South Oak Cliff Corridor Blue Line Extension 2.0 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED This chapter describes the alternatives considered during the South Oak Cliff Corridor Blue Line Extension Alternatives Analysis (AA) and the alternative considered in this Environmental Assessment (EA) process. Seven light rail transit (LRT) alternatives, a Bus/Transportation System Management (TSM) Alternative and a No‐Build Alternative were evaluated during the AA phase. Two alternatives were considered during the EA phase, a No‐Build Alternative and an LRT Alternative, referred to here as the Build Alternative. The No‐Build Alternative includes transportation and transit projects that have a reasonable expectation of funding and/or are programmed for implementation. This alternative is used as a basis for comparison against the potential environmental impacts that would be associated with the proposed Build Alternative. The proposed action is a 2.6‐mile light rail transit project between Ledbetter Station and the University of North Texas Dallas campus derived from the AA process. 2.1 Alternatives Analysis The study area considered in the AA phase encompasses the area bound by Interstate Highway (IH) 20 and Ledbetter Drive (Loop 12), stretching from one‐half mile west of University Hills Boulevard to one‐half mile east of Lancaster Road [State Highway (SH) 342], accounting for approximately four square miles. The AA study area is wholly within Dallas County. Ledbetter Station, the Blue Line’s current southern terminus, is within the study area. Figure 2‐1 presents the regional location of the AA‐level study area. 2.1.1 Screening and Selection Process The screening and selection process followed during the AA phase consisted of two distinct phases: Conceptual and Detailed Evaluation. The Conceptual phase considered three LRT alternatives, two of which had vertical profile options. The three most promising LRT alternatives were carried into the Detailed Evaluation phase for comparison against a no‐build alternative and a bus/TSM alternative. The public input process conducted during the Detailed Evaluation phase produced two more LRT alternatives to consider. 2.1.2 Alternatives Considered for Conceptual Evaluation The Conceptual Evaluation process was designed to consider a range of light rail options available in the study area to serve existing and projected transportation needs and then narrow the number of LRT alternatives considered in the Detailed Evaluation phase. The LRT alternatives considered are shown in Figure 2‐2 and included the previously approved alignment (Alignment 3), which followed the west side of the open space in the study area; an alignment at the eastern side of the open space in the study area (Alignment 1); and one between the other two alignments (Alignment 2). The rolling terrain provided the opportunity to consider alternate vertical options for two of the alignments. For Alignment 1, one alternative (Alignment 1A) proposed traveling at‐grade before and after Camp Wisdom Station, which was located in a retained cut, while the other alternative (Alignment 1B) traveled on aerial structure and the station was at grade. Draft Local Environmental Assessment 2‐1 South Oak Cliff Corridor Blue Line Extension Figure 2‐1 South Oak Cliff Corridor Blue Line Extension Alternatives Analysis Study Area Source: CMEC, 2012 2‐2 Draft Local Environmental Assessment South Oak Cliff Corridor Blue Line Extension Figure 2‐2 South Oak Cliff Corridor Blue Line Extension Alignment Alternatives for Conceptual Evaluation Source: South Oak Cliff Corridor Blue Line Extension Alternatives Analysis: LPA Report ‐ GPC, 2012 Draft Local Environmental Assessment 2‐3 South Oak Cliff Corridor Blue Line Extension For Alignment 2, one alternative (Alignment 2A) proposed an at‐grade Camp Wisdom Station located just north of the City of Dallas police substation. In the other alternative (Alignment 2B), the proposed station location was on aerial structure straddling Camp Wisdom Road. As a result of the varying horizontal and vertical alignments, a total of five LRT alternatives were evaluated. The full evaluation of conceptual alternatives is documented in the South Oak Cliff Corridor Blue Line Extension Alternatives Analysis: Conceptual Definition and Evaluation of Alternatives Report (General Planning Consultant, 2011). Criteria to evaluate alternatives reflected the alternative’s ability to: Enhance mobility Promote sustainability Strive for consensus Be fiscally responsible Consider appropriate technologies Minimize community and environmental impacts Based on the evaluation results, the range of LRT alternatives was narrowed from five to three (1B, 2A, and 3). The key alignment priorities revealed during the public input process conducted