1

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSThis project was made possible through the hardwork of many Sierra Club and NRDC volun-teers, interns, and staff, including:

Research, Writing, and EditingNeha Bhatt, Laura Bruce, Anne Jakle, SarahLevin, Deron Lovaas, Eric Olson, Rosalie Wagner

Communications and DesignEric Antebi, Jim Bradbury, Robert Perks, JanRogers (design)

Field Research and Editorial AssistanceLane Boldman, Glen Brand, Scott Chapman,

John Deacon, Andy Didion, David Ellenberger,Jane Feldman, Hank Graddy, Amanda Hardy,Brett Hulsey, Frank Jackalone, Sarah Kite, JeremyMarin, Melanie Maycock, Jennifer McMurtray,Albert Melcher, Chris Miller, Bill Myers, DebbieRohe, Ba r ry Schiller, Megan Se y m o u r, Pa u lShively, Mark Skvotvki, JJ Straight, Kelly Thayer,Don Thompson, Jonathan Ullman, Susan VonWagoner

This report has been funded by a grant fromThe Sierra Club Foundation.

Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

OREGON, Mt. Hood Corridor Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

NEVADA, Hoover Dam Bypass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

MONTANA, US-93 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

COLORADO, I-70 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

WISCONSIN, Highway 26 Bypass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

MICHIGAN, US-23 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

KENTUCKY, Paris Pike . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

FLORIDA, Alligator Alley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

OHIO, US-24 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

VIRGINIA, Route 50 Corridor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

RHODE ISLAND, Route 403 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

MASSACHUSETTS, Route 146 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

The Road to Better Transportation Projects:PUBLIC INVO LVEMENT AND THE NEPA PRO C E S S

2

Faster is better. For decades, this has been a basicAmerican value. E-mail zips across the country,replacing “snail mail.” Media cycles become shorterand shorter. We are tempted to cut corners toaccomplish jobs more quickly. But sometimes

bending or breaking the rules for the sake of speed can havedisastrous consequences. Sometimes quality of work mattersas much or more than speed.

This report is about a landmark law requiringthe federal government to examine alternativesand seek to minimize harmful effects of federallyfunded projects, like highways, which have thepotential to damage our health, environment,and quality of life. The National EnvironmentalPolicy Act (NEPA), which took effect in 1970,requires that federal agencies study and disclosethe environmental effects of their actions andinclude the public in the decision-making processfor federally funded projects.

Public participation and environmental revieware fundamentally important to the developmentof high quality projects and protection of naturalresources. They have contributed mightily to theenhancement of road and bridge projects all overthe country and are partly responsible for thelevel of environmental quality Americans enjoytoday. However, the public participation andenvironmental review processes now face seriousthreats from shortsighted proposals from theBush Administration and the road constructionlobby, who seek to limit these critical phases ofproject development by weakening provisions ofNEPA as they apply to highway construction.

Transportation, Community Development,and Natural Resources

Over the course of the twentieth century, ournation built a tremendous network of roads andhighways. The U.S. Department of Transpor-tation has estimated that the nation’s highwayand road network equals a staggering four-mil-lion miles.

The pavement of roads and the cars and trucksthat travel on them leave a big imprint on com-munities and the environment. Haphazard high-way development and the subsequent sprawl thatfollows it chews up open space and wildlife habi-

tat at an alarming rate. America is now losing anincredible two million acres of land a year todevelopment. Automobiles are a major source ofthe air pollutants that have left 137 millionAmericans living in places where the air isunhealthy to breathe, according to the AmericanLung Association. Polluted runoff damages thewater quality of our streams, lakes, and rivers. Ofthe 38 percent of our estuaries that are impaired,46 percent of that impairment is due to pollutedurban runoff, according to a 1996 EnvironmentalProtection Agency re p o rt to Congre s s .Neglecting to look at the effects of how a newhighway will impact the local community and itsenvironment is a mistake with significant conse-quences.

The Road to Better Transportation ProjectsFo rt u n a t e l y, NEPA re q u i red re v i ews help

reduce this environmental damage by improvingthe quality of transportation projects. NEPA notonly requires that the impacts be studied, but thatalternatives be pursued in cases where the damagewill be significant. Additionally, NEPA requirespublic inclusion in the decision-making process.NEPA has thus led to many positive modifica-tions, which have resulted in transportation proj-ects that “fit better” into communities. Thisreport takes a critical look at the role NEPA hasplayed in a dozen road projects around the coun-try. The projects profiled in these pages includetestimonials from transportation officials, citi-zens, and others who were involved in projectdevelopment.

These examples tell stories from every cornerof the country. In the west, NEPA requirementsprovided the needed incentive to consider meas-ures including shuttles and parking fees in orderto reduce the negative effects of traffic in

3

Oregon’s Mount Hood Corridor. Thanks to pro-cedural safeguards under NEPA, several parts oflocal communities, including farmland, we resaved by better routing of Wisconsin’s Highway26 Bypass. Building a new four-lane highway inRhode Island caused less environmental damagedue to NEPA-driven decisions about location andsize of the facility. And a project, in the aptlynamed Alligator Alley, crosses Florida’s pricelessEverglades with reduced damage due to cleverdesign techniques including 24 wildlife under-passes and fencing along 40 miles of the route toreduce roadkill. NEPA’s protections gave local cit-izens a seat at the table and spurred these innova-tions.

