I-10 Mobile River Bridge. & Bayway Widening

Transcription

1 I-10 Mobile River Bridge & Bayway Widening

2 Purpose and Need Increase the Capacity of I-10 to Meet Existing and Predicted Future Traffic Volumes Reduce congestion on I-10 and add capacity across the Mobile River Provide a More Direct Route for Vehicles Transporting Hazardous Materials Haz-mat vehicles are currently prohibited from using the Wallace and Bankhead tunnels and detour from I-10 through Mobile Central Business District via Water Street. Minimize Impacts to Mobile s Maritime Industry

3 Purpose and Need - Traffic George Wallace Tunnel , ,000 ORIGINAL DESIGN 73, DAILY AVERAGE 100, PEAK SEASON No. of Vehicles per Day 2030 DAILY AVERAGE Original Design 2013 Daily Average 2013 Peak Season 2030 Daily Average

4 What is NEPA? National Environmental Policy Act (1969) Agencies are obligated under NEPA to review the effects of their proposed actions prior to making a decision and to solicit input from the public.

5 Steps to Final EIS Completed Remaining Need for action identified and proposal developed Determined that significant environmental effects may or will occur Notice of Intent to Prepare Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) published Environmental impacts studied Over 30 stakeholder and 5 public involvement meetings conducted Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) prepared (DEIS) Completed 7/22/14 Public Comment Period Review and Address Public Comments Historic Resource Coordination Hazardous Materials Surveys Archaeological Surveys Mitigation Construction Methods All Other ALDOT Commitments in DEIS

6 Original Alternatives

7 Feasible Alternatives Four routes were carried forward in the Environmental Process All Build Alternatives Include Bayway Widening Alternative A Alternative B Alternative B ( B Prime) Alternative C The No Build Alternative is Also Considered

8 Alternative Impacts A B B (B Prime) C No Build Potential Visual Impacts Highest Moderate Moderate Low NA Direct Historic Impact None Union Hall None Maritime District NA Section 4(f) Properties None 1 None 1 NA Navigation Safety Concerns Yes No No No NA Economic Benefit ($M) $537 - $1,054 $549 - $1,066 $549 - $1,066 $560 - $1,077 NA Economic Loss ($M) $5.6 $6.1 $6.1 $200 NA Wetlands (acres) NA 2010 Public Involvement Comments in Support of an Alternative

9 Preferred Alternative B (B Prime)

10 Preferred Alternative B (B Prime)

11 The Proposed Bridge Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Draft EIS commits ALDOT to provide Bicycle/Pedestrian access across the Mobile River.

12 Construction PLANNING/PRE-CONSTRUCTION FHWA Approval of Final Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision Developing Plans Design Hearing Right-of-Way Acquisition CONSTRUCTION TIME Estimated at 6-8 years Dependent upon chosen design Additional time tied to funding FUNDING Source(s) TBD Estimated at $850 Million

13 The Proposed Bridge Cable Stayed Bridge Economical Flexible Design Minimum Vertical Clearance 215 FEET Over Navigable Channel

14 Bridge Height Comparison Golden Gate Bridge San Francisco, CA Mobile River Bridge Mobile, AL Cooper River Bridge Charleston, SC Sunshine Skyway Bridge Tampa, FL Crescent City Bridge New Orleans, LA Cochrane-Africatown Bridge Mobile, AL

15 Comment Period September 23 November 7 Submitting a Comment At the Public Hearing In Person at the Forum Comment Form Court Reporter

16 Comment Period September 23 November 7 Submitting a Comment Return the Comment Form By Mail Fax to (251) mobileriverbridge.com to: hossaina@dot.state.al.us

17 Contact US ALDOT Southwest Region Public Information Office M o b i l e R i v e r B r i d g e. c o