DRAFT DESIGN REPORT / ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
OCTOBER 2014
Highway / Intersection Project
P.I.N. 4531.07
Route 531 Terminus Improvement Monroe County Towns of Ogden and Sweden
U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration
NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ANDREW M. CUOMO, Governor JOAN MCDONALD, Commissioner
OCTOBER 2014 Draft Design Report /Environmental Assessment PIN 4531.07
PROJECT APPROVAL SHEET (Pursuant to SAFETEA-LU Matrix) A. IPP Approval: The project is ready to be added to the Regional Capital Program and project scoping can begin.
The IPP was approved by: 3/15/04 Kevin Bush, Regional Director
B. Scope Approval: The project cost and schedule are consistent with the Regional Capital Program. The scope was approved by: 5/7/10 Kevin Bush, Regional Director
C. Public Hearing A public hearing was held on 2014 in accordance with 23 USC 128. Certification (23 USC 128): 2014
Wesley Alden, Project Manager
D. Recommendation for The project cost and schedule are consistent with the Regional Capital Program. Design Approval:
Regional Program Manager
E. Recommendation for All requirements requisite to these actions and approvals have been met, the Design and Nonstandard required independent quality control reviews separate from the functional group Feature Approval: reviews have been accomplished, and the work is consistent with established standards, policies, regulations and procedures, except as otherwise noted and explained.
Regional Design Engineer
F. Nonstandard Feature The nonstandard features have been adequately justified and it is not prudent to Approval: eliminate them as part of this project.
Deputy Chief Engineer
G. Design Approval: The required environmental determinations have been made and the preferred alternative for this project is ready for final design.
Deputy Chief Engineer
i
OCTOBER 2014 Draft Design Report /Environmental Assessment PIN 4531.07
LIST OF PREPARERS
Group Director Responsible for Production of the Design Approval Document:
Frank Billittier, P.E., Regional Design Engineer, NYSDOT – Region 4 P.E. STAMP
This report was prepared by the following Prime and subconsultant staff:
James Hofmann, P.E., Principal, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. P.E. STAMP Description of Work Performed by Firm: Directed the preparation of the Design Approval Document in accordance with established standards, policies, regulations and procedures, except as otherwise explained in this document.
Bryce A. Walker, P.E., Lead Design Engineer, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. P.E. STAMP Description of Work Performed by Firm: Prepared the Design Approval Document, developed the engineering solutions and coordinated the multi- disciplined efforts in accordance with established standards, policies, regulations and procedures, except as otherwise explained in this document.
John C. Honan, P.E., Senior Manager, Watts Architecture & Engineering, P.C. P.E. STAMP Description of Work Performed by Firm: Directed the preparation of the Environmental Engineering Reports in accordance with established standards, policies, regulations and procedures, except as otherwise explained in this document.
Nancy S. Gillette, P.E., Environmental Manager, Ravi Engineering & LS, P.C. P.E. STAMP Description of Work Performed by Firm: Directed the preparation of the Contaminated and Hazardous Materials & Asbestos Assessment in accordance with established standards, policies, regulations and procedures, except as otherwise explained in this document.
Note: It is a violation of law for any person, unless they are acting under the direction of a licensed professional engineer, architect, landscape architect, or land surveyor, to alter an item in any way. If an item bearing the stamp of a licensed professional is altered, the altering engineer, architect, landscape architect, or land surveyor shall stamp the document and include the notation "altered by" followed by their signature, the date of such alteration, and a specific description of the alteration.
