[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 158 (Wednesday, August 14, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42252-42255]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-20667]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
Public Buildings Service; Record of Decision; Federal Building--
United States Courthouse, Phoenix, Arizona
The United States General Services Administration (GSA) announces
its decision, in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) and the Regulations issued by the Council on Environmental
Quality, November 29, 1978, to construct a new Federal Building--United
States Courthouse (FB-CT) in Phoenix, Arizona.
The new FB-CT would consist of approximately 515,000 gross square
feet (GSF) of building space and 380 parking spaces (totaling 40,800
GSF). The project, designed to relieve overcrowded conditions at the
existing court facilities in Phoenix, is to be sited within the Central
Business Area (CBA) of the City of Phoenix, Arizona and is anticipated
to be ready for occupancy in the year 2000. The federal agencies
proposed to utilize the new FB-CT are currently housed within the
existing Phoenix FB-CT, located at 230 1st Avenue, and in leased
commercial space in the Phoenix area. An objective of this project is
to consolidate these federal agencies into a single structure within
the City's CBA. The consolidation would promote efficiency in
operations for agencies housed within several downtown locations.
Alternatives Considered
The GSA has considered a range of alternatives that could feasibly
attain the objectives of the proposed project. NEPA does not require
that an agency consider every possibility, but requires that the range
of alternatives be comprehensive, so that the agency can make a
``reasoned choice'' among them. Alternatives considered are as follows:
Alternative 1 (``The Proposed Action'')
The proposed project site to be donated to the federal government
by the City of Phoenix encompasses two city blocks and has an area of
approximately 4.5 acres. The project site is bound by Washington Street
(north), 4th Avenue (east), Jefferson Street (south), and 6th Avenue
(west). Only a portion of this site would be utilized for the Proposed
Action, with the remaining portion being used for surface parking in
anticipation of future expansion to meet the United States District
Court's proposed long-range space requirements. Under this alternative,
both 5th and 6th Avenues between Washington and Jefferson Streets would
be closed to vehicular traffic and much of the abandoned roadway area
included into the GSA-proposed development area.
Alternative 2 (``The 5th Avenue Alternative'')
The proposed site under this alternative would be the same as for
the Proposed Action. The site is bound by Washington Street (north),
4th Avenue (east), Jefferson Street (south), and 6th Avenue (west). The
difference between this alternative and Proposed Action is the closure
of project area roadways. Under this alternative, 5th Avenue would be
closed and utilized as part of the project site, while 6th Avenue would
remain open to through traffic.
Alternative 3 (``The Alternative Site'')
This alternative proposes developing 4.5 acres of a 8.5 acre site
bounded by West Woodland Avenue (north), 7th Avenue (east), West Adams
Street (south) and 9th Avenue (east). Portions of this property are
owned by the Monroe School Association, Phoenix Automatic Machine
Products, and by several private individuals. Site improvements
currently include an abandoned 3-story building (Grace Court School),
two abandoned single-story auxiliary school buildings, four single-
family residences, an abandoned commercial building, and an auto parts
store. This site is listed on the National Register of Historic Places
(NHRP) as part of the Woodland Historic District. The three onsite
school buildings and four residences are considered contributors to the
district, while the commercial structures are considered
noncontributors.
No Action Alternative
NEPA Section 1502.14(d) requires an alternative of No Action be
included in the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) analysis. The ``No
Action'' Alternative would preclude development of the Phoenix FB-CT on
any of the proposed project sites, therefore, property used for the
project would be retained by the current owners. Under this
alternative, U.S. Court and executive agencies and Congressional
offices would continue to be housed in the existing Phoenix FB-CT at
230 North 1st Avenue and at various leased locations in Phoenix. The
[[Page 42253]]
projected increase in federal presence in the Phoenix area is not
contingent on the construction of the proposed project, therefore, the
rate of growth in federal employment levels in both the judicial and
executive branches is projected to occur regardless of whether the
proposed building is constructed.
