I-15 South, MP 0 to MP 16 Environmental Assessment. Public Hearing. August 7, :00 PM to 7:00 PM

Similar documents
APPENDIX B. Excerpts from the October 2002 Conceptual Alternatives Report

FINDINGS OF FACT and CONCLUSIONS

Appendix C - Highway 400 Widening and Interchange Evaluation Summary Tables

St. Francis Drive through the City of Santa Fe Corridor Study

River Valley. Intermodal Facilities. February Prepared by: Federal Highway Administration Draft Environmental Impact Statement

5. Other Environmental Consequences

Northwest State Route 138 Corridor Improvement Project

I-4 Beyond the Ultimate Project Development & Environment (PD&E) Reevaluation Study FROM WEST OF SR 528 (BEACHLINE EXPRESSWAY)

WELCOME IL 47. Community Advisory Group Meeting #5 Waubonsee Community College Wednesday, May 31, 2017

Puget Sound Gateway Program Phase 1 of the SR 509 Completion Project

NORTHWEST CORRIDOR PROJECT. NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT 2015 Addendum Phase IV

REEVALUATION FORM. Page 1. Code:

Free Bridge Congestion Relief Project: Using FHWA s Eco-Logical Process

I-95 Corridor Study Phase II Highway Element

Section 7 Environmental Constraints

Alternatives Evaluation Methodology

Oklahoma Department of Transportation Environmental Programs Division Office Fax

POND SITING REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES LIST OF FIGURES EXECUTIVE SUMMARY SECTION 1.0 INTRODUCTION SECTION 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

FINDINGS OF FACT And CONCLUSIONS

THIS IS NOT A PAID ADVERTISEMENT. Public Notice. Public Notice No. CENAP-OP-R October 26, 2018

Welcome. Public Meeting. August 2, :00 to 7:00 p.m. Presentation 6:00 to 6:30 p.m.

County Road 61 (Shady Oak Road): CR 3 (Excelsior Boulevard) WELCOME. November 1, 2012

State Route 8 Bridge Replacement Project

Highway Construction Program

I 75 PD&E STUDIES TABLE OF CONTENTS DTTM, TECHNICAL REPORT No. 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter 9 Wetlands Park Study Team

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION RECORD OF DECISION FOR THE LYNNWOOD LINK EXTENSION

LOCATION HYDRAULIC REPORT

I-17 and Happy Valley Road Diverging Diamond Interchange (DDI)

Downtown Estes Loop Project Frequently Asked Questions

Summary. Preliminary Alternative Development and Screening. DEIS July 23, 2018

I-15/US 93 Garnet Interchange & US 93 Improvements WELCOME. Public Information Meeting October 6, 2016

TRANSPORTATION RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER ELEMENTS OF THE PLAN AND COUNTY REGULATIONS VISION FOR TRANSPORTATION PLANNING ROAD NETWORK SECTION 7

Charlottesville Albemarle MPO:

Suncoast Parkway 2/SR Toll 589 FPID: & 3, -4

9.0 I-26 & I-526 Interchange Improvements

PUBLIC HEARING US 69 WIDENING. Phase 1 (IH-10 to LNVA Canal) Phase 2 (LNVA Canal to Tram Road) Jefferson County, Texas

POLICY FOR CONSTRUCTION OF NOISE BARRIERS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS

I-95/US 322 Interchange Improvement Project. Website Update

Project Information. Pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S. Code 1344), notice is hereby given that

State Route 189, International Border to Grand Avenue

Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) POLICY

SR 15 SECTION 088 CSVT SOUTHERN SECTION PUBLIC MEETING MAY 25, 2017

A three-stage process was implemented in order to develop and evaluate the project concepts and provide recommendations for the project.

Chester Bridge Environmental Assessment (EA) CAG Meeting #2. October 12, 2017

October 19, 2017 Community Engagement Panel Meeting #4 Overview of Environmental Effects

DRAFT. SR-60 7 th Avenue Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE) I-605 Corridor Improvement Project (CIP) I-605/SR-60 EA# 3101U0

DDI s Can Move More Than Cars. Alex Ariniello. Presentation for the ITE Western District Annual Meeting. July, 2016 in Albuquerque, New Mexico

I-10 CONNECT. Public Meeting #1

HIGHWAY 412 EXECUTIVEXECUTIVE SUMMARYUMMARY FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT. Benton and Washington Counties. October 2005

INTERCHANGE MODIFICATION REPORT

PennDOTDistrict 8 I-83 East Shore Section 1 Improvements Project. Final Design Noise Analysis & Mitigation Recommendations

PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING TUESDAY MARCH 9, 2010

Florida Department of Transportation District Four KICK-OFF MEETING. I-95 at Southern Boulevard (SR 80) Project Development and Environment Study

Draft Environmental Impact Report

TREASURE COAST REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL M E M O R A N D U M. To: Council Members AGENDA ITEM 4G. Intergovernmental Coordination and Review Log

US 14 EIS (New Ulm to N. Mankato) Interchange and Intersection Type Comparison

SR 9/I-95 Interchange at 45th Street PD&E Study Palm Beach County, Florida FPID No.: FAP No.: ETDM No.

