I-93 Improvements: Salem to Manchester Draft Supplemental - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Public Hearing – September 22, 2009 Derry Municipal Center – 7:00 pm I-93 Improvements: Salem to Manchester Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement and Reevaluation/Section 4(f) Evaluation

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

Public Hearing Agenda Public Hearing Agenda

• Project Description and Background
• FHWA Role
• DSEIS Process and Conclusions
• Project Status Update
• Opportunity for Public Comment

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

Project Description Project Description and Background and Background

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

Project Description Project Description

• Reconstruction and widening
• f I-93 from MA State line in

Salem to I-293 in Manchester, a distance of 19.8 miles.

• Widening from three-lanes in

each direction to four-lanes in each direction between State line and Exit 1.

• Widening from two-lanes in

direction to four-lanes in each direction between Exit 1 and I-293.

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

Project Description Project Description

• Reconstruction of five existing

interchanges and cross roads, including the replacement of deficient bridges.

• Public transportation and transportation

demand management enhancements, including new park-and-ride lots at Exits 2, 3 and 5; improvements to the existing park-and-ride lot at Exit 4; and expanded commuter bus service.

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

Project Environmental Project Environmental Commitments Commitments

• Protection of approximately 1,000 acres of

land as part of compensatory wetland and floodplains mitigation.

• Funding of $3 million for the NHDES

Drinking Water Supply Land Grant Program to be used to purchase property rights to aid in the protection of water quality along the corridor.

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

Project Environmental Project Environmental Commitments Commitments

• Funding of $3.5 million for a Community

Technical Assistance Program to help I-93 corridor municipalities manage growth related issues.

• Extensive storm water treatment

measures.

• Participation in ongoing regional chloride
• studies. NHDOT has dedicated $4.5 million

for salt reduction, including $2.5 million available to I-93 corridor municipalities to fund salt reduction.

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

Purpose and Need for the Project Purpose and Need for the Project

• Improve transportation efficiency and

reduce safety problems along the corridor.

– Severe peak period congestion that interferes with the movement of people and goods. – Hazardous conditions resulting from congestion and geometric deficiencies. – Deteriorating infrastructure conditions

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

Court Decision Court Decision

• August 30, 2007 decision of the U.S. District Court

for the District of New Hampshire in the case - Conservation Law Foundation v. Federal Highway Administration and New Hampshire Department of Transportation.

• Court directed NHDOT and FHWA to prepare a

focused Supplemental EIS that specifically considers how “…Delphi Panel’s population forecasts affect Defendants’ analysis of both the effectiveness of the Four Lane Alternative as a traffic congestion reduction measure and the indirect effects of the additional population predicted by those forecasts on secondary road traffic and air quality issues.”

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

Federal Highway Federal Highway Administration Role Administration Role

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

Federal Highway Administration Federal Highway Administration

• Agency of the U.S. Department of

Transportation.

• Mission is to improve the quality of the

Nation’s highway system and its intermodal connections.

• Works cooperatively with partners to

ensure transportation system plans and improvements take full account of the impacts on the human and natural environment.

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

Lead Federal Agency Role Lead Federal Agency Role

• Transportation improvement projects

which FHWA must take action on and/or provide funding towards typically require FHWA to take on the lead federal agency role to ensure such improvements are evaluated and developed in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969.

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

Lead Federal Agency Role Lead Federal Agency Role

• NEPA requires all federal projects to be

evaluated for potential impacts to both the human and natural environment in order to determine the significance of any such impacts, whether such impacts can be avoided and, if not, then full consideration

• f minimizing and mitigating impacts must

be given.

• For projects which are anticipated to

significantly affect the human and/or natural environment NEPA requires the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

Original I Original I-

• 93 EIS Process

93 EIS Process

• I-93 Project initiation, Notice Of Intent, Early

coordination and Scoping process (NOI published October 2000).

• I-93 Project Draft Environmental Impact

Statement (DEIS September 2002).

• I-93 Public hearings/comment (November 2002).
• I-93 Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS

April 2004).