Env i ro n m e ntal Rev i ew: The Co nve n i e ntScapegoat

In spite of NEPA’s major role in including thepublic and mitigating environmental impacts ofroad projects, this indispensable statute is in jeop-ardy. President Bush signed an executive order inSeptember of 2002 to undermine the environ-mental review process for transportation projects.This has spurred additional proposals to weakenthese protections. Why is NEPA under attack? Itis targeted because the highway builders havebeen aggre s s i vely promoting the conve n i e n talthough false argument that NEPA is to blamefor delays in road construction.

Howe ve r, limiting public invo l vement andweakening environmental review are not the bestways to achieve greater efficiency. Proponents ofthese measures claim that such reviews causeunnecessary and significant delay. While it is truethat the process of producing an environmentalimpact statement (as opposed to a less intensive“environmental assessment”) requires time —especially when the project is controversial — thefact is that they slow down only a very small per-centage of projects every year. There are fewerand fewer such full-blown reviews; the numberfiled in 2001 — about 500 — was less than aquarter of the approximately 2,000 statementsfiled in 1973. Today, a mere three percent of fed-erally funded transportation projects require anEIS.

In most cases, environmental reviews are not asignificant time killer. In a 2000 study of 89 proj-ects that had been delayed at least five years, theFederal Highway Administration found thatenvironmental impact statements were not themajor cause of delay. According to the study, the

most significant factors slowing down these proj-ects were lack of funding, local controversy, lowpriority, and project complexity, which collec-tively accounted for 62 percent of the delays. Theremaining 38 percent included a range of otherfactors, including environmental concerns.Endangered species and wetlands accounted foronly seven percent and four percent of delays,respectively.

A Better Way to GoWhile the evidence is clear that public and

environmental reviews improve the quality of ourroads and have little to do with project delays, theNEPA process is not perfect and there are meth-ods to improve it. N atural resource agenciescould do their job more efficiently if they hadappropriate budgets for staff and tools for con-ducting reviews so that better projects can bedelivered faster. For instance, federal and stateagencies are trapped by outdated technology. A2000 National Research Council report recom-mended some specific ways to enhance the reviewprocess. The suggestions included: new collabora-tive planning and design processes, use of (geo-graphic information systems) GIS to determinenatural and community constraints on a project(called “gap analysis”), and computer visualiza-tion programs that allow users to view a proposedproject and its potential impact in three dimen-sions. Better support for these agencies andupdates of their tools and technology would go along way toward speedier, higher quality projectdelivery.

Possibly the most promising — and common-sense — way to reduce delay is to establish earlypartnerships and coordination among stakehold-ers. The earlier that everyone affected is broughttogether to assist with the design of a project, theless likelihood there is for opposition furtherdown the road. A recent Government AccountingOffice study confirmed this: 30 of 33 transporta-tion experts indicated that this approach has greator very great potential for reducing project deliv-ery time.

America is known for its open roads. But justas our highway system is integral to our way oflife, so are the laws that protect our communitiesand the natural resources we treasure. Since roadscannot be “unbuilt,” sensible protections such asNEPA — which guarantee project review andpublic involvement — should be safeguarded andnot targeted in the name of expediency.

4

Mt. Hood highway roughly parallels aportion of the Oregon Trail and hasrich cultural and historic significance.

St retching from the community of Rhodo-dendron to its intersection with State Highway35, it passes through the Spotted Owl wetlandsand several endangered species habitats. This 35-mile segment cameunder scrutiny as Mt.Hood National Forestwas becoming ani n c reasingly popularre c reational destina-tion.

As plans for expansion began, pressure to sup-port economic development on the mountainwas matched with concern by community inter-est groups and Native American tribal govern-ments to protect surrounding natural andcultural resources.

Ore g o n’s De p a rtment of Tr a n s p o rt a t i o n(ODOT) had begun widening the entire highwaypiece-by-piece, but in 1994 the Federal HighwayAdministration intervened and indicated that theNEPA review process was needed before anyadditional expansion could occur.

Ge o f f rey Kaiser, then unit enviro n m e n t a l /major projects manager for ODOT, wanted amethod to consider the highway as a wholeinstead of studying segments individually. “Weproposed an alternative to do a combination for

Tier 1 EIS and a 20-year master plan,” hesaid.

Completed in 1996,the resulting Mt. HoodCorridor Study yieldeda set of guiding princi-ples to be applied to allfuture modifications tothe entire Mt. HoodHighway over the next20 years. Establishingthe guiding re s o u rc e

conservation principles very early in the planningstages became the critical step to avoid many laterobstacles and delays in the development anddesign phases.

“This was the first real project where ODOTintroduced NEPA in the comprehensive planningphase,” Kaiser said. “It took a lot of attitude

adjustment. It was a challenge for scientists tothink more conceptually, but they began to real-ize that by being involved early in the planningphase, it lessened the detail work later,” he added.

The study involved a large advisory committeerepresenting community interest groups as well asdevelopment advocates. The group found thatwidening the segment alone would not alleviatecongestion in the area, and thus recommendedalternative solutions to mitigating the traffic.These included shuttles, real-time cameras toadvise travelers of road conditions, and increasede n f o rcement measures like parking fees toencourage off-peak visits.

