ALTERNATIVE WORKSHOP JULY

Transcription

1 WELCOME - ALTERNATIVE WORKSHOP JULY 27, 2017

2 MEETING GOALS ITD is committed to working collaboratively with stakeholders to ensure safe and efficient mobility through Island Park and Targhee Pass. TONIGHT WE WILL: Present the EA purpose and need Review design issues identified during scoping Discuss the Cooperative Agreement between ITD and IDFG to address wildlife vehicle collisions (WVC) and wildlife connectivity throughout the U.S. 20 Corridor Plan HOW YOU CAN PARTICIPATE: Talk to and ask questions of the Targhee Pass EA team members. Use blank maps and/or comment forms to tell us your ideas about Targhee Pass alternatives and design elements. PLEASE SUBMIT COMMENTS TONIGHT!

3 ITD PROCESS ITIP Federally Funded Project Environmental Evaluation Form (Internal Scoping) YES Decision to prepare Environmental Impact Statement Categorical Exclusion (Cat. X) Decision NO Significant Impacts Notice of Intent (NOI)? Scoping Approve Project for Final Design Federal Highway Admin. (FHWA) Consultation and /or Public Meeting(s) Draft Environmental Impact Statement? Degree of public controversy is unknown; or 23 CFR identifies the project as an action that normally requires an EIS but the EE indicates no significant impacts; or EE indicates the need for extensive mitigation; or Significant Impacts Public Hearing Alternative actions should be considered.? Final EIS We Are Here Public Hearing/Notice Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) Decision Environmental Assessment (EA) Record of Decision (ROD) Public Hearing/Notice Approve Project for Approve Project for Final Design NO Significant Impacts Final Design

4 PLANNING PROCESS NEPA DOCUMENTS ASHTON HILL BRIDGE TO DUMP GROUND ROAD CHESTER TO ASHTON Highway/Wildlife linkage analysis Roadway Initiation of the U.S. 20 Elk and Moose study Wildlife listed as a critical resource in the U.S. 20 Corridor Plan ITD U.S. 20 Elk and Moose study report ITD agreement with IDFG, WCS and Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team (IGBST) to locate and evaluate grizzly bear passage data Dr. Cramer report on U.S. 20 to reduce WVC and enhance wildlife movement ITD research for prioritizing mitigation to reduce WVC SHEEP FALLS TO PINE HAVEN PINE HAVEN TO BUFFALO RIVER BRIDGE We are here EA CONSTRUCTION ASHTON HILL BRIDGE TO DUMP GROUND ROAD CONSTRUCTION CONSTRUCTION CHESTER TO ASHTON SHEEP FALLS TO PINE HAVEN CONSTRUCTION BUFFALO RIVER BRIDGE TO ISLAND PARK LODGE CONSTRUCTION PINE HAVEN TO BUFFALO RIVER BRIDGE Safety

5 Include intersection improvement at ID 87 ITD will look EA TIMELINE or signage to help prevent non-stopping traffic. and conside

6 PURPOSE & NEED PURPOSE The purpose of the proposed project is to improve driver safety, traffic flow, and roadway structural integrity of U.S. 20 between the Junction of ID 87 and the Montana state line, also known as Targhee Pass. NEED The need for this project is partially documented in the U.S. 20 Corridor Plan (Plan) that was approved by the Idaho Transportation Board in 2006 and by more recent technical reviews by transportation subject matter experts including traffic, geo-technical, wildlife, and pavement maintenance engineering. Specific needs supporting improvement to this portion of U.S. 20 are: DRIVER SAFETY The Plan identified the need to improve safety of U.S. 20 by adding passing lanes and other intersection improvements. The existing road shoulders do not meet current design standards nor do they meet the recommendations of the Plan. Certain types of vehicle crashes will be reduced by widening the road shoulders. Current traffic volumes warrant modification of the traffic flow at the Big Horn Hills Estates entrances and at the Howard Springs pull-out. Forest canopy shading causes road icing in certain locations reducing safety. Blowing and drifting snow contributes to vehicle crashes in the winter.

