APPENDIX H NEPA TRANSITION REPORT

Transcription

1 APPENDIX H NEPA TRANSITION REPORT BORDER HIGHWAY EAST STUDY CSJ: EL PASO COUNTY, TEXAS TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION The environmental review, consultation, and other actions required by applicable Federal environmental laws for this project are being, or have been, carried-out by TxDOT pursuant to U.S.C. and a Memorandum of Understanding dated December, 0, and executed by FHWA and TxDOT. SEPTEMBER 0

2 0 TABLE OF CONTENTS.0 INTRODUCTION....0 BHE PEL OVERVIEW AND STUDY AREA.... Previous Studies and Plans....0 ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES AND ANALYSES NOT INCLUDED IN THE BHE PEL STUDY....0 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES AND MITIGATION STRATEGIES....0 INCORPORATING PEL ANALYSES INTO THE NEPA PROCESS....0 SUMMARY OF BHE PEL STUDY RECOMMENDATIONS OR PROJECTS....0 REFERENCES... LIST OF FIGURES Figure : BHE PEL Study Area... Figure : 00 Recommended Alternatives... i

3 INTRODUCTION In order to be seamlessly incorporated into the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process, all corridor and subarea studies utilizing the Planning and Environmental Linkages (PEL) study approach must adhere to certain standards and must include extensive public involvement and agency coordination. The regulations for a PEL study are formalized in the Statewide Transportation Planning; Metropolitan Transportation Planning; Final Rule ( CFR 0), which details how results or decisions of transportation planning studies may be used as part of the overall project development process consistent with NEPA. Appendix A to Part 0 Linking the Transportation Planning and NEPA Processes ( USC ) describes how information, analysis, and products from transportation planning can be incorporated into and relied upon in NEPA documents under existing laws. Some of the key criteria that a Federal agency must consider in deciding whether to adopt planning-level analyses or decisions in the NEPA process include: Involvement of interested state, local, tribal, and Federal agencies; Public review; Reasonable opportunity to comment during the development of the corridor or subarea planning study; Documentation of relevant decisions in a form that is identifiable and available for review during the NEPA scoping process and can be appended to or referenced in the NEPA document; and The review by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), as appropriate. In an effort to link planning studies to environmental processes that are compliant with NEPA, FHWA developed Guidance on Using Corridor and Subarea Planning to Inform NEPA, April, 0. This guidance encourages the integration of initial highway and transit planning efforts into a NEPA process to minimize duplication of effort, number of review cycles, and project costs..0 BHE PEL OVERVIEW AND STUDY AREA In May 0, the Texas Department of Transportation El Paso District (TxDOT) began the (BHE) PEL Study to develop conceptual transportation solutions that would address existing operational deficiencies, lack of connectivity to Interstate 0 (I-0) and Loop (Americas Avenue), and anticipated future demand on the existing transportation network identified within the study area that can advance to the schematic and environmental phase (NEPA) of project development. The PEL process provided an opportunity for early coordination with the public as well as local, state, tribal/sovereign nation, and federal agencies in a collaborative environment. By working together, alternatives (including tolling), and avoidance measures were developed at a high-level. FHWA. 00. Planning and Environmental Linkages Implementation Resource Guide. AASHTO. 00. Using the Transportation Planning Process to Support the NEPA Process.

