REGION 8 POUGHKEEPSIE, NEW YORK DRAFT DESIGN REPORT/ DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Report Chapters 1 to 8 NYS ROUTE 17 AT EXIT 122 TOWN OF WALLKILL ORANGE COUNTY, NEW YORK P.I.N. 8006.72 May 2007 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ELIOT C. SPITZER, Governor ASTRID C. GLYNN., Commissioner CONVERSION FROM INCH-POUND TO METRIC UNITS The Federal Government has designated the metric system as the preferred system of weights and measures in order to improve the competitiveness of American business and industry in the world marketplace. It is the policy of the Federal Highway Administration and the New York State Department of Transportation to convert from inch-pound to metric units for all projects to be let for con- struction after September 30, 1996. Therefore, this project is being designed using metric units. The text of this report uses metric (inch-pound units). The following table of approximate conversion factors provides the relationship between metric and inch pound unit for some of the more frequently used units in highway design. Metric Unit = Inch-Pound Unit x Factor Length kilometer (km) = miles (mi) x 1.61 " meter (m) = feet (ft) x 0.305 Area hectares (ha) = acre (a) x 0.405 " sq. meter (m2) = sq. yard (sy) x 0.836 " sq. meter (m2) = sq. foot (sf) x 0.093 Volume cubic meter (m3) = cubic yard (cy) x 0.765 " cubic meter (m3) = cubic foot (cf) x 0.028 Document Summary The purpose of this section is to provide you with information you can use to easily understand why the project is needed, what alternatives have been considered and how each alternative meets the project goals and affects the environment. This summary will also outline the different ways you can provide feedback and comments on the project. The New York State Department of Transportation and Federal Highway Administration are trying a new format for this summary that uses clear, concise writing and effective graphics to provide a reader friendly summary of the project. Since this is a new format we are interested in your opinion of this format. If you find this to be an effective tool for understanding an overview of the project without having to read pages of technical documentation, please let us know. If you find this format does not give you a clear overview of the project, please let us know and include your suggestions to make it better. William J. Gorton P.E. Regional Design Engineer New York State Department of Transportation Existing Aerial View of Exit 122 Page i Where is the project located? The project is located entirely in the Town of Wallkill at Exit 122 along Route 17 between I84 (Exit 121) and the Wallkill River Why is the project needed? Exit 122 on Route 17 has been the subject of conversation in the Town of Wallkill and Orange County for many years. The increase in traffic using this exit has grown with the overall increase in traffic on Route 17 and as a result of the growing residential and commercial development around the exit. The exit was built in the 1950’s and was not designed for the amount of traffic it is currently serving. Several of the major problems are: • Very sharp curves on the ramps • The closeness of the exit and entrance ramps to the I84 ramps, which is resulting in a high accident pattern especially west bound (towards I84) • The delays at the ramp intersections with Crystal Run Road and East Main Street • The steep grade on East Main Street. These conditions have lead to accidents and back ups on Route 17 as drivers get on and off the ramps at East Main Street and Crystal Run Road. Page ii In addition the State Department of Transportation has a program to convert Route 17 to a Federal Interstate highway to be numbered I-86. To accomplish this, many roadway features need to be upgraded to the current requirements for Interstate highways. The benefit of this conversion is to enhance the economic potential of the Route 17 corridor. Who is leading this project? This project is led by a partnership of two agencies: the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT). FHWA is the federal lead agency and is responsible for ensuring federal regulations and standards are followed. FHWA has the primary responsibility for the content and accuracy of National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documents, including this Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS), and has approval authority for all expenditures of federal-aid highway funds. NYSDOT is the owner of Route 17 and responsible for its maintenance. NYSDOT also has the responsibility to evaluate the proposed alternatives under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQR). The Town of Wallkill and Orange County are significant stakeholders in this project as the Town owns and maintains Crystal Run Road