Kaiser explained the study’s message, “Beforeyou leap to widening, make a good effort. So far,it has been a useful master plan,” he said. Theplan has since been used to support subsequentadditions to the highway and other neighboringprojects, such as relocating a streambed andadding wildlife crossings. “Each of these projectshas to prove that the expansion does not exceedthe [development] capacity of the area,” saidKaiser.

Donna Kilber, the NEPA coordination man-ager at the time, attributes the successful study tothe NEPA process. “If the NEPA process wasn’tt h e re, I doubt we would have taken the ove r a l llook like we did,” said Kilber.

Establishing the guiding re s o u rce co n s e rvation pri n c i p l e sve ry early in the planning stages be came the cri t i cal step toavoiding many later obstacles and delays in the deve l o p-ment and design phases.

The relocated Bear Creekchannel is one of many proj-ects guided by the larger prin-ciples established by the Mt.Hood Corridor Study.

Oregon, Mt. Hood CorridorEARLY PLANNING FACILITATES DESIGN

5

The 3.5-mile Hoover Dam Bypass projectwas developed to address increased con-gestion from switchbacks and restrictions

at the Hoover Dam crossing. The proposedbypass would stretch from Clark County, Nevadaacross the Colorado River to Mojave County,Arizona. The Central Federal Lands HighwayDivision (CFLHD) of the Federal Hi g h w a y

Administration was chosen to oversee the projectbecause it is an initiative of both federal and localgovernment.

Project manager Dave Zanetell considers histeam to be a leader in environmentally responsi-ble highway projects. “We work within a cultureof context-sensitive design,” he said.

He led a multi-agency team in conducting theEn v i ronmental Impact Statement (EIS).However, environmental groups were concernedthat not all options were being explored. “Wedidn’t think the EIS was sufficient,” said JaneFeldman, a Sierra Club activist involved with theproject.

Zanetell agreed. “In response to their con-cerns, we agreed we had not fully explored allalternatives,” he said. In response, Zanetell hired

a committee to research an alternative proposedby environmental groups more thoroughly. “Wehad grossly underestimated some of the alterna-tives and too quickly dismissed them. Because oftheir input, we decided to reexamine some otheralternatives,” he said.

The alignment endorsed by environmentalgroups was researched, but ultimately it was not

chosen as the preferreda l t e r n a t i ve in finaldesign. Though disap-pointed, Feldman andother communitymembers re c o g n i ze d

the importance of their inclusion in the discus-sion. “If NEPA wasn’t there, we wouldn’t havehad any opportunity [for involvement] at all,” shesaid.

Designers responded to public comments byadding some important features to the project.The final route is in closer proximity to devel-oped areas instead of cutting through more pris-tine corridors. Also, accommodations such assidewalks, pedestrian facilities, and parking havebeen included on the bridge project to make thearea accessible to pedestrian visitors.

“Often times the public is a huge influence onthe project. NEPA is certainly the foundation forpublic participation,” said Zanetell. “We don’tlook at it as a burden, it is something we rel-ish,”he added.

“If NEPA wa s n’t there, we wo u l d n’t have had any oppo rt u n i-ty [for invo lvement] at all.”

- Jane Feldman, community member

“ In re s ponse to [the env i ronmental gro u p’s] co n ce rns thatwe re addre s s e d, we agreed we had not fully ex p l o red thata l te rn a t i ve.”

- Dave Zanetell, federal official and project manager

The “Composite Deck Arch”model is designed tocomplement the landscape

in this bridge rendering.

Nevada, Hoover Dam BypassNEPA AS DIALOGUE BETWEEN DESIGNERS AND PUBLIC

6

The Mission and SalsishMountains rise above US- 93.The view became a newpriority in highway design.

Montana, US-93 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PROMPTS CREATIVE SOLUTIONS

US-93, north of Missoula in we s t e r nMontana, faces increased congestionf rom traffic heading tow a rd Gl a c i e r

National Park. The Montana Department ofTransportation (MDT) proposed to take a 56-mile, two-lane segment of Route 93 and changeit into a five-lane, undivided highway. This seg-ment runs through the unique cultural landscapeof the Flathead Indian Reservation, including ter-ritory in the heart of the Rocky Mountain ecosys-tem and the Ninepipe Wetlands Area, anecosystem with thousands of kettle ponds sup-porting unique and fragile species of wildlife.

Under NEPA’s rules, the Confederated Salishand Kootenai tribal government and grassrootsc i t i zen groups such as Flathead Re s o u rc eOrganization (FRO) we re able to challenge

MDT — first, on the validity of the initialEnvironmental Assessment (which evaluated onlya seven-mile stretch of the 56-mile project) andlater on the Environmental Impact Statement(EIS). Federal agencies are required to make andevaluate EIS reports in order to determine theconsequences of a proposed action, analyze actionalternatives, and share the results with other agen-cies and the public. By forcing MDT to do anEIS, tribal members and citizens made MDTlook for creative solutions and consider alterna-tives for the highway, which could negativelyaffect safety, environmental issues, and lack of

protection for tribal culture and family farms.A Federal Highway Administration decision

stipulating that the tribes and MDT must agreeon the project design prompted them to hirelandscape architect Jim Sipes of Jones & Jones (afirm based out of Seattle, Washington). Sipeshelped create a final design agreed to by all gov-ernment entities involved.