4 0 0 0 At the initiation of the BHE PEL Study, the Study Team developed the BHE PEL Process Framework and Methodology Agreement which acknowledged the spirit of cooperation and collaboration, as well as the critical role that a number of agencies play in achieving the corridor vision and goals. The BHE PEL Process Framework and Methodology Agreement was developed to foster proactive working relationships among TxDOT and FHWA. The purpose of the Framework and Methodology was to encourage the use of the PEL process to meet agency needs while expediting transportation project delivery and to formalize the scope, schedule and expectations for the BHE PEL Study. As signatories of the BHE PEL Process Framework and Methodology Agreement, TxDOT and FHWA committed to partner together in efforts to develop a process that encouraged: Early communication, coordination, and collaboration with and input by other local, state and federal agencies in the transportation planning process; Better informed and strategic transportation decisions; and Efficient and cost-effective solutions. Early communication and collaboration among all interested parties is essential to the success of future plans, NEPA requirements, and projects. The agreement was signed by TxDOT and FHWA in November 0. Additionally, the BHE PEL Study Team coordinated with the El Paso Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). The Study Team met with the Executive Director of the MPO in June 0 and the MPO was invited to participate in the four Technical Work Group (TWG) meetings held throughout the BHE PEL Study. The BHE PEL study area or study area is located within the southwest portion of El Paso County in an area known as the Lower Valley. The communities of the Lower Valley include Socorro, San Elizario, Town of Clint, Fabens and Tornillo Census Designated Places (CDP). The northern limit of the study area is Loop between the Zaragoza International Port of Entry (POE) and I-0. The study area extends approximately 0 miles in a southeasterly direction to just south of the Fabens International POE (future Tornillo-Guadalupe International POE). The western limit is the Rio Grande and the eastern limit is I-0. The study area is shown in Figure.

5 Figure : BHE PEL Study Area

6 Previous Studies and Plans The BHE PEL Study builds upon the results of previous planning studies conducted within the study area. Following is a list of the previous studies used during the BHE PEL Study process with a brief description. For a more detailed description of the previous studies and plans, please refer to the BHE PEL Study Summary of Previous Studies Report (Appendix A). Border Highway Extension Feasibility Study o The Border Highway Extension Feasibility Study (TxDOT ) identified and analyzed constraints within the study area, assessed the existing transportation system, developed traffic projections, and considered alternatives. The study integrated the public involvement process and technical evaluation to develop a purpose and need, analyze and screen alternatives, and determine a feasible alignment/route. The study concluded that based on travel demand in the study area, a new highway would best serve the Lower Valley. 00 County Route Study o A proposed alignment was developed for the Border Highway Extension- East by El Paso County in 00. The proposed alignment generally follows the U.S./Mexico International border. The proposed extension begins at Loop near the Ysleta POE and traverses generally south terminating at the Fabens International POE (future Tornillo-Guadalupe International POE), connecting to the Manuel F. Aguilera Highway (Farmto-Market 0 (FM 0)). Pass Through Tolling Analysis o The Border Highway Extension-East Pass-Through Tolling Analysis was prepared by TxDOT in January 00. This document compared passthrough toll feasibility with conventional toll feasibility for the proposed Border Highway Extension-East. 00 Comprehensive Mobility Plan o The 00 Comprehensive Mobility Plan (July 00) was developed by the Partners for Mobility, which included El Paso MPO, the City of El Paso, Camino Real Regional Mobility Authority (CRRMA), and TxDOT. The Plan identified challenges in the region and developed solutions to address those challenges through mobility enhancements and agency partnerships. In addition to the projects and plans identified above, the BHE PEL Study utilized transportation solutions identified in the following plans: The current El Paso MPO regional transportation plan, Horizon 00 Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) (October 0); and The El Paso County 0 Comprehensive Mobility Plan (CMP).