7 PURPOSE & NEED (CONTINUED) DRIVER SAFETY (CONTINUED) Wildlife-vehicle collisions (WVC) contributed to 10 percent of recorded vehicle crashes on U.S. 20 between Chester and the Montana state line from 2009 to 2014 (Kittleson, 2014). TRAFFIC FLOW Traffic flow is hindered at times by congestion and slower moving vehicles climbing Targhee Pass. Construction of a climbing lane is warranted. The Plan identified the need to improve traffic flow on U.S. 20 by adding passing lanes and intersection improvements. ROADWAY STRUCTURE Roadway pavement and foundation age exceed the expected life cycle of 40 years. Poor drainage creates soft spots and allows frost heaving of the road during the winter. Recent investigations show the aged road foundation is not suitable for long term pavement stability. GOALS & OBJECTIVES Other important community issues to be evaluated in the Environmental Assessment include: Improving safety for pedestrians and bicycles within the project area. Enhancing wildlife movement across U.S. 20 within the project area. Wildlife movement across U.S. 20 is a safety issue for both drivers and wildlife. U.S. 20 can impede migratory, dispersal, and daily movements of wildlife (Clevenger and Huijser, 2011).

8 DESIGN ISSUES IDENTIFIED DURING SCOPING Carried forward Not carried forward Summary of Level 1 screening for potential project elements identified during scoping based on consistency with the Corridor Plan and EA Purpose and Need. SUGGESTION RESULT REASON Roadway Replace existing pavement and road base. Improve surface drainage and ditches. Road geometry improvements. Existing road is beyond routine repair. Drainage issues identified in several locations. Some curves do not meet current design safety standards. Include intersection improvement at ID 87 or signage to help prevent non-stopping traffic. ITD wil look at existing intersection signage and advance warning and consider potential improvements. Safety Add turn lanes for intersections and trailheads. Build a divided highway. Included at specific locations, depending on traffic study and physical design constraints. Not part of the Corridor Plan, would exceed design year capacity needs. Add a climbing lane. Warranted by traffic study and design standards. Re-route freight traffic. Beyond the scope of D6 s decision. This is a designated route in the State's Freight Plan. Freight movement is a purpose of this highway as a component of the National Highway System.

9 DESIGN ISSUES IDENTIFIED DURING SCOPING Carried forward Not carried forward SUGGESTION RESULT REASON Bike USe Increase shoulder width for bike/pedestrian safety, breakdowns. Provide a striped bike lane or separated bike path. Existing shoulder does not meet design safety standards. Not planned for this segment of the corridor by ITD (or locally). Speed Limit Lower the speed limit. Increase enforcement of speed limits. Lowering speed not called for in the Corridor Plan. Speed limit decisions are made through a broader, statewide process (beyond the project scope). This is not an ITD decision. Speed enforcement is outside ITD s jurisdiction. Address safety issues for snowmobile trail use and grooming within the corridor. ITD permits Fremont County access for trail grooming in certain locations within the corridor. Recreation Improve entry point to Howard Springs Waystation. Include improvement at the top of the pass for traffic pulling over at the state line and associated pedestrian crossing activity. ITD will look at maintaining or improving access in and out of the Howard Springs area. There is existing pullout space on the MT side, pedestrian crossing at this location not recommended but signage improvements here and along the Targhee Pass segment of the corridor will be considered. Provide for use of Howard Springs as a boat inspection station by Idaho Department of Agriculture or find alternative location. Idaho Department of Agriculture is no longer using this site.

10 DESIGN ISSUES IDENTIFIED DURING SCOPING Carried forward Not carried forward SUGGESTION RESULT REASON Improve warning signage for wildlife crossings, intersections and trail crossings. Improved signage is a part of the Corridor Plan and is a safety component of the identified project needs. Wildlife Include a wildlife detection/active warning system. Include wildlife crossings (underpass or overpass) with fencing. Carried forward because the Corridor Plan calls for further evaluation of measures to reduce wildlife vehicle collisions and to improve wildlife passage. Carried forward because the Corridor Plan calls for further evaluation of measures to reduce wildlife vehicle collisions and to improve wildlife passage. Wildlife fencing only Not carried forward unless combined with crossing(s). Fencing alone would reduce wildlife-vehicle collisions but would block wildlife movement if not combined with crossing(s). Expansion Build a frontage road at Big Horn Hills Estates. Do not expand the road. Not part of the Corridor Plan, outside of the ROW. Safety needs can be addressed with turn lanes. ITD will evaluate a No-Action Alternative in the EA but this alternative does not meet the purpose and need.