This report was prepared by the following NYSDOT staff:
Wes Alden, P.E., Design Project Manager, NYSDOT – Region 4 P.E. STAMP Description of Work Performed: Directly supervised the preparation of the Final Design Report in accordance with established standards, policies, regulations and procedures, except as otherwise explained in this document. ii
OCTOBER 2014 Draft Design Report /Environmental Assessment PIN 4531.07
TABLE OF CONTENTS
COVER (Title / PIN / Location) PROJECT APPROVAL SHEET LIST OF PREPARERS
CHAPTER 1 - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.1 Introduction ...... 1-3 1.2. Purpose and Need ...... 1-3 1.3. What Alternatives Are Being Considered? ...... 1-4 1.4. How will the Alternatives Affect the Environment? ...... 1-6 1.5. What Are The Costs & Schedules? ...... 1-8 1.6. Which Alternative is Preferred? ...... 1-9 1.7. Wh at are the Opportunities for Public Involvment…………………………………………………….. 1-10
CHAPTER 2 - PROJECT CONTEXT: HISTORY, TRANSPORTATION PLANS, CONDITIONS AND NEEDS 2.1. Project History ...... 2-1 2.2. Transportation Plans and Land Use ...... 2-2 2.2.1. Local Plans for the Project Area...... 2-2 2.2.2. Transportation Corridor...... 2-2 2.3. Transportation Conditions, Deficiencies and Engineering Considerations ...... 2-3 2.3.1. Operations (Traffic and Safety) & Maintenance...... 2-3 2.3.2. Multimodal...... 2-13 2.3.3. Infrastructure...... 2-14 2.3.4. Potential Enhancement Opportunities...... 2-18 2.3.5. Miscellaneous...... 2-19
CHAPTER 3 – ALTERNATIVES 3.1. Alternatives Considered and Eliminated from Further Study ...... 3-1 3.2. Feasible Build Alternatives ...... 3-3 3.2.1. Description of Feasible Alternatives...... 3-3 3.2.2 Preferred Alternative...... 3-15 3.2.3. Design Criteria for Feasible Alternative(s)...... 3-15 3.3. Engineering Considerations...... 3-21 3.3.1. Operations (Traffic and Safety) & Maintenance...... 3-21 3.3.2. Multimodal...... 3-40 3.3.3. Infrastructure...... 3-47 3.3.4. Landscape and Environmental Enhancements...... 3-55 3.3.5. Miscellaneous...... 3-56
CHAPTER 4 - SOCIAL, ECONOMIC & ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS 4.1. Introduction ...... 4-1 4.2. Social ...... 4-3 4.3 Economic ...... 4-15 4.4 Environmental...... 4-16 4.5 Construction Effects………………..…………………………………………………………………… 4-51
iii
OCTOBER 2014 Draft Design Report /Environmental Assessment PIN 4531.07
Appendices
A Plans, Profiles & Typical Sections – Feasible Alternatives 2, 3 & 5 Environmental Information B • SHPO Correspondence / Finding Document • Correspondence Traffic Information • Accident Analysis, Safety Screen` C • Design Speed Review • Pedestrian Generator Checklist Public Involvement (PI) Plan and Input from Stakeholders D • Public Hearing Sign-in sheet • Public Hearing Comment Summary form E Non-Standard Features Justification F Conceptual Stage Relocation Plan & Right of Way G Matrix Evaluation Technical Appendices Available upon request Technical Memorandum – APRIL 2010 Technical Memorandum for PIN 4531.05 A1 Route 531 Extension Study (Washington Street to Redman Road) Towns of Ogden & Sweden, Monroe County B1 Pavement Evaluation & Treatment Selection Report (PETSR) Drainage – Route 531 Terminus improvement Project, Technical Memorandum Floodplain Evaluation, C1 July 9, 2013 D1 Route 531 Farmland documentation – Prime & Unique, Agricultural District Separate Engineering Reports Available upon request 1. Culvert Inspection Report Pending 2. Air Quality Analysis Report – March 2013 3. Noise Analysis Report – May 2013 4. Wetland Assessment & Delineation Report – November 2013 5. Hazardous Waste Assessment – April 2012
iv
OCTOBER 2014 Draft Design Report /Environmental Assessment PIN 4531.07
CHAPTER 1 - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report serves as the project Design Approval Document (DAD), providing documentation for the Route 531 Terminus Improvement project, including defining the needs and objectives for the project study area and how these will be met as well as an assessment of the environmental effects. This report will assess existing conditions, identify the overall project objectives, analyze alternative solutions, and discuss the social, economic and environmental effects on the community resulting from the implementation of the alternatives under consideration.