7 These plans all identified a need for transportation improvements within the study area, but not all identified projects have advanced to the NEPA process for further development and impacts analysis. The BHE PEL Study provided a tool for reengaging the public and agencies in developing improvements within the study area and created a link between past, current, and future transportation decisions, thus potentially minimizing any duplication of effort and time lost between studies. Additionally, the BHE PEL Study has the potential to shorten the time needed to implement a project by allowing planning-level decisions to be carried into future, more detailed environmental studies..0 ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES AND ANALYSES NOT INCLUDED IN THE BHE PEL STUDY Cumulative impacts were not considered in the BHE PEL Study. This BHE PEL Study was utilized as a master planning effort to identify future projects in a very large and diverse study area. The results of the PEL identified future, prioritized alternatives that identified corridors for improvements. Schematic design and project details necessary to adequately assess cumulative impacts of proposed alternatives were not developed at the PEL level. The recommended alternatives would be further studied and refined in the next phase of project development, NEPA. During NEPA, the schematic design would be completed and project level details would be researched and evaluated. Additionally, while the BHE PEL Study considered community needs, context sensitive solutions (CSS), and stakeholder input, as identified in the study goals (BHE PEL Study Purpose and Need Technical Report (Appendix C), more detailed design approaches, mitigation strategies, and CSS is recommended to be completed during the NEPA and design phase..0 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES AND MITIGATION STRATEGIES The BHE PEL Study Recommended Alternatives are conceptual and do not include defining the preferred route of an alternative; therefore, project-specific design of the alternatives was not part of the BHE PEL Study. The BHE PEL Study did identify several issues that would be addressed under NEPA, which are summarized below and include: Crossing El Paso County Water Improvement District Number (EPCWID) drainage features; Traversing Ysleta del Sur Pueblo (YDSP) land; Bisecting family-owned parcels used as farmland; Impacting residential area near Petunia Street (neighborhood in San Elizario adjacent to the Rio Grande) as well as concerns about potential relocations to this residential area were raised by the members of the Adults and Youth United Development Association (AYUDA); Changing the historic character of the El Camino Real de Tierra Adentro (ECRDTA) National Historic Trail), which is located within the study area along

8 Socorro Road; Providing mitigation solutions for potential impacts and maintaining access to the Rio Bosque Wetlands Park; Maintaining access to areas and maintenance roads under the jurisdiction of the International Boundary and Water Commission (IBWC) and U.S. Customs and Border Patrol; and Considering CSS and techniques to maintain the natural and cultural landscapes adjacent to the proposed roadways. The issues are described in further detail in the BHE PEL Study Affected Environment Technical Report (Appendix G). Additionally, the issues are associated with each Recommended Alternative in the BHE PEL Study Alternatives Development and Screening Technical Report (Appendix F). Detailed records of coordination efforts conducted throughout the BHE PEL Study are included in the BHE PEL Study Agency Coordination Technical Report (Appendix D). Planning-level decisions regarding mitigation strategies include activities and concepts that may be adopted or incorporated into NEPA. This will be accomplished during the planning and environmental process, when the recommended alternatives are further studied and refined. During NEPA, potential impacts and associated mitigation strategies would be determined for the proposed alternative..0 INCORPORATING PEL ANALYSES INTO THE NEPA PROCESS As the Recommended Alternatives or projects are funded and move into the next phase of project development, the type of environmental document required will need to be determined for each project. The environmental document scoping process will be accomplished in accordance with the FHWA s Environmental Impact and Related Procedures ( CFR ), and in compliance with Texas Administrative Code Title, Part, Chapter. On February, 0, a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between FHWA and TxDOT was signed that delegated TxDOT FHWA s NEPA approval responsibilities for the assigned types of categorical exclusions (CE) determination projects; however TxDOT has applied for full NEPA delegation which would allow TxDOT to assume FHWA s responsibilities and approve all levels of environmental documents. NEPA delegation or assignment took place in late 0 and it is anticipated that future BHE projects would fall under the new MOU. Texas State statute requires completion of risk assessments that assist with determining the NEPA project scope early in the environmental review process. This early scoping process identifies key issues to be addressed, delineates roles and responsibilities in the environmental review process, and determines the level of NEPA document to be prepared. As projects identified in the BHE PEL Study progress to NEPA, risk assessments will be completed, according to TxDOT policy, to determine the level of NEPA document required. The future NEPA documents will incorporate the

