KOSCIUSZKO BRIDGE PROJECT - New York State Department …...KOSCIUSZKO BRIDGE PROJECT PIN X729.77.123 Project Limits Brooklyn-Queens Expressway (BQE)/Interstate 278 Between Morgan

DRAFT NEPA SCOPING MEMORANDUM: DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT

KOSCIUSZKO BRIDGE PROJECT PIN X729.77.123

Project Limits Brooklyn-Queens Expressway (BQE)/Interstate 278 Between Morgan Avenue and the Long Island Expressway (LIE) Interchange Kings and Queens Counties April 2002 New York State

Department of TransportationU.S. Department of TransportationFederal Highway Administration

Kosciuszko Bridge Project Draft NEPA Scoping Memorandum

1

I. Introduction The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), in cooperation with the New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT), will prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) that will study and document possible improvements to the Kosciuszko Bridge, focusing on a 1.1-mile segment of the Brooklyn-Queens Expressway (BQE) portion of I-278, from Morgan Avenue in Kings County to the Long Island Expressway (LIE) interchange in Queens County. In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA), a public "scoping" process will be conducted to identify the social, economic, and environmental issues to be evaluated in a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). This process ensures that the DEIS is a concise, accurate and comprehensive document that covers all concerns and issues for public and agency review. This Draft Scoping Memorandum is one of the first steps in the preparation of the DEIS for the Kosciuszko Bridge Project. It presents: (1) background information on the project, (2) the types of alternatives to be considered and the methods to be used to select alternatives for consideration in the DEIS, and (3) the projected procedures and methodologies to be followed in the preparation of the DEIS. Information on the project’s extensive public outreach program is also provided. This memorandum also outlines the Kosciuszko Bridge Project's goals and objectives, the alternatives selection process and expected environmental issues, each of which is discussed in later sections of this memorandum.

II. Overview of the Kosciuszko Bridge Project Project Location The Kosciuszko Bridge Project will study possible solutions for the rehabilitation or replacement of the Kosciuszko Bridge, focusing on a 1.1-mile segment of the Brooklyn-Queens Expressway (BQE), from Morgan Avenue in Kings County to the Long Island Expressway (LIE) interchange in Queens County (see Figure 1). North of the bridge, the BQE connects to the LIE, the Grand Central Parkway (GCP), which extends to LaGuardia International Airport, and across the Triborough Bridge leading into Manhattan and the Bronx. To the south, the BQE connects to the Williamsburg, Manhattan and Brooklyn bridges, as well as the Brooklyn-Battery Tunnel, leading into Manhattan, and continues south as the Gowanus Expressway and across the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge, leading to Staten Island. As one of New York City’s few north-south interstates, I-278 serves commuter and local traffic as well as a significant amount of truck traffic, which is prohibited from neighboring parkways. Need for Improvements The Kosciuszko Bridge Project will address three primary problems identified with this segment of the BQE:


2

• Traffic Congestion. The bridge, built in the 1930’s, cannot safely carry the present volume of traffic. The bridge’s narrow lanes (11 feet), steep grades (4 percent), lack of shoulders, and short merge/weave distances near ramps and interchanges do not meet current highway design standards. These design shortcomings, combined with the approximately 170,000 vehicles using the bridge each day, result in stop-and-go conditions during the morning and evening peak periods and severe congestion throughout much of the midday. The delay that results on the bridge encourages many drivers to seek alternate routes around the highway congestion by diverting onto already crowded arterials and neighborhood streets in adjacent communities. As the expected growth in highway volumes continues, these problems will increase as well.

• Traffic Safety. The same design problems that affect traffic flow, as noted above, also

affect traffic safety conditions on the bridge and adjacent highway segments. Those problems collectively result in an accident rate more than four times higher than found on comparable roads elsewhere in New York State.

