.58 49.45 39.00 18.71

31.28 46.74 35.61 24.32

36.95 48.16 35.43 26.26

32.74 50.98 39.00 28.92

PM10 (annual norm: 50 µg/m3)

 Santa Elena  Hospital Maternidad  Soyapango  Colonia Escalón

41.30 67.93 60.61 37.34

59.24 86.12 65.12 40.83

43.23 75.29 57.65 30.69

37.90 68.70 56.13 38.13

PTS (annual norm: 75 µg/m3)

 Santa Elena  Colonia Escalón

101.77 53.98

105.17 58.93

153.46 117.55

127.85 122.52

Ozone (annual norm: 60 µg/m3)

 Santa Elena  Colonia Escalón

33.18 35.00

30.89 31.38

33.89 35.61

36.16 39.40

Source: MARN, 2008.

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

In 2008, MARN started the Air Quality Monitoring Network (Red de Monitoreo de la Calidad del Aire – REDCA) in the SSMA; originally with three monitoring stations (Universidad Don Bosco, Centro de Gobierno, and Comando de Doctrina y Educación Militar – CODEM); out of which only the first two are still operational. Although these stations are equipped to measure PM2.5, PM10, CO, SO2, and NOx, only concentrations of PM2.5 are currently being monitored (MARN, 2014). Table 10 shows the annual concentrations of PM2.5 recorded by the REDCA station at Centro de Gobierno between January 2009 and August 2016 (complete data sets in Annex 9). Table 10. Monthly mean value concentrations of PM2.5 recorded in at “Centro de Gobierno” between 2009 and 2016. Expressed in micrograms by cubic meter (µg/m3).

YEARS

Ene

Feb

Mar

Abril

Mayo

Jun

Jul

Ago

Sept

Oct

Nov

Dic

ANNUAL= AVERAGE

2009

25.8

21.3

26.5

41.9

41.8

28.6

26.0

29.3

30.9

21.5

29.5

29.4

6.6

2010

22.5

25.7

33.4

46.4

30.9

22.5

15.9

9.9

25.6

25.9

9.9

2011

26.1

23.3

24.7

40.3

81.2

27.8

19.2

34.7

20.0

2012

26.2

25.1

30.2

43.2

43.0

20.1

19.4

31.3

9.7

2013

25.5

34.9

32.6

56.3

58.4

34.4

38.9

47.2

39.0

43.0

30.3

24.5

38.7

10.4

2014

10.8

7.5

34.6

58.5

58.7

46.6

41.5

57.8

58.0

25.0

17.2

20.0

36.3

18.9

2015

27.7

9.0

10.6

20.1

21.7

22.1

19.5

13.3

17.4

21.4

14.8

21.8

18.3

5.2

2016

17.3

17.5

34.6

46.0

40.5

25.8

21.1

12.5

26.9

11.3

AVERAGE SD

22.7 5.4

20.5 8.5

28.4 7.5

44.1 11.0

42.0 13.4

30.3 9.3

27.6 9.7

27.8 18.5

41.9 20.1

31.8 8.4

20.5 4.9

23.0 3.7

30.1

8.1

Source: MARN 2009-2016

The Central American Annual Norm for PM2.5 (NSO 13.11.2001:01) sets a concentration of 15.0 µg/m3 as the acceptable standard. Values that appear in green color in the former Table are the only values that comply with that standard. Since 2012 data from the REDCA stations can be found on MARN’s Risk Monitoring Center Internet site. Data are updated on an hourly basis, and transformed into the color-coded Central American Air Quality Index (Índice Centroamericano de Calidad del Aire – ICCA), following the next scale (CCAD, 2011).

January 30, 2017

Table 11. Color scale use by the Central American Air Quality Index (Índice Centroa-‐ mericano de Calidad del Aire – ICCA). (CCAD, 2011) COLOR

POLLUTANT CONCENTRATION (µg/m3) PM2.5 PM10

INTERPRETATION

0 – 15.3

0 – 54

Good

15.5 – 40.2

56 – 154

Satisfactory

40.5 – 65.4

155 – 254

Slightly prejudicial

66 – 159

255 – 354

Prejudicial

160 – 250

355 – 424

Very prejudicial

251 – 500

424 – 604

Dangerous

A common way of interpreting air pollution data is to account for the number of days within a set period when the concentration of a certain pollutant surpasses the accepted standard and can thus be harmful to human health. Table 12 and Figure 9 apply the ICCA scale to daily measurements reported by REDCA at the Centro de Gobierno station. Table 12. Number and percentage of days per ICCA category, according to the PM2.5 values reported by the Centro de Gobierno REDCA station, during the period January 2009 – August 2016 (complete data sets in Annex 9). AIR QUALITY

YEAR Nº of Days:

2009 305

2010 241

2011 159

2012 171

2013 365

2014 334

2015 329

2016 Jan – Aug 170

GOOD

Nº Days: % :

45 14.75%

70 29.05%

29 18.24%

29 16.96%

37 10.14%

105 31.44%

172 52.28%

40 23.53%

SATISFAC-‐ TORY

Nº Days: %

221 72.46%

125 51.87%

95 59.75%

95 55.56%

169 46.30%

102 30.54%

139 42.25%

105 61.76%

SLIGHTLY PREJUDICIAL

Nº Days: % :

36 11.80%

42 17.43%

22 13.84%

45 26.32%

134 36.71%

80 23.95%

13 3.95%

29 17.06%

PREJUDICIAL

Nº Days : % :

3 0.98%

4 1.66%

3 1.89%

2 1.17%

25 6.85%

55 16.47%

5 1.52%

6 3.53%

VERY PREJUDICIAL

Nº Days : % :

0 0.00%

DANGEROUS

Nº Days: % :

0 0.00%

ays show below each year correspond to PM sampling days. NOTE: The Nº of D 2.5

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

Figure 9. Percentage of days per ICCA category, according to the PM2.5 values reported by the Centro de Gobierno REDCA station, during the period January 2009 – August 2016 (complete data sets in Annex 9). 0.98%#

100%#

11.80%#

90%#

1.66%#

1.89%#

17.43%#

13.84%#

1.17%#

1.52%# 3.95%#

6.85%# 16.47%#

3.53%#

26.32%#

80%#

VERY#PREJUDICIAL# 36.71%#

70%#

23.95%#

42.25%#

PREJUDICIAL#

51.87%#

60%# 72.46%#

50%#

61.76%#

55.56%# 30.54%#

59.75%#

40%#

46.30%#

30%#

52.28%#

29.05%#

20%#

SLIGHTLY#PREJUDICIAL# SATISFACTORY#

31.44%# 18.24%#

14.75%#

10%#

DANGEROUS#

17.06%#

16.96%#

23.53%#

10.14%#

GOOD#

0%# 2009#

2010#

2011#

2012#

2013#

2014#

2015#

2016#

From the data in Table 12 and Figure 9, it is clear to see that approximately half of the time (50.68 percent of the days during that period of 8.67 years) the concentration of the health threatening PM2.5 stayed at “satisfactory” levels between 15.5 – 40.2 µg/m3. But the days in which the PM2.5 reached harmful concentrations (40.5 µg/m3 or more), 24.30 percent, equaled the days it was within the recommended levels (15.3 µg/m3 or less), 25.41 percent. Urban green areas, such as Parque Cuscatlán, play an important role in the capture and precipitation of these pollutants (see Section 2.2.4). 2015 was a very favorable year, with concentrations ranging between “good” and “satisfactory” 94.5 percent of the time. 2016, 2009, 2010 and 2011 could be considered average years, with concentrations considered “good” or “satisfactory” around 80 percent of the time. 2012, 2013, and 2014 (particularly 2013) show the lowest percentage days having favorable conditions, 61.73 percent. As stated before, a significant part – probably the biggest part – of the atmospheric pollutants in the SSMA comes from motorized vehicles. In the report “Preliminary Estimation of the Potential to Reduce the Emissions of Greenhouse Effect Gases, and Other Atmospheric Pollutants by the SSMA Transport Integrated System (Sistema Integrado de Transporte del Área Metropolitana de San Salvador – SITRAMSS)” (Domínguez et al., 2015), the total number of vehicles registered in SSMA as of August 2014 (from the official database) was 397,444 vehicles (47.6 percent of the country’s inventory), and the total fuel (diesel and gasoline) reported to be sold in the gas stations of the SSMA for the same year was 104.15 million liters. It was estimated that just the public transportation units in the SSMA (2,540 buses, and 1,843 microbuses) consumed 18.99 millions of liters, mainly diesel, and produced 149,904 tons of

January 30, 2017

Greenhouse Effect Gases (GEG), and 5,314 tons of Other Atmospheric Pollutants (OAP), as shown in detail in Table 13. (Domínguez et al., 2015) Table 13. Total amounts of GEG and OAP produced by the public transportation system in the SSMA during 2012 and 2014 (calculations made using the AM0031: Baseline Methodology for Bus Rapid Transit Projects from UNFCCC). GREENHOUSE EFFECT GASES:

EMISSIONS 2012

EMISSIONS 2014

CO2e emissions (tons)

148,620

143,658

CH4e emissions (tons)

112

108

N2Oe emissions (tons)

1,173

1,134

Total (tons of CO2e)

149,904

144,899

CO emissions (tons)

3,002

2,890

HC emissions (tons)

299

288

NOx emissions (tons)

978

941

SO2 emissions (tons)

280

270

PTS emissions (tons)

291

280

PM10 emissions (tons)

247

238

OTHER ATMOSPHERIC POLLUTANTS:

Source: Domínguez et al., 2015

The Quality of Surface Water Since 2006 MARN regularly monitors the quality and quantity of water in El Salvador’s main surface hydrographic systems through a network of 122 sampling stations in 55 rivers throughout the country. Three of those sampling stations are on the Acelhuate River, which drains the SSMA into the Lempa River. On the last available “Report on the Quality of the Rivers of El Salvador 2012 – 2013” (MARN, 2013), the Acelhuate River has received a “Very Bad” grade (20 to 22), according to the General Index of Water Quality (Índice de Calidad de Agua General – ICA), an index that rates the quality of water in a 0 to 100 scale – 0 being the worst and 100 the best – based on the values of 9 different parameters: (i) dissolved oxygen; (ii) fecal coliforms; (iii) pH value; (iv) oxygen biochemical demand; (v) nitrates; (vi) phosphates; (vii) temperature change; (viii) turbidity, and (ix) total dissolved solids. (MARN, 2013) Table 14 summarizes the results obtained in the Acelhuate River water samples taken in the monitoring 2012 – 2013.

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

ICA Qualification

ICA Interpretation

Coliforms (NMP/100 mL)

Oxygen Biochemical Demand (mg/L)

Nitrates (mg/L)

A 14 ACELH

7.8

25.3

509

2.11

25.74

7.35

29.5

790,000

Very Bad

A 17 ACELH

7.76

27.1

476.5

1.5

18.91

7.25

1,300,000

Very Bad

A 25 ACELH

7.77

32.3

465

1.98

27.32

7.15

220,000

Very Bad

STATION

Temperature (°C)

Phosphates (mg/L)

Oxygen Saturation Percentage (%)

Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)

Total Dissolved Solids (mg/L)

Table 14. Results of analysis performed in three samples of water from the Acelhuate River in the monitoring period 2012 – 2013. Source: MARN, 2013.

January 30, 2017

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

3. PURPOSE AND NEEDS The purpose of the proposed interventions is to renovate the Park, improve existing conditions, enhance and diversify opportunities for relaxation, recreation, and education, including cultural and social programs, in a safe and secure environment. This purpose is expected to be achieved through the actions detailed in Chapter 4 of this EA. The PCTC focuses on restoring this surviving urban space, with the fundamental concept of the restoration being to generate an open, busy area, permeable and inclusive, with unrestricted pedestrian access to all users, including with physical disabilities and socio-economically disadvantaged. It is also expected that the Park‘s restoration will motivate the participation of public and private stakeholders and trigger other investments, which will improve social tolerance and peaceful coexistence, renewing for citizens the pride, ownership, peace of mind, and the chance to improve their wellbeing without the fear of being exiled from their own city. The wider Master Plan aims to inspire common dreams over individual interests, creating a sense of collective ownership and solidarity that creates pride and joy in being part of something bigger, transcendental. (Uribe, 2015a) As stated in the PCTC Master Plan (Uribe, 2015a), the European neoclassic influence that characterizes the Park’s architecture is currently just a shadow of what it used to be. The symmetrically geometric, straight, wide walking paths are heavily eroded and have become streets for cars and motorcycles; the green areas have lost much of their green and have become refuges for drunks and delinquents. The once beating heart of a main sector of the city, which still holds a fond place in the memories of San Salvadorians over 40 years old who were taken there by their parents to ride horses and play ball, has turned into an area to be avoided, at least for the lower middle class and up. There is a need to improve the infrastructure of the Park to create a safe recreational area that meets the needs of users, to renovate the Park’s green areas, to provide improved parking and vehicular control, to organize the vendors to provide quality products, to instill an environmental ethic among users, especially youth, and to work with gangs, local businesses, and park users to improve the Park’s safety, and in general to restore a sense of the Park’s tremendous value as an urban asset. As described in Section 2.4 of this EA, two of SSMA’s most significant problems are: (i) the incidence of delinquency and the culture of violence, and (ii) environmental – particularly atmospheric – pollution. SolucionES was specifically designed to deal with the first of those problems, while the PCTC has the potential to contribute to the solution of both (see Section 1.1.1). In the present state of things, San Salvadorans desperately need this intervention to be successful!

January 30, 2017

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

4. ACTIONS PROPOSED BY THE PARQUE CUSCATLÁN TRANSFORMATION COMPONENT The following sections are a summary of the descriptive and construction elements – particularly those relevant to this EA – given by the project’s conceptual design documents: (i) “Plan Maestro del Parque Cuscatlán y su Área de Influencia” (Uribe, 2015a); (ii) “Anteproyecto Pasarelas Aéreas” (Uribe, 2015b); (iii) “Anteproyecto Senderos y Mobiliario” (Uribe, 2016a); (iv) “Anteproyecto La Hoja Cultural” (Uribe, 2016b); and (iv) “Anteproyecto Sala Nacional Salarrué” (Uribe, 2016c).