This Design Approval Document was prepared in accordance with the New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) Project Development Manual, 17 NYCRR Part 15, and 23 CFR 771, the American Association of State Highways and Transportation Official’s (AASHTO) “A Policy on Geometric Design of Streets and Highways, 2004”, and “A Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities, 2012”.
There are three (3) feasible alternatives under consideration and each has been reviewed for their social, economic and environmental effects. A decision will be made after the comments on the design approval document and comments received from the public hearing have been evaluated. NYSDOT’s Environmental Action Plan describes the process to be used in developing Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) federal aid Transportation projects. Following the Environmental Action Plan ensures compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA); this project will be advanced as a Class III Action (Environmental Assessment) under NEPA. This project has also been classified as a Non- Type II (Environmental Assessment) project under the SEQRA guidelines, and NYSDOT satisfies SEQRA requirements with the preparation of this report. The Federal Highway Administration is the lead agency for the NEPA process and the NYSDOT is the lead agency under SEQRA. Refer to Chapter IV for further discussions regarding classification and the environmental procedure. This report will be distributed for review and comment to all required Federal, State, and Local Agencies, as well as other groups and individuals who have special interests or concerns. It will also be made available to the public. After distribution of the Draft DAD, a Public Hearing regarding this project will be held. The information contained in this report, along with comments received as a result of the review process, will be evaluated prior to making a final design recommendation. Upon approval, the project will be progressed to Final Design, which includes the preparation for Contract Plans, Specification and Estimate.
Project Location and Evolution:
The Route 531 Terminus is located in the western portion of the Town of Ogden with the Route 31 terminus work extending into the Town of Sweden in Monroe County. Route 31 serves as a major east west corridor for the western side of Monroe County. The project study area is east of Route 260, Sweden-Walker Road and extends east past Route 36; it begins 700 ft west of Salmon Creek Road on Route 31 and proceeds easterly, for approximately 2 miles, along Route 31 and then Route 531, to approximately 2,000 feet east of the current Route 531 Terminus with Route 36. The Genesee Transportation Council (GTC) Resolution #94-16 adopted December 15, 1994 identified the extension of the NYS Route 531 to the west as a potential Major Investment Study (MIS). The Final Summary Report was sponsored and directed by the Genesee Transportation Council with the assistance of the NYSDOT and the Route 531/Brockport – Rochester Corridor Major Investment Study (MIS) was completed in February 2000. This project was a direct result of the Route 531 Extension Study Scoping Phase Technical Memorandum completed in April 2010. The purpose of the Route 531 Extension Study (PIN 4531.05) was to consider capacity improvements along the Route 31 corridor from Washington Street (Route 36) to Brockport (6.5 miles) including an upgrade to existing Route 31 or an extension of Route 531 to the west of Brockport. During the scoping phase of that project the results of the traffic and accident analysis indicated that in
1-1 OCTOBER 2014 Draft Design Report /Environmental Assessment PIN 4531.07
the future the existing Route 31 traffic would continue to operate at or near capacity during the commuter peak hours. The conclusion of the scoping phase determined that an extension of Route 531 was not a viable alternative and that location-specific improvements developed as a result of the scoping phase should be monitored and progressed on an as needed basis. Based upon the data from the scoping report, there are continued safety, traffic, pavement and system needs along Route 31 and in the immediate Terminus area. Most importantly, these included safety and capacity improvements to the Route 531 Terminus, which is a persistent accident and capacity problem area, and along Route 31 immediately to the west to include implementation of a preferred alignment and speed transitions. Purpose of the Project: The purpose of this project is to address the needs of the 18,000 to 21,000 vehicles per day that travel through the existing Terminus along Route 531, Route 36 and Route 31 and consider the needs of those who live in the project study area. The alternatives have been developed to address mobility and safety needs (Route 531/Route 36/Route 31 bottleneck) and significantly reduce accidents at the existing Terminus. The feasible alternatives consider two (2) At-grade intersection treatments along with a grade separated Full Diamond interchange. All of the feasible alternatives include the Route 31 Improvements immediately west of the Terminus to transition the Route 531 alignment to existing Route 31, provide traffic calming features for speed transition and Route 31 intersection improvements for safety. Engineering, environmental and community effects and issues have been identified and documented herein and are used with the alternative evaluations.