KennedyAirport

LaGuardiaAirport

BROOKLYN

QUEENS

MAN

HATT

AN

Van Wyck Expw

yGow

anus

Exp

wyBr

ookl

yn

Queens

ExpwyLongIslandExpwy

Grand Central Pkwy

SIE

Holland Tunnel

Tri-Boro

Bridge

Verrazano

Bridge

Lincoln Tunnel

Belt

Pkwy

Belt

Pkwy

Kosciuszko Bridge

KennedyAirport

LaGuardiaAirport

BROOKLYN

QUEENS

MAN

HATT

AN

Van Wyck Expw

yGow

anus

Exp

wyBr

ookl

yn

Queens

ExpwyLongIslandExpwy

Grand Central Pkwy

SIE

Holland Tunnel

Tri-Boro

Bridge

Verrazano

Bridge

Lincoln Tunnel

Belt

Pkwy

Belt

Pkwy

Kosciuszko Bridge

FIGURE 1. KOSCIUSZKO BRIDGE LOCATION


3

• Structural Conditions. The structural condition of the bridge is deteriorating. The 60-year old bridge underwent a major rehabilitation in the 1960s, followed by a series of major roadway and structural repairs starting in the late 1980s. However, recent inspections have indicated that despite these aggressive maintenance efforts by NYSDOT, the structural deficiencies are increasing. The frequent maintenance and repair efforts and their associated lane closures, while necessary to maintain the bridge, exacerbate the congestion and traffic diversion problems mentioned above and do not provide a long-term solution to the structure’s underlying problems. Project Goals and Objectives During the EIS process, alternatives will be developed to address the traffic capacity, safety, and structural needs noted above. NYSDOT, working with local elected officials, community boards and groups, and other agencies, is establishing a series of goals and objectives that any proposed alternatives should seek to achieve. Any alternative being considered will then be evaluated against these goals and objectives, balancing the needs of the project with a broad range of social, economic, and environmental concerns. Prior to the start of the public scoping process, NYSDOT held several open houses in Brooklyn and Queens and meetings with community boards, along with discussions with other agencies and elected officials. From these efforts, NYSDOT gained an initial understanding of what issues were of most concern to community members, business groups, planning agencies and other stakeholders. Using this information, the following goals and objectives have been developed for the project: Transportation Goals:

• Improve traffic operations in the corridor, reducing delays and increasing efficiency and reliability.

• Reduce the frequency and severity of traffic accidents in the corridor by eliminating non-standard elements on the bridge and associated highway sections and ramps.

• Minimize diversion of highway auto and truck traffic to local streets, both during construction and long-term.

• Substantially conform to established project design criteria to ensure safe operation and a smooth flow of traffic.

• Be consistent with regional transportation plans in the I-278 corridor and any related highway, transit or freight plans potentially affected by decisions in the project corridor.

• Provide a cost-effective solution to problems in the corridor, including both required capital construction costs and recurring operations and maintenance expenses.

• Improve the opportunities for pedestrian/bicycle travel in the corridor.

• Increase effectiveness of mass transit modes in the corridor.


4

Social, Economic & Environmental Goals:

• Minimize the displacement of residences, commercial establishments, parks and other valued community assets during construction and in the final build condition.

• Minimize adverse impacts on the operation of commercial, residential and industrial

properties, historic sites, and educational, religious or recreational facilities, during construction and in the final build condition.

• Minimize adverse environmental impacts in the surrounding communities during

construction and in the final build condition.

• Be consistent with existing and committed transportation, community development, and land use plans and projects.

This list will be refined and expanded during the scoping process based on additional input from agencies, elected officials, and the general public. As part of the alternatives analysis process, screening criteria, reflecting these goals and objectives, will be developed and used to evaluate the project alternatives and select those to receive detailed consideration in the EIS. This alternatives analysis process is discussed further in Section IV.