4.1. Renovation of Trails, Benches and other Related Facilities Trails are one of the most influential aspects in the public use of open spaces. As a rule of thumb, the better the trails, the higher the number and diversity of users/visitors. Due to the lack of an appropriate maintenance program, the trails at Parque Cuscatlán have deteriorated for decades; irregular surfaces marred by protruding tree roots exposed by erosion and mud from rain limit the use and even pose risks to path users. The Parque Cuscatlán Master Plan, consequently, gives priority attention to renovating trails (Uribe, 2015a). The concept report “Anteproyecto Senderos y Mobiliario” offers abundant details (Uribe, 2016a), including recognizing three different sectors within the Park for their physical, architectural, current and potential uses: A. The “core” of the Park – referred to as Sector 2 in the Conceptual Design document – is an area of 34,200 m2 characterized by a neoclassic European (specifically French) geometry of laterally symmetric rectangular and circular areas delimited by parallel and perpendicular, relatively wide (approximately 10 m) paths (Figure 10). This sector is considered a cultural patrimony. Proposed interventions in this sector are restricted to improving the surfaces of existing paths with gravel, paving stones, and permeable concrete laid down in a central track of permeable concrete flanked by two tracks paved with stones and individual “cages” of gravel for trees at regular intervals (Figure 11). Along the lateral tracks would be metal and concrete benches, trash receptacles, and drinking water fountains. B. A 20 m wide zone – Sector 1 in the Conceptual Design document – runs along the north side of the Park parallel to Av. Roosevelt with the “Sala Nacional de Exposiciones” (National Expositions Hall) in the middle, and the “Muro de la Memoria y la Verdad” (Wall of Memory and Truth) to the west. This zone is characterized by stepped topography that falls as much as 6 m below Av. Roosevelt (Figure 10). The proposed intervention for this sector is to construct two parallel walkways on two terraces, five feet separating the upper walkway from the lower, running along the stone wall that borders the Park on the north. The surface of the upper walkway, closer to the existing stone wall – which will be an exhibition surface – would be made of modular metal profiles with a 1” separation and would encircle existing trees. The walk way would include two types of benches: one low made of the same metal profiles as

January 30, 2017

the walkway surface, and a second in which the metal profiles support a concrete base to create a medium-height sitting-bank (Figure 12). The lower walkway would be paved with stones, and would include more benches of the same two types just described. The border dividing Sectors 1 and 2 would consist of a long continuous concrete bench that also serves as a retention wall for the upper slope (Figure 13). C. Sector 3 is comprised of a trapezoidal 36,700 m2 area along the Park’s south border next to 6ª-10ª Calle Poniente. It is 80 m wide on its eastern end next to 25 Av. Sur and 118 m wide on its western end bordering with Tin-Marín Museum. The slope in this sector is steep, dropping as much as 9 m from south to north, from the street to the Park’s core sector. Sector 3 trails are irregular, sinuous, and circular (Figure 10), a characteristic that could be used to advantage by improving ground cover and using permeable concrete surfaces. The repeated circular forms provide areas for sport activities and multiple-use “islands” paved with metallic modules, similar to those already described for the upper walkway and benches in Sector 1. The boundary between Sector 3 and the Park’s core will be a long continuous linear concrete bench that also serves as a retention wall for the upper slope, just like the one in the border between Sectors 1 and 2 (Figure 13). Figure 10. Basic zoning of Parque Cuscatlán (source: Uribe, 2016a)

Sector 1

Sector 2

Sector 3

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

Figure 11. Path improvements in Sector 2 of the Park (source: Uribe, 2016a).

Figure 12. Path and benches along the stone wall that borders the Park on the north (source: Uribe, 2016a).

January 30, 2017

Figure 13. Continuous concrete bench that divides Sectors 1 and 2, and serves as a retention wall for the upper slope (source: Uribe, 2016a).

The goal of all these interventions is to give the Park unrestricted circulation from one end to the other, and to avoid dead ends and secretive spots where illegal activities might be concealed from public view. By opening the spaces, users become observers and monitors and the Park becomes safer, even at night. (Uribe, 2016a) The hydrologic problems caused by the necessarily reduced permeability of the proposed trails1 is solved by the permeable gravel “cages” containing trees, as well as by the placement of infiltration channels – also filled with gravel – under the surface. Other related elements, such as signs, exhibition frames, bicycle stands, water stations, benches, tables and lights (including some photovoltaic lamps) complement the facilities offered in these public use areas. 1

Materials to be used on these trails are permeable concrete and paver stones.

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

4.2. Construction of Elevated Walkways Taking advantage of the basin-like topography of the Park – several meters below the surrounding street level – the conceptual proposal for the Park’s transformation introduces the idea of elevated walkways. These are meant to be not only pedestrian circulation elements, but also urban connectivity structures. (Uribe, 2015b) The corresponding report “Anteproyecto Pasarelas Aéreas” (Uribe, 2015b) contemplates the construction of two such structures, connecting Av. Roosevelt and 6ª-10ª Calle Poniente, one on the east and one on the west halves of the Park (Figure 14). The document also describes how environmental elements, such as existing trees and other plants, and utilitarian structures, such as benches and stairs, are to be included as an integral part of the design, but does not provide details about dimensions, nor suggested materials to be used. Figure 14. Proposed elevated walkways in Parque Cuscatlán (source: Uribe, 2015b).

4.3. Amphitheater – Cultural Leaf The Park’s transformation conceptual proposal includes the construction of a roof in the form of a “leaf” to cover the already existing amphitheater located close to the southeast corner of the Park. Seats and

January 30, 2017

immediately adjoining areas will be covered by the roof, which includes openings to accommodate already existing trees. The “Anteproyecto La Hoja Cultural” document (Uribe, 2016b) offers detail on how the proposed infrastructure should work, as well as different perspectives showing its look (Figure 15), but provides no technical information on dimensions or materials to be used. Figure 15. Conceptual view of the amphitheater “Cultural Leaf” (source: Uribe, 2016b).

4.4. Expansion of the “Sala Nacional de Exposiciones Salarrué” Located in the middle of the Park’s northern border, and literally incorporated into the stone wall that contains the Av. Roosevelt, is the “Sala Nacional de Exposiciones Salarrué”, founded in 1959 as the first National Art Gallery. The existing building is in the same neoclassic European style of the Park’s overall design and is part of the National Cultural Patrimony. The proposed intervention leaves the main building unchanged, but envisions a modern extension in metal and glass that projects over the original building and its front plaza and extends backwards over Av. Roosevelt to its northern sidewalk where Hospital Rosales is. This new structure will serve as a second “roof” to the original building, helping control existing problems with rain infiltration. It is designed to serve as an extension of the art gallery and as an elevated walkway to cross Av. Roosevelt. No specific dimensions are given by the “Anteproyecto Sala Nacional Salarrué” document (Uribe, 2016c), nor are materials specified, but the conceptual document does say that the new building is expected to provide gallery as well as educational space (library, workshops, projection facilities, etc.), and become not just a museum for the conservation and exhibition of

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

art, but also a public building of a light, clear appearance that promotes culture and learning and becomes part of the urban landscape (Figures 16 and 17). Figure 16. Projected renewed façade of the National Art Gallery “Salarrué” (source: Uribe, 2016c).

Figure 17. Projected extension of the National Art Gallery as an elevated walkway over Roosevelt Avenue (source: Uribe, 2016c).

January 30, 2017

4.5. Construction of the Civic Education Center for Youth and Children “Concejo de los Niños” It is important to clarify that a fundamental issue of the project’s conceptual proposal is the free circulation and enhanced connectivity throughout the whole public property, which includes not only the Parque Cuscatlán area, but also the Museo Tin-Marín, the Gimnasio Nacional Adolfo Pineda, and the INDES facilities. To achieve this goal implies eliminating all current existing physical barriers and managing the common public space. The tower known as “Concejo de los Niños” is an outstanding element of the proposed conceptual design, and as such – although placed out of the boundaries of what is currently recognized as Parque Cuscatlán – was considered as part of this EA. The tower has been visualized as a high building (Figure 18) that serves not only as a lookout point, but is a symbolic lighthouse of hope in the future, standing above the urban turbulence San Salvador now confronts. The Master Plan proposes that the tower should host a hall in the fashion of a “children counsel”, a TV channel, a radio station, and a newspaper editorial office – all run by youth and children – but does not specify dimensions or any further information (Uribe, 2015a), which hampered the preparation of this EA. Figure 18. Conceptual view of the tower at “Concejo de los Niños” (right) and expanded Tin-Marín Museum (center). (source: Uribe, 2015a).

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

4.6. Expansion of the “Museo de los Niños Tin-Marín” The conceptual design presented by the project’s Master Plan (Uribe, 2015a), includes a new, improved, two-floor building for the Tin-Marín, to be built where the current museum is, but on top of a balustrade connected to Parque Cuscatlán by massive stairs, and to the “Concejo de los Niños” tower by a plaza and an elevated walkway (Figure 19). Located almost in the middle of the public area, the new Tin-Marín Museum should become the Park’s representative image (Uribe, 2015a). Figure 19. Projected view of the renewed Tin-Marín Museum from the “Monument to Memory and Truth” (source: Uribe, 2015a).

4.7. Other Significant Interventions “Portal de las Delicias” As stated in Section 2.1.1 of the Scoping Statement, a key current component of the Park’s socioeconomic dynamics is the group of stationary food vendors (“comedores”) provisionally clustered on the westernmost margin of Parque Cuscatlán, close to the Tin-Marín museum. The Project foresees the construction of semi-open, pergola-like facilities to serve as cafeterias and common sitting areas close to the southwestern corner of Parque Cuscatlán with a direct access from 6ª-10ª Street (Uribe, 2015a). This would open the possibility of access to new potential clients. No details on actual dimension, designs and/or materials are provided.

January 30, 2017

“Portal de las Flores” Conceived of as the main entrance to the Park, this structure would occupy the east side of the Park, along 25th Ave. It would be a roofed, L-shape elevated walkway over a water pond with four deck-like entranceways from the street that connects to the south and west with the Cultural Leaf amphitheater (see Section 4.3, Uribe, 2015a, Figure 20). No details on actual dimensions and/or materials are provided. Figure 20. Conceptual view of the “Portal de las Flores”, main entrance to the Park (source: Uribe, 2015a).

4.8. Infrastructure Maintenance and Improvement The proposed Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component (PCTC) includes the creation of a trust fund, fed from private donations, for the adequate maintenance and improvement of the Park.

Sections 4.1 through 4.8 describe PCTC interventions as stated in the corresponding conceptual design documents: (i) “Plan Maestro del Parque Cuscatlán y su Área de Influencia” (Uribe, 2015a); (ii) “Anteproyecto Pasarelas Aéreas” (Uribe, 2015b); “Anteproyecto Senderos y Mobiliario” (Uribe, 2016a); “Anteproyecto La Hoja Cultural” (Uribe, 2016b); and “Anteproyecto Sala Nacional Salarrué” (Uribe,

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

2016c). Sections 4.9 and 4.10 add two different main actions that where not considered in the original design, but that should be taken into consideration for the successful implementation of the Project.

4.9. Facilities for People with Disabilities and Reduced Mobility Given the public and inclusive character, as well as the pilot demonstration purposes of the Project, the construction of structures and facilities that ease access and allow the participation of people with reduced physical capacities is a main issue that should have been considered from the beginning. In the first implementation phase this issue is addressed by: (a) adequate the trail surfaces (a condition already met by the original proposal, Section 4.1); (b) access ramps to all Park sectors, parking area, toilets, amphitheater (“La Hoja Cultural”), food court, and the National Art Gallery (“Sala Nacional de Exposiciones Salarrué”); (c) signs and exhibits designed and placed to be accessible from wheelchairs and by blind people (see Sections 6.3. “Modified Proposed Action Alternative”, and 8.1. Environmental Mitigation Plan).

4.10. Demolitions Although no demolition actions are specifically addressed by the conceptual design documents, the following existing structures will have to be demolished in order to allow the construction of the proposed new buildings and facilities: a. The Municipal Police (Cuerpo de Agentes Municipales – CAM) operational quarters; b. The metal fence between Parque Cuscatlán and the Tin-Marín Museum; and c. The building known as “La Galera”, located immediately south of the existing toilets (Section 2.3.2) This required demolitions will generate debris. Its proper management and disposal is an issue this EA deals with in Sections 6.3. “Modified Proposed Action Alternative”, and 8.1. Environmental Mitigation Plan.

January 30, 2017

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

5. ISSUES ANALIZED OR DISMISSED FROM FURTHER REVIEW Given the current existing conditions of the Park and its surrounding area (Chapter 2), the Assessment Team identified the natural and socio-economic significant situations/issues that might result from the PCTC’s proposed actions (Chapter 4). Section 5.1 refers to those issues that have a significant probability of occurring, might have a significant effects on currently existing conditions, and, therefore, are required to be specifically evaluated by this EA (Chapter 7). Section 5.2 refers to those issues that are unlikely to occur, or, if they occur, are not expected to significantly affect the existing natural and/or socioeconomic conditions; they are, therefore, not analyzed in this EA.

5.1. Identification of Potentially Significant Issues Table 15 lists fourteen potentially significant issues identified by the Assessment Team during the Scoping Phase. It includes actions proposed by the PCTC and the nature of the effects they could have on the Park’s natural and/or socio-economic conditions. Such effects can be: (i) Positive, when creating and/or enhancing desired attributes/conditions; (ii) Negative, when creating and/or increasing undesirable attributes/conditions, and/or limiting or diminishing the desired attributes/conditions; (iii) Direct, when occurring at the same time and place as the proposed action; (iv) Indirect, when occurring later in time or farther removed in distance from their causing action; (v) Simple, when the effect does not affect more than one aspect, is directly associated with a given activity and usually ceases when the causing activity ends; and (vi) Cumulative, when impacts on the environment result from the incremental impact of an action when added to other past, present, and reasonable foreseeable future actions, with effects that result from the interaction of multiple activities over time and/or geographic areas, and may last for many years beyond the life of the project (GEMS, 2015). Table 15. Potentially Significant Issues addressed in this EA. Nº 1

PROPOSED ACTIONS FORESEEN EFFECT ASSOCIATED WITH THE ISSUE

ISSUE

Potential impacts to existing vegetation and associated Construction of infrastrucenvironmental benefits. ture. Construction of new infrastructure and relocation of trees may have a direct negative impact to the existing vegetation (loss of vegetation), thus decreasing the environmental benefits it currently provides. But it can also be an opportunity to increase the number and diversity of plant species.

Relocation and/or substitution of trees from the open grass areas to the contour of trails in Park’s Sector 2.

Negative / Positive, Direct, Cumulative

January 30, 2017

Potential impacts to fauna populations and their associated environmental benefits. Changes in the composition and structure of the vegetation, as mentioned in #1, have a direct impact on the food, shelter, and other sources needed by local fauna. In general terms, if the cover and diversity of vegetation decreases, so do fauna populations, and with them the pollination, insect control and other environmental services they provide.

Aesthetic and visual improvement of the area. This is the fundamental basis of the PCTC. All originally proposed interventions aim for a significant positive change of the Park, and – in the future – its surrounding areas.

Increase of opportunities for public education and awareness.

Infrastructure construction. Relocation and/or substitution of trees, which signify changes in vegetation cover, and thus indirectly affect fauna populations.

Construction/renovation of infrastructure and facilities.

Positive, Direct, Simple

Renovations in the Park will improve access and learning opportunities for students and other groups.

Positive, Indirect and Direct, Cumulative

The renovations in the Park will cause the number of visitors to rise significantly. The nature and social character of the Park are adequate to develop inter- Expansion of the Tin-Marín pretative materials on themes such as the importance Museum, elevated walkways, of green urban areas and services they provide, the improved pathways. flora and fauna species that occur in the SSMA, separation of solid waste, social tolerance and inclusion, among many others. 5

Increased options for relaxation and leisure, which Renovations in the Park will improves individual and public mental health, and thus facilitate access, allow longer supports violence prevention. visits via improved security from new lighting, and proEven in its present condition, the Park offers many vide diversified micropeople a relaxing environment where they can temenvironments. porarily escape from urban stress. The interventions proposed by the PCTC multiply the number and diversity of both individual and group relaxation and leisure options.