Sipes’s design addressed safety, environmental,and cultural concerns about sprawl. Slow curvesin the roadway are planned along the most scenicareas of the route to discourage speeding and fol-low the contour of the land. One mile of thehighway will be relocated around the NinepipeWetlands area. Additionally, an unprecedented42 wildlife crossings and wildlife fencing will beadded at the request of the Tribes to reduce harm

to area wildlife. Amanda Ha rd y,

re s e a rch ecologist atthe Western Transpor-tation Institute at

Montana State University, is involved with thedesign and evaluation of the wildlife crossings.She said NEPA allowed “the public and agenciesan opportunity to comment” so alternatives likethese could be pursued.

“US-93 became a project dramatically differ-ent than what the DOT had ever done,” saidSipes. “NEPA gave us more weight so our voicescould be heard — without it, US 93 would havebeen a standard four-lane highway with destruc-tive impacts to the community,” he added. beena standard four-lane highway with destructiveimpacts to the community,” he added.

“It be came a pro j e ct dra m a t i ca l ly diffe rent than what theD OT had ever done.”

- Jim Sipes, landscape architect

7

Initial plans for I-70 through Gl e n w o o dC a n yon in Colorado included blastingt h rough the cliff, using ugly retaining walls,

and channeling the Colorado Rive r. But thoseplans we re soon to change.

The Colorado Highway Commission’s lonee n v i ronmental member helped to form a Citize n sAd v i s o ry Committee (CAC) of design and eco-logical professionals, with members from T h eColorado Open Space Coalition and we s t e r nColorado interests.

The group was active throughout the NEPAre v i ew process until the highway’s completion in1992. The result is a 12.5-mile stretch of highwaywith lower environmental impacts — thanks inlarge part to NEPA’s procedural pro t e c t i o n s .

In 1978, after two years of design re v i ew, CDH(Colorado De p a rtment of Highways) brought thep roposal before the public. Their proposal incor-porated elements of natural and social sciencesand environmental design in the highway’s plan-ning and decision-making. These citize n s’ con-cerns we re incorporated into the final design,including the CAC suggestion to place a sectionof the highway in tunnels to protect the scenicHanging Lake area from noise and visual impacts.

The final design pre s e rves the natural topogra-phy and maintains the integrity of the ColoradoR i ver and side rivers entering it. Eastbound andwestbound lanes often diverge with one lane risingover a bridge or ducking through a tunnel, pre-s e rving the canyon floor, walls, vegetation, andr i ver where ver possible. Fo rty bridges and viaducts(totaling 6.5 miles) and three tunnels minimizethe highway’s impact on its surrounding enviro n-ment. Also, the speed limit was set at 50 miles perhour (as opposed to the original 60 mph) toi m p rove safety.

Ad d i t i o n a l l y, a construction technique calledbalanced cantilever construction allowed each sec-tion of the highway to be built on bridge columns,reducing damage to the canyon. Wo rkers we refined for damaging vegetation marked for pre s e r-va t i o n .

Fe a t u res such as four rest stops, a bike and jog-

ging path along the length of the canyon, a boatlaunch, and a raft drop allowed for canyon re c re-ational use by tourists and regional re s i d e n t s .Placing the highway section near Hanging Lakeinto tunnels ensures that hikers in this area con-tinue to enjoy their experience.

“ N E PA helped engineers to understand ecol-ogy and environmental design. In this case, with-out it, the CAC would have been ignored orabolished and the unique Canyon would havebeen destroyed. NEPA ensured that citizens anddesign professionals we re heard in pre s e rving theC a n yon,” said Be rt Me l c h e r, citizen activist.Indeed, the Glenwood Canyon project hasre c e i ved more than thirty awards for innova t i vedesign and environmental sensitivity. T h eAmerican Society of Civil Engineers awarded thep roject the Outstanding Civil En g i n e e r i n gAc h i e vement Aw a rd in 1993. Melcher concludes,“This proves that NEPA work s . ”

“N E PA helped engineers to understande co l ogy and env i ronmental design.”

- Debbie Bauman, project manager

Colorado, I-70 MAXIMUM PRESERVATION AND INNOVATION

8

Highway 26 is a regional road that ru n st h rough south-central Wisconsin, con-necting Illinois to Wi s c o n s i n’s Fox Rive r

Va l l e y. In order to address increasing traffic fro mt rucks and regional drivers, Wi s c o n s i n’sDe p a rtment of Tr a n s p o rtation (Wi s D OT) pro-posed the construction of a bypass.

The proposed routes for the bypass would havehad impacts on a widevariety of landscapes.N E PA provided thep rocess for stakeholdersto engage in discus-sions about the project development. “NEPAf o rces us into providing alternatives that are re p re-s e n t a t i ve of the interests from all agenciesi n vo l ved,” said James Oeth, Wi s D OT pro j e c tmanager (on contract from Earth Te c h n o l o g i e s ) .

The 48-mile corridor encompasses three com-munities. As stipulated by NEPA, several alterna-t i ves we re selected, studied in detail, and madea vailable for public comment. “We made sure toh a ve alternatives for both the east and west sides,”said Oeth. “Without NEPA, we would have justasked what the shortest distance was and built theroad through there,” he added.

