Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBID - 7332 MAX BRT PROJECT (14)MEMO Michael Baker Jr., Inc. Page 1 of 11 To: Kurt Ravenschlag Date: February 11, 2010 From: Denise Weston and Mary Keith Floyd Re: Mason Corridor - Environmental Justice Compliance This technical memo includes an excerpt from Chapter 3 of the Mason Corridor Mason Express Bus Rapid Transit Environmental Assessment (EA) completed for the City of Fort Collins in July of 2008. Additional research on Environmental Justice has been completed to document compliance with the requirements for the Environmental Justice Analysis of Construction Projects under Title VI Circular 4702.1.A Chapter IV, Section 8. 3.4 Environmental Justice In February 1994 President Clinton issued Executive Order 12898 requiring federal agencies to incorporate the consideration of environmental justice into the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) evaluation process. The purpose of this order was to ensure that minority and low- income populations and minority-owned businesses do not receive disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental impacts as a result of federal actions. E.O.12898 was enacted to reinforce Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which states, “No person in the United States shall, on the grounds of race, color or national origin be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.” Subsequent Orders at the state and federal level, including DOT Order 5610.2 Order To Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations (U.S. DOT, 1997) have reinforced the directives outlined in E.O. 12898. On May 13, 2007 the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) issued Title VI and Title VI- Dependent Guidelines for FTA Recipients. The purpose of this circular is to provide recipients of FTA financial assistance with guidance and instruction necessary to carry out Title VI of the Civil Rights Act and comply with the requirements of DOT Order 5610.2 and the DOT Policy Guidance Concerning Recipient’s Responsibilities to Limited English Proficient (LEP) Persons (70 FR 74087, December 14, 2005). The analysis that follows has been prepared in accordance with this and all other applicable guidance for addressing environmental justice. 3.4.1 Affected Environment 3.4.1.1.1 Minority Populations and Minority Owned Businesses The discussion of minority populations is based upon information from 2000 Census data at the block level. Information regarding minority business enterprises within the study area is derived from the Disadvantaged Business Enterprise program, the Colorado Minority Business Office, and the City of Fort Collins planning department. Minority populations are comprised of ethnic and/or racial minorities. As defined in DOT Order 5610.2, a minority is a person who is Black, Hispanic, Asian American, or American Indian or Page 2 of 11 Alaskan Native. It is important to note that Hispanic or Latino heritage is considered an ethnicity; a person of Hispanic of Latino origin can identify with any racial group. To avoid double counting, the total White, Non-Hispanic population of a geographic area is subtracted from the total population to generate the total minority population. The percentage of minorities is then compared to city or county averages. Any blocks with a higher percentage of minorities than the respective city or county are evaluated for disproportionately high and adverse effects and are targeted for outreach. Fort Collins contains a minority population of 15 percent. There are a total of 245 census blocks within 0.25 mile of the MAX BRT/Mason Corridor. Of these, 59 contain minority populations that exceed the 15 percent threshold. These are shown in Figure 3-3. One minority-owned business – the CE Group (400 Remington Street) - is located within the study area. The CE Group was formed in 1998 and offers a full scope of mechanical, plumbing and control systems, design engineering services and construction observation. There is no evidence to suggest that this business has any particular connection to a minority community or provides employment, goods and/or services uniquely important to a minority population group. 3.4.1.1.2 Low-Income Populations DOT Order 5610.2 defines low-income as “… a person whose median household income is below the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) poverty guidelines.” The method used for identifying low-income populations in the study area is to calculate the number and percentage of low-income households within an area using census data at the block group level and compare this figure with national poverty guidelines set annually by the HHS to determine financial eligibility for certain federal programs. Any block group in the study area with a higher percentage of low-income households than that of the respective city or county are evaluated for disproportionately high and adverse effects and are targeted for outreach. The 2007 national poverty guideline reported by HHS for a family of four is $20,650. In Fort Collins, 21 percent of households fall below this threshold. There are a total of 25 census block groups within 0.25 mile of the MAX BRT/Mason Corridor. As shown in Figure 3-4, in 16 of these more than 21 percent of households fall below the threshold of $20,650. Nine of the block groups that are considered low-income are located in the vicinity