Positive, Indirect, Cumulative

Sales of local “comedores” could be affected due to relocation (a definite place has not yet been established) and changes in the number and profile of potential clients.

Negative / Positive Indirect, Cumulative

Relocation of existing “comedores”.

The proposed renovations will change the number and The location, design and construction of the new food profile of people visiting the court (where the existing “comedores” are expected Park. to be relocated), as well as the capacity of their owners to adapt to the preferences and quality standards of the new visitors, could determine their success or failure. The first two variables can be controlled by the Project, the last one influenced with training.

Negative / Positive, Direct and Indirect, Cumulative

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

Sales of itinerant vendors1 may increase, due to the increase in the number of visitors. While “comedores” depend on the number of clients that come on their own (which is why the location, type of products and quality standards are so important), itinerant vendors are much more flexible, actively looking for clients and more easily adapting to offer the products visitors ask for. That is why the increase of visitors can only signify more sales for itinerant vendors, while it could go both ways in the case of “comedores”.

The proposed renovations will change the number and profile of people visiting the Park.

Positive, Indirect, Simple

The lack of sufficient and safe parking space might affect the traffic dynamics in nearby areas of the Park.

Traffic within the Park will be restricted, but no rehabilitation of parking space has Although currently the number of vehicles entering been proposed, although the the Park is relatively small, new visitors attracted by number of visitors is exthe Park’s renovation will bring more vehicles, and if pected to increase signifithere are no options for parking they must stay in the cantly. already saturated surrounding streets.

Negative, Indirect, Simple

Increase in security and its perception.

Positive, Indirect, Cumulative

All Park sectors will be appropriately illuminated, and the construction of elevated walkways and trails improvement will ease access, which will increase the number of visitors and the use of all spaces/ environments within the Park, even at night. This is a strategy proved effective in cities such as Medellín an México D.F. to dissuade potential crime. 10

Risk of infrastructure failure due to lack of financial resources and technical capacity for maintenance and replacement.

The PCTC includes the placement of adequate lights in all sectors of the Park. General improvements will attract more visitors.

Renovation and construction activities, including gardening.

Negative, Indirect, Cumulative

Improved and new infrastructure/facilities will need constant maintenance and eventual replacement, which demands significant resources. 11

Improvements in infrastructure will probably increase Renovation and construction visitation to the Park, and thus the demand for seractivities, including gardening. vices like toilets, running water, sewage, waste management, etc., which in turn could exceed current facilities and municipal capacity and resources.

Negative, Direct / Indirect, Cumulative

“Itinerant vendors” refer to vendors that are in the Park on a regular basis, but that can move in and outside the Park, carrying their merchandise with them.

January 30, 2017

Handling and disposal of demolition materials. Demolition produces a significant amount of waste materials, many of which are non-recyclable and can cause drainage and/or visual negative impacts if not appropriately disposed of.

Access for people with disabilities.

Initial contacts with the administration of Hospital Rosales, suggest that the Ministry of Health and Social Care (MINSAL) may be reluctant to open the south sector of the Hospital’s property, in order to accommodate the northern steps and walkway of the proposed extended elevated walkway and exhibition hall over Av. Roosevelt.

Renovation and construction activities.

Negative, Indirect, Simple

Design and construction of all Negative / Positive infrastructure. Direct, Simple Given the public and inclusive character, as well as the demonstrative nature of the Project, the construction of structures and facilities that ease access and allow the participation of people with reduced physical capacities is an important issue that should have been considered from the beginning, but was not. The conceptual design includes the construction of an elevated walkway and exhibition hall over Av. Roosevelt, which would extent the National Gallery, and be anchored to a renovated walkway on the south limit of Hospital Rosales.

Negative, Direct, Simple

5.2. Climate Change Related Issues Some of the above-described potentially significant issues are related to the causes and consequences of Climate Change. These issues are: a. Potential impacts to existing vegetation and associated environmental benefits. As described in Section 2.2.4. Ecosystems and ecosystem services, the vegetation in the Park contributes significantly to the absorption of GEGs and other air pollutants, microclimate regulation, and habitat, refuge, food, and reproduction conditions for native fauna. b. Increase in opportunities for public education and awareness. As mentioned in different parts of this EA, the transformation of Parque Cuscatlán represents an opportunity to educate visitors on different environmental topics, among which the causes and consequences of Climate Change should be a priority. c. From a different perspective, the improvements planned for Park trails (Section 4.1) will also improve the infiltration of rainwater (an issue eliminated from further review, see Section 5.3 and Table 16 below), which in the face of increasingly extreme rains – a local consequence of Climate Change – represents an advantage.

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

5.3. Issues Eliminated from Further Review Table 16 includes three issues that the Assessment Team judged did not need further analysis in this EA and gives brief justifications for their elimination. Table 16. Issues eliminated from further review. NO.

ISSUE

JUSTIFICATION FOR ELIMINATING

Changes in the flow and infiltration patterns: the materials to be use for the improvement of existing trails and the placement of metal modules in some nodes may somehow affect the soil capacity for infiltration.

Proposed materials (paving stones, permeable concrete, non-continuous metal profiles) for the improvement of existing trails allow the infiltration of water, at least in a similar rate than the currently existing compacted dirt surface. Besides, gravel-filled beds around trees and gravel-filled drainages below the trails have already been considered as part of the proposed design (Uribe, 2016a). Thus the infiltration rate will at least remain the same and most probably improve.

Risk of damage to cultural goods and patrimony. All conceptual design documents (Uribe, 2015, 2016a, 2016b and 2016c) consider the cultural goods and patrimony that exist within Parque Cuscatlán and its surrounding areas (for example, the architecture of some of the houses in the Flor Blanca, the Hospital Rosales, etc.) and are careful to maintain, restore and/or enhance such cultural attributes. Therefore, no risk of damage to any cultural goods or patrimony are to be expected, if the guidelines set by the conceptual design documents are followed.

Risks associated with the demolition, handling, and disposal of materials containing asbestos.

In consultation with the Municipality, as well as from observations during evaluation visits, it was possible to establish that no asbestos-containing materials are found in any of the existing buildings, nor any of the service-related infrastructures within the Park, including underground water, drainage, and sewage systems.

January 30, 2017

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

6. EVALUATED ALTERNATIVES

As stated in Section 1.1.5, The Assessment Team considered three alternative implementations of the PCTC to evaluate their different potential impacts and to allow selecting the most favorable route of action. The evaluated alternatives were: (a) the “No Project Alternative”, (b) the “Proposed Action Alternative”, and (c) the “Modified Proposed Action Alternative”. They area described in the following sections.

6.1. “No Project Alternative” Under the No Project Alternative, no park improvements would be made, besides the new energyefficient lamps that have already been installed (see 1.1.4. Status of the Proposed Activities in Relation to the Environmental Assessment Process). Otherwise, the Park would remain as it is and the municipality would continue to manage it under the current maintenance and operation regime, making their own improvements within the capacity of their budget and plans.

6.2. “Proposed Action Alternative” The Proposed Action Alternative includes all of the interventions in the conceptual design documents: (i) “Plan Maestro del Parque Cuscatlán y su Área de Influencia” (Uribe, 2015a); (ii) “Anteproyecto Pasarelas Aéreas” (Uribe, 2015b); “Anteproyecto Senderos y Mobiliario” (Uribe, 2016a); “Anteproyecto La Hoja Cultural” (Uribe, 2016b); and “Anteproyecto Sala Nacional Salarrué” (Uribe, 2016c). These documents propose eight main actions as described in Sections 4.1 through 4.8 of this report:

ü

Renovation of Trails, Benches and other Related Facilities (Section 4.1)

ü

Construction of Elevated Walkways (Section 4.2)

ü

Amphitheater – Cultural Leaf (Section 4.3)

ü

Expansion of the “Sala Nacional de Exposiciones Salarrué” (Section 4.4)

ü

Construction of the Civic Education Center for Youth and Children “Concejo de los Niños” (Section 4.5)

ü

Expansion of the “Museo de los Niños Tin-Marín” (Section 4.6)

January 30, 2017

ü

Other Significant Interventions (“Portal de las Delicias” and “Portal de las Flores”) (Section 4.7)

ü

Maintenance and Improvement (Section 4.8)

6.3. “Modified Proposed Action Alternative” This alternative includes all of the same interventions as the “Proposed Action Alternative”, with the addition of the mitigation measures found in Section 8 of this EA and the following actions within the corresponding above-mentioned main actions or milestones (described in detail in Sections 4.1 through 4.8):

ð

Renovation of Trails, Benches and other Related Facilities (Section 4.1) o Interpretative signs and exhibits should be designed, produced, and placed along trails, to explain

to visitors issues such as the importance of green urban areas, the species from different taxa that can be observed in the Park, the environmental services the Park produces, the history of the Park, the country’s history (including the civil conflict), etc. Signs for blind people – in Braille text and/or 3-D figures – should be included, at least at special sites such as the “Monument to Memory and Truth” (“Monumento a la Memoria y la Verdad”). Environmental funds, such as FIAES and FONAES, could support such signs and exhibits. o Proposed trail surfaces, as described by the conceptual design documents (Section 4.1), are

adequate for the use of wheelchairs and walking aids, but access and mobility throughout the Park’s ground level trail system must be guaranteed for people with physical disabilities. This requires ramps whenever steps are present. o As already pointed out in different sections of this document, a significant increase of the number

of visitors to the Park can be expected, consequently the need for parking space will also increase. Motorised vehicles are currently allowed to park within the Park, particularly on internal paths/trails. This practice should not continue once the renovation of trails has started. The easiest solution is to habilitate the Tin-Marín parking area, which can accomodate up to 75 vehicles (more than the Museum currently needs), as a general parking area for both the Museum and the Park. Additionally, there’s parking space for a total of about 50 vehicles in the back of INDES sport facilities, on Monseñor Escrivá de Balaguer street, that is not in use most of the time.

ð

Construction of Elevated Walkways (Section 4.2) o Interpretative signs should be designed, produced, and placed along elevated walkways, to ex-

plain to visitors issues such as the importance of green urban areas, the species from different taxa that can be observed in the Park, the environmental services the Park produces, the history of the Park, the country’s history (including the civil conflict), etc. Signs for blind people – in Braille text and/or 3-D figures – should be included, at least at special sites. Environmental funds, such as FIAES and FONAES, could support such signs and exhibits.

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

o Access and mobility for people with physical disabilities and reduced mobility must be guaranteed

by placing adecuate ramps in the entrances and exits to elevated walkways.

ð

Amphitheater – Cultural Leaf (Section 4.3) o An easily accessible area must be provided for people with physical disabilities and reduced

mobility attending events. This may be an explanade with access ramps.

ð

Expansion of the “Sala Nacional de Exposiciones Salarrué” (Section 4.4) o Ramps should be installed to the right of current access steps to allow access for people with

physical disabilities, but they should be removable to maintain the original architectural design of this cultural patrimony building (see Section 2.3.5). An elevator should be built on both sides of the elevated walkway above Avenida Roosevelt. o The National Art Gallery building should host repeated weekend “Classroom and Workshop on

Environmental Arts”. People in general, and children in particular, should be able to attend art classes or just meet on a regular basis with other people who share artistic interests to produce drawings, paintings, theater, texts, photographs, and any other type of art inspired by the Park’s environment. Besides educating and building artistic skills, one of the objectives of this initiative would be to provide healthy entertainment and development options to children and youth at risk, thus contributing to violence prevention. This idea was mentioned to the SECULTURA representative and National Art Gallery Curator, Mayra Barraza, who was supportive. This could be supported by funds such as FIAES and/or FONAES. o The National Art Gallery could also become an incubator of productive art initiatives. The con-

cept is to train youth at risk (“ni-nis”) in plastic arts and skills (drawing, painting, but also serigraphy, batik, etc.) and help them sell the resulting handcrafts. One option could be to produce cloth bags, printed and/or painted with natural designs, for any of the big supermarket chains, which could offer them to their customers as part of a campaign to reduce the use of plastic bags. Perhaps a small store could be placed within the National Gallery or in another place of the Park and also within sponsoring supermarkets. The objective would be to create development and economic options for youth at risk as a direct contribution to violence and crime prevention. The Assessment Team calls this idea “The Hope Project”. It could be supported by institutions such as FIAES and/or FONAES. o Continue negotiations with authorities from the Ministry of Health and Social Care (MINSAL)

and Hospital Rosales in a local support committee for the transformation of Parque Cuscatlán and adjacent areas. This will improve the chances of getting the corresponding authorizations to build the northern leg of the elevated gallery extension and walkway.

ð

Construction of the Civic Education Center for Youth and Children “Concejo de los Niños” (Section 4.5) o Access and mobility for people with physical disabilities must be guaranteed by placing adequate

ramps next to stairs, as well as elevators in buildings with two or more floors.

January 30, 2017

ð

Expansion of the “Museo de los Niños Tin-Marín” (Section 4.6) o Access and mobility for people with physical disabilities must be guaranteed by placing adequate

ramps next to stairs, as well as elevators in buildings with two or more floors.

ð

Other Significant Interventions (Section 4.7) o The Assessment Team calculated that 112,000 users visit the Park annually (Section 2.1.2, Figure

3) and that number can be expected to triple once the PCTC has finished its first intervention1. This increase in Park visitors will mean an increase in the demand for facilities and services, such as toilets, water taps, and trash deposits. Following the guidelines of the Salvadorian Normalization Entity (Organismo Salvadoreño de Normalización – OSN, 2014) 30 additional toilets, and 36 additional urinaries should be built to cover peak visitation days (weekends and especial dates), when some 2,400 visitors can be expected. It is recommended that these new sanitary facilities be placed in the northeast sector of the Park, directly opposite to the currently existing facilities, to ease access for visitors. Toilets and urinals should be of low water consumption designs and the facilities must include at least one unit for people with disabilities (Annex 13). Additionally, a biodigester system should be included, which can produce natural gas from biological wastes, which –depending on amount and public acceptance– could be used as cooking fuel in the Park “comedores”, but more importantly, serve environmental education purposes (Annex 14). o A minimum of 20 water taps and 20 trash deposits should be placed in strategic locations, to

cover all Park sectors. Water taps must include water-waste prevention devices and be accessible for people in wheelchairs. Trash deposits should be adequate for waste sorting, according to the waste managing program (common categories include: compost – paper/cardboard – plastics/glass/metal). o More visitors also means an increase in the demand of food, beverages, and other vendibles.