Six (6) Alternatives Considered: The project study efforts considered the following alternatives: Alternative 1 – Null or “No-Build/Maintenance” alternative Alternative 2 – Route 531/Route 36 At-grade conventional signalized intersection with traffic calming and safety improvements to Route 31; Alternative 3 – Route 531/Route 36 At-grade signalized superstreet median crossover with traffic calming and safety improvements to Route 31; Alternative 4 – Route 531/Route 36 Half diamond interchange with traffic calming and safety improvements to Route 31; Alternative 5 – Route 531/Route 36 Full diamond interchange with traffic calming and safety improvements to Route 31; Alternative 6 – Route 531/Route 36 Roundabout with traffic calming and safety improvements to Route 31.
Three (3) Feasible Alternatives: The following are considered Feasible Alternatives based on the study documentation herein and as presented in section 3.2.1:
Alternative 2 – Route 531/Route 36 At-grade conventional signalized intersection with traffic calming and safety improvements to Route 31
Alternative 3 – Route 531/Route 36 At-grade signalized superstreet median crossover with traffic calming and safety improvements to Route 31
Alternative 5 – Route 531/Route 36 Full diamond interchange with traffic calming and safety improvements to Route 31
1-2 OCTOBER 2014 Draft Design Report /Environmental Assessment PIN 4531.07
1.1. Introduction
This report was prepared in accordance with the NYSDOT Project Development Manual, 17 NYCRR Part 15, and 23 CFR 771.
1.2. Purpose and Need
1.2.1. Where is the Project Located?
Exhibit 1.2.1 Project Location Map
(1) Route number/name: Route 531 – Spencerport Expressway; Route 31 – Brockport Spencerport Road; Route 36 – Washington Street (2) SH number and official highway description – SH 92-2 (Route 531), SH 5539 (Route 31 – Route 36 to Route 260), SH 1466 (Route 36, Washington Street south of Route 31), CR 221 (Washington Street north of Route 31) (3) CIN CA00307 – Route 31 Culvert over Salmon Creek (4) Municipality – Towns of Ogden and Sweden (5) County – Monroe County (6) Length – 11,500 feet (7) From RM 31-4301-1076 to RM 531-4301-2002 (8) Termini: West – 700 ft west of Salmon Creek Road along Route 31 East – 1500 ft to 2000 ft east of the western terminus of Route 531.
1-3 OCTOBER 2014 Draft Design Report /Environmental Assessment PIN 4531.07
1.2.2. Why is the Project Needed?
The purpose of this project is to improve highway safety and address congestion for the Route 531 terminus at Route 36/Route 31 and address highway safety along Route 31 from the Route 531 terminus to Salmon Creek Road, including: Improve safety features of the existing facility to address current and future safety needs. These include: • Existing high number of accidents o Rear-end o Intersection o Turning movements • Fatalities along Route 31 in the project study area • Improvements that will safely accommodate existing and future travel demand
1.2.3. What are the Objectives/Purposes of the Project? The objectives of this project are to:
(1) Improve Safety features of the existing facility to address current and future safety needs within the project limits.
• Improve the overall safety along the corridor by reducing the potential for accident occurrences. • Reduce the number and severity of accidents along the corridor.
(2) Improve overall traffic conditions using cost effective methods to reduce delay and to provide an acceptable level of service at the Route 531/Route 31 intersection (Route 531 Terminus), for a minimum design period of 20 years.
(3) Provide traffic calming techniques to encourage vehicles to transition from the 65 mph expressway speed limit to 55 mph along Route 31.
(4) Maintain Bike Route 5 within the Project Limits.
(5) Minimize the project’s impacts on environmental and man-made resources.
