Tier I DEIS Richmond/Hampton Roads Passenger Rail Project CHAPTER 3 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES 3.0 Introduction The purpose of this chapter is to describe the existing environmental conditions in the areas that would be affected by the proposed passenger rail project alternatives; evaluate potential environmental impacts associated with constructing and operating the alternatives; and present potential program-level mitigation strategies to avoid or reduce those impacts. At the end of each section, there are also recommended next steps to be considered as the project advances into more detailed analysis of the selected alternative. This Tier I Draft EIS concentrates primarily on the issues related to intercity passenger and freight rail operations between Richmond and Newport News and between Petersburg and Norfolk. The environmental impacts associated with route alternatives between Richmond and Petersburg are being studied by the SEHSR. Detailed analysis of this segment is contained in the SEHSR Tier I Documents and the Tier II document under development.20 The SEHSR Tier II EIS, under development, will identify specific actions needed to fully implement high speed rail in the corridor, including the identification of specific alignments, station locations, and number of train stops, detailed environmental and engineering analyses and more accurate capital cost estimates. During the Tier II process, planning will be done to avoid, minimize and mitigate environmental impacts. This EIS provides generalized cost estimates for the Richmond - Petersburg section for comparative evaluation of alternatives. 3.1 Travel Demand This section describes passenger rail demand projections for the Richmond/Hampton Roads study area. It includes an analysis of passenger ridership forecasts and impacts on travel times. Passenger rail travel demand is the primary measurement of transportation benefits for this project. Ridership travel demand measures the potential attractiveness of a new passenger rail service investment for the traveling public. Several measures of ridership were examined to determine the impacts associated with the build alternatives. These measures include average annual passenger rail trips for each Build alternative and the change in ridership when compared to the Status Quo and No Action Alternatives. 3.1.1 Methodology Travel demand analysis was initially performed for the project and reported in the Travel Demand Methodology and Results Report in April 2005, and updated in March 2008 (http://www.rich2hrrail.info/pages/mp_reports.html). The travel demand model applied in this analysis was developed from extensive market research and observed travel volumes and service characteristics by travel mode that were conducted and assembled in study area markets in the southeast and other regions21. For application in this study area, data describing travel within the Richmond/Hampton Roads region was used, including existing travel trips by mode and purpose, and population/employment market growth. The travel demand forecasting approach utilized a two-stage model system. The first stage forecasted the growth in the total number of travel trips in each market, and the second stage predicted the market share of 20 SEHSR Tier I documents and current information about the Tier II documents can be found at www.sehsr.org. 21 Phase II – New Orleans to Mobile Corridor Development Plan, Ridership and Revenue Forecasts prepared for Southern Rapid Rail Transit Commission (January 2005); Pacific Northwest Rail Corridor, Ridership and Revenue Forecasts in Support of the Amtrak Cascades Plan for Washington State 2003-2023 Update (July 2003); Southeast High-Speed Rail (SEHSR) and other corridor studies for adjacent states in the Southeast (1997-2008); California intercity passenger rail forecasting in the Pacific Surfliner, Capitol, and San Joaquin corridors for Amtrak and California (1996-2008). Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Page 3-1 Richmond Hampton Roads Passenger Rail Project Tier I DEIS each available travel mode in each market. Both stages were dependent on the service characteristics of each travel mode and the characteristics of the study area population. Additional details regarding the travel demand modeling analysis methodology may be found in Appendix G of this Tier I Draft EIS. A brief description of the required model inputs is provided below. Key travel demand model data sources include the three Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) in the study area: Hampton Roads Planning District Commission (HRPDC); Richmond Regional Planning District Commission (RRPDC); and Crater Planning District Commission (CPDC). Current (2007) travel volumes across all