of the CSU campus. This area is dominated by student housing that includes dormitories, apartment complexes, and older single-family homes. In general, students are not permanent residents, and do not constitute low-income households with critical social and community ties. Of the low-income block groups not associated with CSU, one is located in the northernmost portion of Mason Street. Most of the homes in this area are located in neighborhoods that extend up to a mile north and west of the study area. Low-income households are also identified in four block groups east of Mason Street, in neighborhoods behind the businesses that front College Avenue. The two block groups west of Mason Street between Prospect and Drake Roads do not contain any households in the portion of the block group that falls within the study area. Page 3 of 11 . Page 4 of 11 Figure 3-4 Low-Income Populations Close evaluation of the combined information presented in Figures 3-3 and 3-4 indicates that all Page 5 of 11 of the stations/stops and the majority of the corridor are within or adjacent to low-income and/or minority populations. There is only one small section of the corridor, located between Troutman and Drake, that does not have identified low-income or minority populations directly adjacent to the project corridor. It is, however, within a quarter of a mile of a low-income and/or minority population, therefore, it will be considered under the same level of analysis as the remainder of the corridor. 3.4.1.1.3 Specialized Outreach Specialized outreach to minority and low-income populations was conducted as part of the public involvement process to gather comments and concerns regarding the project. While it was expected that minority and low-income populations would receive project information through the general public outreach, additional efforts were made to ensure an increased level of awareness and participation in the project. Public meetings were announced in both the local English and Spanish press (the Coloradoan and La Tribuna). Flyers with information about the project and upcoming public involvement activities were delivered to many locations where minority and low-income populations might have access to them. A complete list of posted locations is included in the Agency and Public Coordination Report, associated with the EA. In addition, a Spanish translator was made available at the March 8, 2007 open house. 3.4.2 Environmental Consequences 3.4.2.1 No Action Alternative Adverse Effects The No Action Alternative would not result in disproportionately high and adverse impacts to minority or low-income populations. However, residents of low income and/or minority neighborhoods along the corridor would continue to struggle with a congested transportation system and limited alternatives to vehicular travel. The traffic congestion and lack of transit options would hinder access to housing, businesses, and community facilities and services for minority and low-income populations, as well as the overall community. The No Action Alternative would not support the transit oriented development (TOD) overlay along the corridor which has been adopted by the City, and would, therefore, not encourage economic development in Fort Collins. The No Action Alternative would not provide minority and low-income populations with the accessibility benefits associated with BRT service. Low-income populations in particular, are often dependent on transit and would particularly benefit from expanded service. Traffic The No Action Alternative would not benefit from the expected improvement in level of service (LOS) that would result from the Mason BRT project. As further identified in the EA, ten intersections along College Avenue were evaluated for LOS impacts. Seven of these intersections would improve, one would remain the same, and two would decrease under the Build Alternative. These overall benefits would not be realized under the No Action Alternative. Positive Effects Under the No Action Alternative, the current bus route would remain on College Avenue. Page 6 of 11 Although the travel-time would be longer the proximity to commercial and retail development would remain in its existing condition, closer and more familiar to regular transit riders. Under the No Action alternative there would be no loss of parking at various locations along the corridor. 3.4.2.2 Build Alternative Adverse Effects During and After Construction The following provides a summary of the potential adverse effects associated with the Build Alternative as they relate to the low-income and/or minority populations located adjacent to the Mason Corridor. No businesses would be displaced and no residential relocations would occur as a result of the Mason BRT Project. No businesses or employees would be displaced and no residential relocations would occur along the entire corridor. Visual Impacts There will be visual impacts as a result of the construction of the BRT system. Consideration and minimization of these impacts have been consistent along the length of the corridor. Given the existing railroad facility, the modifications to the view shed are not considered significant in any areas. Retaining walls will be constructed in several locations along the corridor some of which have been identified within low income and/or minority census blocks. However, the criteria for placement of these