1.3. What Alternatives Are Being Considered?
The following alternatives, representing possible engineering solutions, are presented in this report:
• Alternative 1 – ‘Null’ or No-Build/Maintenance alternative; • Alternative 2 – Route 531/Route 36 At-grade conventional signalized intersection with traffic calming and safety improvements to Route 31; • Alternative 3 - Route 531/Route 36 At-grade signalized superstreet median crossover with traffic calming and safety improvements to Route 31; • Alternative 4 – Route 531/Route 36 Half Diamond interchange with traffic calming and safety improvements to Route 31; • Alternative 5 – Route 531/Route 36 Full Diamond interchange with traffic calming and safety improvements to Route 31; • Alternative 6 – Route 531/Route 36 Roundabout with traffic calming and safety improvements to Route 31.
1-4 OCTOBER 2014 Draft Design Report /Environmental Assessment PIN 4531.07
Alternative 1 – No Build/Maintenance Alternative – Under this alternative, the existing infrastructure would be retained as is and routine maintenance efforts would be performed by the NYSDOT forces to extend the service life of the existing terminus configuration and pavement. Routine maintenance work would be of temporary nature and would not address the long term safety and capacity deficiencies identified, therefore the terminus’ current state of safety and capacity issues would continue and/or become worse. This alternative is not considered feasible but will be used to compare against other feasible alternatives.
Improvements common to all Build Alternatives:
Traffic improvements for all alternatives include enhancements to Route 31 to improve overall safety by providing traffic calming features as you continue westerly towards Brockport and the westbound running speed transition from expressway to arterial. Traffic calming features may include: major downstream alignments at Hubbell and Gallup Roads; a gradual section width narrowing with median width reduction, the introduction of a raised median and advanced signage and striping.
As mentioned above, Hubbell and Gallup Road intersections would be realigned to provide downstream traffic calming features that will safely transition from an “Expressway” speed to slower “Rural Arterial” speed. In addition better access to and from Route 31 utilizing intersection channelization, center, left and acceleration lanes along with storage and refuge areas will be provided.
At-grade Intersection Alternatives – The project studied two (2) at-grade signalized intersection treatments in depth for the Route 531 terminus. In addition a two-lane roundabout (Alternative 6) was considered but dropped due to inadequate capacity capabilities.
Alternative 2 – At-grade intersection – The existing Route 531 terminus with Route 36 would be modified to provide a conventional four-way signalized intersection utilizing two way operation for all four approaches and eliminate the indirect Route 531 westbound movement to Route 31. Channelization improvements are integrated in the design for safety purposes. This alternative would eliminate the current Route 31 east-west traffic pattern requiring this maneuver to pass through the proposed signalized intersection, while converting Route 31 2,000 feet west of Route 36 to a Cul-de-sac. This alternative meets the projects needs and objectives and is considered feasible.
Alternative 3 – Modified Superstreet – The existing Route 531 terminus with Route 36 would be modified to provide a signalized superstreet median crossover intersection to improve operational safety and eliminate the indirect Route 531 westbound movement to Route 31. The superstreet concept would allow the Route 531 (major traffic flow) direct east – west access while providing the Route 36 (minor traffic flow) a more circuitous route. Alternative 3 would also eliminate the current Route 31 east-west traffic pattern requiring this maneuver to pass through the proposed signalized superstreet intersection, while proposing a Cul-de-Sac on Route 31 2,000 feet west of Route 36. This alternative meets the projects needs and objectives and is considered feasible.
Alternative 6 - Roundabout – The existing Route 531 terminus with Route 36 would be replaced with a two-lane roundabout to improve operational safety and eliminate the indirect westbound movement to Route 31. The roundabout would allow the Route 531 major traffic direct east – west access to circulate through the roundabout while providing the Route 36 traffic with through and turning movements to Route 531. This alternative would also eliminate the current Route 31 east-west traffic pattern allowing this maneuver to pass through the proposed roundabout, while proposing a Cul-de-Sac on Route 31 2,000 feet west of Route 36. However, this alternative is not considered feasible due to the high volume of traffic on Route 531, which a roundabout of this size is not capable of managing and an increased accident potential within a roundabout configuration.