The construction of the food court “Portal de las Delicias” and the relocation of the existing “comedores” should be one of the main elements included in the first phase of PCTC implementation. Potential sites and an attractive design should be evaluated with the participation of representatives of comedores owners. Local comedores already use propane gas as fuel, and it is recommended that they keep using it, as an alternative to firewood. A training program should be implemented that includes development of new products, hygienic food preparation and storage, solid waste management, pricing and basic accounting, and client service. o Another key issue is the actual and perceived increase in security. The cumulative effect of all

the interventions described in the Master Plan and conceptual design documents (Uribe, 2015a, 2015b, 2016a, 2016b and 2016c) will have a significant positive impact on security, but the Assessment Team suggests more affirmative actions: a security building should be built in an accessible sector of the Park. Such a structure could serve two purposes: (i) as a security personnel operations base and (ii) an information/interpretation facility for police work, violence prevention, and risk management. Security personnel (CAM and/or PNC) should be trained as Park nature and historic guides and they should develop closer interactions with visitors that go beyond enforcement. 1

That estimation comes from the fact that “Parque del Bicentenario” receives around 300,000 visitors a year.

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

o As part of the educational/interpretative facilities, a small artificial wetland could be created in an

appropriate area of the Park. A potential place would be the southwest sector, where currently “La Galera” [see Section 2.3.2] and its front area are. This would have the additional advantage of being near the food court “Portal de las Delicias”, and could thus become an attraction for children. The objective would be to educate visitors about the importance of wetlands and at the same time it would increase the diversity of flora and fauna in the Park and its associated environmental services. Adequate interpretative signage should be designed, produced, and placed, including signs for blind people. Potential sponsors are ANDA, FIAES or FONAES. o Similarly, a “Maya Corner” could be built, meaning an area where El Salvador’s most representa-

tive Maya structures (Tazumal, San Andrés, etc.) could be replicated at scale, including one or two pertinent interpretative signs (including signs for blind people). This could also be placed near the food court area, providing children a place to explore while adults enjoy a cup of hot chocolate. o Another option to enhance the Park’s potential as an open classroom and awareness incubator is

to create a “Geological Corner” – in the style of a rock garden – where samples of the rocks found in El Salvador would be mounted with appropriate interpretative signs. Due to its tactile nature, this could become an excellent “garden” for blind people as well. o No current public education-entertainment programs exist in El Salvador that children can at-

tend during their annual vacation November–December. An Environmental “Summer” Camp could be offered in the Park, and again youth at risk (“ni-nis”) could – under the supervision of an adult – manage the program. This would create jobs for “ni-nis” and directly contribute to violence and crime prevention. This could be supported by institutions such as FIAES and/or FONAES. o The “Lend a Book Project”: As done in other cities, closed-but-not-locked display cabinets could

be placed in different sectors of the Park, where people can leave the books they have already read and take new ones. This would be a type of unrestricted public library.

ð

Infrastructure Maintenance and Improvement (Section 4.8) o Besides the trust fund already considered by the PCTC Master Plan, the Modified Proposed Al-

ternative suggests establishing public-private alliances with business partners that have an interest in building and maintaining educational exhibits related to the work they perform e.g. AES with electricity and ANDA with water, while they could also sponsor the electricity or water costs of the Park.

ð

Facilities for People with Disabilities and Reduced Mobility (Section 4.9) o Access and mobility for people with physical disabilities must be guaranteed by placing adequate

access ramps for the “Portal de las Delicias” and “Portal de las Flores” as described in Section 4.7 of this document, as well as for all the aboved-mentioned facilities.

January 30, 2017

ð

Demolitions (Section 4.10) o Although no demolition actions are specifically addressed by the conceptual design documents,

the following existing structures will have to be demolished, in order to allow the construction of the proposed new buildings and facilities: (a) the Municipal Police (Cuerpo de Agentes Municipales – CAM) operational quarters, (b) the metal fence between Parque Cuscatlán and the TinMarín Museum, and (c) the building known as “La Galera”, located immediately south of the existing toilets (See Section 2.3.2). o Materials resulting from the demolition of existing structures must be first sorted out in reusable

and non-reusable materials. The later must be sorted a second time into recyclable and nonrecyclable materials. The sale of recyclable materials (such as metals and plastics) can contribute funds to the Park’s trust fund. Non-recyclable materials (such as debris) can be used in bases and sub-bases for trails, aggregate of asphaltic layers, and even as gravel for new concrete1.

ð

Actions to Enhance Potential Positive Impacts o The Assessment Team considers that the PCTC Master Plan and its conceptual design documents (Uribe, 2015a, 2015b, 2016a, 2016b and 2016c) deal with all aesthetic and visual elements in a very sound and highly effective manner, and thus gives no further recommendations in this regard. o On the other hand, the Assessment Team feels that many opportunities for public education and awareness were left out. The Park has a great potential to be developed as an “open school” for environmental and social issues by adding interpretative materials (signs, exhibitions, etc.) and organizing regular activities and special events as summarized in Section 8.3. That potential should be exhaustively and systematically developed and public education should become one of the Park’s focal activities. o Potential increase in number and diversity of existing vegetation and associated environmental benefits: The Park area can still accommodate a significant number of new trees (see i-Tree report in Annex 4), but visitors also need open, sunny areas so the number of trees should not be increased to more than the number has now (between 800 to 900 trees). Revegetation efforts should be focused on bushes, forbs and grasses species. Annex 14 gives a list of suggested plant species for revegetation. Abundant and exotic species (which can be identified from Annex 5) should be the first targets when a tree needs to be cut and then should be replaced by one of the recommended species. o Potential increases in the number and diversity of fauna populations and their associated environmental benefits: Many of the recommended plant species (Annex 14) provide food or refuge to native fauna whose numbers and diversity are expected to increase in the Park. Additionally, the Assessment Team recommends that artificial nesting and hiding structures – resembling natural trunks – be placed in trees to encourage the reproduction and presence of bird and bat species.

1 More information on the adequate management and disposition of demolition debris can be found in the document “Guía de manejo de escombros y otros residuos de la construcción” published by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN, 2011), with support from HOLCIM.

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

6.4. Comparison of Alternatives Table 17 summarizes the actions contemplated for each of the three evaluated alternatives grouped into 10 main activities or milestones of the PCTC, as described in detail in Chapter 4 of this report, plus a series of actions to enhance positive impacts, added as an eleventh category.

Milestones

No-Action Alternative

1. Renovation of Trails, Benches and other Related Facilities

Table 17. Main differences and similarities of the three evaluated alternatives.

• New energyefficient lamps have already been installed by the Municipality.

• No other actions are foreseen.

Proposed Action Alternative

Modified Proposed Action Alternative

Main Issues

• Install new energy-efficient lamps.

• Same actions listed for the “Proposed Action Alternative”, plus:

• Potential impacts to existing vegetation and associated benefits.

• Improve the ground of existing paths (without changing their position, size or form), using gravel, paving stones and permeable concrete.

• Installation of environmental and socio-cultural interpretation signs and exhibits, including signs for people with disabilities;

• Aesthetic and visual improvement of the area.

• Place “cages” of gravel that contain the trees at regular intervals.

• Guarantee access to people with disabilities or reduced mobility (ramps and open passages between zones); and

• Install different types of metal • Upgrade existing Tin-Marín parkand concrete benches, as well ing as a general parking area for as trash receptacles and both the Museum and the Park. drinking water fountains.

• Potential impacts to fauna populations and associated benefits. • Increase of opportunities for public education and awareness. • Increased options for relaxation and leisure. • Increase in security and its perception. • Increase visitation to the Park and thus required services. • Sales of local “comedores” could be affected due to relocation and changes in visitor numbers and profile. • Sales of itinerant vendors may increase, due to increased visitation. • Lack of parking space might affect traffic in nearby areas. • Risk of infrastructure failure due to lack of financial resources and technical capacity for maintenance and replacement. • Access for people with disabilities and/or reduced mobility. • Risk of damage to cultural goods and patrimony.

January 30, 2017

2. Construction of Elevated Walkways

No-Action Alternative • No actions foreseen.

3. Amphitheater – Cultural Leaf

Milestones

• No actions foreseen.

Proposed Action Alternative

Modified Proposed Action Alternative

• Construction of two elevated • Same actions as the “Proposed walkways, connecting Av. Action Alternative”, plus: Roosevelt with 6ª–10ª Calle • Installation of environmental and Poniente, one on the east and socio-cultural interpretation signs; one on the west halves of the and Park. • Guarantee access to people with disabilities and reduced mobility (ramps in entrances and exits).

Main Issues • Aesthetic and visual improvement of the area. • Increase of opportunities for public education and awareness. • Increased options for relaxation and leisure. • Increase in security and its perception. • Increase visitation to the Park and thus required services. • Sales of local “comedores” could be affected due to relocation and changes in visitor numbers and profile. • Sales of itinerant vendors may increase, due to increased visitation. • Risk of infrastructure failure due to lack of financial resources and technical capacity for maintenance and replacement. • Access for people with disabilities and/or reduced mobility.

• Construction of a roof in the • Same as the “Proposed Action Al- • Aesthetic and visual improvement of the area. form of a “leaf” to cover the ternative”, plus: • Increase of opportunities for public education and awareness. already existing amphitheater, • Include an accessible area for • Increased options for relaxation and leisure. seats, and immediate areas, people with physical disabilities located close to the southand reduced mobility attending the • Increase in security and its perception. east corner of the Park; indifferent events: explanade • Increase visitation to the Park and thus required services. cluding openings to accomaccesible by ramp. modate already existing trees. • Sales of local “comedores” could be affected due to relocation and changes in visitor numbers and profile. • Sales of itinerant vendors may increase, due to increased visitation. • Lack of parking space might affect traffic in nearby areas. • Risk of infrastructure failure due to lack of financial resources and technical capacity for maintenance and replacement. • Access for people with disabilities and/or reduced mobility.

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

5. Construction of the Education Center for Youth and Children “Concejo de los Niños”

4. Expansion of the “Sala Nacional de Exposiciones Salarrué”

Milestones

No-Action Alternative

Proposed Action Alternative

Modified Proposed Action Alternative

• No actions foreseen.

• Conservation of the cultural patrimony building in its current state.

• No actions foreseen.

• The PCTC Master Plan pro- • Same as the “Proposed Action Alposes the construction of a ternative”, plus: glass and metal tower that • Guarantee access to people with will host a meetings hall (“the disabilities and reduced mobility by children counsel”), a TV placing adecuate ramps next to channel, a radio station, and a stairs, as well as elevators in twonewspaper editorial office, floor- and hihgher buildings. but no specific dimensions or any further information are specified.

Main Issues

• Same as the “Proposed Action Al- • Aesthetic and visual improvement of the area. ternative”, plus: • Increase of opportunities for public education and awareness. • Place removable ramps in access • Increased options for relaxation and leisure. • Construction of an extension steps to ease access for people in metal and glass that prowith physical disabilities and at the • Increase visitation to the Park and thus required services. jects over the classic building same time maintain the original • Lack of parking space might affect traffic in nearby areas. and its front plaza, and exarquitectural design. Add elevatends backwards over the Av. tors in both sides of the elevated • Risk of infrastructure failure due to lack of financial resources and Roosevelt to its northern walhway above Roosevelt Avenue; technical capacity for maintenance and replacement. sidewalk, where Hospital • Develop a public “Classroom and • Access for people with disabilities and/or reduced mobility. Rosales is. This new strucWorkshop on Environmental • The Ministry of Health and Social Care could be reluctant to open ture will serve both as an exArts” (see Section 6.3); the south sector of Hospital Rosales to accommodate the northern tension of the art gallery and steps and walkway. as elevated walkway to cross • Develop an incubator program for art-productive-initiatives to generAv. Roosevelt. ate occupation for youth-at-risk (see Section 6.3).

• Aesthetic and visual improvement of the area. • Increase of opportunities for public education and awareness. • Increased options for relaxation and leisure. • Risk of infrastructure failure due to lack of financial resources and technical capacity for maintenance and replacement. • Handling and disposal of demolition materials. • Access for people with disabilities and/or reduced mobility.

January 30, 2017 Proposed Action Alternative

6. Expansion of the “Museo de los Niños Tin-Marín”

No-Action Alternative • No actions foreseen.

• Construction of a two-floor building where the current museum is.

7. Other Significant Interventions

Milestones

• No actions foreseen.

“Portal de las Delicias”:

Modified Proposed Action Alternative

• Same as the “Proposed Action Al- • Aesthetic and visual improvement of the area. ternative”, plus: • Increase of opportunities for public education and awareness. • Guarantee access to people with • Increased options for relaxation and leisure. • Massive stairs will connect disabilities and reduced mobility by • Risk of infrastructure failure due to lack of financial resources and the new Tin-Marín to Parque placing adecuate ramps next to technical capacity for maintenance and replacement. Cuscatlán. stairs, as well as elevators in twofloorand hihgher buildings. • Access for people with disabilities and/or reduced mobility. • An elevated walkway will connect the new Tin-Marín to the “Concejo de los Niños” tower. • Same as the “Proposed Action Al- • Potential impacts to existing vegetation and associated benefits. ternative”, plus: • Potential impacts to fauna populations and associated benefits. • Build 30 WC, 20 drink fountains • Aesthetic and visual improvement of the area. and 20 trash sorting deposits; • Increase of opportunities for public education and awareness. • Schedule the construction of the food court “Portal de las Delicias” • Increased options for relaxation and leisure. within the first construction phase; • Increase in security and its perception.

• Construction of semi-open facilities to accommodate cafeterias and common siting areas, close to the southwestern corner of the Park, with a direct access from the 6ª-10ª Street. No details on actual • Build a new basecamp for CAM / • Increase visitation to the Park, and thus required services. dimensions, designs and/or PNC personnel; including intermaterials are provided. • Sales of local “comedores” could be affected due to relocation and pretative are open to the public. “Portal de las Flores”: changes in visitor numbers and profile. • Construction of an educational ar• Construction of a L-shape el• Sales of itinerant vendors may increase, due to increased visitation. tificial wetland; evated walkway over a water • Construction of scaled replicas of • Lack of parking space might affect traffic in nearby areas. pond crossed by four decklocal Maya ruins: “Maya Corner”; • Risk of infrastructure failure due to lack of financial resources and like accesses, this will be the Park’s main entrance, on the • Placing of all types of rocks found in technical capacity for maintenance and replacement. east side of the Park, along the country: “Geology Corner”; • Access for people with disabilities and/or reduced mobility. the 25th Ave. No details on actual dimensions and/or ma- • Construction of a fauna rescue center; terials are provided. • Development of an Environmental “Summer” Camp; and • Closed cabinets for book exchange: “Lend a Book Project.”

Main Issues

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component Proposed Action Alternative

Modified Proposed Action Alternative

Main Issues

8. Maintenance and Improvement

No-Action Alternative

• Maintenance • The PCTC Master Plan con- • Besides the trust fund already • Aesthetic and visual improvement of the area. would continue siders the creation of a trust considered by the PCTC Master • Increase in security and its perception. as up to date, fund – fed from private donaPlan (Section 4.8), the Modified doing whatever tions – for the adequate Proposed Alternative suggests the • Risk of infrastructure failure due to lack of financial resources and technical capacity for maintenance and replacement. is possible with maintenance of the Park and establishing of public-private allithe minimum its improvement. ances with partners that might resources that have an interest in building and can be destine maintaining educational exhibits from the murelated to the work they perform nicipal budget. e.g. AES with electricity and ANThe same situaDA with water, while they could tion that has let also sponsor the total Park’s electo the present tricity or running water costs. detriment.