11 WILDLIFE MOVEMENT ENHANCEMENT WHAT'S NEXT? In February 2017, ITD signed a Cooperative Agreement with IDFG to conduct additional work above and beyond the work already completed in the overall corridor planning and wildlife migration pattern studies. Under this 3-year Cooperative Agreement: IDFG will: Focus on reducing WVCs and facilitating wildlife movement across U.S. 20. Develop programmatic and site specific information and criteria on WVCs, wildlife connectivity, wildlife crossings and wildlife crossing designs. Develop site specific recommendations. Develop best management practices (BMP) to reduce WVCs, improve highway safety, provide for wildlife connectivity, and mitigate impacts to drivers from WVC. Develop data and information on wildlife roadkill, connectivity and crossing feasibility. Facilitate a committee to innovate options to mitigate WVC throughout the U.S. 20 corridor and improve wildlife movement. ITD will: Select and incorporate those IDFG recommendations for design concepts, BMPs, and performance standards that best suit ITD projects, planning, and programs. Analyze WVC mitigation measures for feasibility along the U.S. 20 corridor.

12 WILDLIFE ENHANCEMENT DESIGN ELEMENTS Highway Design Elements to reduce wildlife-vehicle collisions and maintain/enhance wildlife movement: TYPE OF MITIGATION EFFECTIVENESS COST Animal detection system 57-87% $$$ Effectiveness % = CHANGE DRIVER BEHAVIOR Standard warning sign Digital/variable message sign Seasonal wildlife warning signs Vegetation removal Public education campaigns Reduced vehicle speed 0% 9-50% 26% 20-38% 0% $ $ $ $$ $-$$ $ Estimated percent reduction in large mammal collisions $ = $0-$20,000 $$ = $20,000-$150,000 $$$ = 150,000 - $1M $$$$ = $1M+ In-vehicle animal detection system Under research $$ Digital/variable message sign J. Mobeck at JHWF Seasonal wildlife warning signs Any action alternative could include one of these techniques or a combination of techniques.

13 WILDLIFE ENHANCEMENT DESIGN ELEMENTS * Human use can significantly TYPE OF MITIGATION EFFECTIVENESS COST effect wildlife use of the structure Landscape bridge/wildlife overpass (with fencing) % $$$$ $ = $0-$20,000 $$ = $20,000-$150,000 Multi-use overpass (with fencing) %* $$$$ $$$ = 150,000 - $1M $$$$ = $1M+ Canopy crossing $$ Viaduct or flyover $$$$ CHANGE ANIMAL BEHAVIOR Large mammal underpass (with fencing) Multi-use underpass (with fencing) Underpass with waterflow Small/medium-sized mammal underpass Modified culvert/dry drainage culvert Fencing - large mammals (combo with crossing) % % % $$$$ $$$$ $$$ $$ $$ $$$$ Open-Bottom Culverts Fencing - small and medium vertebrates Unknown $$$ Jump-outs Unknown $ Fencing (human access gates can be used) Fence end treatments $ Electromats/cattle guards at access roads $$ Deer reflectors 0-1% $ Population Culling 50% $$ Wildlife Overpass

14 at existing intersection signage and advance warning PUBLIC SCOPING - WHAT WE VE HEARD potential improvements. The EA team has received and incorporated feedback from the public since the onset of the EA. During the official public scoping period (12/15/16-1/30/17), ITD received a total of 104 comments. Since then, the study team has continued to review stakeholder feedback and respond to public questions, comments and concerns, as they come in. Major themes amongst stakeholder feedback include: Safety: Lower the posted speed limit. Residents would like to see turn lanes to safely access turnouts to residential areas. Safe facilities for bicycle/pedestrian use. Wildlife: Prevent wildlife vehicle collisions and maintain animal movement/migration. Consider wildlife movement enhancements; implement safe wildlife passage on Targhee Pass. Consider potential private property impacts and Access/Recreation: cost/benefit of investment in wildlife enhancements. Maintain access to public lands. Consider winter recreation needs and maintenance. Traffic: Increased traffic on U.S. 20, with travel to the Cultural: Recognition and avoidance of cultural resources, like the Nez Perce Trail. Yellowstone region. Increased truck traffic on the two-lane highway is concerning to residents.

15 COMMENTING PROCESS YOUR COMMENTS ON THE EA INFORM THE STUDY MOVING FORWARD Please provide your comments any of the following ways: Comment Card: Fill out a comment card provided Maps: Take time tonight to draw potential alternatives and design features onto blank maps. Online: TargheePass@langdongroupinc.com Call: (A member of the public engagement team will record your comment) The Targhee Pass EA team will compile all stakeholder feedback, along with today s comments, into a scoping report, develop and screen alternatives, and hold a meeting at the end of August to present alternatives for public review and comment.