walls was based on safety and drainage concerns and do not imply a disproportionate impact. Intersection Congestion Although overall traffic congestion, as measured by vehicle miles traveled (VMT), is expected to reduce by two percent (2%) under the Build Alternative, as compared to the No Action Alternative, there are some specific intersections that will result in an increase in traffic levels. All of the intersections along the corridor are located within or adjacent to low-income and/or minority areas; therefore, the impacts have not been identified to be disproportionate to the rest of the corridor. Intersection analysis does include potential traffic increases to and from the Park-N-Ride and Kiss-N-Ride locations. Results indicate that during the AM Peak, three intersections are expected to have a reduced level of service (LOS) and during the PM Peak, only two intersections are expected to have a reduced level of service. All other intersections resulted in an improved LOS or maintained the same LOS. Two of the intersections with LOS reduction were from LOS A to LOS B (Mason/Cherry and Mason/Troutman [AM]). This minimal modification is not considered a significant impact. Two more of the intersections with LOS reduction were within the downtown activity center (Laurel/Mason and College/Drake); therefore, a LOS F and LOS E, respectively are acceptable according to the Transportation Master Plan and will not result in significant impacts to the adjacent land use. The remaining intersection with identified LOS reduction is Mason/Troutman during the PM Peak. The LOS reduction at this location is from LOS B to LOS E. This is a notable difference and is most likely a result of the proposed Kiss-N-Ride at that location. The City will continue to monitor this location and will mitigate as necessary. Overall, the isolated Page 7 of 11 impacts at this location are minimal compared to the location-specific benefits that could result from a successful Kiss-N-Ride, both from a transit and economic development perspective. Park-N-Ride Lots Within the BRT corridor, there are seven Park-N-Ride lots. All of these lots are either in, adjacent to, or require access through a low-income and/or minority area. The Park-N-Ride locations were very strategically chosen based on access and availability of parking spaces and are equally distributed along the length of the corridor. There are no indicators that there are any disproportionate impacts as a result of the location selection process. The potential for increased traffic was evaluated at all intersections near the Mason Corridor with direct consideration of the vehicular use of the Park-N-Ride lots. Intersection analysis results are provided in the previous section and mitigation for the increased traffic congestion is further discussed in the Mitigation Section below. However, the overall benefit of transit for the low-income and minority residents adjacent to and throughout the community well outweighs the isolated impacts that may be experienced near the Park-N-Ride lots. In addition, an increase in bus and vehicular traffic around station sites could result in localized increases in noise levels and air emissions. However, air emissions were not determined to exceed National Ambient Air Quality Standards and air quality overall, is expected to improve as a result of increasing emissions controls. Noise levels were not determined to exceed FTA’s transit noise impact criteria at any location within the corridor. Parking There are at least six businesses along the corridor that will lose some parking spaces permanently as a result of the Mason BRT project. In addition, there are at least six businesses that will result in a temporary parking loss during construction. Although the majority of these businesses do exist within low-income/minority census blocks, they have not been identified as a low-income or minority-owned business. In addition, on-street parking spaces will be lost due to the construction of the bus stops in the downtown area along Mason Street. Although the downtown bus stops are located within low-income and/or minority populations, there was no disproportionate impacts with regard to location determination for parking removal. The BRT bus stop locations are consistent with the existing bus stop locations and the parking removal is necessary to implement safe bus loading and unloading of passengers on the larger BRT buses. Construction-Related Impacts Construction-related impacts are clearly defined in the EA and summarized below. Although, much of the impact presented below may occur in low-income and/or minority areas, the location and level of impact with regard to construction activities will be based solely on the most efficient construction process.  Noise and vibration due to heavy equipment.  Potential for utility relocation and disruption.  Exhaust emissions and fugitive dust.  Erosion and sedimentation impacts on water quality.  