9. Facilities for People with disabilities and reduced mobility

Milestones

• No actions foreseen.

• No related actions are de• Build structures to ease the access scribe in any of the conceptu- for people with reduced physical al design documents. capacities to all main Park facilities, including: (a) ground level trails; (b) elevated walkways; (c) amphitheatre; (d) national art gallery; (e) “Concejo de los Niños” building; (f) Tin-Marín Museum; (g) food court (“Portal de las Delicias”) and (h) the main Park entrance (“Portal de las Flores”).

• Increase of opportunities for public education and awareness. • Increased options for relaxation and leisure. • Increase visitation to the Park and thus required services. • Sales of local “comedores” could be affected due to relocation and changes in visitor numbers and profile. • Sales of itinerant vendors may increase, due to increased visitation. • Lack of parking space and corresponding access for people with disabilities.

• Risk of infrastructure failure due to lack of financial resources and • As many as possible educational technical capacity for maintenance and replacement. signs and exhibits should also be accessible for people with disabilities (e.g. placed so that they can be read from wheelchairs and include Braille and/or 3-D texts an figures).

January 30, 2017 Milestones

No-Action Alternative

10. Demolitions

• No actions foreseen.

Proposed Action Alternative

Modified Proposed Action Alternative

• No demolition actions are • It comprises the demolition of the • Potential impacts to existing vegetation and associated benefits. specifically addressed by the following existing structures dur- • Potential impacts to fauna populations and associated benefits. conceptual design documents; ing the first phase of the transfor• Handling and disposal of demolition materials. nonetheless, some demolimation process: tions must be carried out to o CAM personnel operational make room for the new infraquarters; structure. o Metal fence between the Park and Museo Tin-Marín; and o Building

11. Actions to Enhance Positive Impacts

• No actions foreseen.

Main Issues

• The PCTC Master Plan and its conceptual design documents deal with all aesthetic and visual elements in a very sound and highly effective manner, but do not include actions that would help developed all the potential that Parque Cuscatlán has as an urban ecology anchor and open classroom.

known as “La Galera”.

• Increase the number and diversity • Potential impacts to existing vegetation and associated environmenof existing vegetation with native tal benefits. species that favor fauna species. • Potential impacts to fauna populations and their associated envi• Placement of artificial nesting and ronmental benefits. hiding structures to favor the re- • Aesthetic and visual improvement of the area. production and presence of bird • Increase of opportunities for public education and awareness. and bat species. • Make public education one of the Park’s main activities. The Park has a great potential to be developed as an “open school” for environmental and social issues, such and opportunity should be exhaustively and systematically developed, by adding interpretative materials (signs, exhibitions, etc.) and exhibits, organizing periodic activities and special events, as already mentioned in the numerals before.

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

7. VALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ACCORDING TO EACH ALTERNATIVE Negative and positive potential impacts identified for each of the three alternatives (Chapter 6) were qualified using the method of Relevant Integrated Criteria (RIC), which calculates an Environmental Qualification (EQ) value, using the following general formula: EQ = (I + E + Du + De + Re)/5 x Ro

Where “I” stands for Intensity, which can be understood as the relative importance of the consequences that the alteration would have on the environment, according to the following the scale: Low ç 0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

è High 1.0

“E” stands for Extension, magnitude or surface area to be affected by the impact, which can be: Punctual

Local

Regional

0.1 – 0.3

0.4 – 0.7

0.8 – 1.0

“Du” is the Duration or measure of the time period in which the effects or repercussions of a given impact are to be experienced, or how long will it take a given environmental attribute to recover after the occurrence of an impact, according to the following scale: < 2 years

3 to 4 years

5 to 9 years

> 10 years

0.1 – 0.2

0.3 – 0.4

0.5 – 0.7

0.8 – 1.0

“De” is the Development or time that it takes the impact to fully develop. For example, if the paving of internal paths were to prevent the infiltration of water, and trees along the trails were to die because of the lack of water, how long will it take for all trees to die? The development is measured using the following scale:

< 1 month

1 to 6 months

6 to 12 months

12 to 24 months

> 24 months

0.9 – 1.0

0.7 – 0.8

0.5 – 0.6

0.3 – 0.4

0.1 – 0.2

January 30, 2017

“Re” stands for Reversibility or how feasible it is to return the affected environmental elements or aspects to their previous condition, following the next general scale: Irreversible

Partially reversible

Reversible

0.8 – 1.0

0.4 – 0.7

0.1 – 0.3

And “Ro” refers to the Risk of occurrence or probability there is that a given impact will occur because of implementing the proposed activities, according to the next general scale: Possible but not probable

Probable

Highly probable

Almost certain

Certain

1–3

4–6

7–8

Applying the corresponding EQ formula, and the above-explained criteria, impacts – both negative and positive – were qualified according to the characteristic aspects of each of the three considered alternatives (Chapter 6); dividing actions and their associated potential impacts in two different stages of the project’s implementation: (a) the construction phase, and (b) the operation and maintenance phase, as detailed in the following sections.

7.1. Environmental Impacts Corresponding to the “No-Action Alternative” Although usually no Construction Phase exists in the No-Action Alternative of a given project, in the present case the Municipality of San Salvador has already installed energy-efficient lights in the Park (see Section 1.1.4. Status of the Proposed Activities in Relation to the Environmental Assessment Process), and thus the potential impacts related to that action need to be evaluated. On the other hand, an Operation & Maintenance Phase does exist (the day-to-day life in the Park), and corresponding impacts can then be qualified. Tables 18 and 19 summarize the impacts of each of the two phases, and show the values assigned and EQ calculated for negative and positive impacts – respectively – that could be expected to occur if the current conditions were to remain unchanged. As no other actions are being proposed in the No-Action alternative, no negative impacts are anticipated in the construction actions section nor would there be any positive impacts other than those occurring (e.g. recreation and relaxation in a deteriorating park setting).

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

i. Construction Phase

Total:

Qualification (EQ)

Risk of Occurrence (Ro)

Reversibility (Re)

Development (De)

Duration (Du)

Intensity (I)

NEGATIVE IMPACTS

Extension (E)

Table 18. Potential adverse or negative environmental impacts of the “No-Action Alternative”.

0.44

§ As explained above, the Municipality recently placed new lamps and underground wiring in the Park. Such an action implies the consideration of potentially derived impacts, however little, qualified below. Average:

0.15

• Potential detriment of existing vegetation and associated

0.1

1.0

0.1

0.5

0.14

• Potential detriment of fauna populations and their

0.1

1.0

0.1

0.5

0.14

0.1

0.8

0.5

0.16

Total:

3.2

environmental benefits would be minor

associated environmental benefits would be minor

• Problems derived from the handling and disposal of

demolition/old materials would be minor unless the municipality decides to do other work (e.g. rehabilitate pathways)

ii. Operation & Maintenance Phase

§ The “comedores” would remain in the same location, and the number and profile of visitors to the park would not change; thus no change in the income made by local businesses is expected. § Vehicles would still be allowed to park within the Park (as it currently is the case), and thus the local traffic dynamics would continue to be the same. § No change in the amount of funding and/or type of maintenance would occur, and thus infrastructure would continue to deteriorate at the present rate. § No increase in visitation is expected, and thus the demand for services would no increase. Average:

• Sales of local “comedores” could decrease, due to

relocation and changes in the number and profile of potential clients

0.0

• The lack of enough parking space might affect the traffic

0.0

0.1

0.3

1.0

0.1

3.2

0.0

dynamics in the Park’s nearby areas

• Risk of infrastructure failure due to lack of financial

resources and technical capacity for maintenance and replacement

• Increased demand in services provided by the municipality

0.8

TOTAL:

3.6

AVERAGE:

0.5

January 30, 2017

i. Construction Phase

Total:

Qualification (EQ)

Risk of Occurrence (Ro)

Reversibility (Re)

Development (De)

Duration (Du)

Intensity (I)

POSITIVE IMPACTS

Extension (E)

Table 19. Potential positive environmental impacts of the “No-Action Alternative”.

§ As said before, the Municipality already placed new lamps, and underground wiring in the Park. But benefits derived from that action would first be evident during the operation. Average:

• Potential increase in number and diversity of existing

• Potential increase in number and diversity of fauna

vegetation and associated environmental benefits

populations and their associated environmental benefits

ii. Operation & Maintenance Phase

Total:

4.7

Average:

0.7

§ The day-to-day life in the Park would remain almost the same as it is now, except for a slight improvement in security and its perception by users, due to the new lighting system.

• Aesthetic and visual improvement of the whole area

0.0

• Increase of opportunities for public education and

0.0

0.5

0.3

0.5

0.3

4.7

awareness

• Increase of options for relaxation and leisure, which

improves individual and public mental health, and thus supports violence prevention

• Sales of local “comedores” may increase, due to

relocation and changes in the number and profile of potential clients

• Sales of itinerant vendors may increase, due to the increase in the number of visitors

• Increase in security and its perception • Improved access for people with disabilities

TOTAL:

4.7

AVERAGE:

0.5

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

7.2. Environmental Impacts Corresponding the “Proposed Action Alternative” Unlike the “No-Action Alternative”, the alternative proposed by the PCTC, as stated by its Master Plan and Conceptual Designs, does include a Construction and an Operation & Maintenance Phase, in which the following negative and positive impacts can be expected to occur:

i. Construction Phase

Total:

Qualification (EQ)

Risk of Occurrence (Or)

Reversibility (Re)

Development (De)

Duration (Du)

Intensity (I)

NEGATIVE IMPACTS

Extension (E)

Table 20. Potential adverse or negative environmental impacts of the “Proposed Action Alternative”.

12.2

§ If all PCTC intervention actions were to be implemented as described in Sections 4.1 through 4.8 of this EA document, some adverse impacts, however small, would derive from the necessary construction activities: o Number and diversity of plants – particularly trees – and their associated environmental services, could decrease as a result of the construction process: plants directly removed and plants damaged. o Number and diversity of fauna species, and their associated environmental services, could decrease as a direct result of construction activities, and as an indirect result of the reduction of vegetation. o Although the conceptual design documents say nothing about demolition, it is certain that some of the existing infrastructure will have to be removed in order to build the new facilities (Section 4.10). Recycling may not occur and safety hazards related to scattered debris left after demolition or construction may occur. o There is uncertainty as to whether the Ministry of Health and Social Care would allow the use of part of the south sector of Hospital Rosales property, as the northern anchor of the elevated walkway above Av. Roosevelt, as part of the National Art Gallery extension proposal (Section 4.4). o Inadequate restroom facilities would occur due to the potential increase of park visitors as no actions are proposed for the restroom renovations in the Proposed Action. Average:

• Potential detriment of existing vegetation and associated

0.1

0.4

1.0

0.5

0.1

4.2

• Potential detriment of fauna populations and their

0.1

0.4

1.0

0.4

0.1

3.2

• Problems derived from the handling and disposal of

0.1

0.3

0.2

0.7

0.3

2.8

0.1

1.0

0.7

0.1

2.0

environmental benefits

associated environmental benefits demolition materials

• The Ministry of Health and Social Care (MINSAL) could be reluctant to open the south sector of Hospital Rosales’ property

3.1

ii. Operation & Maintenance Phase

Total:

Qualification (EQ)

Risk of Occurrence (Or)

Reversibility (Re)

Development (De)

Duration (Du)

Intensity (I)

NEGATIVE IMPACTS

Extension (E)

January 30, 2017

11.3

§ Local “comedores” would be relocated – although no final location has been decided yet –, and the profile of visitors to the Park can be expected to change significantly. Thus there is the risk that the new location of the “comedores” isn’t as good – in terms of access and visibility – and that they are not well prepare to fulfill the expectations of their new potential clients. § Since parking inside the Park will not be allowed anymore, and the number of visitors is expected to increase significantly; parking in adjacent streets would add to the already chaotic local traffic dynamics. § Although a trust fund is proposed by the PCTC concept design to cover for maintenance costs, it is not clear how much is needed, nor how such a fund would operate, and thus there’s always the risk that there may not be resources – both financial, and human/capacity – to properly maintain the investments. § The number of visitors to the Park is expected to significantly increase (based on the visitation to Parque Bicentenario, visitors to the Parque Cuscatlán could triple, from about 100,000 to 300,000 a year) as a result of all the improvements proposed by the PCTC. This would put a lot of pressure on the Municipality to keep pace with a corresponding increased demand of services. Average:

• Sales of local “comedores” could decrease, due to

relocation and changes in the number and profile of potential clients

0.2

0.3

0.2

0.9

0.2

1.8

• The lack of enough parking space might affect the traffic

0.2

0.3

0.5

1.0

0.4

3.8

0.3

0.1

1.0

0.1

0.3

2.9

0.5

0.1

0.5

0.1

2.8

dynamics in the Park’s nearby areas

• Risk of infrastructure failure due to lack of financial

resources and technical capacity for maintenance and replacement

• Increased demand in services provided by the municipality

2.8

TOTAL:

23.5

AVERAGE:

2.9

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

i. Construction Phase

Total:

Qualification (EQ)

Risk of Occurrence (Ro)

Reversibility (Re)

Development (De)

Duration (Du)

Intensity (I)

POSITIVE IMPACTS

Extension (E)

Table 21. Potential positive environmental impacts of the “Proposed Action Alternative”.