Grade separated Intersection Alternative - The project studied two (2) grade separated intersection alternatives in depth for the Route 531 terminus. Alternative 4 would provide a Half Diamond Interchange with safety/traffic calming improvements along Route 31, while Alternative 5 would provide a Full Diamond Interchange with safety/traffic calming improvements along Route 31 .
1-5 OCTOBER 2014 Draft Design Report /Environmental Assessment PIN 4531.07
Alternative 4 – Half Diamond Interchange –The existing Route 531 terminus with Route 36 would be replaced with a Half Diamond Interchange (on the east side of Route 36) along with a pair of connector ramps to and from Route 31 (on the west side of Route 36). This alternative would also grade separate traffic and eliminate the indirect Route 531 westbound movement to Route 31. The proposed interchange and scope of work for Alternative 4 would modify the Route 31 east-west traffic pattern by realigning existing Route 31, west of Route 36, as a pair of connector ramps to and from the extended Route 531, immediately west of Route 36. As shown in Exhibit 3.1-1 the former Route 31 would be terminated as a cul-de-sac 2,000 feet west of Route 36. This alternative would however, provide geometrically inadequate design criteria (non-standard features) using appropriate design speeds for Route 531 and Route 36.
While this alternative meets the Projects needs and objectives it is substantially more expensive, has a larger footprint of impacts and several non-standard features than the similar Alternative 5 – Full Diamond Interchange below, and therefore is not considered feasible.
Alternative 5 – Full Diamond Interchange – The existing Route 531 terminus with Route 36 would be replaced with a Full Diamond Interchange grade separating traffic and eliminating the indirect Route 531 westbound movement to Route 31. The new grade separated interchange would allow for free flow east- west movement through the Route 531/Route 31 transition and free flow north-south movement along Route 36 as an overpass. This alternative would also eliminate the current Route 31 east-west traffic pattern by proposing a Route 31 Cul-de-Sac 2,000 feet west of Route 36 and require this maneuver to pass through the proposed grade separated interchange. This alternative meets the projects needs and objectives and is considered feasible.
For a more in-depth discussion of the feasible alternatives, design criteria and nonstandard features see Section 3.2.1 and 3.2.3 of this report.
1.4 How will the Alternatives Affect the Environment? Exhibit 1.4 – A Environmental Summary NEPA Classification Class III BY Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) SEQR Type: Non-Type II (EA) BY New York State Dept. of Transportation (NYSDOT)
Exhibit 1.4 – B Comparison of Feasible Alternatives Alternatives Null 2 3 5 Category No Build Conventional Signalized Signalized Grade separated Full Maintenance Intersection Superstreet Diamond Interchange Intersection Wetland impacts None 0.68 acres 0.70 acres 0.75 acres
100 year floodplain None None None Negligible impact
Impact to Prime Farmland Soils None 2.13 acres 2.18 acres 2.05 acres (NRCS) Impact to Agricultural None 1.95 acres 1.95 acres 1.89 acres District No. 5 Forested Upland None 2.10 acres 2.81 acres 7.08 acres Impacts
1-6 OCTOBER 2014 Draft Design Report /Environmental Assessment PIN 4531.07
Sites A & C Site A Site A Site A 1 Noise impacts Noise Noise impact above FHWA Noise impact above Noise impact above above FHWA NAC FHWA NAC FHWA NAC NAC 9.54 acres (Acquisition) 9.63 acres (Acquisition) 10.14 acres (Acquisition) 4.06 acres (ROW) 4.22 acres (ROW) 4.49 acres (ROW) 14 parcels 14 parcels 15 parcels Property impacts None 0 Businesses 0 Businesses 0 Businesses 6 Relocations 6 Relocations 6 Relocations 1 Agricultural District 1 Agricultural District 1 Agricultural District Operation at ETC + 20 (Route 531 WB - 7.2 min delay 0.5 min delay 0.5 min delay No delay PM) Approximate Accident None 26.9% 24.9% 45.7% Reduction Factor • Rte 531 Median change • Route 36 overpass • Rte 531 Median change • 531 Channelized • Vertical change Traffic Calming Existing Traffic • 531 Superstreet pattern Intersection • Lane drop Benefits Signal • Route 31 sweeping • Route 31 sweeping • Route 31 sweeping horizontal alignment horizontal alignment horizontal alignment Construction Cost None $ 18.37 M $ 18.28 M $ 29.69 M Notes: 1. Refer to Section 4.4.17 for the Receiver Site locations; the differences in noise levels between the three (3) build alternatives are essentially negligible and primarily imperceptible to the human ear. 2. Refer to Chapter 4 for mitigation measures that are proposed for this project.