III. Environmental Review and Scoping Process Based on its review of the potential impacts of the proposed Kosciuszko Bridge Project, FHWA and NYSDOT concluded that it was appropriate to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the project. Therefore, FHWA published a “Notice of Intent” (NOI) to prepare an EIS in the Federal Register, consistent with NEPA regulations, while under parallel SEQRA guidelines, NYSDOT published a similar “Positive Declaration” in the Environmental Notice Bulletin. The Draft and Final EIS documents, to be completed in compliance with NEPA and SEQRA regulations, will be used by the FHWA, NYSDOT and other involved agencies to consider environmental concerns when making decisions. These documents will also serve as a public disclosure of the project's environmental effects. Scoping Process The scoping process is the earliest opportunity for the public to be involved in the preparation of the DEIS. It is a public process designed to affirm the overall goals and objectives of the DEIS effort and to determine the scope of issues to be considered and addressed in that document. The purpose of scoping is to identify all concerns, issues and ideas so that they can be appropriately studied during the DEIS analysis. Scoping is also an opportunity for the public to review, and recommend for consideration, alternatives to be addressed in the DEIS. Based on reviews by other involved agencies, local agencies and officials and the general public, this scoping memorandum will be revised as required and FHWA and NYSDOT will finalize the scope of the DEIS and the full range of alternatives to be considered in the alternatives analysis process.


5

Scoping Activities The DEIS scoping process normally involves:

• Scoping discussions with other agencies, particularly those with a direct or indirect involvement in the project area; and

• Public scoping meetings, which are held to provide the public with information about the project, and to assist in formulating the scope of the environmental studies in the DEIS. Comments on the project and the scope of the DEIS are then received from the public.

The schedule for the public scoping meetings is as follows:

Date: May 14, 2002 May 21, 2002

Time: 3:00 pm – 9:00 pm 3:00 pm – 9:00 pm Location: Martin Luther High School St. Cecilia’s Roman Catholic Church 60-02 Maspeth Avenue 84 Herbert Street Maspeth, NY 11378 Brooklyn, NY 11222

At these meetings, attendees may review displays describing the project with project staff available to respond to questions. At 4:00 pm and 7:00 pm, NYSDOT will make a brief presentation describing the project and its goals. Following each presentation, interested persons can make oral statements concerning the project, possible alternatives, and the scope of the DEIS. All statements will be recorded by a meeting stenographer for inclusion in the meeting record. Written statements may also be submitted at the meeting or sent to the address below. Any comments received within 30 days of the date of the last scoping meeting will be made part of the record. Prior to or after the public scoping meetings, comments can be submitted to NYSDOT by mail, fax, or e-mail as follows: By Mail: Mr. Joseph Brown, P.E., Project Director NYS Department of Transportation – Region 11 Hunters Point Plaza 47-40 21st Street Long Island City, NY 11101 By Fax: (718) 482-6319 By E-mail: [email protected]


6

IV. Proposed Scope of DEIS During the preparation of the DEIS, there will be extensive public outreach activities to insure continuous input from community and business interest groups, elected officials, other interested agencies, and the general public. In addition to larger public meetings and workshops and smaller meetings with local community groups, NYSDOT is developing a mailing list of all interested groups, organizations, agencies and individuals who have expressed an interest in the project, to ensure that they receive newsletters and other information about the project's progress on a timely basis. A Stakeholder Advisory Committee will be formed to help advise NYSDOT on the development, selection and evaluation of project alternatives, up to the selection of the project's preferred alternative. This committee will consist of representatives from NYSDOT, FHWA, other involved agencies, local elected officials, civic/environmental organizations, and user groups and associations that could be affected by the project. After the DEIS is released for public review, a public hearing will be held to obtain comments on that document. The Final EIS will include responses to those comments, which will also help guide the eventual selection of the project's preferred alternative. Based on initial reviews of the proposed project, discussions with local agencies and elected officials, and preliminary environmental assessments of potential project impacts, a draft scope of the DEIS has been prepared. The following is a listing of the projected scope for each section of the DEIS.

Chapter I. Introduction This section presents various legal and regulatory aspects of the project and its EIS process, and information about the public availability of the DEIS. Chapter II. Project Identification, Evolution, Conditions and Needs, And Objectives This section defines the location and type of the proposed project, and the project's evolution prior to the decision to prepare a DEIS. This includes the type and severity of the identified problems, previous studies completed for the project site and past public outreach and community coordination efforts. This section includes a detailed description of existing and expected future “No-Action” transportation conditions within the project area. The results of the scoping process are summarized, along with a full statement of the purpose of and need for the proposed project. The associated project goals and objectives, which provide the foundation against which each alternative will be compared, are then discussed. To assess the future “No-Action” transportation conditions, the project will utilize portions of the regional travel demand model, maintained by the New York Metropolitan Transportation Council (NYMTC). The model simulates existing travel patterns for the region, based on U.S. Census information and other transportation data, and is used to predict future travel patterns and trends based on changes in population, employment, land use, and the transportation system. The model will be used to predict future travel conditions, including level of service, travel time, and delay, for the traffic study area, shown in Figure 2. This area includes major connections