9 appropriate PEL analyses by reference and become part of the administrative record and history of the decision-making process. As noted above, the BHE PEL Study identified several issues that would be addressed during the NEPA process. This would require further coordination with the local organizations and stakeholders and state, tribal/sovereign nation, and federal agencies. Additionally, the data collected and purpose and need documented during the BHE PEL Study will need to be tailored to the specific project. Additional studies such as indirect and cumulative impacts analyses will need to be completed with the specific impacts identified during the NEPA phase. Project-specific public involvement should also be conducted during the NEPA process to inform the public and gather their input on the proposed project. Depending on the timing of future NEPA effort, resources may require reassessment due to new regulations, changes to listed threatened and endangered species, age of data, etc. In summary, the data collected during the BHE PEL Study will serve as a baseline for NEPA analyses, however; it would be supplemented with more project-specific data and field reconnaissance information..0 SUMMARY OF BHE PEL STUDY RECOMMENDATIONS OR PROJECTS The BHE PEL Study included an alternative screening process that reviewed three levels of screening, using criteria developed from the purpose and need statement and the study goals. The result of the third level of screening was the identification of the Recommended Alternatives or projects to be carried forward to the next phase of project development (NEPA). This process is further described in the BHE PEL Study Alternatives Development and Screening Technical Report (Appendix F). The Recommended Alternatives, which includes 0 roadway corridors, comprised of various alternatives, are illustrated in Figure. The following is a summary of the Recommended Alternatives: Although the No-Build Alternative would not provide any additional roadway improvements outside of the programmed and funded projects already identified in the study area, this alternative will be used as a baseline for the impact analysis conducted during NEPA. It was determined during the BHE PEL Study that the identified, programmed projects would not sufficiently address the future traffic demand in the study area. Roadway Alternatives Widening Alameda Avenue Alternative, widening Alameda Avenue (State Highway 0 (SH 0)) from Loop to Herring Road, would provide additional capacity to an existing primary arterial and reduce travel times in the study area. Widening North Loop Drive Alternative Mod, widening North Loop Drive (FM ) from Horizon Boulevard to San Elizario Road (FM 0), would provide additional capacity to an existing primary

10 arterial and improve traffic operations. This alternative would complement a current construction project consisting of widening North Loop Drive to four lanes from Loop to Horizon Boulevard (FM ). Border Highway Extension The northern portion of the Border Highway Extension utilizing Alternative was considered a Recommended Alternative because it would utilize Pan American Drive, which provides access to Loop. Continuing south of Pan American Drive, the Border Highway Extension, would include the implementation of Alternative and a portion of Alternative, to Herring Road. This series of alternatives was recommended because the corridor would effectively attract traffic from existing and future congested roadways as determined in the 00 travel demand model. The northern segment of the proposed Border Highway Extension, Loop to Herring Road, would address congestion within the city limits of El Paso, Socorro and San Elizario, which were the areas with the greatest population growth, between 000 and 00, and these areas are projected to have the greatest future traffic demand. The northern portion could be constructed first, with the southern portion being constructed as future traffic demand warrants. The southern portion would include Alternative, south of Herring Road, and Alternative Mod-Rev. The southern portion is recommended for implementation only in conjunction with the northern portion, as described above. Alternative Mod-Rev would utilize existing TxDOT right-of-way along Middle Island Road (FM ). I-0 Improvements Improvements to I-0 are recommended and include Alternative, mainlane widening from Loop to O.T. Smith Road, and Alternatives and, extension of frontage roads from FM 0 to O.T. Smith Road. While these alternatives do have relatively high construction costs in comparison to other alternatives, these improvements would benefit the roadway network in the study area while minimizing potential environmental impacts because the I-0 mainlane improvements would be constructed within the existing right-of-way. City of Socorro Connections Alternative I Mod-Rev is recommended to improve connectivity between I-0 and the City of Socorro. Alternative I Mod-Rev would connect North Loop Drive to the proposed Border Highway Extension, via an extension of Old Hueco Tanks Road, and is recommended because it would be a new location roadway that would reduce traffic on the existing, surrounding network. This alternative also had a greater impact than Alternative D Mod in reducing travel times in the study area. Additionally, this alternative would include a grade-separated railroad crossing which would improve safety and efficiency of connections to I-0. This project is included in the City of Socorro Comprehensive Master Plan (City of Socorro 0). Another improvement, located near the southern limit of Socorro, is a new connection to I-0 and the proposed Border Highway Extension. Alternative L is a proposed new