Anticipated Permits/Certifications/Coordination:
NYSDEC: • NYSDEC State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (SPDES) General Permit • Water Quality Certification (Section 401) of the FWPCA • Section 404 Individual Permit
Federal Executive Orders • 11990 – Protection of Wetlands • 13112 – Invasive Species • 11988 – Floodplain Management • 13166 – Improved Access to Services for Persons with Limited English Proficiency
USACOE • U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Section 401/ NYSDEC Article 15 Water Quality Certifications
Coordination • Coordination with NYSDEC pursuant to the “NYSDEC/NYSDOT Memorandum of Understanding Regarding ECL Article 15 & 24” • Coordination with Federal Highway Administration • Coordination with New York State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) • Coordination with the US Fish and Wildlife Service • Coordination with the New York Natural Heritage Program • New York Agricultural & Markets • Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) • Rochester Genesee Regional Transportation Authority (RGRTA)
Certifications • NYSDOL: Asbestos Variances
1-7 OCTOBER 2014 Draft Design Report /Environmental Assessment PIN 4531.07
Others • Monroe County Department of Transportation • Monroe County Department of Health • Monroe County Parks • Town of Ogden Highway 139 Permit • Town of Sweden Highway 139 Permit • Local Floodplain Development Approval by the Town(Code Enforcement Officer) • Construction Staging Permit • Historic or Archaeological Impacts on Federal 106
Note: The anticipated Permits/Coordination required will be updated when Chapter 4 is completed.
1.5. What Are The Costs & Schedules ?
The estimated costs of the Route 531/Route 36 feasible alternatives including the Route 31 safety improvements range from $18.28M to $29.69M. The current approved funding for the project is $5.785M for construction, $10.137M in federal Highway Safety Improvement Program funding, $2.039M for ROW acquisition and $0.708M for construction inspection, for a total of $18.669M.
The $8.326M in federal funds are the remaining amounts from a TEA 21-2004 appropriation, described as “Route 531/Brockport-Rochester Corridor in Monroe County, New York” and from SAFETEA-LU Section 1702 described as “Route 531 Expansion Spencerport-Brockport, four lane Highway is a project to extend Route 531”. $7.6M in federal funds is from a statewide allocation of Highway Safety Improvement Program funds, which was awarded to provide safety improvements and traffic calming features at the rural intersections to reduce speeds and provide a transition from the high-speed expressway to the rural, two-lane roadway section. Once a selected preferred alternative is identified and the costs are verified the NYSDOT will explore funding and delivery options if the current programmed amount is inadequate to deliver the entire preferred alternative in a single project.
Design Approval is scheduled for the Fall of 2014 with Construction scheduled to last eighteen (18) months beginning in the Summer of 2016.