7

from the Kosciuszko Bridge (LIE, Gowanus Expressway, and Williamsburg Bridge) and primary diversion routes (Grand Street and Greenpoint Avenue). Chapter III. Project Alternatives The DEIS will include a review of proposed alternatives that could potentially meet the project's goals and objectives, and the process used to select the alternatives analyzed in detail in the DEIS. This chapter will list and discuss the design criteria to be used to develop the project alternatives, including NYSDOT design standards and critical design elements for the project such as design speed, lane widths, and sight distances. A “long list” of alternatives will initially be developed based on comments and suggestions from the public and agency scoping process and NYSDOT’s own internal studies. Working closely with the Stakeholder Advisory Committee and the general public, this process will insure that all reasonable and feasible alternatives are considered. Although specific alternatives have yet to be determined, they are expected to fall into one of five general categories:

• No Build Alternative. Under NEPA and SEQRA regulations, the DEIS is required to include a "No Build" or "No Action" alternative. The No Build Alternative essentially means “Do Nothing” except continue the current maintenance and repair efforts,

.-,278

.-,4 95

TrafficStudy Area

ProjectLimits

.-,4 95

.-,278

McCarrenPark

Mt. ZionCemetary

NewCalvary

Cemetary

CalvaryCemetary

LIRR

Blvd.

McG

ui nnes

Avenue

Grand

Avenue

Greenpoint

Express

way

Bro

okly

n

Queens

Expressway

Island

Long

WilliamsburgBridge

Newtown Creek

Eas

t

Riv

er

KosciuszkoBridge

Morgan Avenue

FIGURE 2. KOSCIUSZKO BRIDGE TRAFFIC STUDY AREA


8

addressing the most serious areas of deterioration, while maintaining the bridge in a state of good repair.

• Transportation Systems Management (TSM). The TSM Alternative will assess low-cost, operationally oriented improvements to meet the transportation needs of the corridor.

• Rehabilitate the Bridge. Alternatives in this category would generally involve major rehabilitation of the existing bridge. This may be done in phases and could incorporate the use of a temporary bridge to accommodate traffic during construction. Upon completion of this type of alternative, the bridge and associated roadways would very closely resemble the structures that exist today, with no increase in capacity and minimal improvements in accident reduction potential.

• Rehabilitation with additional capacity. Under this category of alternatives, the bridge would be rehabilitated similar to above, but when completed the bridge and associated roadways would include additional capacity and safety improvements.

• Bridge Replacement. The alternatives analysis process will consider a wide range of concepts for the construction of a replacement for the existing bridge. A replacement facility could be located parallel to the existing structure or be built on the same alignment. Other design options considered shall consist of additional capacity and safety improvements, including the reduction of the bridge’s vertical clearance over Newtown Creek.

The alternatives analysis process will involve (a) an initial "Level 1" or "fatal flaw" screening phase, to eliminate those alternatives that clearly could not meet the project's goals and objectives, and (b) a "Level 2" phase that will analyze the remaining alternatives more closely. At the conclusion of the Level 2 phase, those “feasible alternatives” considered to most likely meet the project's goals will be recommended for detailed consideration in the DEIS. The screening criteria against which alternatives will be compared during both screening phases will be based on the project's goals and objectives as discussed earlier in this scoping memorandum. NYSDOT will extensively involve the Stakeholder Advisory Committee and other interested agencies and community groups throughout this alternatives selection process. Each of the feasible alternatives will be described in sufficient detail for the public to understand their nature and extent and the potential for impacts from their implementation. Also included in this section is a detailed discussion of design year conditions associated with each alternative. This will include projected design year traffic volumes and levels of service, safety and traffic control considerations, the effects of the project on hydraulics, drainage and utilities, maintenance and protection of traffic measures necessary, as well as any right-of-way impacts associated with the alternative. Finally this section will include a comparison of estimated construction costs and projected schedule of implementation for each alternative.