The final decisionwas to skirt the by p a s sa round the we s t e r nb o rder of Je f f e r s o n .Ac c o rding to Wi s D OT,this route was found toh a ve the least impactand disruption to thec o m m u n i t y. “I believeN E PA allowed forthese alterations to takeplace,” said AndyDidion, Jefferson re s i-dent and member ofthe Pre s e rve 26Coalition, a citize n s’i n t e rest gro u p.

Although not all of

the community’s major requests we re accommo-dated, residents appreciated the opportunity to bei n vo l ved in the process. “The DOT is gettingmuch better and realizing this affects people’sl i ves,” said Didion, “They did their job and lete ve rybody talk.”

One of the good results of the public invo l ve-ment process came in moving the route to go

a round Ed Mc Fa r l a n d’s dairy farm, which sitswest of Wa t e rt own, instead of plowing rightt h rough it. While Mc Farland did not agree withthe decision to place the bypass around the we s t-ern portion of the town, he believes the publici n vo l vement process lessened the damage. “Pu b l i ci n vo l vement helped us … the less land we lose,the better,” he said.

Plans for the bypass stayed close to the com-m u n i t y’s urban service area, which includes landdesignated for development over the next tenyears.

As the project nears its final stages of pre p a r a-tion, significant consensus exists between the localresidents and transportation officials because ofthe opportunity for early public invo l ve m e n t .Public input allowed local citizens and public offi-cials to discuss important local issues that wouldnot have otherwise be re v i ewed by Wi s D OT.

Another important benefit of NEPA was theHighway 26 Corridor Planning Process, a news u p p l e m e n t a ry planning process to coord i n a t elocal planning efforts. It brought local politiciansand citizens together.

“We talked out problems and came up withsolutions that we re agreeable to most part i c i-pants,” said Greg David, a Jefferson CountySu p e rv i s o r. “The NEPA process has saved us a lotof money, and mitigated many of the externalize dconsequences of a fre eway expansion project,” hea d d e d .

“Without NEPA , we would have just asked what the shorte s td i s t a n ce was and built the road through there.”

- James Oeth, Wisconsin DOT

Highway 26 Bypass

Wisconsin, Highway 26 BypassNEPA BRINGS COMMUNITIES TO THE TABLE

9

The Michigan De p a rtment of Tr a n s -p o rtation (MDOT) had pushed the con-s t ruction of a four-lane fre eway parallel to

the existing two-lane US-23 for close to a decade.The expansion would have re routed and widenedthe existing US-23 through undeveloped countryin the northeastern part of the state. It would havef o rced the largest single wetlands loss withinMichigan, according to the U.S. Fish and Wi l d l i f eSe rvice. Friends of the Earth listed the US-23expansion among the nation’s “Fifty Most Wa s t e f u lRoads in America.” Phases II and III of the pro j e c twould have seve rely compromised pro t e c t e dwildlife habitat, state and national forest land,

coastal wetlands, and the Au Sable River Corridor.Along with environmental concerns, residents

did not support the expansion and maintained apreference for adding passing lanes and othersafety improvements, according to the MichiganLand Use Institute.

"Right from the start, that was our wholefocus. Fix what we have and don’t build a new,billion-dollar freeway," said Paul Bruce, founderof People for US-23 Freeway Alternatives, a citizengroup in Alpena.

A Draft Environmental Impact Statement wasmade public in 1995. At that time, the onlychoices listed were to build the extension or donothing. Upon discovering MDOT’s failure tocomply with the NEPA requirement to analyzea l t e r n a t i ves to new construction, the Fe d e r a lHighway Administration (FHWA) rejected theproposal, which was the largest, most expensiveproject canceled in Michigan’s history.

The FHWA directed MDOT to upgrade theexisting US-23 two-lane highway or study thec reation of a less-damaging bouleva rd. Afterreviewing the state’s Final Environmental ImpactStudy (EIS) on US-23, the FHWA recommended

a l t e r n a t i ves support e dby residents, includingpassing lanes, trafficsignal upgrades, andturn lanes to improvethe road.

Kelly Thayer, transportation project coordina-tor at the Michigan Land Use Institute, said theintervention was a huge success. Instead of acostly and damaging expansion, safety andmobility improvements were made.

“NEPA kept alive the public’s opportunity togive input,” said Thayer. Due to the NEPAreview process, these communities will be sparedthe devastating impacts of unneeded andunwanted expansion. And in the end, an eye-popping $1.5 billion will be saved.

“Right from the start, that was our whole foc u s. Fix what weh ave and don’t build a new, billion-dollar fre eway,”

- Paul Bruce, founder of People for US-23 Freeway Alternatives

The proposed expansionwould have paralleled US 23through the towns of Alpenaand Standish, severely com-promising protected wildlifehabitat, state and national for-est land, coastal wetlands, andthe Au Sable River Corridor.

Michigan, US-23 AVOIDING COSTLY EXPANSION

10

Ke n t u c k y’s Paris Pike is a scenic ro a db e t ween Lexington and Paris, whosebeauty was overshadowed by safety haz-

ards and congestion. The Kentucky Transpor-tation Center (KTC) proposed building a stan-dard four-lane highway but faced oppositionf rom local communities concerned aboutirreparable harm to the corridor’s history and nat-ural landscape.

