Environmental Assessment of Three Infill Stations
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
This Page Intentionally Left Blank ABSTRACT The Metropolitan Council on behalf of the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), the lead federal agency, has prepared this Infill Stations Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Central Corridor Light Rail Transit Project (the Project) pursuant to 23 CFR 771.130(c). The Project is10.9 miles long (9.7 miles of new alignment, 1.2 miles on shared alignment) and consists of 20 Central Corridor Light Rail Transit (LRT) stations – 15 new stations and five shared with the Hiawatha LRT. A total of three potential infill stations have been identified in the City of St. Paul within the Midway East Project segment between Snelling Avenue and Rice Street. Potential infill station locations are at Hamline Avenue, Victoria Street, and Western Avenue. This Infill Stations EA analyzes the social, economic, and environmental impacts associated with the construction of above-grade elements of these three stations. The June 2009 Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for the Project analyzed its social, economic, and environmental impacts, including the construction of below-grade infrastructure for three potential infill stations. Recently, the project sponsors obtained a commitment for local funding to build one above-grade infill station at Hamline Avenue, Victoria Street, or Western Avenue. Consequently, an evaluation of the social, economic, and environmental impacts for the construction of an above-grade station is required in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The above- grade construction of all three infill stations is included in this Infill Stations EA. A public comment period was established for this document. Comments were submitted in writing, via e-mail, or in person at two public hearings held on January 27, 2010 at the Hallie Q. Brown Community Center at 270 N. Kent Street in St. Paul. Two hearings were held that day, one starting at 11:00 a.m., and one starting at 6:00 p.m. This Page Intentionally Left Blank Central Corridor Light Rail Transit Environmental Assessment Three Infill Stations Western, Victoria, and Hamline Metropolitan Council February 2010 This Page Intentionally Left Blank Central Corridor LRT Project Table of Contents Table of Contents ES 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................. 1 ES 1.1 BASIS FOR THE EA ........................................................................................................... 1 ES 1.2 PURPOSE AND NEED ....................................................................................................... 4 ES 1.3 SUMMARY OF AFFECTED RESOURCE AREAS .............................................................. 5 ES 1.4 SUMMARY OF UNAFFECTED RESOURCE AREAS ......................................................... 8 ES 1.5 CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................................... 8 1.0 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION ............................ 1-1 1.1 PROJECT HISTORY AND TIMELINE .............................................................................. 1-2 1.1.1 Alternatives Analysis/Draft Environmental Impact Statement (AA/DEIS), 2006 ...................... 1-2 1.1.2 Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement (SDEIS), 2008 ..................................... 1-2 1.1.3 Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS), Record of Decision (ROD), and Adequacy Determination, 2009 ............................................................................................... 1-3 1.2 BASIS FOR THIS INFILL STATIONS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (EA) .............. 1-6 1.3 PURPOSE AND NEED .................................................................................................... 1-7 1.4 SUMMARY OF AFFECTED RESOURCE AREAS ........................................................... 1-8 1.5 SUMMARY OF NON-AFFECTED RESOURCE AREAS .................................................. 1-8 2.0 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED ................................................................. 2-1 2.1 NO BUILD ALTERNATIVE ............................................................................................... 2-1 2.2 BUILD ALTERNATIVE ..................................................................................................... 2-1 3.0 SOCIAL EFFECTS ....................................................................................... 3-1 3.1 RESOURCE AREAS INCREMENTALLY AFFECTED ..................................................... 3-1 3.1.1 Land Use and Socioeconomics ............................................................................................... 3-1 3.1.2 Neighborhoods, Community Services, and Community Cohesion .......................................... 3-3 3.1.3 Cultural Resources .................................................................................................................. 3-4 3.1.4 Visual Quality and Aesthetics .................................................................................................. 3-5 3.1.5 Environmental Justice ............................................................................................................. 3-6 3.2 RESOURCE AREAS NOT INCREMENTALLY AFFECTED ............................................. 3-7 3.2.1 Acquisitions and Displacements/Relocations .......................................................................... 3-7 3.2.2 Parklands and Recreation Areas ............................................................................................. 3-8 3.2.3 Safety and Security ................................................................................................................. 3-8 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS ..................................................................... 4-1 4.1 RESOURCE AREAS INCREMENTALLY AFFECTED ..................................................... 4-1 4.1.1 Air Quality ................................................................................................................................ 4-1 4.1.2 Noise ....................................................................................................................................... 4-2 4.1.3 Vibration .................................................................................................................................. 4-2 4.2 RESOURCE AREAS NOT INCREMENTALLY AFFECTED ............................................. 4-3 4.2.1 Groundwater and Soil Resources............................................................................................ 4-3 4.2.2 Water Resources ..................................................................................................................... 4-4 4.2.3 Biota and Habitat ..................................................................................................................... 4-4 4.2.4 Threatened and Endangered Species ..................................................................................... 4-4 4.2.5 Hazardous/Regulated Materials .............................................................................................. 4-5 4.2.6 Electromagnetic Fields and Utilities......................................................................................... 4-7 Environmental Assessment i February 2010 Central Corridor LRT Project – Three Infill Stations Table of Contents 4.2.7 Energy .................................................................................................................................... 4-8 5.0 ECONOMIC EFFECTS ................................................................................. 5-1 5.1 RESOURCE AREAS INCREMENTALLY AFFECTED ..................................................... 5-1 5.1.1 Station Area Development ...................................................................................................... 5-1 5.2 RESOURCE AREAS NOT INCREMENTALLY AFFECTED ............................................ 5-2 5.2.1 Output, Earnings, and Employment Effects from Capital Expenditures.................................. 5-2 5.2.2 Output, Earnings, and Employment Effects from Operations and Maintenance Expenditures ..................................................................................................... 5-3 5.2.3 Tax Revenue Effects .............................................................................................................. 5-3 6.0 TRANSPORTATION .................................................................................... 6-1 6.1 RESOURCE AREAS INCREMENTALLY AFFECTED ..................................................... 6-1 6.1.1 Transit Effects ........................................................................................................................ 6-1 6.1.2 Other Transportation Impacts ................................................................................................. 6-2 6.2 RESOURCE AREAS NOT INCREMENTALLY AFFECTED ............................................ 6-3 6.2.1 Effects on Roadways .............................................................................................................. 6-3 7.0 SECTION 4(F) EVALUATION ...................................................................... 7-1 8.0 INDIRECT AND CUMULATIVE IMPACTS .................................................. 8-1 9.0 PUBLIC AND AGENCY COORDINATION AND COMMENTS/PERMITS AND APPROVALS ............................................... 9-1 9.1 PUBLIC AND AGENCY COORDINATION AND COMMENTS .......................................