SR 50 PD&E Study

APPENDIX A. NEPA Assessment Checklist

TRANSPORTATION PROJECT REPORT DRAFT CONCEPTUAL ACCESS MODIFICATION PROPOSAL OCTOBER 2002

LONG ISLAND RAIL ROAD EXPANSION PROJECT FROM FLORAL PARK TO HICKSVILLE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT

State Road (S.R.) 12 (Florida Arts Trail PD&E)

The Policies section will also provide guidance and short range policies in order to accomplish the goals and objectives.

SUMMARY S.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION S.2 PURPOSE AND NEED

Public Notice October 21, 2016 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Charleston District

NEPA and Design Public Hearings

Table of Contents. ES Executive Summary. 1.0 Introduction to the Project. 2.0 Alternatives Screened and Evaluated VOLUME 1. Page

Executive Summary. ES.1 Project Overview

Northern Branch Corridor CLC Meeting. June 30, 2008

Environme ntal Assessment Addendum

5/11/2016 SR 15 SECTION 088 CSVT SOUTHERN SECTION SR 15 SECTION 088 CSVT SOUTHERN SECTION AGENDA

PARLEY S INTERCHANGE. I-80 /I-215 Eastside WELCOME. Parley s Interchange EIS. Public Scoping Meeting. March 6, :00pm 7:00pm

Airport Road from 1 km North of Mayfield Road to 0.6 km North of King Street Public Information Centre #1

Public Notice ISSUED: 20-JAN-2016 EXPIRES: 19-FEB-2016

Public Notice ISSUED: July 13, 2018 EXPIRES: August 13, 2018

SECONDARY WETLAND IMPACTS ANALYSIS

On behalf of the Carolina Crossroads project team we thank you for taking the time to attend this meeting.

Environmental Impact Statement for the Green Line to the Airport Project. ACTION: Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).

Clinton Keith Road Extension Project

Appendix M. Criteria, Measures and Indicators for Effects Assessment

Torbram Road Improvements From Queen Street East to Bovaird Drive

Community Advisory Committee Meeting No. 2. June 22, 2006

TABLE OF CONTENTS 3.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

Utah s Most Critical Surface Transportation Projects to Support Economic Growth and Quality of Life. March Washington, DC

Chapter 4: Transportation and Circulation

HIGHWAY 71 CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT STUDY BELLA VISTA BYPASS MISSOURI STATE LINE BENTON COUNTY

acquiring, managing, and disposing of federal lands and facilities;

D R A F T. SECTION 4(f) EVALUATION. INTERSTATE 73 From I-95 to the Myrtle Beach Region

Notice of Preparation for the Copeland Creek Stormwater Detention Basin (CIP Project )

Final Air Quality Report

4.9 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION

APPENDIX H: SFEIS FLOODPLAIN IMPACT ANALYSIS SECTION

PUBLIC NOTICE. Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344) Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C.

Article 16 Traffic Impact Analysis

JULY Introduction/Proposed Action

THE PROJECT. Executive Summary. City of Industry. City of Diamond Bar. 57/60 Confluence.

An Overview and Comparison of the Tennessee Department of Transportation s Environmental Evaluation Process

INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR PROBABLE CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION (SECTION (d))

MOSLEY STREET URBANIZATION TH

Transcription:

I-15 South, MP 0 to MP 16 Environmental Assessment Public Hearing August 7, 2012 5:00 PM to 7:00 PM 1

PROJECT OVERVIEW The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) have completed an Environmental Assessment (EA) to analyze the need for transportation improvements to I-15 between mileposts 0 and 16 in Washington County, UtahThe. EA identifies current and future transportation needs within the project area and evaluates alternatives and their associated impacts to the natural and built environment. 2

Project Purpose The purpose of the project is to address the projected 2040 travel demand on the I-15 corridor between MP 0 and MP 16. PURPOSE AND NEED Project Need The project is needed because the I-15 corridor between MP 0 and MP 16 lacks the capacity to accommodate the 2040 future travel demand. The projected travel demand will increase congestion on I-15 between MP 0 and MP 16. The increasing congestion will be a result of: Population growth Traffic volume growth High volumes of freight traffic 3

Level-of-Service Level-of-Service (LOS) characterizes the traffic operations of a roadway in terms of: speed average travel delay travel times freedom to maneuver driver comfort/convenience LOS ranges from A to F (see table). For planning purposes, facilities with current or projected 2040 LOS D or better are acceptable for urbanized areas. Between the Southern Parkway and SR-9, I-15 will operate at an unacceptable LOS in 2040. EXISTING AND PROJECTED TRAFFIC Existing Traffic Projected 2040 No-action Traffic 4

Dixie Metropolitan Planning Organization CONSISTENCY WITH LOCAL PLANS I-15 is listed for widening from MP 0 to MP 16 in the Dixie Metropolitan Planning Organization s 2011 2040 Regional Transportation Plan City of St. George The St. George Master Traffic and Transportation Study (2008) recognizes the need for capacity improvements to I-15 in the study area 5