When the public did not approve of KTC’splan for the highway, they decided to take theirconcerns to court to voice their opinions. A

judge’s ruling told KTC to return to the planningprocess and seek a workable alternative to thehighway that would meet demands of both par-ties. KTC and community members decided on adesign that fit the aesthetics and contours of theland while minimizing environmental impacts.The improved road has received nationally recog-nized design awards and is the model for futureprojects of this nature.

The original two-lane rural highway extendedover 13.5 miles of rolling hills dotted with his-toric thoroughbred farms. The highway had min-

imal shoulders with no passing or turning lanes,contributing to a fatal accident rate significantlyhigher than the average for two-lane roads.

The new design consists of two independenttwo-lane highways, one northbound and the othersouthbound, and an added shoulder to incre a s es a f e t y. Existing trees, fences, and stone walls we reeither pre s e rved or moved and re s t o red to theiroriginal condition. En v i ronmental improve m e n t sinclude the relocation of more than 3,000 newt rees and shrubs, designation of wetland areas, nat-ural wooden guardrails, grass instead of grave lshoulders, three miles of stone fence, and thep re s e rvation of the natural environment within themedian. A historic farmhouse was turned into av i s i t o r s’ center, generating tourism dollars for at own that would have lost money if Paris Pike we rem e rely expanded.

“ It has been an immensely successful project. Itp re s e rved aesthetic integrity while doing what itwas supposed to do: increase safety and capacity. Ithas significantly improved the corridor,” saidCumberland Sierra Club Chapter Chair, LaneBoldman. The final approach included hiringa rchitects and landscape designers to work withthe pro j e c t’s engineering team on a context-sensi-t i ve design, creating a more natural re l a t i o n s h i pb e t ween the landscape and ro a d .

Local resident Hank Graddy said goingthrough the NEPA process was essential, noting,“It brought people and ideas to the table that oth-erwise would not have been there.”

Paris Pike represents a true compromise facili-tated by the NEPA process—road expansionwithout accompanying aesthetic and naturald e s t ruction. The National Trust for Hi s t o r i cPreservation, not usually a friend of road expan-sion, cited Paris Pike as a project that “celebratesthe spirit of place instead of obliterating it.” Thefourth and final phase of the $70 million projectwill be complete in November 2003.

“It has been an immensely successful pro j e ct. It pre s e rve dits aesthetic inte g ri ty while doing what it was supposed tod o : i n c rease safe ty and ca p a c i ty. It has significa n t lyi m p roved the co rri d o r. ”

- Lane Boldman, resident and activist

Kentucky, Paris PikeCELEBRATING “THE SPIRIT OF PLACE”

Paris Pike

11

Interstate 75 in Florida runs through a port i o nof the Everglades that harbors endangered andunique wildlife, including prime habitat of the

e n d a n g e red Florida panther. The Fl o r i d aDe p a rtment of Tr a n s p o rtation (FDOT) pro p o s e dwidening the stretch of interstate that runs thro u g h‘Alligator Alley,’ named for the large number of alli-gators in the area. It was clear that future designsneeded to address the issue of panther roadkill on I-75, which was threatening the panther population’ss e ve rely depleted numbers.

The En v i ronmental Impact Statement (EIS)p re p a red for Alligator Alley was one of the first con-ducted in the State of Florida. Without it, as LeroyIrwin of FDOT’s En v i ronmental Ma n a g e m e n t

Office comments, “t h e re wouldn’t have been anyc o n s e rvation mitigation.”

After many delays, largely due to lack of fund-ing, FDOT was set to move forw a rd and had tocomplete what is re f e r red to as an “e n v i ro n m e n t a lre e valuation,” which is mandated by the Fe d e r a lHighway Ad m i n i s t r a t i o n’s NEPA regulations. T h ee n v i ronmental re e valuation of Alligator Alleyfound that 36 wildlife underpasses and bridgewidenings we re needed to better protect the pan-

ther and other important wildlife from the ro a d s .The re e valuation “helped the design tre m e n-d o u s l y,” according to Irwin, and the final pro j e c teliminated panther roadkill mortality on thiss t retch of I-75.

The completed project included 24 wildlifeunderpasses, 12 bridge extensions, habitat re s t o r a-tion, and extensive fencing along one 40-miles t retch. FDOT purchased land at the SR-29 inter-change to pre vent development and helped to pur-chase the land that became a Panther Refuge andthe Big Cy p ress addition. En v i ronmental educationwas prioritized. Bro c h u res about the Fl o r i d aPanther are handed out at tollbooths alongAlligator Alley. Informational environmental kiosks

n ow exist at rest stops,and wildlife warningsigns have been postedalong the highway. Inaddition to the elimina-tion of panther mort a l-

i t y, roadkill of the black bear, deer, and bobcats hasalso disappeared along this stretch of highway.

The amount of environmental re v i ew and miti-gation that went into the project is a helpful exam-ple for future Florida De p a rtment ofTr a n s p o rtation projects.

Ga ry Evink, a former FDOT ecologist, agre e sthat “NEPA was critical to this and other large pro j-ects around the country as it provides accountabil-ity for impacts and leads to this sort of mitigation.”