Exhibit 1.5 – 1 Project Schedule Activity Date Occurred/ Tentative Scoping Approval May 2010 Design Approval Fall 2014 ROW Acquisition Start Late 2014 through Spring 2016 Construction Start Fall 2016 Substantial Construction Fall 2017 Complete
1-8 OCTOBER 2014 Draft Design Report /Environmental Assessment PIN 4531.07
Exhibit 1.5 – 2 Summary of Alternative Project Costs – Million Dollars (Calculated Year) Conventional Signalized Full Diamond Signalized Superstreet Interchange Activities Intersection Crossover Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 5
Bridge &/or large 0.220 0.220 3.416 Construction culvert Costs Highway 11.329 11.303 17.080
Wetland Mitigation 0.160 0.160 0.160
SPDES Mitigation 0.715 0.660 0.550
Subtotal (2014 Dollars) 12.424 12.343 21.206
Field Change Payment 1 0.790 0.800 1.170
Subtotal (2014 Dollars) 13.214 13.143 22.376
Mobilization (4%) 0.529 0.526 0.895
Subtotal (2014 Dollars) 13.743 13.669 23.271
Contingencies 2 (10% @ 1.374 1.367 2.327 Design Approval)
Subtotal (2014 Dollars) 15.117 15.036 25.598
Construction Inspection 1.209 1.203 2.048 (8%)
ROW Costs 2.039 2.039 2.039 (2012 Dollars)
Total Costs 18.365 18.278 29.685
Notes: 1. According to HDM Chapter 21 Section 21.3.9.4, EB 03-029 & EB 06-057. 2. NYSDOT recommends standard contingencies: 25% Scoping stage, 15% Design Approval stage, 5% Advanced Detail Plans stage. The contingency amount includes anticipated inflation costs.
1.6. Which Alternative is Preferred?
The Department’s preferred alternative is Alternative 2, the At-Grade Conventional Signalized Intersection. A selected alternative will be chosen once all comments received on the draft Design Report/Environmental Assessment and at the Public Hearing are considered.
1-9 OCTOBER 2014 Draft Design Report /Environmental Assessment PIN 4531.07
1.7. What are the Opportunities for Public Involvement?
The New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT), in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is responsible for making the decision on the preferred alternative for the project. When making the decision the NYSDOT has and will consider all comments received from the community, impacted residents and various involved agencies. Two (2) Public Informational meetings were held, a workshop session and a Public Hearing was held as noted below (See Appendix D for meeting minutes).
The purpose of this Design Approval Document is to document findings of the design studies that includes traffic and accident analysis, development of design alternatives, the Right of Way acquisition process and social, economic and environmental studies.
Based upon the data presented in this Design Approval Document, there is continued safety, traffic, pavement and system needs at the Route 531 Terminus and the adjacent segments of Route 31 and Route 36 within this corridor. These improvements being considered are part of the Terminus Improvement project and are not anticipated to have a significant impact on the environment.
There are no known major actions proposed by other governmental agencies within the same area as the proposed project.
Exhibit 1.7 Public Involvement Plan Schedule of Milestone Dates Activity Date Occurred/Tentative Technical Memorandum – Extension Study April 2010 Workshop Session Meeting May 2011 Public Informational Meetings September 2010 / June 2012 Public Hearing Early 2015 Current Project Letting date August 2016
Refer to Appendix D for Public Involvement (PI) Plan and Input from Stakeholders.
There are a variety of ways you can provide your thoughts.
• There will be a Public Hearing scheduled for early 2015 where you can talk to Department representatives, give comments to a stenographer or leave written comments. According to the 2010 census data, 2.5% of the population in this rural area has limited English proficiency, this level does not meet the threshold therefore any Public Information materials would not require translation. For Limited English Proficiency, the limit is greater than 5% of individuals in a census tract.
• You can contact:
Wes Alden, Project Manager Please include the six digit Project Identification Number (PIN) 4531.07 Questions or comments email: [email protected] Telephone: (585) 272-3306
Mailing Address: New York State Department of Transportation Region 4 Design 1530 Jefferson Road Rochester, New York 14623 1-10 OCTOBER 2014 Draft Design Report /Environmental Assessment PIN 4531.07
• You can visit the Project’s website: https://www.nysdot.gov/portal/page/portal/regional- offices/region4/projects/route531terminus
The deadline for submitting comments on this report circulation is 10 days after the Public Hearing .
The remainder of this report is a detailed technical evaluation of the existing conditions, the proposed alternatives, the impacts of the alternatives, copies of technical reports and plans and other supporting information.
1-11