travel modes within the study area were estimated from the following sources: Origin-destination license plate survey conducted at two locations in the Richmond/Hampton Roads region in September 2004. Origin-destination data compiled as part of a 1994 survey for the Chesapeake Bay Bridge-Tunnel (CBBT) Study. Origin-destination data collected in 1995 in conjunction with data from the Southeast High-Speed Rail Study. Actual air travel and Amtrak ridership data. Socio-economic data and forecasts provided by local and state sources within the Richmond/Hampton Roads study area and supplemented by the national vendor Moody’s Economy.com were applied to the current travel volume estimates to project estimated future automobile, air, and rail (No-Build) travel trips. Current and future highway characteristics were provided by the local MPOs in the Richmond/Hampton Roads study area, supplemented by a national data source to account for the remaining highway network in the travel demand study area. Published Amtrak timetables (2007) provided the basis for quantifying the travel time and frequency of intercity passenger rail service in each market. Average rail fares were computed by dividing actual Amtrak revenue by ridership and airfares. According to Amtrak, current (2007) on-time performance of trains serving the Richmond/Hampton Roads study area is approximately 72 percent. Current market-based air travel data, including travel times and fares, were provided by an outside vendor, BACK Associates. 3.1.2 Regulatory Requirements The FRA’s Procedures for Considering Environmental Impacts (64 Fed. Reg. 28545 (May 26, 1999)), under the topic of transportation states, “The EIS should assess the impacts on both passenger and freight transportation, by all modes, from local, regional, national and international perspectives. The EIS should include a discussion of both construction period and long-term impacts on vehicular traffic congestion.” 3.1.3 Affected Environment The Richmond/Hampton Roads study area stretches approximately 120 miles from Virginia Beach and southeastern Hampton Roads to the western suburbs of Richmond. I-64 connects the Peninsula/CSXT route from end-to-end and Route 460 connects the Southside/NS route from end-to-end. The mouth of the James River presents a natural barrier in the study area, separating the Peninsula from the Southside. Two crossings, the Hampton Roads Bridge-Tunnel and the Monitor-Merrimac Bridge-Tunnel, provide automobile access from the Southside to the Peninsula. The travel demand study area includes the portion of I-95 in the Northeast Corridor stretching from Petersburg to Boston, MA; including Washington, DC; Baltimore, MD; Philadelphia, PA; and New York, NY. The study area also includes the portion of the I-85 Corridor consistent with the proposed SEHSR project, Page 3-2 Chapter 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Tier I DEIS Richmond/Hampton Roads Passenger Rail Project stretching between Petersburg and Charlotte, NC; including Raleigh, NC; Durham, NC; Greensboro, NC; and Winston-Salem, NC. Amtrak intercity passenger rail service, Greyhound intercity bus service, and direct airline service operate in the study area. Currently Amtrak provides two daily round-trip trains between Newport News and Richmond, with through service to the Northeast Corridor. Amtrak also provides service between Newport News and the Southeast through connections in Richmond. Greyhound provides six direct daily round-trips between Norfolk and Richmond, but provides limited direct intercity bus service to destinations outside the Richmond/Hampton Roads region. Greyhound provides one direct daily round-trip between Norfolk and Washington, DC, three direct daily round-trips between Norfolk and New York, NY, and no direct daily round-trips between Norfolk and Charlotte, NC. Though there is no direct air travel service between the three major airports within the study area, (Norfolk International, Newport News-Williamsburg International, and Richmond International), the airports provide direct daily service to all of the major cities in the northeast and southeast. 3.1.4 Environmental Consequences This section provides an overview of the potential effects of travel demand, followed by a discussion of each of the proposed alternatives. If any alternative is selected and advanced, future travel conditions would be analyzed in more detail and additional ridership forecasts will be prepared as part of the Tier II EIS. 3.1.4.1 Range of Passenger Rail Ridership Forecasts As described above, the analysis and prediction of future intercity passenger rail travel demand began with quantifying existing travel by mode, geography, and trip purpose. The analysis included an examination of existing automobile,