Alternatives Examined But Not Considered in the EIS
In addition to the alternatives described above, several options
were considered to fulfill the needs of the U.S. District Courts. These
included the examination of several alternative sites beyond those
considered within the EIS, the acquisition of Base Realignment and
Closure Act properties, Resolution Trust Corporation (RTC) properties,
the potential leasing of building space, and the expansion of the
existing FB-CT. These alternatives were eliminated from further
consideration due to a number of reasons, including but not limited to:
fiscal cost, remote location, nonconforming lot configuration, and/or
deficiencies in security and court operations.
Impacts/Mitigation Measures
The proposed construction of the FB-CT at the site of the Proposed
Action would result in several significant environmental impacts. These
significant adverse impacts will be reduced through incorporation of
the following proposed mitigation measures.
Geology and Landforms. Project construction at the site of the
Proposed Action would have the potential to cause short-term soil
instability erosion. Potential long-term geologic impacts include the
potential for subsidence and soil expansion.
Mitigation Measures: These impacts would be mitigated through
implementation of a stormwater pollution prevention plan, as well as
compliance with the requirements of the City of Phoenix Grading and
Drainage Ordinance and a site-specific geotechnical investigation to be
conducted prior to construction.
Surface Hydrology. Offside movement of disturbed soils during
construction at the site may result in short-term deposition in area
storms drains. No long-term impacts to area drainage are anticipated.
Mitigation Measures: Construction-related impacts would be
mitigated by development of a stormwater pollution prevention plan.
Vegetation and Wildlife. The Mexican free-tailed bat, a Department
of Forestry special status species, has been documented in the vicinity
of the Proposed Action. However, project implementation is not
anticipated to significantly affect this species. No other rare,
threatened, or endangered species occur in the area.
Mitigation Measures: None required.
Air Quality. Short-term emissions associated with construction
activities would not exceed Clean Air Act thresholds and would be less
than significant. Long-term emissions of volatile organic compounds
(VOC) and carbon monoxide (CO) associated with vehicle trips and onsite
energy consumption would not exceed the 100 tons per year significance
thresholds and are, therefore, considered less than significant.
Project vehicle trips would, however, result in exceedances of the 8-
hour Federal CO standard at several project analyzed intersections.
Exceedances are predicted to occur immediately adjacent to congested
intersections, even if the project is not implemented. These
exceedances appear inconsistent with the Maricopa Association of
Governments (MAG) Carbon Monoxide Plan (MAG 1993, 1994), which predicts
regional attainment of the standard by 1995. However, the focus of
project-level analysis is purposely different from regional attainment
analysis. Project-level analysis is designed to detect local impacts
associated with increasing traffic volumes, changing traffic
distribution pattern and reducing distances of receptors to congested
intersections. The focus of regional attainment analysis is to identify
areas in violation of the standard, determine the effect of control
strategies and to determine population exposure. However, both analyses
utilize the intersection model CAL3QHC.
A guidance document developed by the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency titled ``Guideline for Modeling Carbon Monoxide from Roadway
Intersections'' (1992) provides distinctly different guidance for the
two types of analysis. The primary differences in this guidance are the
use of receptors immediately adjacent to congested intersections and
worst-case meteorological default values for project-level analysis.
Regional attainment analysis is required to use existing air quality
monitoring stations as receptors since attainment is based upon
concentrations measured at these stations. Regional attainment analysis
is also required to use actual meteorological data and background CO
concentrations obtained from regional modeling (i.e.: Urban Airshed
Model). Regional modeling is complex, involving dividing the non-
attainment area into grid squares and estimating emissions, meteorology
and resulting CO concentrations in each grid square. Since regional
modeling is not conducted for project-level analysis, this data is not
available as input to the intersection modeling.
Because regional attainment analysis uses actual meteorology and
background CO concentrations for the grid square in which the
intersection is located, regional attainment analysis is expected to
more realistically represent future conditions. Project-level analysis
is expected to produce higher CO concentrations because receptors are
much closer to the intersection, and worst-case meteorology and
background CO concentrations are used in the analysis. Worst-case
meteorology includes using a wind direction that blows emissions
directly by at each receptor.