3.7

§ Selective plant cutting – particularly trees – is a decisive element to be considered when constructing. In general terms, if the number of native species and their diversity is increased, the associated environmental benefits can be expected to improve. But without sound knowledge as to which species should be removed and which planted, the probability of success can be expected to be about 50-50 %. § The occurrence and survival of most animal species, an other groups, are highly dependable on the type and status of the vegetation in a given area, and thus the potential effects the project activities might have on local fauna populations is highly correlated to the impact on vegetation. With the difference that species successfully reproducing in the Park, would export new individuals to colonize other nearby urban, semi-urban, and rural areas; and thus the “extension” value is slightly higher. Average:

1.9

• Potential increase in number and diversity of existing

0.1

0.3

1.0

0.1

0.3

1.8

• Potential increase in number and diversity of fauna

0.1

0.4

1.0

0.1

0.3

1.9

Total:

27.6

vegetation and associated environmental benefits

populations and their associated environmental benefits

ii. Operation & Maintenance Phase

§ Three of the potential positive impacts scored the highest EQ values: (a) aesthetic and visual improvement of the whole area; (b) increase of options for relaxation and leisure; and (c) increase security and its perception. Which is consequent with the fact that those are some of the main objectives the PCTC was created and designed for. § Itinerant vendors might experience an increase in their sales, simply because more people will visit the Park, but also because their unrestricted mobility is a great advantage over “comedores”. § There are then potential positive impacts that could provide important benefits, but that were not considered in the conceptual design documents – a fact reflected in the lower EQ values these impacts achieved within the evaluation of the “Proposed Action Alternative”. These potential positive impacts are: (a) increase of opportunities for public education and awareness; (b) potential increase in the sales of local “comedores”; and (c) improved access for people with disabilities. Average:

• Aesthetic and visual improvement of the whole area

1.0

0.4

1.0

0.5

6.8

• Increase of opportunities for public education and

0.3

0.1

1.0

0.5

1.9

0.8

0.7

1.0

0.5

6.3

awareness

• Increase of options for relaxation and leisure, which

improves individual and public mental health, and thus supports violence prevention

3.9

• Sales of local “comedores” may increase, due to

Qualification (EQ)

Risk of Occurrence (Ro)

Reversibility (Re)

Development (De)

0.2

0.3

1.0

0.9

0.5

1.7

• Sales of itinerant vendors may increase, due to the

0.2

0.3

1.0

0.9

0.5

4.6

• Increase in security and its perception

0.8

0.4

1.0

0.5

5.8

• Improved access for people with disabilities

0.5

0.3

0.7

0.4

0.5

relocation and changes in the number and profile of potential clients increase in the number of visitors

Duration (Du)

Intensity (I)

POSITIVE IMPACTS

Extension (E)

January 30, 2017

100

TOTAL:

31.3

AVERAGE:

3.5

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

7.3. Environmental Impacts Corresponding to the “Proposed Modified Action Alternative” The “Proposed Modified Action Alternative” takes into consideration all recommendations, as detailed in Sections 6.3 and 6.4, made with the purpose of controlling or mitigating adverse impacts and enhance positive ones, resulting in the reviewed criteria and EQ values shown in Tables 22 and 23. The Modified Proposed Actions also includes mitigation measures found in Section 8 that would reduce negative impacts and improve positive impacts.

i. Construction Phase

Total:

Qualification (EQ)

Risk of Occurrence (Or)

Reversibility (Re)

Development (De)

Duration (Du)

Intensity (I)

NEGATIVE IMPACTS

Extension (E)

Table 22. Potential adverse or negative environmental impacts of the “Proposed Modified Action Alternative”.

2.3

§ The potential negative impacts derive from project activities are the same as the ones expected in the Proposed Action Alternative (Section 7.2, Table 20), but the changes/modifications that this modified alternative introduces would significantly reduce their overall negative effects, as follow: o Designs and construction activities should be planned and executed as to minimize impacts to existing vegetation. The removal of introduced abundant species would be prioritized vs. native and less represented ones. Thus, the probability to damage existing vegetation is remote. o When avoiding or significantly lowering the changes in vegetation structure, the derived potentially negative impacts to fauna species are also prevent. o By acknowledging and considering the negative impacts that from the handling and disposal of demolitions materials may derived, as well as taking into consideration small but significant measures (see Sections 4.10, 6.3, 6.4, Table 17), the probability of impacts diminishes significantly. o The improvement of communication channels with the Ministry of Health and Social Care (MINSAL), and its inclusion as part of a support committee for the Transformation of the Park (Section 6.3), could increases the chances of a positive answer to place the northern leg of the extension above Av. Roosevelt within the southern limit of Hospital Rosales area. Average:

• Potential detriment of existing vegetation and associated

0.1

0.4

1.0

0.5

0.1

1.0

0.4

• Potential detriment of fauna populations and their

0.1

0.4

1.0

0.4

0.1

1.0

0.4

• Problems derived from the handling and disposal of

0.1

0.3

0.2

0.7

0.3

1.0

0.3

environmental benefits

associated environmental benefits demolition materials

0.6

101

• The Ministry of Health and Social Care (MINSAL) could be reluctant to open the south sector of Hospital Rosales’ property

0.1

1.0

0.7

0.1

ii. Operation & Maintenance Phase

Qualification (EQ)

Risk of Occurrence (Or)

Reversibility (Re)

Development (De)

Duration (Du)

Intensity (I)

NEGATIVE IMPACTS

Extension (E)

January 30, 2017

3.0

1.2

Total:

5.1

§ By defining an appropriate area – in terms of access and visibility – to relocate the existing “comedores”, and train personnel to be better prepare to fulfill the expectations of their new potential clients, the risk of lost is significantly reduced. § Using the area at Museo Tin-Marín as a general parking area for both the Museum and the Park would eliminate (in no-peak days) or significantly reduce (in peak days) the number of vehicles parking in adjacent streets, and thus prevent or at least diminish traffic problems. § Besides the trust fund proposed by the PCTC concept design to cover for maintenance costs, the “Proposed Modified Action Alternative” includes the recruiting of donors with the interest and capacity to pay for the construction, operation and maintenance of specific exhibits and/or services within the Park – in exchange for publicity –, such as FIAES, FONAES, AES, ANDA, etc. This single action could help diminish two potential negative impacts: (a) the risk of infrastructure failure due to lack of financial resources and technical capacity for maintenance and replacement, and (b) the increased demand in services provided by the municipality. Average:

• Sales of local “comedores” could decrease, due to

relocation and changes in the number and profile of potential clients

0.2

0.3

0.2

0.9

0.2

1.1

• The lack of enough parking space might affect the traffic

0.2

0.3

0.5

1.0

0.4

1.4

0.1

1.0

0.1

0.3

1.6

0.5

0.1

0.5

0.1

1.0

dynamics in the Park’s nearby areas

• Risk of infrastructure failure due to lack of financial

resources and technical capacity for maintenance and replacement

• Increased demand in services provided by the municipality

1.3

102

TOTAL:

7.4

AVERAGE:

0.9

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

i. Construction Phase

Qualification (EQ)

Risk of Occurrence (Ro)

Reversibility (Re)

Development (De)

Duration (Du)

Intensity (I)

POSITIVE IMPACTS

Extension (E)

Table 23. Potential positive environmental impacts of the “Proposed Modified Action Alternative”.

Total:

§ By selecting and planting appropriate native species of trees and plants (Annex 10) to increase and diversify the plant coverage in the Park, a number of associated environmental benefits (see Section 2.2.4) are secured, while the number and diversity of animal species – as well as their associated environmental benefits – can be expected to increase at the same time.

12.0

§ By placing structures similar to natural cavities, the reproduction and presence of bird and bat species would be favored. Average:

6.0

• Potential increase in number and diversity of existing

1.0

0.4

1.0

0.1

0.5

6.0

• Potential increase in number and diversity of fauna

1.0

0.4

1.0

0.1

0.5

6.0

Total:

43.1

vegetation and associated environmental benefits

populations and their associated environmental benefits

ii. Operation & Maintenance Phase

§ In the “Proposed Modified Action Alternative” priority is given to those positive impacts that were somehow overseen by the conceptual design, but that have a great potential to contribute to the improvement of both environmental and social elements of the urban environment, such as: o Increased opportunities for public education and awareness could become one of the most significant side effects of the PCTC, if there’s the vision and capacity to fully develop elements such as the interpretative signs and exhibits, the eco-art workshops, the artificial wetland, the “Maya Corner”, and the “Geology Corner”, among others (see Section 6.3 and 6.4, and Table 17). o Selecting the appropriate site – visible and easy to access – to relocate the current “comedores”, and train owners and personnel in issues such as hygienic management, client service, pricing and accounting, etc. would guarantee that these micro family businesses benefit from the transformation of the Park. o An aspect of upmost importance is to provide access for people with disabilities (see Section 6.3, 6.4, and Table 17). o With some training, itinerant vendors would be in a better position to take advantage of the Park transformation. § On the other hand, the three positive impacts already prioritized by the conceptual design: (a) aesthetic and visual improvement of the whole area; (b) increase of options for relaxation and leisure; and (c) increase security and its perception, remain the same. Average:

• Aesthetic and visual improvement of the whole area

1.0

0.4

1.0

0.5

6.8

• Increased opportunities for public education and

1.0

0.4

1.0

0.5

6.8

0.8

0.7

1.0

0.5

6.3

awareness

• Increase of options for relaxation and leisure, which

improves individual and public mental health, and thus supports violence prevention

6.2

103

• Sales of local “comedores” may increase, due to

Qualification (EQ)

Risk of Occurrence (Ro)

Reversibility (Re)

Development (De)

Duration (Du)

Intensity (I)

POSITIVE IMPACTS

Extension (E)

January 30, 2017

0.3

1.0

0.9

0.5

5.4

• Sales of itinerant vendors may increase, due to the

0.3

1.0

0.9

0.5

5.4

• Increase in security and its perception

0.8

0.4

1.0

0.5

5.8

• Improved access for people with disabilities

0.7

0.4

1.0

0.4

0.8

6.6

relocation and changes in the number and profile of potential clients increase in the number of visitors

TOTAL:

55.1

AVERAGE:

6.0

7.4. Alternatives Comparison (Environmental Qualification Values) Tables 24 and 25 show a comparison between EQ values corresponding to each negative and positive environmental impact in each of the three considered alternatives:

Total:

Proposed Modified Action Alternative

i. Construction Phase

Proposed Action Alternative

NEGATIVE IMPACTS

No-Action Alternative

Table 24. Comparison of potential adverse or negative environmental impacts of each considered alternative.

0.44

12.2

2.3

0.15

3.1

0.6

The fact that there is no construction phase within the “No-Action Alternative” accounts for the corresponding extremely low EQ values. The placing of new lamps by the Municipality (Section 1.1.4) was here considered a construction phase action. The EQ values corresponding the “Proposed Action Alternative” are significantly higher, because of the intrusive interventions typical to almost all construction processes. But the implementation of all mitigation measures included as part of the “Proposed Modified Action Alternative” lower all associated potential negative impacts to practically insignificant levels. Average:

104

No-Action Alternative

Proposed Action Alternative

Proposed Modified Action Alternative

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

0.14

4.2

0.4

0.14

3.2

0.4

• Problems derived from the handling and disposal of demolition materials

0.16

2.8

0.3

• The Ministry of Health and Social Care (MINSAL) could be reluctant to open the

2.0

1.2

3.2

11.3

5.1

0.8

2.8

1.3

• Sales of local “comedores” could decrease, due to relocation and changes in the

0.0

1.8

1.1

• The lack of enough parking space might affect the traffic dynamics in the Park’s

0.0

3.8

1.4

• Risk of infrastructure failure due to lack of financial resources and technical capac-

3.2

2.9

1.6

0.0

2.8

1.0

TOTAL:

3.6

23.5

7.4

AVERAGE:

0.5

2.9

0.9

NEGATIVE IMPACTS

• Potential detriment of existing vegetation and associated environmental benefits • Potential detriment of fauna populations and their associated benefits

south sector of Hospital Rosales’ property.

ii. Operation & Maintenance Phase

Total:

Since the current situation is not altered in the “No-Action Alternative”, the only thing that changes in time is the general gradual deterioration of the infrastructure. The implementation of the “Proposed Alternative” brings a potential risk to local micro-businesses (but it could also be an opportunity), an increased demand for facilities and services, and the parking space problem. But the mitigation measures included as part of the “Proposed Modified Action Alternative” cut all those associated risks by more than half of the corresponding EQ values. Average: number and profile of potential clients nearby areas

ity for maintenance and replacement

• Increased demand in services provided by the municipality

It is noticeable that the “No-Action Alternative” scores negative impact EQ values significantly lower than those of the “Proposed Action Alternative” and the “Modified Proposed Action Alternative”. That is because in the absence of any action the Park will continue to provide the environmental and socioeconomic services it has been providing (see Sections 2.1 and 2.2). Additionally, the risk of destabilizing the current equilibrium – indistinctly whether good or bad – is avoided, while only the infrastructure continues gradually deteriorating. But what better identifies and distinguishes the two action alternatives from the no-action one is their corresponding high values of positive impacts, which can be expected to develop from their implementation (Table 25).

105

January 30, 2017

No-Action Alternative

Proposed Alternative

Proposed Modified Action Alternative

Table 25. Comparison of potential positive environmental impacts of each considered alternative.

0.0

3.6

12.0

0.0

1.8

6.0

• Potential increase in number and diversity of existing vegetation and associated

0.0

1.7

6.0

• Potential increase in number and diversity of fauna populations and their

0.0

1.9

6.0

4.7

27.6

43.1

0.7

3.9

6.2

• Aesthetic and visual improvement of the whole area

0.0

6.8

• Increased opportunities for public education and awareness

0.0

1.9

6.8

• Increase of options for relaxation and leisure, which improves individual and

0.0

6.3

• Sales of local “comedores” may increase, due to relocation and changes in the

0.0

1.7

5.4

• Sales of itinerant vendors may increase, due to the increase in the number of

0.0

4.6

5.4

4.7

5.8

0.5

6.6

TOTAL:

4.7

31.2

55.1

AVERAGE:

0.5

3.5

6.0

POSITIVE IMPACTS

i. Construction Phase

Total:

In the “No-Action Alternative” no changes occur, so no potential positive impacts can be expected. Positive impacts from the “Proposed Alternative” are mainly random, since no effort is directed into the selection and planting of adequate species; while in the “Proposed Modified Action Alternative” the positive result is certain, because attention is given to choosing the appropriate species and arrangements. Average: environmental benefits

associated environmental benefits

ii. Operation & Maintenance Phase

Total:

The only positive EQ value in the “No-Action Alternative” comes from the fact that new lamps have already been installed, and that could bring certain increase in security and its perception by users (although most probably no users would visit the Park in the evening as it is now). On the other hand, the “Proposed Alternative” carries a lot more positive impacts, which can be enhanced by the measures considered as part of the “Proposed Modified Action Alternative”. Average:

public mental health, and thus supports violence prevention number and profile of potential clients visitors

• Increase in security and its perception • Improved access for people with disabilities

106

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

7.5. Recommended Alternative and Justification for Selection Although the “No-Action Alternative” scores significantly low EQ values for negative impacts (Tables 18 & 24), it introduces no changes (which is the reason why the EQ values are so low: no changes means no risks!), but the Park continues to be an area avoided by the majority of citizens, particularly at dusk, and continues slowly deteriorating. Besides a slight improvement in security and its perception (due to the placement of new lights by the Municipality. Section 1.1.4), no positive changes/impacts occur in the “NoAction Alternative”. The “Proposed Action Alternative” on the other hand, introduces risks that are an unavoidable part of any proposed change, and thus scores higher EQ values for negative impacts (Tables 20 & 24), but it also brings important positive impacts (Tables 21 & 25) that constitute the essence of the PCTC. Finally, the “Proposed Modified Action Alternative” incorporates a series of mitigation and enhancement measures, as described in Section 6.3 and Tables 17, 28 and 29, which significantly reduce the risk of potential negative impacts (Tables 22 & 24) and improve the chances and results of potential positive ones (Tables 23 & 25). For that reason, the Assessment Teams strongly recommends the implementation of all measures considered as the “Proposed Modified Action Alternative”, as described in Section 6.3 of this EA document. Identifying the most significant impacts – negative or positive – can help decide where sources/efforts should be better put, and when. Based on their corresponding Environmental Qualification (EQ) values, potential impacts of the “Proposed Modified Alternative” can be prioritized as follows: Table 26. Prioritization of potential negative impacts of the “Proposed Modified Action Alternative”. EQ

ADVERSE IMPACTS

1.6

Risk of infrastructure failure due to lack of financial resources and technical capacity for maintenance and replacement

1.4

The lack of enough parking space might affect the traffic dynamics in the Park’s nearby areas

1.2

The Ministry of Health and Social Care (MINSAL) could be reluctant to open the south sector of Hospital Rosales to accommodate the northern steps and walkway of the proposed extended elevated walkway and exhibition hall over Av. Roosevelt.

