|
1
|
- US 24 West EA
- Technical Leadership Team
- February 9, 2005
|
|
2
|
- NEPA – National Environmental Policy Act
- FHWA role invokes federal environmental law
- EA to determine if significant impacts occur
|
|
3
|
- Identify purpose and need
- Develop alternatives
- Evaluate impacts and mitigations
- Documentation
- Public involvement woven throughout
|
|
4
|
- 20+ environmental resources addressed in EA
- Natural environment
- Built and social environment
|
|
5
|
- Focus: possible alternative-shaping resources
- Preliminary data collected for select environmental resources
|
|
6
|
- Traffic and Accidents
- Floodplains
- Hazardous Waste
- Historic Properties
- Parks and Open Space
- Wildlife and Threatened/Endangered Species
- Environmental Justice
|
|
7
|
- Traffic volumes and accidents may shape the purpose and need
|
|
8
|
- Traffic Volumes
- City of Colorado Springs counts
- CDOT counts and AADTs
- Turning movements from City of Colorado Springs
- Gold Hill Mesa Traffic Study
- PPACG Model Volumes
- 2000 daily model volumes
- 2030 daily, AM, and PM model volumes
|
|
9
|
- Some gaps in existing traffic data
- US 24 accident data for Jan ‘00-Dec ‘02
- Segments rated good, fair, or poor based on statewide accident rates
|
|
10
|
|
|
11
|
- Floodplains may affect alternative structures, alignments or stormwater
facilities
|
|
12
|
- Most of US 24 within 100-year floodplain
- Flooding has occurred in project area
- 1999 and 2000 flooding in Manitou Springs and at 21st
Street/US 24
|
|
13
|
|
|
14
|
- Current studies may redefine floodplain limits
- 100-year limits likely to widen
- Conveyance capacity reduced over time
- Floodplain encroachment serious
local/regional concern
|
|
15
|
- Hazardous waste sites may affect alignments because of ROW limits or
remediation constraints
|
|
16
|
- 118 sites of potential concern within 1,000 feet of US 24
- Types of sites vary in corridor
- On Record/Contaminated/Remediated
- Active/Closed
- Sites of greatest concern are those which are Contaminated and Active
|
|
17
|
|
|
18
|
- 7 sites implementing corrective action plans
- 6 gas stations
- Chief Petroleum Bulk Plant
- All sites less than ¼-mile from US 24 and near Fountain Creek
|
|
19
|
- Gold Hill Mesa
- Former gold extraction facility
- Redeveloping for residential use
|
|
20
|
- Historic properties may affect location of improvements or ROW
acquisition
|
|
21
|
- Includes buildings, structures, archaeological sites and traditional
cultural properties
- Historic properties are eligible or listed on the NRHP because they
- Are associated with important historical events
- Are associated with lives of persons important to history
- Represent significant architecture/engineering style
- Have or may yield important historical information
|
|
22
|
- Properties within 1,000 feet of US 24
- 2 listed on the NRHP
- 8 field-assessed as eligible for the NRHP
- 2 field-assessed as contributing to a Historic District
- Listed, eligible and contributing properties all protected
|
|
23
|
- Two NRHP-listed Historic Districts intersect project limits
- Manitou Springs Historic District generally encompasses all of Manitou
Springs
- Old Colorado City Historic Commercial District along Colorado Ave from
24th to 26th Street
|
|
24
|
|
|
25
|
- Adverse effects include ROW acquisition and altering historic
environment
- Adverse effects influence alternatives design
- Adverse effects require MOA with SHPO and Section 4(f) Evaluation
|
|
26
|
- Parks and open space generate traffic and require access, and may affect
location of improvements or ROW acquisition
|
|
27
|
|
|
28
|
- Wildlife may affect how structures or barriers are designed to prevent
entry onto roadways
- Action can not “harm” federal or state T&E species
|
|
29
|
- FWS lists 13 T&E species in El Paso County
- Preble’s jumping mouse, Arkansas darter, and bald eagles may be present
in project area
|
|
30
|
- Large open space, park, and forest areas south of US 24 in El Paso
County
- No CNHP habitat in study area
- Degraded condition of Fountain Creek limits habitat and wildlife values
in project area
|
|
31
|
|
|
32
|
- Low-income and minority populations must not be disproportionately
adversely affected
|
|
33
|
- No minority or low-income populations identified at Census Block Group
level
- Isolated neighborhoods may exist
|
|
34
|
|