• I-93 Record of Decision (ROD June 2005).
• Lawsuit filed (February 2006).
• U.S. District Court judgment, Supplemental EIS

required (August, 2007).

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

Overview of Supplemental EIS Overview of Supplemental EIS Requirements/Process Requirements/Process

• Required whenever there are changes, new

information, or further developments on a project which may result in significant environmental impacts not identified in the most recently distributed version of the draft or final EIS.

• No required format, but should provide sufficient

information to describe the proposed action, the reasons why a SEIS is being prepared and the status of the previous draft or final EIS.

• SEIS needs to address only those changes or

new information that are the basis for preparing the supplement and were not addressed in the previous EIS.

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

Overview of Supplemental EIS Overview of Supplemental EIS Requirements/Process Requirements/Process

• Reference to and summarizing the

previous EIS is preferable to repeating unchanged, but still valid, portions of the

• riginal document. New environmental

requirements effective after the previous EIS was prepared only need to be addressed to the extent they apply to the portion of the project being evaluated and are relevant to the subject of the supplement.

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

Overview of Supplemental EIS Overview of Supplemental EIS Requirements/Process Requirements/Process

• A SEIS is developed using the same process

used to prepare an original EIS Except that scoping is not required (e.g. NOI, Draft, Public comment, Final, ROD).

• In some cases, such as with the I-93 Project, a

supplemental EIS may be required to address issues of limited scope. In such cases, the preparation of the SEIS shall not necessarily: – Prevent the granting of new approvals. – Require the withdrawal of previous approvals. – Require the suspension of project activities not directly affected by the supplement.

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

SEIS Process SEIS Process

• Draft SEIS must be made available at the public

hearing and for a minimum of 15 days in advance

• f the public hearing.
• 45 day comment period. Federal Register Notice
• f Availability of the I-93 DSEIS published August

17, 2009.

• Comments received on the DESIS must be

reviewed and adequately addressed in the FSEIS document.

• Approval and availability of Supplemental ROD:

– No sooner than 30 days after Federal Register notice (FSEIS). – No sooner than 90 days after Federal Register notice (DSEIS).

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

DSEIS Process and Conclusions DSEIS Process and Conclusions

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

DSEIS Purpose DSEIS Purpose

• Additional analysis of traffic and air quality

issues required by the Court Order.

• Reevaluation of 2004 FEIS to provide an

up-to-date consideration of the environmental effects of the project.

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

DSEIS Population & Employment DSEIS Population & Employment Scenarios Scenarios

• Future population and employment

projections are key inputs to travel demand modeling.

• Scenario 1- based on experimental “Delphi

Panel” approach referenced in 2004 FEIS.

• Scenario 2- based on latest official State

population and employment projections.

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

Scenario 1 Scenario 1 Delphi Panel Results Delphi Panel Results

• Meet requirements of Court Order (study

traffic and air quality effects using population and employment results from Delphi Panel process).

• However, results of Delphi Panel process

are outdated and unrealistically high.

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

Scenario 2 Scenario 2 Official State Projections Official State Projections

• Meets objective of SEIS by updating

analysis based on the latest information.

• More consistent with current best practices

for estimating the effects of transportation improvements on growth patterns.

• Maintains the integrity of the projections for

the region as a whole while redistributing future growth within the region to account for an improved I-93.

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

Comparison of Scenario 1 Comparison of Scenario 1 and Scenario 2 and Scenario 2

2020 Build Condition Population

5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000 40,000 45,000 50,000 Salem Windham Derry Londonderry Scenario 1 2020 Build Scenario 2 2020 Build

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

New Hampshire Statewide Model New Hampshire Statewide Model Traffic Analysis Zones Traffic Analysis Zones

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

Scenario 2 2030 No Build vs. Build Scenario 2 2030 No Build vs. Build Population Population

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

Scenario 2 2030 No Build vs. Build Scenario 2 2030 No Build vs. Build Employment Employment

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

Scenario 2 Scenario 2 -

• Population & Employment

Population & Employment Conclusions Conclusions

• A portion of future population and

employment growth will shift from other areas of the model region to the vicinity of I-93 because of the project.