1.1

Sales of local “comedores” could decrease, due to relocation and changes in the number and profile of potential clients

1.0

Increased demand in services provided by the municipality

0.4

Potential detriment of existing vegetation and associated environmental benefits

0.4

Potential detriment of fauna populations and their associated environmental benefits

0.3

Problems derived from the handling and disposal of demolition materials

107

January 30, 2017

Table 27. Prioritization of potential positive impacts of the “Proposed Modified Action Alternative”. EQ

POSITIVE IMPACTS

6.8

Aesthetic and visual improvement of the whole area

6.8

Increased opportunities for public education and awareness

6.6

Improved access for people with disabilities

6.3

Increase of options for relaxation and leisure, which improves individual and public mental health, and thus supports violence prevention

6.0

Potential increase in number and diversity of existing vegetation and associated environmental benefits

6.0

Potential increase in number and diversity of fauna populations and associated environmental benefits

5.8

Increase in security and its perception

5.4

Sales of local “comedores” may increase, due to relocation and changes in the number and profile of potential clients

5.4

Sales of itinerant vendors may increase, due to the increase in the number of visitors

108

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

8. ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION, ENHANCEMENT, AND MONITORING PLANS 8.1. Environmental Mitigation Plan As stated in different parts of this EA, there are no very significant adverse impacts that can be foreseen from the implementation of the proposed interventions. Nonetheless, Table 28 outlines all control and mitigation measures that are recommended as part of the “Proposed Modified Action Alternative” for each identified potential negative impact, according to the PCTC main proposed actions. Because of the relatively low environmental consequences of the identified negative impacts, the proposed measures are most of all warnings to be aware of the latent risks and plan in advance simple measures to either avoid the occurrence of the impact or diminish its effects. Table 28. Environmental Mitigation Plan (Table 2 of the USAID Guidelines for Implementing Partners, 2015) Main Proposed Actions 1. Renovation of Trails, Benches and other Related Facilities

2. Construction of Elevated Walkways

Potential Negative Impacts

Control / Mitigation Measures

• Potential impacts to existing vegetation and associated benefits

è

Minimize vegetation removal to the extent possible. Replaced removed plants with native species (Annex 10)

• Potential impacts to fauna populations and associated benefits

è

Same as above, plus place refugees-like structures in trees for bird and bat species

• Increase visitation to the Park, and thus required services

è

Establish a trust fund, and engage institutions and companies that can take over operation costs (e.g. electricity and water)

• Lack of parking space might affect traffic in nearby areas

è

Habilitate Tin-Marín’s parking area as general area for both the Museum and the Park

• Risk of infrastructure failure due lacking of financial resources and technical capacity for maintenance and replacement

è

See Nº 8. Infrastructure Maintenance and Improvement, below

• Risk of damage to cultural goods and patrimony

è

Special attention must be given to avoid any potential damage to relevant cultural elements, such as the trails corresponding to the Park’s core zone (Section 2.3.5)

• Potential impacts to existing vegetation and associated benefits

è

Minimize vegetation removal to the extent possible. Replaced removed plants with native species (Annex 10)

• Potential impacts to fauna populations and associated benefits

è

Same as above, plus place refugees-like structures in trees for bird and bat species

• Increase visitation to the Park, and thus required services

è

Establish a trust fund, and engage institutions and companies that can take over operation costs (e.g. electricity and water)

• Risk of infrastructure failure

è

See Nº 8. Infrastructure Maintenance and Improvement, below

109

January 30, 2017

Main Proposed Actions 3. Construction of the Amphitheater “the Cultural Leaf”

Potential Negative Impacts

Control / Mitigation Measures

• Increase visitation to the Park, and thus required services

è

Establish a trust fund, and engage institutions and companies that can take over operation costs (e.g. electricity and water)

• Lack of parking space might affect traffic in nearby areas

è

Habilitate Tin-Marín’s parking area as general area for both the Museum and the Park

• Risk of infrastructure failure due lacking of financial resources and technical capacity for maintenance and replacement

è

See Nº 8. Infrastructure Maintenance and Improvement, below

• Increase visitation to the Park, and thus required services

è

Establish a trust fund, and engage institutions and companies that can take over operation costs (e.g. electricity and water)

• Lack of parking space might affect traffic in nearby areas

è

Habilitate Tin-Marín’s parking area as general area for both the Museum and the Park

• Risk of infrastructure failure due lacking of financial resources and technical capacity for maintenance and replacement

è

See Nº 8. Infrastructure Maintenance and Improvement, below

• The Ministry of Health and Social Care could be reluctant to open the south sector of Hospital Rosales to accommodate the northern steps and walkway

è

Include the authorities from the Ministry of Health and Social Care (MINSAL) in a local support committee for the transformation of the Park and adjacent areas

• Risk of damage to cultural goods and patrimony

è

Special attention must be given to avoid any potential damage to relevant cultural elements, such as the “Sala Nacional de Exposiciones” building (Section 2.3.5)

5. Construction of the Civic Education Center for Youth and Children “Concejo de los Niños”

• Risk of infrastructure failure due lacking of financial resources and technical capacity for maintenance and replacement

è

See Nº 8. Infrastructure Maintenance and Improvement, below

• Handling and disposal of demolition materials

è

See Nº 10. Demolitions, below

6. Expansion of “Museo Tin-Marín”

• Risk of infrastructure failure due lacking of financial resources and technical capacity for maintenance and replacement

è

See Nº 8. Infrastructure Maintenance and Improvement, below

• Handling and disposal of demolition materials

è

See Nº 10. Demolitions, below

è

Minimize vegetation removal to the extent possible. Replaced removed plants with native species (Annex 10)

è

Same as above, plus place refugees-like structures in trees for bird and bat species

è

Establish a trust fund, and engage institutions and companies that can take over operation costs (e.g. electricity and water)

è

Build new toilets and urinaries (30 and 36 units) on the northeast sector of the Park

è

Build 20 new water fountains homogeneously distributed along the Park

è

Place 20 trash sorting deposits homogeneously distributed along the Park

è

The construction of the food court “Portal de las Delicias” and the relocation of the existing “comedores” should be one of the main elements included in the first phase of the PCTC. Potential sites and an attractive design should be evaluated altogether with the group of owners

4. Expansion of the “Sala Nacional de Exposiciones Salarrué”

7. Other Significant Inter- • Potential impacts to existing vegetation and associated benefits ventions (“Portal Las Delicias”, “Portal las Flores”, • Potential impacts to fauna populations and associated benefits toilets, “security building”, • Increase visitation to the Park, and thus required services recreational and educational exhibits, etc.)

• Sales of local “comedores” could be affected due to relocation and changes in visitor numbers and profile

110

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component Main Proposed Actions

8. Infrastructure Maintenance and Improvement

Potential Negative Impacts

Control / Mitigation Measures è

A training program should be implemented, including: the development of new products, the hygienic preparation and storage of food, solid waste management, pricing and basic accounting, and client service, among others

è

A solid waste management an recycling program should be developed by the Municipality, in coordination with the “comedores”

• Lack of parking space might affect traffic in nearby areas

è

Habilitate Tin-Marín’s parking area as general area for both the Museum and the Park

• Risk of infrastructure failure due lacking of financial resources and technical capacity for maintenance and replacement

è

See Nº 8. Infrastructure Maintenance and Improvement, below

• Risk of infrastructure failure due lacking of financial resources and technical capacity for maintenance and replacement

è

Establish a trust fund, and engage private sponsors to pay for construction and maintenance costs of specific areas, facilities and/or exhibits, applying a public-private alliance model

è

Realistic calculations should be done about expected costs for appropriate maintenance of infrastructure and other Park facilities, to plan for equivalent resources within the corresponding trust fund

9. Facilities for People with Disabilities and Reduced Mobility

• Limited access to facilities and services for people with disabilities and reduced mobility

è

All new structure, facilities and services must be designed and constructed as to allow access to people with physical disabilities

• Risk of infrastructure failure due lacking of financial resources and technical capacity for maintenance and replacement

è

See Nº 8. Infrastructure Maintenance and Improvement, above

10. Demolitions

• Potential impacts to existing vegetation and associated benefits

è

Minimize vegetation removal to the extent possible. Replaced removed plants with native species (see Annex 10)

• Potential impacts to fauna populations and associated benefits

è

Same as above, plus place refugees-like structures in trees for bird and bat species

• Handling and disposal of demolition materials

è

Materials resulting from the demolition of existing structures must be first sorted out in reusable and non-reusable materials. The later must be sorted a second time into recyclable and non-recyclable materials. The sale of recyclable materials (such as metals and plastics) can contribute funds to the Park’s trust fund. Non-recyclable materials (such as debris) can be used in bases and sub-bases for trails, aggregate of asphaltic layers, and even as gravel for new concrete1.

• All of the above

è

The same as with construction supervision, the PCTC should have a continuous environmental supervision, whose role it will be to oversee the works and make sure that all control and mitigation measures an other pertinent environmental considerations are properly followed

11. General

111

January 30, 2017

8.2. Environmental Enhancement Plan The following table resumes the proposed enhancement measures, which aim to increase the probability for potential positive impacts to occur, and at the same time enhance, multiply, and expand them. Table 29. Enhancement measures for identified positive impacts (Table 2 of the USAID Guidelines for Implementing Partners, 2015). Main Proposed Actions 1. Renovation of Trails, Benches and other Related Facilities

2. Construction of Elevated Walkways

Potential Positive Impacts

Enhancement Measures

• Potential increase in number and diversity of existing vegetation and associated environmental benefits

è

Plant trees around grass blocks, shrubs, and other plants around grass blocks, tree trunks, and in some islands within grass blocks (recommended species in Annex 10)

• Potential increase in number and diversity of fauna populations and associated environmental benefits

è

Species listed in Annex 10 are also thought to increase the number and diversity of fauna. Additionally, artificial nesting and hiding structures can be placed up in trees, to favor the reproduction and presence of bird and bat species

• Aesthetic and visual improvement of the area

è

No particular enhancement measure required. Gardening will contribute to this goal

• Increase of opportunities for public education and awareness

è

Design, produce and install interpretative signs and exhibits, as described in Section 6.3

• Increased options for relaxation and leisure

è

No particular enhancement measure required

• Increase in security and its perception

è

See Nº 7. Other Significant Interventions, below

• Sales of itinerant vendors may increase, due to increased visitation

è

Organize itinerant vendors, including training, and probably even uniform them with Park shirts specifically designed for them

• Aesthetic and visual improvement of the area

è

No particular enhancement measure required. Gardening will contribute to this goal

• Increase of opportunities for public education and awareness

è

Design, production and installment of interpretative signs, as described in Section 6.3

• Increased options for relaxation and leisure

è

No particular enhancement measure required

• Increase in security and its perception

è

See Nº 7. Other Significant Interventions, below

• Sales of itinerant vendors may increase, due to increased visitation

è

Organize itinerant vendors, including training, and probably even uniform them with Park shirts specifically designed for them

è

No particular enhancement measure required. Gardening will contribute to this goal

è

Maintain a program of cultural and educational presentations, including street theater, music/dance, puppets, etc.

• Increased options for relaxation and leisure

è

No particular enhancement measure required

• Increase in security and its perception

è

See Nº 7. Other Significant Interventions, below

3. Construction of the Amphi- • Aesthetic and visual improvement of the area theater “the Cultural Leaf” • Increase of opportunities for public education and awareness

112

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component Main Proposed Actions 4. Expansion of the “Sala Nacional de Exposiciones Salarrué”

Potential Positive Impacts

Enhancement Measures

• Aesthetic and visual improvement of the area

è

No particular enhancement measure required. Gardening will contribute to this goal

• Increase of opportunities for public education and awareness

è

Design and implementation of an open cultural program, including the environmental art workshops, as described in Section 6.3

• Increased options for relaxation and leisure

è

No particular enhancement measure required

5. Construction of the Civic Education Center for Youth and Children “Concejo de los Niños”

• Aesthetic and visual improvement of the area

è

No particular enhancement measure required. Gardening will contribute to this goal

• Increase of opportunities for public education and awareness

è

No particular enhancement measure required for this particular action

6. Expansion of the “Museo Tin-Marín”

• Aesthetic and visual improvement of the area

è

No particular enhancement measure required. Gardening will contribute to this goal

• Increase of opportunities for public education and awareness

è

No particular enhancement measure required for this particular action

• Increased options for relaxation and leisure

è

No particular enhancement measure required

• Aesthetic and visual improvement of the area

è

The design of all new proposed facilities (see Section 6.3) should adapt to the whole new Park general image

• Increase of opportunities for public education and awareness

è

Design and construction of the artificial wetland, the Maya and geological corners, and the fauna rescue facilities, as described in Section 6.3.

• Increased options for relaxation and leisure

è

No particular enhancement measure required

• Increase in security and its perception

è

Build a new CAM/PNC facility, in an open view location within the Park; including an open reception area where people can learn about the municipal and security works, get city maps, information on urban green areas, occurring species, etc. (Section 6.3)

• Sales of local “comedores” may increase due to relocation and changes in visitor numbers and profile

è

Enhancement measures are in this case the same as mitigation measures (see Nº 7 in Table 28 above)

• Aesthetic and visual improvement of the area

è

Infrastructure construction and maintenance, and gardening will enhance the Park aesthetics

• Increase in security and its perception

è

See Nº 7. Other Significant Interventions, above

• Increase of opportunities for public education and awareness

è

• Increased options for relaxation and leisure

è

No particular enhancement measure required

• Guarantied general access for people with disabilities and/or reduced mobility

è

All new structure, facilities and services must be designed and constructed as to allow access to people with physical disabilities

• Aesthetic and visual improvement of the area

è

No particular enhancement measure required

7. Other Significant Interventions (“Portal Las Delicias”, “Portal las Flores”, toilets, “security building”, recreational and educational exhibits, etc.)