9

Chapter IV. Social, Economic, and Environmental Consequences This chapter analyzes the social, economic and environmental consequences of each project alternative. The DEIS will evaluate each of the feasible project alternatives, including the no-build alternative, for a wide range of potential impacts. These categories, discussed in the following sections, include the natural and built environments, environmental, socioeconomic, and other quality of life issues. In each section, the discussion will include assessment of existing conditions, analysis of construction period and long-term impacts, and assessment of measures to mitigate identified impacts. Land Use and Zoning Existing and projected design year land uses will be determined with input from the Department of City Planning, the Brooklyn Borough President’s Office, the Queens Borough President’s Office and other agencies. This section will include an assessment of existing zoning and land use, as well as a discussion of recent development trends in the project area. It will also identify any projects that are presently under construction or in various stages of planning or review by local officials. Major employers and generators of truck trips will be identified and located. This information will be reviewed and summarized for use in estimation of traffic and goods movement impacts and trip generation, and will be available in GIS for alternatives analysis and related environmental and engineering studies. Two study areas will be delineated to aid in assessing the impacts of the project alternatives on land use. The primary land use study area will include the areas immediately surrounding the project limits. This area will include those properties subject to direct impacts by the project alternatives. The secondary land use study area will be much broader in geographic scope and will include adjacent communities that could be affected by indirect changes in land use, such as changes in traffic or development patterns that may result from the implementation of each alternative. The boundaries of these study areas will be determined once the nature and extent of the project alternatives has been determined. Both the direct and indirect land use changes anticipated to occur will be evaluated for their consistency with existing comprehensive plans. Neighborhood Character and Socioeconomic Conditions The DEIS will include a detailed assessment of the existing socio-economic conditions in the project area. An overview of recent employment and economic development patterns in the area will be established, based on available data. Economic activity on a more localized basis will be established through discussions with the Department of City Planning. This section will also assess whether any of the project alternatives would have a disproportionately high and adverse effect on minority or low-income populations, in accordance with Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low Income Populations. The projected impacts of construction activities on the surrounding community, particularly those associated with traffic diversion onto local streets, shall be of central importance to communities and their elected officials. The impacts of diverted traffic will be estimated using the regional travel demand model as discussed above. Potential impacts on local businesses


10

dependent on trucks for goods movement and the diversion of trucks onto local streets will also be addressed. The long-term implications of an improved highway in this corridor to these communities will also be important. Noise The DEIS will include analyses of potential changes in ambient sound levels during construction and upon completion of the project. Existing and projected noise levels will be analyzed for sensitive receptors (residences, parks, etc.). Measures to potentially mitigate sound levels at various locations will be identified and assessed. Noise impacts due to project construction, both from diverted traffic and from construction equipment and activities will also be assessed. Air Quality The DEIS will assess the impacts of the project alternatives on air quality in the project area. Using the MOBILE 5B mobile source emissions model and the CAL3QHC dispersion model, the impact of each alternative on microscale carbon monoxide (CO) levels will be assessed. These estimates will be compared to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) as established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The DEIS must also show that the proposed action would be consistent with the New York State Implementation Plan (SIP) to attain federally mandated air quality standards. General Ecology and Endangered Species A field investigation will be conducted to determine existing terrestrial and aquatic ecological characteristics in the existing and proposed right-of-way. The nature, extent, and significance of potential impacts (including impacts during construction) of each project alternative on fish, wildlife, and habitat will be evaluated, including general determinations of the amount and type of vegetation to be disturbed, special habitats that might be damaged, and possible interruption of fish and wildlife movements. Appropriate avoidance, minimization of harm, and mitigation measures to compensate for project impacts will also be determined. Surface Water Bodies and Wetlands For each project alternative, the DEIS will evaluate the effects of construction activities, project changes to surface water bodies and wetlands, and evaluate appropriate avoidance and mitigation measures. Sources of surface water pollution could include dredge/fill activities, sediment from erosion, and surface water drainage. Ground Water Quality For each alternative, the DEIS will evaluate the potential impact on the groundwater regime of the project area. This will include the effects of construction impacts, project impacts, and the development of appropriate avoidance and mitigation measures. Navigable Waters The DEIS will assess potential impacts to navigable waters as determined by the US Army Corps of Engineers and the US Coast Guard. For each project alternative, the DEIS will evaluate the effects of construction activities, project changes to navigable waterways, and evaluate appropriate avoidance and mitigation measures. The DEIS will also provide an analysis of the project’s potential impacts on Newtown Creek freight movement and on associated economic