The Preferred Alternative would include: PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE Constructing an additional general purpose lane on I-15 in both the northbound and southbound directions between Southern Parkway and SR-9 Constructing auxiliary lanes between the Port-of-Entry and Southern Parkway, Brigham Road and Dixie i Drive, and Washington Parkway and SR-9 Improving and/or re-configuring interchanges at: Brigham Road St. George Boulevard Green Springs Drive SR-9 6

Environmental Issue Pedestrian and Bicyclist Issues Noise Cultural l Resources SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION Preferred Alternative Would construct new pedestrian facilities that would cross I- 15 at Brigham Road and St. George Boulevard Noise levels would increase over existing noise levels (noise levels l would range from 58 dba to 81 dba, with an average noise level of about 66 dba) Would have an overall adverse effect on historic properties Wtl Wetlands No impacts to wetlands, minor impacts to four drainages Water Quality Floodplains Would increase impervious surface area by 41% over existing I-15 Detention basins and Best Management Practices would be used to treat t increases in stormwater t runoff, resulting in a minimal effect to water quality Impacts to floodplains would not cause a 1 foot increase in the 100-year flood elevation Mitigation No mitigation required 8 noise walls meet criteria outlined in UDOT s Noise Policy and are recommended, pending balloting efforts (see map) A Programmatic Agreement (PA) will be developed to resolve potential adverse effects The PA will require development of a written data recovery plan and research design Section 404 Permit will be obtained from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Detention ponds will be provided for water quality treatment where necessary to detain runoff to reduce peak flow rate Will comply with applicable local, state, and federal regulations 7

Environmental Issue Threatened & Endangered Species Wildlife SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION Preferred Alternative Likely to adversely affect the desert tortoise and desert tortoise Critical Habitat Likely to adversely affect the dwarf bear-poppy Likely to adversely affect the holmgren milk-vetch and holmgren milk- vetch Critical Habitat. Likely to adversely affect the Virgin River chub and Virgin River chub Critical Habitat Likely to adversely affect the woundfin and woundfin Critical Habitat Not likely l to adversely affect the southwestern t willow flycatcher and would not affect southwestern willow flycatcher Critical Habitat Not likely to adversely affect the yellow-billed cuckoo and would not affect yellow-billed cuckoo Critical Habitat Would negatively affect the Virgin spinedace and the flannelmouth sucker Mitigation Requirements outlined in the Biological Opinion from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service will be implemented to reduce the effect to Threatened ed & Endangered ed Species Same requirements outlined in the Biological Opinion from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service will be implemented 8

NOISE WALLS The UDOT Noise Abatement Policy states that noise walls will only be considered for properties that are impacted by noise. Typical Noise Levels in A-weighted decibels (dba) How Does UDOT Define a Noise Impact? 66 dba or more for residences, schools, churches 71 dba or more for businesses OR 10 dba or more above the existing noise level 9

NOISE WALLS How does UDOT determine if a noise wall will be constructed? The UDOT Noise Abatement Policy states that the following criteria must be met: Noise walls need to reduce noise levels by at least 8 dba to properties adjacent to the noise wall The cost of noise walls must be reasonable Property owners and residences need to be in favor of noise walls (balloting would be conducted during the design phase, should a build alternative be selected) Where is the I-15 South Environmental Assessment recommending noise walls? See map for potential noise wall locations (pending balloting efforts) 10

WHAT COULD THE NOISE WALLS LOOK LIKE? The UDOT Standard Drawings identify five panel surface texture options for noise walls: Ashlar Stone Exposed Aggregate Fractured Fin River Rock Stacked Stone 11

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PROCESS & SCHEDULE 12

Old Slides 13

BRIGHAM ROAD INTERCHANGE OPTIONS The Single Point Interchange (SPI) Option was selected for the following reasons: Provides for better interchange driver expectancy Would eliminate the roundabouts and alleviate public concerns Would better accommodate heavy truck movements 14

ST. GEORGE BOULEVARD INTERCHANGE OPTIONS The Diverging Diamond Interchange (DDI) Option was selected for the following reasons: Would use the existing bridge structure Provides for better traffic operations and performance than the Tight Diamond Option, and is comparable to the Single Point Option 15

SR-9 INTERCHANGE OPTIONS The Trumpet Option was selected for the following reasons: Would use existing infrastructure by closely matching the existing design layout/footprint Provides for better traffic operations and performance Provides for better safety since all conflicts are removed 16

KEY ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Archaeology Floodplains l Prehistoric (Lithic Scatters, Rock Shelter, Camp Sites, Habitation, Rock Art) Historic (Settlement, Farming and Ranching, Mining, Transportation) Noise Noise walls were evaluated for a number of residential and commercial areas Virgin and Santa Clara Rivers Stream/Wash crossings Threatened & Endangered Species Bird (Southwest Willow Flycatcher, Western Yellowbilled Cuckoo) Fish (Virgin River Chub, Woundfin Minnow) Plant (Dwarf Bear Poppy, Holmgren Milk-vetch) Reptile (Desert Tortoise) 17