8. Infrastructure Maintenance and Improvement 9. Facilities for People with Disabilities and/or Reduced Mobility

10. Demolitions

113

Design and construct educational signs and exhibits as to allow access to people with physical disabilities è Include interpretative signing and/or exhibits about people with disabilities and their rights, as a mean to raise awareness in the general public

January 30, 2017

8.3. Environmental Monitoring Plan Tables 30 and 31 list all mitigation and enhancement measures, their corresponding estimated cost of implementation, responsible party, and main monitoring parameters. Considerations used to establish estimated costs can be found in Annex 12. Table 30. Environmental Monitoring Plan (Table 3 of the USAID Guidelines for Implementing Partners, 2015): Mitigation Measures. Monitoring

Responsible Party

Indicators

Methods

Frequency

1. Implement an environmental supervision.

Project Implementer

Contract

Direct review

Once

$3,000 /month

2. Minimize vegetation removal, or replace with recommended species.

Constructor/ Supervision

Plants removed & planted

Inventory / supervision

Weekly

See Nº 1 Table 31

3. Establish a trust fund, and engage sponsors for specific interventions, and/or operational costs.

Project Implementer

% of costs covered

Accounting report

Monthly

No direct costs

4. Establish a Maintenance and Improvement Program.

Project Implementer

Program indicators

Monthly reports

Quarterly

≈$8,000 /month1

5. Habilitate Tin-Marín’s parking area to serve both the Museum and the Park.

Project Implementer

Agreement signed

Direct review

Once

$5,0002

6. Avoid potential damages to relevant cul- Constructor/ Supervision tural patrimony elements.

Reported damages

Supervision

Daily

None

7. Get MINSAL’s approval for the extension of the National Art Gallery component.

Project Implementer

Permission granted

Direct review

Once

None

8. Maintain an open dialog with all key stakeholders.

Project Implementer

Frequency of meetings

Review of meeting reports

Monthly

$100 /month3

Mitigation Measures

Triple of current costs (Table 4), including maintenance personnel, and expendable materials Including signage and Access ramp to the Park 3 For meeting costs 1 2

114

Estimated Costs

Results Recommended Dates Problems Mitigation Adjustments Monitored Encountered Effectiveness

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component Monitoring

Mitigation Measures

Responsible Party

Indicators

Methods

Frequency

Estimated Costs

9. Expedite construction of the food court “Portal de las Delicias” and the relocation of the existing “comedores”.

Project Implementer

Design & construction

Supervision

Once each

$86,0001

10. Implement a training program for “comedor” owners and itinerant vendors.

Project Implementer

Nº of people trained

Training reports

Weekly

$15,000

11. Develop a solid waste management and recycling program.

Project Implementer

Amount of wastes treated

Supervision

Monthly

$25,0002

12. Build new toilets and urinaries (30 and 36 units, respectively).

Project Implementer

Design & construction

Supervision

Once

$130,0003

13. Redesign and construct all originally proposed facilities and services considering access to people with physical disabilities.

Constructor/ Supervision

Design & construction

Supervision

Once each

$25,0004

14. Implement adequate management of demolition materials.

Constructor/ Supervision

% of recycled and disposed materials

Supervision

Weekly

$5,0005

TOTAL ESTIMATED INVESTMENT:

Results Recommended Dates Problems Mitigation Adjustments Monitored Encountered Effectiveness

$376,2006

Considering a 100 m2 area and a $800/m2 cost Considering 20 sorting deposits at $600/deposit, 20 signs at $200/sign, general equipment and training. 3 Based on an estimated of 130 m2 and a cost of $1,000/m2. 4 This represents the estimated cost for an architectural consultancy that should design and estimate costs for all needed structures. 5 Including handwork and transportation. 6 Monthly costs (i. environmental supervision; ii. maintenance and improvement; and iii. open dialog with all key stakeholders) have been considered for a 12 months period. 1 2

115

January 30, 2017 Table 31. Environmental Monitoring Plan (Table 3 of the USAID Guidelines for Implementing Partners, 2015): Enhancement Measures. Monitoring

Enhancement Measures

Responsible Party

Indicators

Methods

Frequency

1. Improve gardening: plant recommended species in suited areas.

Contractor/ Supervision

Forestation map and inventory

Auditing

Begin & end of activity

$20,0001

2. Place structures to favor the reproduction and presence of bird and bat species.

Contractor/ Supervision

Structures placed

Auditing

Begin & end of activity

$2,0002

3. Design, produce and install interpretative signs and exhibits.

Contractor/ Supervision

Designs, signs & exhibits

Participatory process

Weekly

$45,0003

4. Implement environmental art workshops.

SECULTURA / Municipality

Nº of attendants

Auditing

Monthly

$1,000 /month4

5. Maintain a program of cultural and educational events.

SECULTURA / Municipality

Program

Auditing

Monthly

$500 /month4

6. Design and construction of new proposed educational-recreational facilities: wetland, “Maya and Geological Corners”.

Contractor/ Supervision

Designs & constructed facilities

Participatory process

Weekly

$25,0005

7. Design and Build new CAM/PNC facility.

Contractor/ Supervision

Design & construction

Auditing

Begin & end of activity

$100,0006

8. All new structures must be designed and constructed as to allow access to people with physical disabilities.

Contractor/ Supervision

Design & construction

Auditing

Begin & end of activity

See Nº 13 Table 30

9. Train and organize itinerant vendors.

Project Implementer

Nº of people trained

Training reports

Weekly

See Nº 10 Table 30

TOTAL ESTIMATED INVESTMENT:

Estimated Costs

Results Recommended Dates Problems Mitigation Adjustments Monitored Encountered Effectiveness

$210,0007

Considering 73,000 m2 x $0.27/m2. Considering 100 units x $20/unit. 3 Considering a consultancy ($15,000), plus 100 signs x $250/sign, plus 5 exhibits x $1,000/exhibit. 4 For expendable materials. 5 Including design and construction. 6 Considering 200 m2 x $500/m2. 7 Monthly costs (i. environmental art workshops; and ii. cultural and educational events) have been considered for a 12 months period. 1 2

116

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

9. GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS

The following is a list of general recommendations, based on the knowledge and experience of the Assessment Team members. They are offered here more as an added value to the EA than as a part of it. Although some of them are related to the control/mitigation and/or enhancement measures included in Sections 8.1, 8.2 and 8.3, unlike these general recommendations are not binding to the EA results, nor mandatory to implement. It is at the discretion of the interested party or parties to implement all or just some of them, as consider appropriate.

An open dialog should be kept open with all key stakeholders (see Section 2.1.1. Table 1), particularly at the stage of final design that the PCTC is entering now, to secure their support and appropriation.

Plates with the names and logos of main private donors should be placed at the entrances and/or other highly visible areas of the Park –but taking good care not to cause aesthetic disturbance and/or visual contamination– with the purpose of incentivizing private investment and support.

Both Salvadorian environmental funds, FIAES and FONAES, are potentially interested in financing a complete interpretative exhibition on El Salvador’s natural history, the ecology in the SSMA, and the conservation efforts being implemented. Such an exhibition could be placed on, and extend along, the rock wall that is the north limit of the Park in the northeast sector (between the National Art Gallery and the 25 Av.). FIAES’ 2015 – 2020 Institutional Strategic Plan (Domínguez & Cherret, 2015) includes the development of a public urban education and awareness project, and in a preliminary meeting they expressed their willingness to consider Parque Cuscatlán as the place to develop that project. Special signs for blind people should be considered as part of the exhibition.

AES Corporation is currently shifting all aerial electric lines to underground lines in San Salvador’s Historic Centre. In preliminary talks they expressed their willingness to do the same at Parque Cuscatlán. Additionally, they could be asked to overtake the costs of electricity for the Park (a measure that would ease the pressure on the municipality to cover the increased de-

117

January 30, 2017

mand/cost of services, due the increased number of Park visitors), as recommended in Table 28. AES could also be asked to fund an interpretative exhibition on clean energy technologies, including signs for blind people.

Similarly, ANDA could be asked to finance an interpretative exhibition on the natural cycle of water, its purification, appropriate use, and end treatment, including signs for blind people.

New Park infrastructure and facilities are the perfect scenario to develop a series of especial public events, such as theater plays, marionettes, concerts, etc. aimed to educate and rise awareness about environmental and social problems. Benefactors who support such events might be found among the already existing group of stakeholders and/or the country’s private sector in general. Another interesting option for the Park is a small fauna rescue center. The purpose of this facility would be to receive wounded wildlife, care for them during recuperation, while offering interactive environmental education using animals that cannot apt be released. Such a program could be run by youth at risk (“ni-nis”) and thus create alternative occupations for them as a direct contribution to preventing violence and crime. This could also be supported by institutions such as FIAES and/or FONAES.

As stated in the conceptual design documents, the PCTC is part of a wider vision that contemplates the creation of an urban development corridor, extending from San Salvador’s Historic Centre, along the Alameda Roosevelt, to the “Plaza Salvador del Mundo”, in which the “Castillo Venturoso”, the “Plaza Salvador del Mundo”, and the Park are main anchoring elements. Thus, it would be advisable to somehow link these sites with each other. A way to do that would be to place an open kiosk at the Park, with interpretative information on the vision of the corridor, and the attractions/services that can be found in the other two sites. Correspondingly, an open kiosk could be placed at “Plaza Salvador del Mundo” with information on the corridor, but also on urban ecology and its importance, and a graphic presentation of the attractions and services that can be found in the other sites. At “Castillo Venturoso” a room could be destined to host a more complete interpretative exhibition on urban ecology, the vision of the corridor, as well as the attractions and services that can be found in the other two sites.

118

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

REFERENCES CCAD. 2011. Propuesta de Índice Centroamericano de Calidad del Aire – ICCA, EN: Guía para Calidad del Aire Ambiental, Inmisiones Atmosféricas. Comisión Centroamericana de Ambiente y Desarrollo – CCAD. Domínguez, J.P. & I. Cherret. 2015. Plan Estratégico Institucional, FIAES 2015 – 2020. Fondo de la Iniciativa para las Américas El Salvador – FIAES. San Salvador, El Salvador. 147 pp. Domínguez, J.P.; P. Hernández & W. Del Cid. 2015. Estimación Preliminar Acerca del Potencial de Reducción de Emisiones de Gases de Efecto Invernadero y Otros Contaminantes Atmosféricos / Sistema Integral de Transporte del Área Metropolitana de San Salvador – SITRAMSS. Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo – BID / Vice Ministerio de Transporte – VMT. San Salvador, El Salvador. 124 pp. El Salvador. 2007. VI Censo de Población y V de Vivienda. Dirección General de Estadística y Censos – DIGESTYC / Ministerio de Economía – MINEC. San Salvador, El Salvador. 666 pp. El Salvador. 2014. Norma Técnica Salvadoreña “Accesibilidad al medio físico, Urbanismo y Arquitectura. Requisitos” (NTS11.69.01:14). Organismo Salvadoreño de Normalizaciòn – OSN. San Salvador, El Salvador. 94 pp. Fabián, A. & P. Ayala. 2010. Informe de la Calidad del Aire en el Área Metropolitana de San Salvador. Ministerio del Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales – MARN. San Salvador, El Salvador. Galdámez & Kattan. 2007. “Estudio de respuesta de capas superficiales de suelos en el AMSS”. Trabajo de Graduación para optar al grado de Ingeniero Civil. Universidad Centroamericana 2José Simeón Cañas” – UCA. San Salvador. 104 pp. García, L.; R. Zimmermann; L. Soriano; C. Pérez y P. Ayala. Año Desconocido. Caracterización de Condiciones Meteorológicas En El Salvador. 167 pp. GEMS. 2015. Scoping Statement For USAID/Honduras DO2 Programmatic Environmental Assessment (PEA). Global Environmental Support Contract – GEMS. Tegucigalpa, Honduras. 98 pp. Glasswing. 2013. Plan Operativo Glasswing, Componente 2, Actividades 2.1. Y 2.3. USAID’s SolucionES Project. June 2013. San Salvador, El Salvador. 12 pp. GMSS. 1998. Ordenanza Reguladora de la Oficina de Restauración y Desarrollo del Centro Histórico de la Ciudad de San Salvador. Decreto Municipal Nº 11, de fecha 25/03/98, publicado en el Diario Oficial Nº 79, Tomo 339, de fecha 04/05/98. San Salvador, El Salvador. 3 pp. Holdridge, L. R. 1975. Mapa Ecológico de El Salvador. Memoria Explicativa. Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganadería, Dirección General de Recursos Naturales Renovables. Köppen, G. & M. Geiger. 1936. Das geographische System der Klimate. Handbuch der Klimatologie. Verlag von Gebrüder Bontraeger. Berlin, Deutschland. 44 pp. MARN. 2008. Proyecto Adquisición de Unidades Móviles. Ministerio del Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales – MARN. San Salvador, El Salvador.

119

January 30, 2017

MARN. 2014. Informe de Labores 2012 – 2013. Monitoreo de la Calidad del Aire, pagina 27. Ministerio del Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales – MARN. San Salvador, El Salvador. MARN. 2015. Marco Conceptual. Plan de Recuperación de Ríos Urbanos. Ministerio del Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales. San Salvador, El Salvador. MARN. 2016. Informe de días de mayor contaminación reportados por las estaciones automáticas ubicadas al centro y este del AMSS, para el período 1º de enero de 2009 a 31 de agosto de 2016. Perú. 1991. Reglamento Nacional de Construcciones. Instalaciones Sanitarias para Edificaciones.Norma Técnica de Edificación S.200. Instituto Nacional de Investigación y Normalizaciòn de la Vivienda (ININVI). Lima, Perù. 67 pp. UICN. 2011. Guìa de Manejo de Escombros y Otros Residuos de la Construcciòn. Unión Internacional para la Conservación de la Naturaleza y de los Recursos Naturales (UICN), con el apoyo de HOLCIM. San Josè, Costa Rica. 90 pp. Uribe, Felipe. 2015a. Plan Maestro del Parque Cuscatlán y su Área de Influencia. Technical Report, USAID SolucionES Project. San Salvador, El Salvador. 103 pp. Uribe, Felipe. 2015b. Anteproyecto Pasarelas Aéreas. Technical Report, USAID SolucionES Project. San Salvador, El Salvador. 38 pp. Uribe, Felipe. 2016a. Anteproyecto Senderos y Mobiliario. Technical Report, USAID SolucionES Project. San Salvador, El Salvador. 55 pp. Uribe, Felipe. 2016b. Anteproyecto La Hoja Cultural. Technical Report, USAID SolucionES Project. San Salvador, El Salvador. 30 pp. Uribe, Felipe. 2016c. Anteproyecto Sala Nacional Salarrué. Technical Report, USAID SolucionES Project. San Salvador, El Salvador. 32 pp. USAID. 1980. Agency Environmental Procedures. Title 22, Code of Federal Regulation, Part 216. United States Agency for International Development – USAID. Wasington, D.C. 11 pp.

120

Environmental Assessment Parque Cuscatlán Transformation Component

ANNEXES

Annex 1.

Key stakeholder’s directory.

Annex 2.

Users survey questionnaire format.

Annex 3.

Users survey complete generated database.

Annex 4.

i-Tree methodology complete report.

Annex 5.

Complete inventory of trees found at Parque Cuscatlán.

Annex 6.

Complete inventory of shrubs, orchids and herbs found at Parque Cuscatlán.

Annex 7.

List of bird species observed at Parque Cuscatlán.

Annex 8.

List of butterfly species found at Parque Cuscatlán.

Annex 9.

REDCA station at Centro de Gobierno, complete data sets between January 2009 and August 2016.

Annex 10. List of suggested plant species for forestation purposes. Annex 11. Vendors survey complete generated database. Annex 12. Considerations used to establish estimated costs of mitigation and enhancement measures. Annex 13. Considerations for the construction of toilets for wheelchairs. Annex 14. General scheme of a typical biodigester system for toilets.

121