11

activity, particularly in connection with any reduction in the clearance height of structures over the creek. Coastal Zone Management Each alternative will be evaluated on its consistency with or advancement of 44 coastal policies of the New York Department of State (DOS) and the 12 coastal policies of the New York City Waterfront Revitalization Program. If required, a Rivers and Harbors Act approval will be obtained. Floodplain Evaluation The DEIS will discuss the project's proximity to floodplains and the impacts that would result from each alternative. The analysis will be completed in accordance with NYSDOT's Environmental Procedures Manual. Cultural, Historic, and Recreational Resources This section will evaluate the impacts of each of the alternatives on historic, archaeological, and public parkland sites. This will include a review of all known historic and archaeological resources in the project area and an assessment of the extent to which these resources could be potentially impacted by any of the proposed alternatives, both during construction or after completion. Although no direct impacts to historic sites are anticipated, indirect impacts resulting from traffic increases and changes of access will be studied. All mapped parklands in the vicinity of any of the alternatives will be identified, as well as privately owned recreational facilities used by the local community. The size, condition, facilities, and usage levels will be established through field observations and from discussions with park agency staff members. The DEIS will include Section 4(f) and Section 106 evaluations, as needed, of potential impacts on parkland areas or historic properties, as per federal regulations (Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act [49 U.S.C. § 303] and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act [36 CFR Part 800]). The extent of these studies will depend on the nature of extent of the impacts (if any) of the project alternatives on these resources. Such studies would also include an assessment of possible “avoidance alternatives” (possible variations on the proposed projects that could reduce or avoid the projected impacts on parkland or historic resources) as well as possible mitigation measures. Hazardous Waste/Contaminated Materials Relying on field reviews, government databases, and appropriate mapping, the DEIS will document the location of any potential sites of concern. These can include aboveground or underground storage tanks, sites with historical use/storage of hazardous materials, sites of hazardous materials spills, or other physical indicators of possible contamination. Sites of potential concern will be determined based on methodology presented in the Environmental Procedures Manual. Asbestos Assessment Available utility plans and records will be reviewed to assess the potential presence of asbestos containing materials. Any in-depth investigations that are deemed necessary will take place during the detailed design phase, following the issuance of the Record of Decision (ROD).


12

Energy Analysis The DEIS will address both the direct and indirect energy requirements of each project alternative and will include mitigation measures to conserve energy. Direct energy impacts refer to the impacts of operating the facility after it is constructed and include the energy consumed by vehicles using the facility. Indirect energy impacts include the energy required to construct and maintain the facility, substantial changes in energy consumption likely to result from project-induced land use changes or mode shifts, and any substantial changes in energy use associated with vehicle operation, manufacturing, or maintenance due to increased or decreased automobile use. Visual Impact Assessment A Visual Impact Assessment (VIA) will be included in the DEIS documenting significant visual issues and the potential changes that the proposed project alternatives would have on those conditions. This assessment will identify viewer groups within the project area and determine the exposure and sensitivity of each group to the project alternatives. The VIA will include recommendations of measures to avoid, minimize, or mitigate negative visual impacts and to enhance positive impacts. Conceptual design studies for aesthetic treatments of proposed structures and urban design alternatives will be included in the VIA. Indirect/Secondary and Cumulative Impacts This section will describe the likelihood that each alternative may induce secondary development and the projected positive and negative effects of this growth. In addition this section will discuss the cumulative effects of each alternative, considering the direct effects, the secondary development effects, as well as the combined impact of the alternative and other reasonably anticipated projects in the area. The assessment of cumulative impacts will consider both the build and no-build conditions and will include projects not necessarily being funded or approved by NYSDOT. Chapter IV will also include sections on the relationship between local short-term uses of the environment, maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity, and the irreversible and irretrievable commitment of resources. These sections are standard components of any DEIS for this type of project, and they will be prepared in a manner consistent with applicable state and federal guidelines. Chapter V. Evaluation and Comparison of Alternatives This section serves as a summary of the decision-making process and summarizes the advantages and disadvantages of each feasible alternative. It will be as brief and factual as possible and will include:

• How well each alternative solution does or does not meet the stated project objectives.

• The current cost estimate. • An economic evaluation of quantitative benefits. • A comparison of other benefits.


13

• The social, economic and environmental impacts anticipated for each alternative solution.

Where possible, these evaluations will be quantified and will likely be presented in a matrix format so as to facilitate comparison of the alternatives. Chapter VI. Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation It is national policy that special effort should be made to preserve the natural beauty of the countryside and public park and recreation lands, wildlife and waterfowl refuges, and historic sites. In the US Department of Transportation Act of 1966, a special provision was included to provide protection to these resources. It is known as Section 4(f), and it stipulates that the FHWA will not approve any program or project which requires the use of any publicly owned public park, recreation area, or wildlife or waterfowl refuge, or any land from an historic site of national, state, or local significance unless there is no feasible and prudent alternative to the use, and all possible planning to minimize harm resulting from such use is included. This section will identify the extent to which any of the project alternatives would affect parks or other resources covered under Section 4(f). For each impacted resource, detailed information about the size, location, and type of use will be provided, along with the extent to which it is impacted by project alternatives. For each impacted 4(f) property the DEIS will discuss avoidance alternatives and if necessary impact minimization measures. Chapter VII. Project Coordination This section of the DEIS will contain copies of pertinent correspondence with each cooperating agency, other agencies and the public. The chapter will summarize: 1) the early coordination process, including scoping meetings; 2) meetings with community groups and individuals in the Scoping Stage and Design Stage; and 3) key issues and pertinent information received from the public and government agencies through the project. Chapter VIII. List of Preparers This section will contain lists of Federal, State and local agency personnel, including consultants, who were primarily responsible for preparing the DEIS or performing environmental studies, and a brief summary of their qualifications, including education background and experience. Chapter IX. List of Agencies, Organizations, and Persons to Whom Copies of this Statement are Sent This section will contain lists of all local, state and federal agencies and persons to whom copies of the DEIS were sent. Finally, the DEIS will include an Executive Summary, a list relevant references used in development of the DEIS, a subject index, and a series of technical appendices.


14

V. Proposed Schedule for EIS Process The DEIS will be prepared consistent with all applicable Federal and State requirements and guidelines. Upon review and acceptance of the DEIS by NYSDOT and FHWA, the document is published and made available for public review. A number of public hearings will be held on the DEIS. At those hearings, members of the public as well as interested groups and agencies will submit oral and written comments on the DEIS. Based on the results of the DEIS and on the comments received on that document, NYSDOT will select a preferred alternative for the project. A Final EIS will then be prepared, including any changes or additions required in the EIS based on public comments, written responses to each comment, and justification for selection of the preferred alternative. After the FEIS is accepted by NYSDOT and FHWA, it is published for public review. Based on the content of the FEIS, NYSDOT and FHWA will prepare required environmental "findings" (under SEQRA) and a Record of Decision (ROD) (under NEPA). The ROD will indicate the conclusions of the EIS process, the grounds on which a particular alternative is to be selected, proposed funding methods and mitigation commitments under the preferred alternative. Under the present project schedule, publication of the DEIS is projected for December 2004, with the Final EIS published September 2005 and the ROD prepared in November 2005.

Documents

KOSCIUSZKO BRIDGE PROJECT - New York State Department …...KOSCIUSZKO BRIDGE PROJECT PIN X729.77.123 Project Limits Brooklyn-Queens Expressway (BQE)/Interstate 278 Between Morgan