Record of Decision for the West Davis Corridor Project in Davis and Weber Counties, Utah by Federal Highway Administration, Utah Division in cooperation with Utah Department of Transportation UDOT Project No. S-0067(14)0 September 29, 2017 This page is intentionally blank. Summary Introduction This document is the Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) Record of Decision (ROD) for the West Davis Corridor (WDC) Project in Davis and Weber Counties, Utah. The WDC Project was initiated for two main reasons. First, the project was initiated to address the expected population, employment, and household growth in western Davis and Weber Counties through 2040 by improving regional travel (regional mobility) for automobile, transit, and freight trips. This improvement in regional mobility would be achieved by reducing roadway congestion in the WDC study area. Second, the project was initiated at the request of the city governments and the area’s metropolitan planning organization, whose local and regional transportation plans and corridor planning studies have identified a need for additional transportation infrastructure in the WDC study area. This ROD constitutes FHWA’s approval of Alternative B1 with the Wetland Avoidance Option (Selected Alternative) as described in the WDC Final Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation (Final EIS). This decision is based on the information presented in the Final EIS and supporting technical documents; the associated project file; and input received from the public and interested local, state, and federal agencies. In making this decision, FHWA considered the expected impacts of the project and alternative courses of action under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966, and other applicable laws, thereby balancing the need for safe and efficient transportation with national, state, and local environmental protection goals. Decision FHWA, pursuant to 23 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 771.127 and 40 CFR 1505.2, finds that the requirements of NEPA and other applicable laws have been satisfied for the construction and operation of the Selected Alternative. This ROD is based on FHWA’s involvement in, close monitoring of, and independent evaluations of the process followed by the WDC study team in setting forth and considering the effects of the WDC and the available alternatives. This process included preparing the Draft EIS (published May 2013), the Final EIS (published June 2017), and supporting technical memoranda. This ROD describes the basis for the decision, describes the alternatives considered, identifies the environmentally preferred alternative as the Selected Alternative, and documents the mitigation measures that will be implemented. The summary descriptions included in this ROD do not supersede or negate any of the information, descriptions, or evaluations provided in the environmental review documents, except what is expressly stated below. This ROD and the associated published environmental review documents, which are September 29, 2017 i incorporated into this ROD by reference, constitute FHWA’s environmental record for the WDC Project. Based on the analysis and evaluation in the Final EIS and after careful consideration of the social, economic, and environmental factors and input from the public involvement process, FHWA hereby approves the selection of Alternative B1 with the Wetland Avoidance Option (Selected Alternative) as identified in the Final EIS. This approval constitutes FHWA’s acceptance of Alternative B1 with the Wetland Avoidance Option and completes the approval process for the environmental evaluation. The Selected Alternative, shown in Figure 1 on page 2 of this ROD, is also the environmentally preferable alternative. FHWA has determined that the Selected Alternative best meets the transportation needs for the traveling public while considering environmental, safety, and socioeconomic factors. This decision is based on the Final EIS, public and agency comments received during the EIS process, and the entire project record. In reaching our decision, FHWA has considered all of the issues raised in the project record including the information contained in (and comments on) the Draft and Final EISs. The Selected Alternative was developed through a public process that included project adjustments to avoid and minimize environmental impacts. FHWA consulted with other federal and state agencies including the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; the Utah Reclamation, Mitigation, and Conservation Commission; the Utah Department of Environmental Quality; the Utah Department of Natural Resources; the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources; the Utah State Historic Preservation Office; the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation; and Native American tribes. A full list of interagency coordination is included in Chapter 30, Public and Agency Consultation and Coordination, of the Final EIS. Limitation on Claims FHWA will publish a notice in the Federal Register, pursuant to 23 United States Code 139(1), stating that one or more federal agencies have taken final action on permits, licenses, or approvals for this transportation project. After the notice is published, claims seeking judicial review of those federal agency actions will be barred unless such claims are filed within 150 days after the date of publication of the notice, or within such shorter time period as is specified in the federal laws pursuant to which judicial review of the federal agency action is allowed. ii Record of Decision Contents ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................................. viii GLOSSARY OF TERMS ....................................................................................................... ix 1.0 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Corrections and New Information on the Final EIS..............................................3 2.0 PROJECT PURPOSE (CHAPTER 1 OF THE FINAL EIS) ......................................... 3 3.0 ALTERNATIVES (CHAPTER 2 OF THE FINAL EIS) ............................................... 4 3.1 Summary of the Alternatives-Development Process (Section 2.2 of the Final EIS) ..............................................................................................................4 3.1.1 Identification of Preliminary Alternatives ..............................................5 3.1.2 Screening of Alternatives ..................................................................... 13 3.2 Alternatives Considered for Detailed Study (Section 2.4 of the Final EIS) ..................................................................................................................... 32 3.2.1 No-Action Alternative .......................................................................... 32 3.2.2 Alternative A1 ...................................................................................... 32 3.2.3 Alternative A2 ...................................................................................... 39 3.2.4 Alternative B1 (Selected Alternative) .................................................. 43 3.2.5 Alternative B2 ...................................................................................... 47 3.2.6 Wetland Avoidance Options ................................................................. 50 3.3 Rationale for the Selected Alternative (Section 2.6 of the Final EIS) ................ 52 3.4 Environmentally Preferred Alternative ............................................................... 53 4.0 MEASURES TO MINIMIZE HARM FROM THE SELECTED ALTERNATIVE (CHAPTER 26 OF THE FINAL EIS) ...................................................................... 54 4.1 Mitigation Measures for Land Use Impacts ........................................................ 54 4.2 Mitigation Measures for Farmland Impacts ........................................................ 55 4.2.1 Mitigation Measures for Impacts to Cropland, Century Farms, and Other Non–Century Farms of Interest ........................................... 55 4.2.2 Mitigation Measures for Impacts to FPPA-Eligible Farmland ............. 55 4.2.3 Mitigation Measures for Impacts to Farmland Fragmentation ............. 56 4.2.4 Mitigation Measures for Impacts to Agriculture Protection Areas ..................................................................................................... 57 4.3 Mitigation Measures for Community Impacts .................................................... 57 4.3.1 Mitigation Measures for Impacts to Community Cohesion .................. 57 4.3.2 Mitigation Measures for Impacts to Quality of Life ............................. 57 4.3.3 Mitigation Measures for Impacts to Recreation Resources .................. 57 4.3.4 Mitigation Measures for Impacts to Community Facilities .................. 58 4.3.5 Mitigation Measures for Impacts to Public Health and Safety ............. 58 4.3.6 Mitigation Measures for Impacts to Public Services and Utilities ................................................................................................. 59 4.3.7 Mitigation Measures for Impacts to Housing and Relocations ............. 59 4.4 Mitigation Measures for Environmental Justice Impacts .................................... 59 4.5 Mitigation Measures for Transportation Impacts ...............................................