Modeling conducted for the proposed project should be considered as
a screening method to identify problem intersections and not refuting
the attainment demonstration of MAG's CO Plan. Over-prediction of
exceedances provides a margin of safety such that all potential impacts
are identified and mitigated.
Mitigation Measures: Although short-term air quality impacts are
considered less than significant, the following mitigation measures
will be implemented by GSA to further reduce impacts.
A construction traffic management plan will be developed
to:
--Restrict construction activities that significantly affect traffic
flow to off-peak hours (7 p.m. to 6 a.m. and 10 a.m. to 3 p.m.).
--Route construction trips to avoid congested streets.
--Provide dedicated turn lanes for movement of construction equipment
onsite and offsite.
Electrical power for construction activities will be
obtained from power poles instead of electrical generators (when
feasible).
Methanol of natural gas will be used for mobile
construction equipment instead of diesel (when feasible).
Active portions of the project site will be watered as
needed to prevent excessive fugitive dust.
Non-toxic soil stabilizers will be applied to graded areas
inactive for 10 days or more.
Excavation and grading will be suspended when the wind
speed (as instantaneous gusts) exceeds 25 miles per hour.
Trucks transporting earth material offsite will be covered
or maintain at least 2 feet of freeboard.-
[[Page 42254]]
Paved streets adjacent to the construction site will be
swept as needed to remove dust and silt that may have accumulated as a
result of construction activities.
All construction requiring heavy equipment will be
curtailed during ozone alerts (e.g. hourly ozone concentrations which
exceed 0.20 ppm).
GSA will insure that the following measures are implemented to
reduce long-term air quality impacts associated with the FB-CT project:
GSA will develop a transportation management plan which
will include:
--Providing carpool matching services and preferential parking spaces
for carpool vehicles.
--Offering alternative work hours and alternative work weeks (i.e. 9
days/80 hours, 4 days/40 hours, etc.).
--Providing teleconferencing facilities.
Noise. Project implementation at the site of the Proposed Action
could result in short-term noise and vibration impacts from
construction activities. Long-term impacts associated with the Proposed
Action would be less than significant and would be further reduced
through implementation of appropriate design guidelines.
Mitigation Measures: Although the following mitigation measures
would reduce short-term noise impacts, it is anticipated that noise
levels would remain above significance threshold levels, and therefore,
significant and unavoidable. To reduce impacts from nonpile driver
construction noise, the GSA will implement the following:
Schedule operations to coincide with periods when people
would least likely be affected;
Muffle and shield construction equipment intakes and
exhausts;
Shroud or shield impact tools such as jackhammers and use
electric-powered rather than diesel-powered construction equipment as
feasible;
Utilize portable noise barriers within the area of
equipment areas and around stationary noise source such as compressors;
and
Locate stationary equipment in pit areas or excavated
areas as such siting would create noise barriers.
Natural or Depletable Resources. Project implementation would not
substantially impact available energy supplies or affect access to any
natural resources. Therefore, impacts to natural and depletable
resources would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: None required.
Public Health and Safety. The testing portion of a Phase II
Environmental Site Assessment has recently been completed and has
determined that contamination of both onsite soils and groundwater
exist at the site of the Proposed Action. Because of these findings,
some level of environmental remediation will be required; however,
implementation of these recommendations mitigate any impacts. Long-term
operation of the new FB-CT is not expected to contribute to any ground
water contamination problems in the area.-
Mitigation Measures: GSA will adhere to and implement the
recommendations of the Phase II Environmental Site Assessment.
Land Use, Socioeconomics and Visual Resources. The height of the
proposed federal courthouse may be greater than that allowed by City of
Phoenix land use policy. Such impacts would be reduced through
compliance with City of Phoenix design policies and incorporation of
site amenities. Project implementation would have the beneficial
effects of generating short-term construction jobs and retaining
federal employment opportunities in the downtown area. No significant
adverse impacts to the local housing or real estate markets are
anticipated with implementation of the Proposed Action.