11 location roadway originating at I-0 approximately miles north of FM 0. This new location roadway would create new roadway links to I-0, North Loop Drive, Alameda Avenue, Socorro Road and the proposed Border Highway Extension and include a grade-separated railroad crossing. This proposed alternative is included in the 00 Horizon MTP as a series of projects known as Tiwa Boulevard that would include a new interchange with I-0 and extend west to the proposed Border Highway Extension. FM 0 Improvements The combination of Alternatives N and F is recommended for further study as a new location FM 0. The corridor would improve FM 0, between I-0 and North Loop Drive, and realign FM 0, southwest of the North Loop Drive intersection. The improvements would create a continuous roadway from I-0 to the proposed Border Highway Extension, improving access and connectivity to Clint and San Elizario. Because the current FM 0 is disjointed at North Loop Drive, these alternatives scored better than Alternatives N and E in the engineering and public involvement categories. It should be noted, that at the time of this study, a portion of this corridor (FM 0 between I-0 and Alameda Avenue) received funding and therefore, has advanced to the schematic and environmental phase (NEPA) of project development. Clint/Fabens Connections Alternative P is a proposed new location, four-lane roadway beginning at I-0 and terminating at the proposed Border Highway Extension. This alternative would provide new access to I-0, North Loop Drive, Alameda Avenue, and Socorro Road and includes a grade-separated railroad crossing, while enhancing access to farming communities between San Elizario and Fabens. Alternative R Mod is recommended for further study as a possible Fabens by-pass or relief route from I-0 to the proposed Border Highway Extension at Middle Island Road. This alternative would provide enhanced access to I-0 and Alameda Avenue, and include a grade-separated railroad crossing. Non-Roadway Alternatives Alternative TR- is a proposed bus rapid transit route (BRT) along Alameda Avenue from Loop to Horizon Boulevard and also includes enhancing the existing El Paso County Rural Transit Route 0 from Loop to O.T. Smith Road in Tornillo. Alternative TR- is a proposed extension of the current El Paso County Rural Transit Route 0 from Stop beginning at Alameda Avenue at the Manuel F. Aguilera Highway (FM 0) and terminating at the Fabens International POE (future Tornillo-Guadalupe International POE). Alternative BP- is a proposed bicycle/pedestrian connection from the proposed border trails along Old Hueco Tanks Road and Horizon Boulevard to stops along El Paso County Rural Transit Routes 0, 0, and, terminating at North Loop Drive.

12 0 Alternative BP- is a proposed bicycle/pedestrian footbridge connection to Rio Bosque Park from a parking lot across the Riverside Canal from the park. The parking lot would be accessed from Socorro Road. Alternative BP- is a proposed bicycle/pedestrian connection from the proposed border trails along the Rio Grande to Socorro Road for improved access to the Socorro Entertainment Center. Alternative BP- is a proposed additional bicycle/pedestrian connection from a proposed bike trail in San Elizario to the current El Paso County Rural Transit Route Bus Stop along Socorro Road. Alternative BP- proposes to provide an additional bicycle/pedestrian connection from Fabens International POE (future Tornillo-Guadalupe International POE) to the current El Paso County Rural Transit Route 0 along the Manuel F. Aguilera Highway terminating at the O.T. Smith Road at Alameda Avenue. 0

13 Figure : 00 Recommended Alternatives

14 0 0.0 REFERENCES County of El Paso, CRRMA, TxDOT El Paso County Comprehensive Mobility Plan Presentation to the El Paso Commissioners Court on December, 0. El Paso MPO. Horizon 00 Metropolitan Transportation Plan October 0. Web. November 0. FHWA. Guidance on Using Corridor and Subarea Planning to Inform NEPA, April, 0. Partners for Mobility. 00 Comprehensive Mobility Plan. July 00. Available online at: Texas Department of Transportation El Paso District. Border Highway Extension Feasibility Study. February. Print. Texas Department of Transportation El Paso District. Border Highway Extension-East (El Paso District) Pass-Through Tolling Analysis. Prepared by HNTB Corporation. January 00.