• Population and employment growth in

communities near I-93, and in the region as a whole, will be lower under Scenario 2 (current official State projections) than that from Scenario 1 and the 2004 FEIS.

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

Traffic Analysis Methodology Traffic Analysis Methodology

• Collection of current traffic data on I-93

mainline and secondary roads.

• Future traffic volumes projected using

NHDOT’s New Hampshire Statewide Model.

• Both Scenario 1 and Scenario 2 population

and employment used as input to traffic analysis.

• Traffic modeling incorporates other future

“reasonably foreseeable” transportation projects.

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

Traffic Analysis Methodology Traffic Analysis Methodology

• Future traffic flow and congestion

estimated using Highway Capacity Manual methods.

• Analysis considered both No Build (without

the project) and Build (with the project) conditions.

• Key traffic flow performance indicator is

Level-of-Service (LOS).

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

Level Level-

• of
• f-
• Service (LOS) Defined

Service (LOS) Defined

Forced or breakdown flow F Unstable flow (at or near capacity) E Approaching unstable flow D Stable flow C Reasonably free-flow B Free-flow A General Operating Conditions and Speeds LOS

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

LOS D Conditions LOS D Conditions

Approaching unstable flow Approaching unstable flow

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

LOS E Conditions LOS E Conditions

Unstable flow (at or near capacity) Unstable flow (at or near capacity)

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

LOS F Conditions LOS F Conditions

Forced or breakdown flow Forced or breakdown flow

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

I I-

• 93 Existing Northbound PM Peak

93 Existing Northbound PM Peak Conditions at Exit 1 Conditions at Exit 1 -

• LOS F

LOS F

Forced or breakdown flow Forced or breakdown flow

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

Traffic Analysis Results Traffic Analysis Results I I-

• 93 Mainline (Scenario 1)

93 Mainline (Scenario 1)

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

Traffic Analysis Results Traffic Analysis Results I I-

• 93 Mainline (Scenario 2)

93 Mainline (Scenario 2)

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

Traffic Analysis Results Traffic Analysis Results I I-

• 93 Mainline (Scenario 2)

93 Mainline (Scenario 2)

• The project eliminates LOS F conditions on

all mainline segments in 2020 and 2030.

• The project eliminates LOS E conditions for

all mainline segments except for the segment south of Exit 1, which would be improved from LOS F to LOS E.

• The reconstruction of interchanges will

eliminate all LOS E and LOS F conditions for all ramp junctions.

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

Traffic Analysis Results Traffic Analysis Results I I-

• 93 Mainline (Scenario 2)

93 Mainline (Scenario 2)

• LOS is calculated for the design hour.
• The additional capacity provided by the

project will also shrink the duration of the peak period congestion experienced by motorists.

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

2030 Traffic Analysis Results 2030 Traffic Analysis Results I I-

• 93 Mainline (Scenario 2)

93 Mainline (Scenario 2)

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

Traffic Analysis Results Traffic Analysis Results Intersections (Scenario 2) Intersections (Scenario 2)

• While there are both positive and negative

effects, the project reduces intersection delays overall (more intersections are improved than worsened).

• For example, by 2030 the project is

expected to eliminate LOS E or F conditions at five intersections during the AM peak hour and four intersections in the PM peak hour, but would only create LOS E conditions at one intersection during the PM peak hour.

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

Traffic Analysis Results Traffic Analysis Results Changes in Traffic Patterns Changes in Traffic Patterns

• Traffic volumes on I-93 will increase in

response to congestion reduction and population and employment growth/shifts.

• Project will reduce traffic on parallel roads

such as NH 28 by diverting traffic back to I- 93.

• Project will slightly increase traffic volumes
• n some feeder roads.

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

Traffic Analysis Conclusions Traffic Analysis Conclusions

• The I-93 mainline and ramp junction LOS

analyses reaffirm the congestion reduction benefits of the project.