Mitigation Measures: None required.
Cultural Resources. The Proposed Action would not result in any
impacts to standing historic structures, as no such resources would be
destroyed, damaged, altered, or impacted in any way. Two prehistoric
Hohokam sites, Pueblo Patricia and La Villa, have been recorded near
the site of the Proposed Action. The Pueblo Patricia site is
approximately four blocks from the proposed site, while the La Villa
Site is less than two blocks from the site. In addition, the proposed
project site was part of the Original Townsite of Phoenix.
Consequently, there is a high probability that prehistoric and historic
cultural resources are present onsite, including the possibility of
human remains. GSA will consult with the Arizona State Historic
Preservation Office, City of Phoenix, and Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation to develop a Memorandum of Agreement which will outline
procedures to be adhered to as GSA pursues a data recovery program to
mitigate potential impacts.
Mitigation Measures: GSA will work with the Arizona State Historic
Preservation Office, City of Phoenix, Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation, and affected Native American organizations to insure that
any prehistoric and/or historic cultural resources identified onsite
are recovered and stored in accordance with the National Historic
Preservation Act and the Native American Graves Protection and
Repatriation Act.
Public Utilities
Gas and Electric. Short-term service interruption impacts
associated with extension of electric and natural gas systems could
occur, but are considered insignificant due to their temporary nature.
The local electricity and natural gas distribution networks can serve
the proposed FB-CT. Project design would be in accordance with
applicable energy conservation codes. Thus, electricity and natural gas
service impacts are considered less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: None required.
Solid Waste. Short- and long-term impacts to solid waste collection
and disposal service would be less than significant and would be
further reduced through implementation of the recommended waste
reduction measures.
Mitigation Measures: None required.
Water and Sewer. Short-term interruptions to water or sewer
service, if any, are anticipated to be less than significant. Water
demand and wastewater flow created by project operation would not
significantly affect local water supply or water/wastewater systems.
Water and wastewater impacts are, therefore, considered less than
significant.
Mitigation Measures: None required.
Microwave Communication
Microwave communication services could be affected within the
downtown area due to the construction of the Proposed Action. Both the
County of Maricopa and KSAZ-TV have expressed concern regarding the
proposed project's impact to the integrity of their microwave signals.
Impacts would, however, be reduced to a less than significant level
through relocation of the microwave path. GSA has been informed by
KSAZ-TV that they intend to construct a new 150-foot tall tower so that
its microwave signal will not be compromised by the construction of
mid-rise buildings in the Governmental Mall area.
Mitigation Measures: None required.
Public Services. Project implementation would not be expected to
generate a significant increase in police service calls or affect
Phoenix Police Department response times. Although building height
might complicate fire protection services, the Phoenix Fire Department
is equipped to serve high rise structures. Project implementation would
not substantially affect emergency response times and building design
is expected to comply with applicable building and fire codes.
[[Page 42255]]
Public service impacts are, therefore, considered less than
significant.
Mitigation Measures: None required.
Transportation and Parking. In the EIS, traffic growth was
estimated using a two percent annual growth rate. This growth rate was
applied to the existing traffic counts to estimate future background
traffic conditions. In addition, eight projects in the Downtown area
were identified by City of Phoenix staff and included in the evaluation
of cumulative traffic growth. These projects include: Arizona Museum of
Science and Technology, Phoenix Museum of History, Heritage and Science
Parking Garage, Downtown Phoenix Transit Center, Maricopa County Office
Complex, City of Phoenix Office Development, the Baseball Stadium, and
the Parking Facility located between 6th and 7th Avenues and between
Washington and Jefferson Streets.
The sum of existing traffic volumes, growth in existing traffic
volumes due to general background development occurring in the area by
the year 2000 (for one scenario) and year 2010 (for a second scenario),
and incremental traffic increases related to the eight specific
development projects identified in the study area represents projected
year 2000 and year 2010 traffic conditions without the proposed
courthouse project. The year 2000 and year 2010 analyses presented in
the EIS assumes recommended mitigation measures are incorporated. No
assumptions have been made regarding responsibility for implementation
of the recommended mitigation measures. The LOS levels contained in the
EIS represent operating conditions in year 2000 and year 2010 with
necessary improvements in place.
