[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