Visual impacts due to equipment and materials placement. Page 8 of 11  Access and disruption of traffic. Positive Effects The Build Alternative would benefit minority and low-income residents within the study area as well as the overall community by improving mobility, safety, and access to housing, community facilities, and services. Transit Service Under the Build Alternative, transit service hours would expect to remain the same but there would be an increase in frequency resulting from both the 10-minute headways and the effects of the exclusive guideway minimizing potential travel delays caused by vehicular congestion. Travel-time for the Build Alternative would decrease from 30 minutes to 19 minutes for one-way travel along the length of the Mason Corridor in comparison to travel along College Avenue on the current bus route. In addition, to travel-time reduction, reliability would increase as a result of removing the bus from mixed traffic. The Build Alternative would improve ride quality as a result of larger vehicles, improved suspension, and increased availability. Transit Stations/Stops All of the BRT stations and bus stops are located in minority and/or low-income areas and would serve these populations well. Saint Joseph’s Catholic Church and school have been specifically identified as facilities that are important to the minority community. In addition, there are three more churches, two higher education facilities, two high schools, and five elementary schools. Low-income and/or minority students and employees at all of these facilities would benefit from improved transit service. The proposed station/stop amenities would provide a greater level of comfort and safety as a result of larger shelters, more seating, security cameras, and covered boarding areas. Neighborhoods Because the Build Alternative would operate in an existing rail/roadway corridor, low-income and/or minority neighborhoods would not be divided or isolated and no minority or low- income residents would be displaced. In addition, there will be some upgrades to the railroad crossings near several of the BRT stations providing enhanced pedestrian, bicycle and transit access to and from local neighborhoods. The BRT would improve mobility, reduce congestion, and strengthen connections between the northern and southern parts of Fort Collins. Residents of the Westside Neighborhood Area, the West Central Neighborhoods, and those neighborhoods located to the south of Drake Road would benefit from improved access to CSU, downtown Fort Collins, and to community facilities and commercial services located along College Avenue and in the vicinity of the Mason Corridor. The Build Alternative would increase mobility for advanced age and student populations and would connect these populations to destinations throughout Fort Collins. Page 9 of 11 Land Use and Economic Development All BRT stops would be compatible with existing land use, zoning, and comprehensive plans. The City of Fort Collins has approved a TOD overlay zone for the Mason Corridor which provides for greater station compatibility and encourages economic development near the stations. Land use forecasts prepared as part of the plan to assess the potential for development within ½ mile buffer of the Mason Corridor reveal the following projections for housing and employment in 2035:  Approximately 5,000 new housing units  Approximately 3,300 new jobs Both new housing and new jobs could directly benefit the low-income and/or minority populations located within that ½ mile buffer of the Mason Corridor. Construction of the Build Alternative would benefit the local economy in the short-term through the sales of locally purchased materials and employment of local labor. The Build Alternative would also generate long-term employment for bus operators and mechanics. Development around stations would strengthen existing business and attract new business, further stimulating the economy activity within the low-income and/or minority areas as well as the throughout the community as a whole. Air and Noise Overall, air quality levels are expected to decrease as a result of the Mason BRT construction. For further analysis, as described in the EA, three intersections were identified for Carbon Monoxide (CO) hot spot analysis. All three of the intersection locations are within or adjacent to low-income and minority census blocks. The analysis completed under the EA investigations indicated a decrease in CO levels under the Build Alternative in 2035. The FTA General Transit Noise Assessment model was used to calculate noise levels for specific groups of land-use based receptors located at various distances from the BRT. There were 23 receptors modeled including an equitable distribution of locations within low-income and minority census blocks. The evaluations indicated that receptors along the Mason Corridor would not experience moderate or severe noise impacts as a result of the BRT service. In addition, BRT operations will replace or modify routes already running along the highly congested College Avenue, resulting in more streamlined traffic flow and lessening noise levels outside the BRT corridor. Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities The Build Alternative would improve bicycle and pedestrian travel both within the project corridor and on east/west connections linking to the surrounding transportation network. The project is expected to increase the effective range of local travel for bicyclists and pedestrians. This will benefit the low-income and minority residents living adjacent to the corridor as well as those located throughout the community. Although, significant realignment or improvements to bicycle and pedestrian facilities are not expected, connectivity issues will be addressed and all intersections will receive countdown heads and audible indicators to enhance pedestrian crossing facilities. Page 10 of 11 Mitigation and Environmental Enhancement Actions The following mitigation measures will be implemented to address the effects of the Mason BRT project that were previously discussed with regard to low-income and/or minority populations. Visual Visual impact mitigation measures for the retaining walls as well as the maintenance facility will include the choice of retaining wall colors and textures that will fit into the landscape and compliment the surroundings. Vehicular and Railroad Crossings  Upgrade signal facilities – more efficient and brighter traffic signal heads (LED).  