and the County owns and maintains East Main Street. NYSDOT has been working cooperatively with both agencies and this relationship will continue as the project progresses. What are the goals of the project? The goals for this project are: • To improve Exit 122 to meet Federal standards for an interstate exit • To improve Route 17 to meet Federal Interstate standards • To improve the operation and safety of Route 17, Crystal Run Road and East Main Street for existing traffic and for reasonably foreseeable increases in traffic due to planned development in the area around the exit. Page iii How were the project boundaries selected? The limits of the project were selected to provide a logical connection to the local highways that intersect with Route 17 at Exit 122, and along Route 17, at the end of our proposed improvements to the exit. The remainder of Route 17 will be upgraded by separate projects. What alternatives are being considered? There were many different solutions to the problems developed over the years. There are five alternatives thoroughly discussed in this report. Please see Figures below. Four of these alternatives (2C, 2C1, 2C2 and 2C Modified) are a variation of a similar theme for the exit and different choices for relocating of East Main Street and Crystal Run Road. Alternative 2E takes a different approach for the exit and keeps Crystal Run Road close to its existing location. All the alternatives meet the goals of this project. Page iv Page v Page vi What do the Alternatives cost? The costs vary for the different alternatives and some of these alternatives include a local (Town and/or County) contribution for improvements to the Town and County highways. The costs are summarized in the following table. ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTS (in Millions) Alternative Alternative Alternative Alternative Alternative 2C 2C Modified 2C(1) 2C(2) 2E State Local State Local State Local State Local State Local Share Share Share Share Share Share Share Share Share Share TOTAL $77.7 $14.2 $90.6 -- $78.4 $4.6 $82.2 $6.1 $63.7 $4.7 Cost by Share TOTAL Cost by $92 $91 $83 $89 $69 Alternative How do the alternatives affect the environment? Included in this report is a detailed analysis on how the project alternatives impact the environment. The conclusions are summarized in a comparison table for easy review. The primary environmental areas of concern are: • The Wallkill River – None of the proposed alternatives have a direct impact on the Wallkill River. All the alternatives will have a minor impact on the 100 year floodplain. As an environmental enhancement to the Wallkill River all the alternatives include the construction of a canoe launch near Midway Road. • Wetlands – All of the alternatives have impacts to wetlands. These impacts are unavoidable, will be minimized as much as possible and mitigated as necessary. Permits will be required from the US Army Corps of Engineers. • Archeologically Significant Sites – The undeveloped areas around the exit have been identified with a high potential for pre-historic archeology. These sites are identified and avoided as much as practicable. Where there are impacts, appropriate data recovery investigations will be prepared and the findings will be documented in accordance with regulatory guidance. • Property Impacts - All of the alternatives include large property acquisitions including residential (1-2) and business (6) relocations. Page vii Alternative Alternative Alternative Alternative 2C Alternative 2E 2C Mod. 2C(1) 2C(2) Environmental Impacts Wetland 3.26 acres 2.42 acres 2.83 acres 2.83 acres 1.72 acres impacts 100 year floodplain 3.1 acres 3.1 acres 3.1acres 3.1 acres 3.3 acres impact Archeological 7 sites 7 sites 7 sites 7 sites 6 sites Sites Impacted impacted impacted impacted impacted impacted Impact to 28.7 acres 25.6 acres 15.4 acres 20.4 acres 18.6 acres forested areas Noise Impacts 5 Residences 5 Residences 1 Residence 1 Residence 1 Residence 94 acres 87 acres 71 acres 75 acres 74 acres Property 5 businesses 5 businesses 5 businesses 5 businesses 5 businesses impacts 2 residence 2 residences 1 residence 1 residence 1 residence Table of Comparison of Environmental Impacts All the alternatives include Stormwater Management facilities to protect the surface and ground waters from increases in polluted runoff. Who will decide which alternative will be selected and how can I be involved in this decision? Ultimately, the two lead agencies decide which alternative will be selected. However, this decision relies heavily on both technical information and community feedback. You are invited to participate in this project by reviewing the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS), attending the public hearing, and providing your comments on the information presented.