“N E PA was cri t i cal to this and other large pro j e cts aro u n dthe co u n t ry, as it provides acco u n t a b i l i ty for impacts andleads to this sort of mitigation.”

— Ga ry Evink, former FDOT ecologist

Florida’s Alligator AlleyACCOMMODATING WILDLIFE

Aerial photo of Alligator Alley

12

US-24 has been a controversial highway.Many residents are not convinced that itis needed and fear that its construction

will lead to significant environmental degrada-tion. In fact, it was included as a worst highwayproject in a 2001 report by the Sierra Club OhioChapter.

Despite disappointment in the decision tobuild US-24, residents have appreciated theopportunity to give input on how it will be laidout in their community. It has been difficult forcommunity members to accept a major highway

whose need they do not recognize. However,they do recognize the importance of having a seatat the table to reduce the highway’s negativeimpacts.

Early coordination in the NEPA pro c e s sbetween the United States Fish and WildlifeService (USFWS) and the Ohio Department ofTransportation (ODOT) helped ensure that thereconstruction of US-24 in Ohio got off on theright foot. Partnerships between these agenciesled to the identification of significant resources inthe proposed project area and selection of a pre-ferred alternative route.

Among the significant natural assets jeopard-

ized were the Maumee State Forest, MaumeeState Scenic and Recreational River, a number ofcity and metro parks, several historic properties,and the Oak Op e n i n g s region, a uniqueprairie/savannah complex that occurs nowhereelse in the state and supports a variety of rareplant and animal species. Working within theframework of NEPA led to creative design andcoordination with the public and resource agen-cies to reduce harm to these special areas. Inaddition, ODOT rerouted the project twice toavoid impacts to bald eagles when nests were

found within a half-mile of the proposedroute.

This degree of envi-ronmental pro t e c t i o nwould not have taken

place without NEPA. Mike Ligibel of ODOTconfirms this: “The reason we’re doing all thisspecial environmental planning is because ofNEPA. Without a law we had to follow we mightjust sit down, draw a straight line, and build it.”

Megan Seymour, a wildlife biologist at theUSFWS adds, “Because of NEPA, ODOT takeseffects on streams and wetlands into account andconsiders them significant resources.”

Regarding wetland and forest areas in theOhio US-24 project she stated, “There is noguarantee that impacts in these places would havebeen avoided without NEPA.”

“Without a law we had to fo l l ow we might just sit dow n ,d raw a straight line, and build it.”

- Mike Ligibel, Ohio DOT

Proposed Route of Ohio US-24

Ohio US-24COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT REDUCES DESTRUCTION

13

The segment of Route 50 passing throughAldie, Middleburg, and Upperville, VA,at the foothills of the Blue Ridge

Mountains is a classic example of traditionalmain streets in small towns. This road was not amajor truck or commuter route and traffic vol-umes have remained steady for a number of years.However, it began to suffer from problems ofspeeding, aggressive driving, and congestion dur-ing rush hours at one intersection. Virginia’sDepartment of Transportation (VDOT) came upwith the conventional solution: expand the roadinto a four-lane, divided highway with bypassesaround the small towns. The citizens, however,had another vision. They took the opportunityfor public involvement afforded by the NEPAprocess and ran with it.

Five local citizens’ organizations came togetherin 1995 to create the Route 50 CorridorCoalition to seek alternatives to VDOT’s plan.The Coalition found that a four-lane highwaywould only increase speeding and local businesseswould suffer if bypasses redirected traffic aroundthe towns.

The Coalition conducted its own research,raised private funds, and hired transportationengineer Ian Lockwood. They involved the com-munity in hands-on design workshops and cameup with an alternative “traffic calming” plan thatwould solve the problems on the roadway, pro-mote local business, protect the rural and historiccharacter of the area, and cost much less thanconventional highway expansion.

Traffic calming involves the use of strategicdesign of streets to maximize their role in con-trolling speed, volume, and flow of traffic. TheRoute 50 Corridor Coalition’s design aimed toincorporate the road into the town’s atmosphere

and culture while reducing speeding and promot-ing pedestrian safety. Instead of wider roads thatbypassed the town, the solution included:entranceway features at the edges of the towns,planted medians, raised intersections, changes inpavement for parking areas, and guardrails madefrom natural material. In addition to their aes-thetic advantages, these additions will reducespeeding and promote pedestrian safety. One ofthe most innovative sections of the design is anetwork of roundabouts replacing the conven-tional signalized intersection at the junction ofRoutes 50 and 15.

The traffic calming design received officialapproval from VDOT in March 2003. The proj-ect, which received funding through the federaltransportation enhancements program, is beingimplemented through a partnership involving thelocal community, local government, and VDOT.Through its unprecedented public process andreview, it has producedan innova t i ve, lesse x p e n s i ve solution“that can be a modelfor the nation,” saidSusan Von Wa g o n e r,Coalition member.

Virginia’s Route 50 passes throughhistoric “main street” communi-

ties. The new traffic design is theresult of collaboration among

local citizens, community groups,business people, elected officials, and designers.

Citizens discuss the TrafficCalming Plan with engineer IanLockwood.

