[EQAB-list] Fwd: Oksana K, SR95 widening questions

[Ellen Smith <smithellen at comcast.net>]

FYI to EQAB 

----- Forwarded Message ----- 
From: "O.K." <ivank0 at yahoo.com> 
To: CCouncil at cortn.org, jbernard at cortn.org 
Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2009 9:52:29 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern 
Subject: Fw: Oksana K, SR95 widening questions 



- 




Dear City Council Members, 

I believe that either of 3 mentioned options in the last letter of TDOT will need substantial environmental analysis according to EIS form, as it is mentioned in TDOT policies, and therefore, the time needs to be planned for that. Some specialists indicate that the time of preparation for each project will be somewhat the same, since the proper environmental evaluation was not done in any case. Upon yesterday coverstion with TDOT representative, and he indicated that when writing the last letter the urgent need of EIS was not paid due attention. The whole case is getting to be reviewed again. To feel secure, the neighborhood would like to see EIS to be done prior the hearing of the project, and it needs to indicate that the project is safe according to environmental standards. We will be looking for the second opinion of the alternative team of specialists to reevaluate all necessary calculations, so we also expect to see all the calculations. 

Please reflect how the policies below are going to be followed if 2 or 3 option is considered. 





TDOT environmental procedures manual 



Class I- Environmental Impact Statements are required by NEPA for major actions, that significantly affect the quality of the human environment. The following are examples of actions that normally require an EIS, as listed in 23 CFR 771.115: 

A highway project of four or more lanes on a new location 

New construction or extension of fixed rail transit facilities 



Class III-Environmental Assessment (EA) is prepared for larger scale projects that do not meet the requirements for CE or those for which the significance of the environmental impact is not clearly established. 



The potential significance of an action must be analyzed in several contexts, such as society as whole (human, national), the affected region, the affected interests, and the locality. Both short and long-term effects are relevant. 



Severity of intensity : A significant effect may exist even if the federal agency believes that, on balance, the effect will be beneficial. 

The degree to which the proposed action affects public health or safety should be considered. 

The degree to which the action may establish a precedent for future actions with significant effects or represents a decision in principle about a future consideration should be considered. 



Section 6002.139 of SAFETEA-LU requires TDOT to initiate the environmental review process for an EIS. The timing of the notification is flexible and occurs either when the project is sufficiently defined, and the project sponsor (TDOT) is ready to proceed with NEPA phase. The level of documentation agreed upon is flexible and can be changed if additional information is gathered that warrants changing it. 



For EA and EIS projects, at least two copies of the approved draft environmental document must be available for public review and hearing. 



Noise protection 



The Tennessee Department of Transportation (TDOT) recognizes that highway traffic noise is an important environmental impact consideration in the improvement and development of the state’s highway system. Noise impacts are taken into consideration in the planning, location, design, and construction phases of highway development project. Decisions made during each of these phases attempt to minimize impacts from highway traffic noise-sensitive areas. 



The FHWA noise regulation allows a State to spend Federal-aid highway funds for projects to provide noise abatement along existing highways. The regulation requires that the overall noise abatement benefits outweigh the overall adverse social, economic, and environmental effects and the costs of the noise abatement measures. 







Vegetation is not considered an abatement measure because it is rarely acoustically effective. 



Date of public knowledge 



SHA must identify when the public is officially notified of the adoption of the location of a proposed highway project. The date that development occurred along highways should be an important criterion in determining the reasonableness of noise abatement. Inclusion of a wide range of reasonableness criteria provides greater flexibility in abatement decision making. Such flexibility is essential to allow for consideration of special circumstances in individual cases. Policies should not be rigidly applied. 



Development will be deemed to be planned, designed, and programmed if a noise-sensitive land use has received a building permit form the local agency with jurisdiction at the time of the noise analysis. Substantial Noise Increases are the increases of 10 dB or more above the existing noise level. 



Coordination with Local Officials 



Highway traffic noise should be reduced through a program of shared responsibility. Local governments should use their power to regulate land development in such a way that noise-sensitive land uses are either prohibited from being located adjacent to a highway or that the developments are planned, designed and constructed in such a way that noise impacts are minimized. 



Alternative designs 

An EIS is a full disclosure document that details the process through which a transportation project was developed , includes consideration of a range of reasonable alternatives, analyzes the potential impacts resulting from the alternatives , and demonstrates compliance with other applicable environmental laws and executive orders. 

Participating agencies and the public must be given an opportunity for input in development of the purpose and need and the range of alternatives. FHWA may issue a 180-day statute of limitations (SOL) on legal claims against TDOT and other Federal agencies for certain environmental and other approval actions. A SOL notice can be used for a highway project regardless of the category of documentation used under NEPA. It is expected that notices will be published for most EIS projects and many EA projects. 



A supplemental EIS (SEIS) is necessary when major changes, new information, or further developments occur in the project that would result in significant environmental impacts not identified in the most recently distributed DEIS or FEIS (40 CFR 1502.9(c)) 



CE category for the environmental procedures can be used only if: the actions of TDOT do not induce significant impacts to planned growth or land for the area or do not involve significant air, noise, or water quality impacts. 



Where there are unusual circumstances, TDOT should undertake sufficient early coordination with agencies, public involvement and environmental studies to determine whether there is the potential for significant impacts. 



Public hearing 



Public hearings must be advertised and structured to ensure opportunities for minority, low-income, and disadvantaged populations to participate. Additional effort may be required by the local agency to identify and contact these populations. A location public hearing is generally held for all projects requiring an EIS and encouraged for most EA’s. 



In uncertain situations a hearing should still be considered, even if not “required”, if the impact on the traveling public, adjoining property owners, and businesses in the area is considered to be significant. A hearing may be desirable to advise local officials, adjacent property owners, and other users of the details of the project. 



Additional hearings, meetings, or opportunities for such hearings or meetings may be scheduled when here has been a substantial change in the proposal; substantial unanticipated development in the area affected by the proposal; an unusually long time (more than 3 years) between the last location public hearing and location approval or design public hearing and design approval; and/or identification of significant social, economic, or environmental effects not previously considered at earlier hearings. 



Where there are language barriers, efforts should be made to ensure all voices are heard and all can understand presentations. 
Oksana Kravchenko