in conjunction with the conceptual evaluation were to: Maximize the distance of the alignment from the Villages of Runyon Springs and Singing Hills neighborhoods Encourage economic development in the open areas through which the alignment passes Minimize noise impacts to the Villages of Runyon Springs and Singing Hills neighborhoods 2.1.3 Alternatives Considered for Detailed Evaluation The Detailed Evaluation phase considered the three LRT alternatives carried forward from the Conceptual Evaluation phase as well as the No‐Build and Bus/TSM Alternatives which were included for comparison purposes. The Detailed Evaluation/Locally Preferred Alternative Report (General Planning Consultant, March 2012) documents the evaluation process and its outcome. The No‐Build Alternative assumes no new bus routes but does include service improvements to meet the needs of expected growth in the area. It includes all projects contained in the DART financial plan. The Bus/TSM Alternative consists of Bus Rapid Transit service along a line approximating the light rail alignments considered. This alternative is made up of priority bus service down Lancaster Road and then a dedicated roadway from Camp Wisdom Road along the southern boundary of UNT Dallas. Light Rail Transit Alternatives Considered The three horizontal alignments were carried forth from the conceptual level analysis for detailed evaluation. The LRT alternatives considered in the Detailed Evaluation phase were: 2‐4 Draft Local Environmental Assessment South Oak Cliff Corridor Blue Line Extension 1B – This alignment is closest to Lancaster Road and includes an at‐grade Camp Wisdom Station location near Lancaster Road. 2A – This alignment goes to the west of the large hill known as Adam’s Ridge then turns east to run parallel to Patrol Way and includes an at‐grade Camp Wisdom Station location just north of the Police Substation. 3 – This alignment goes to the west of Adam’s Ridge and the Police Substation and includes an at‐grade Camp Wisdom Station location northwest of the Police Substation. All alternatives are greenfield options and follow the same alignment along the UNT Dallas boundary. 2.1.4 Rationale for Choosing the Locally Preferred Alternative The rationale for the selection of the Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) was based on a detailed and comprehensive evaluation and extensive public and agency involvement. The public and agency input process for this project is documented in the South Oak Cliff Corridor Blue Line Extension Alternatives Analysis: Public Involvement Plan (General Planning Consultant, 2011). Interest in the project and its potential to spur economic development in a historically under‐ developed area led to broad community engagement and input. Two meetings were held specifically to discuss the LRT alignment and economic development potential. The first of these meetings was attended primarily by local developers, City of Dallas staff, and DART staff. The outcome of this meeting was an alternative combining elements of two of the LRT alternatives (culminating in Alternative 2C). This alternative directly addressed the concerns of the owner of the large parcel in the northern portion of the study area as well as optimized the size and location of remaining parcels to support economic development. The second meeting was a workshop with members of all working groups invited to attend. Two alignments were the main topic of discussion at this workshop: Alternative 2C, and a second alignment suggested by the Community Work Group to share a boundary line with the Lancaster Road right‐of‐way. This second alignment was called Alternative 1C. Details of this workshop are presented in Design Charrette for the South Oak Cliff (SOC‐3) Blue Line Extensions Alternatives Analysis (ZGF, November 14, 2011). Based on the results of the detailed evaluation and these two workshops, light rail was chosen as the mode to serve this corridor and Alternative 2C was chosen as the LPA, documented in Detailed Evaluation/Locally Preferred Alternative Report (General Planning Consultant, March 2012). Light rail transit was chosen as the preferred mode for this corridor since it provides the most benefits to transit users in terms of travel convenience and it offers the greatest economic development potential, while remaining compliant with local planning efforts laid out for South Dallas. LRT is also distinguished by better integration with existing transit infrastructure and maintenance facilities. Of the various LRT alternatives considered, the LPA offered lower noise impact, the most economic development potential, and the highest public and stakeholder acceptance based on the results of public involvement and the alternatives analysis phase. The LPA connects Ledbetter