• The intersection LOS analysis results

show that the project will not degrade travel conditions on the secondary road system as a whole.

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

Air Quality Analysis Methodology Air Quality Analysis Methodology

• Local analysis of carbon monoxide (CO)

concentrations around congested intersections using traffic analysis results.

• Regional emissions analysis of CO and
• zone precursors (volatile organic

compounds and nitrogen oxide).

• Analysis of Mobile Source Air Toxics

emissions.

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

Air Quality Analysis Conclusions Air Quality Analysis Conclusions

• No exceedences of air quality standards.
• Emissions budgets for the region will not

be exceeded.

• Mobile Source Air Toxic emissions will

decrease substantially in the future.

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

Reevaluation of the 2004 FEIS Reevaluation of the 2004 FEIS

• In addition to the updated analyses for

traffic and air quality, all the environmental topics examined in the 2004 FEIS were reevaluated and updated, as necessary.

• Addressed noise, socioeconomics, land

use, hazardous materials, natural resources, cultural resources, indirect effects and cumulative impacts, among

• thers.
• While certain details have changed, the

basic conclusions of the 2004 FEIS impact analyses for these topics remain valid.

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

Project Status Update Project Status Update

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

Court Agreement Court Agreement

• Construction can move ahead on certain

projects.

• Projects required to replace “red list”

bridges – safety concerns.

• Projects will not commit the DOT to a

particular outcome.

• Projects will not influence the SEIS

process or ROD.

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

Completed Projects Completed Projects

Bus Terminal at Exit 4 Exit 5 PnR & Route 28 improvements Exit 2 PnR & Bus Terminal Exit 5 Bus Maintenance Facility Cross Street Bridge

$40 Million $40 Million

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

Construction Status Construction Status

$40 M projects complete $16 M – Exit 5 – 85% complete $24 M – Exit 1 – 95% complete $80 M complete by end of 2009 $58 M in additional work underway at Exit 3

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

Construction Construction Milestones Milestones

• $138 M complete/underway

(22% of total).

• Expanded bus service and
• pened Park & Ride lots.
• Replaced 8 “red-list” bridges at

Exit 1.

• Safety improvements - Exit 5

SB ramps opened.

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

• 860 of 1000 acres under preservation.
• Community planning assistance (CTAP) –

year 3.

• Incident management strategies

implemented.

• Improved storm water treatment in place at

Exit 1, Exit 2 & Exit 5.

• Noise barrier in place at Exit 1.

Mitigation Milestones Mitigation Milestones

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

Project Cost Estimate Project Cost Estimate

Total Estimated Cost $795M

• Engineering - $71 M
• ROW – $66M
• Mitigation - $46M
• Construction – $612M

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

Visit Visit www.RebuildingI93.com www.RebuildingI93.com for up to date for up to date information about the information about the project project

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

Public Comments Public Comments

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

Public Hearing Comment Format Public Hearing Comment Format

• Sign up to speak
• Approach the microphone
• State your name and affiliation at the start
• f your comments

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

Other Ways to Comment Other Ways to Comment

• n the DSEIS
• n the DSEIS
• Fill out and submit comment form at the

hearing tonight.

• Mail or email written comments by October 2,

2009 to:

• Mr. Jamison S. Sikora
• Mr. Peter Stamnas

Environmental Program Manager Project Manager Federal Highway Administration New Hampshire Department 19 Chenell Drive

• f Transportation

Suite One 7 Hazen Drive, PO Box 483 Concord, NH 03301 Concord, NH 03302 jamie.sikora@fhwa.dot.gov PStamnas@dot.state.nh.us

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

How will the Public Comments be How will the Public Comments be Addressed? Addressed?

• Written responses to substantive public

comments will be included in the Final SEIS.

• Public comments will be considered in

NHDOT and FHWA decision-making.

RebuildingI93.com RebuildingI93.com

A H E A D

MOVING

Public Hearing Comment Format Public Hearing Comment Format

• Sign up to speak
• Approach the microphone
• State your name and affiliation at the start
• f your comments