Because project implementation would affect the closure of both 5th
and 6th Avenues between Washington and Jefferson Streets, the project
would generate a substantial increase in afternoon peak hour traffic at
the intersections of 3rd/Jefferson and 3rd/Washington, resulting in an
unacceptable level of service for the 3rd/Jefferson intersection and
therefore an unavoidable significant impact.
Existing signal cycle lengths are fixed at 60 seconds for the
inter-connected signal system along Jefferson and Washington. The
setting of signal cycle lengths are influenced by a number of factors.
The magnitude and distribution of peak period traffic flows at the
individual intersection approaches and the signal phases required to
accommodate the various traffic movements contribute to the
determination of the optimum cycle length which results in the lowest
average delay for vehicles being served by the intersection. In the
case of the individual intersection of Jefferson Street and Third
Avenue, GSA believes that the optimum signal cycle length in the future
analysis years would be within the range of 95 to 100 seconds.
The result of not being able to use the signal cycle time in an
efficient manner at the Jefferson/Third Avenue intersection is an
afternoon peak hour Level of Service ``F'' for both the 2000 and 2010
forecast years with the Proposed Action project scenario. Future
service levels for the Washington/Third Avenue intersection were found
to be ``C'' or better. The analysis assumes that GSA will provide a
double left turn at the eastbound Jefferson Street approach to Third
Avenue and at the northbound Third Avenue approach to Washington
Street. Mitigation opportunities provided within the EIS would not be
not sufficient to improve the future traffic service level to ``D'' or
better with the Proposed Action scenario (the City of Phoenix considers
LOS D the limit of tolerable traffic congestion during peak traffic
periods).
Mitigation Measures: Short-term impacts in the project area (during
construction) would be reduced through implementation of the following
mitigation measures:
Heavy construction equipment such as bulldozers and large
loaders would be moved onsite prior to construction and realignment
activities and remain until the equipment is no longer needed;
Some minor disruption of traffic flows would occur at this
time; however, the short duration of activity would minimize impacts;
Movement of construction vehicles and equipment onto and
off of the site would be scheduled in a manner that would avoid the
peak traffic periods on the adjacent street network;
Construction employees traveling to and from the site on a
daily basis will be scheduled to occur prior to the morning and evening
traffic peak.
Long-term impacts would be reduced through implementation of the
following mitigation measures:
GSA will develop a transportation management plan which
would reduce impacts to the local circulation system by reducing the
number of new motor vehicle trips generated by the project.
GSA will work with the City to provide a double left turn
at the eastbound Jefferson Street approach to Third Avenue and at the
northbound Third Avenue approach to Washington Street.
As stated previously, however, the above mitigation measures will
not be sufficient to improve the 3rd/Jefferson intersection to an
acceptable Level of Service.
Significant Unavoidable Impacts
The following impacts associated with the Proposed Action are
considered significant and unavoidable:
Development of the project would result in an increase in
long-term pollutant emissions within the project area, thus
exacerbating the existing inability of the air basin to attain the
national standards for ozone, carbon monoxide, and PM-10.
Construction activities would result in short-term noise
increases in excess of acceptable levels.
The project will result in an afternoon peak hour Level of
Service F at the Jefferson/Third Avenue intersection.
The General Services Administration believes that there are no
additional outstanding issues to be resolved with respect to the
proposed project. Additional information regarding the new Federal
Building--United States Courthouse--may be directed to Mr. Alan
Campbell, Portfolio Management Division (9PT), U.S. General Services
Administration, 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94102, (415)
522-3491.
Dated: August 6, 1996.
Kenn N. Kojima,
Regional Administrator (9A).
[FR Doc. 96-20667 Filed 8-13-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6820-23-M