Upgrade signal phasing to improve operations – modified to improve intersection operations.  Upgrade pedestrian crossings to include countdown heads and audible indicators.  Addition of five railroad gates at Harmony, Horsetooth, Swallow, Drake and Prospect. Drainage Drainage improvements along the corridor will ensure proper drainage for all adjacent areas including those that are low-income and minority. A summary of mitigation measures are as follows:  North of Laurel, inlets will be adjusted if directly affected by station platforms.  South of Laurel, each basin will receive improvements to treat guideway runoff.  At Prospect, all drainage coming from the north will be culverted and directed into the outfall for Spring Creek drainage.  The South Transit Center will receive surface drainage improvements directed to a detention facility. Construction-Related Mitigation All construction-related mitigation measures will be implemented corridor-wide without exception. All mitigation measures will be equitably implemented along the entire corridor, as necessary. The mitigation measures are clearly defined in the EA and summarized below:  Noise and vibration due to heavy equipment will be limited to certain hours of the day and require the use of noise mufflers and noise blankets.  Potential for utility relocation and disruption will be minimized and communication with users will be ongoing.  Exhaust emissions and fugitive dust.  Erosion and sedimentation impacts on water quality.  Visual impacts due to equipment and materials placement will be minimized with the establishment of a suitable construction staging area and appropriate disposal methods. Staging areas have not yet been defined for the project and given the quantity of low- income and minority areas located adjacent to the corridor, the staging area could be result within one of those areas. However, the criteria for location will consider minimizing impacts to adjacent land uses while maximizing efficiency of construction Page 11 of 11 and will not be a manifestation of disproportionate impact to low-income and/or minority neighborhoods.  Access and disruption of traffic will be minimized through proper communication with the community, adjacent neighborhoods, and emergency services. . Remaining Effects The remaining effects that have not been mitigated by the above-listed strategies include the loss of parking and location-specific traffic congestion along the corridor. However, the short-term and long-term impacts of these two remaining effects have been determined to be minimal in comparison to the overall benefit for low-income and minority populations living along the corridor and throughout the Fort Collins community. Comparison of Amenities and Mitigation Research indicates that all of the stations/stops and the majority of the corridor are within or adjacent to low-income and/or minority populations. All decision-making criteria, evaluation of impacts, and all proposed mitigation measures were considered on a corridor-wide basis and there is no indication that any of the proposed improvements would result in a disproportionate impact on low income and/or minority areas. Along the entire corridor, all adverse and positive affects identified in the previous sections would impact the low income and/or minority areas in an equitable manner. All mitigation measures proposed to address impacts have been considered in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), resulting in an objective decision-making process. This process has been presented in detail in the Mason Corridor Environmental Assessment dated July of 2008, with a summary included in this Environmental Justice Analysis. All station/stop locations as well as Park-N-Ride locations identified along the corridor exist within or adjacent to low-income and/or minority populations. Placement of stations was based on accessibility, comfort, safety, and overall functionality. The criteria for locating the Park-N- Ride lots included access and available parking areas. There is no indication of a disproportionate impact as a result of location process for any of these facilities. Right of way acquisition was identified for properties adjacent to the corridor based on preliminary design in order to construct a safe and efficient BRT system for the whole community. There is no indication that the properties requiring acquisition or easements were disproportionately identified due to their low-income and/or minority status. Based on this analysis completed for the EA and the additional information and documentation provided in this Memo, the Build Alternative in not expected to result in disproportionately high and adverse impacts to minority or low-income populations.