Virginia, Route 50A MODEL OF PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT

14

Route 403 originally was a two-lane road-way cutting through the largely residen-tial area of North Kingstown, Rhode

Island. It is the main access to a nearby industrialpark. According to Rhode Island Department ofTransportation (RIDOT), the idea behind relo-cating Route 403, the Quonset Freeway, was toalleviate severe congestion by taking traffic off an

otherwise local road. “The end result was theneed for a freeway connection,” said Peter Healey,Principal Civil Engineer for RIDOT.

This connection meant building a brand new,four-lane highway — an idea that concernedsome groups. “We didn’t see why we had to go toa whole new highway,” said Sierra Club activistBarry Schiller, representing the interests of envi-ronmental organizations. To a certain extent,RIDOT agreed. “There is a big benefit if youdon’t build a new road,” Healey said, “Building isnot always the best choice.”

Due to provisions in NEPA, RIDOT had toconsider this viewpoint (as well as many others)when choosing the best option. “NEPA played avital role in balancing these views,” Healey said.The idea behind NEPA is to “make a concepta vailable to the public. It allows you to seekimpact and balance a project… You can’t make allp a rties happy, but you can certainly balance theiri n t e rests,” Healey added.

“We did look at widening the existing road in identifying alterna-t i ves … as well as[about] eight differenta l t e r n a t i ves for thelocation of the new

route,” Healey said, explaining how NEPA wasused. Healey and his team made extensive effortsto involve the public early in the design process.In addition to approaches mandated by NEPA,they held several briefings for the town council.“The public wants to help you make a projectbetter,” said Healey. “The people that live [in theaffected area] know more than I do.” Heexplained that a key benefit of public involve-ment was giving a voice to those who will be reg-ular users of a project.

Although the decision to build a new, four-lanehighway conflicted with environmental intere s t s ,N E PA provided for modifications to its design. “Ino rder to reduce the ro a d w a y’s width, we decided ton a r row it as much as possible. To do that, we hadto put in a concrete barrier,” Healey explained. Inone of the town council meetings, the suggestionwas brought up to include a culve rt for small-ani-mal crossings. “I probably wouldn’t have thought ofthat on my own,” he said.

This modification lessened damage to we t l a n d s .“The acreage reduction comes out of NEPA , ”Healey said. “It clearly minimizes the impacts.”

Though not completely satisfied with the ove r-all outcome, Schiller agreed that NEPA was anessential element in making some of the positivechanges in the project. Ac c o rding to his re c o rd s ,the EIS indicated a loss of 50 acres of open spaceincluding five acres of wetlands. The final designreduced the impact to 2.42 acres of wetland loss.“We we re protecting the loss of we t l a n d s ;[ R I D OT] reduced the amount that was lost,”Schiller said. “NEPA h a s w o rked in Rhode Is l a n dto improve designs of highways,” he added.

Healey explained the public demand for pro-tection of local natural resources, “As an industry,I’ve noticed there has to be a big concentration onecological issues, because that’s what the publicwants … If NEPA isn’t a requirement, someonemay decide not to do it.”

This completed section of relocated Route 403 shows theneed to include wildlife cross-ings for animals that cannotcross over the concrete barrier.

“The public wants to help you make a pro j e ct be t te r … Th epeople that live [in the affe cted area] kn ow more than I do.”

- Peter Healey, RIDOT Engineer

Rhode Island, Route 403GIVING VOICE TO LOCAL RESIDENTS AND FUTURE USERS

15

Route 146 runs through an area of centralMassachusetts that is rich withAmerican history, industrial deve l o p-

ment, and growing communities. The $290 mil-lion transportation project to transform Ro u t e146 will expand four miles of a two-lane unlim-ited access road into a four-lane divided park-way and includes modifications to majori n t e rchanges and bridges.

Public input, re q u i red under NEPA, trans-formed the final project so that it fulfills itsimmediate economic mission — to improvet r a vel by businesses and residents — and pre-s e rves unique physical and historic characteris-tics of the corridor.

N E PA regulations state that transport a t i o nd e p a rtments must encourage and facilitate pub-lic invo l vement in decision-making. To help ful-fill this re q u i rement, the Ma s s a c h u s e t t sHighway De p a rtment established a Citize n sAd v i s o ry Committee comprised of local busi-ness owners, residents, political leaders, enviro n-mental groups, and re p re s e n t a t i ves from federaland state agencies. After meetings we re con-ducted with the stakeholders, a design wasselected. This design links towns to the highwayand to the history of the Blackstone River whileenhancing natural and historic re s o u rces. Fo rexample, project features include constru c t i o nof a bike path through the corridor, buildingp re s e rvation, historic bridge restoration, stormwater and wetlands mitigation, and wildlife pas-sages.

George Batchelor of the Ma s s a c h u s e t t sHighway De p a rtment said the Citize n sAd v i s o ry Committee was “a meeting of them i n d s” that ensured that “what was done wasdone pro p e r l y.” Without the input of citize n

g roups, the road design would not havea d d ressed the re g i o n’s historic and enviro n m e n-tal re s o u rc e s .

Wo rcester City Councilor Barbara Ha l l e rc o m p a res Route 146 to the controversial I-290p roject in Massachusetts. She said, “[Route 146]is a much better project. It will not disrupt theneighborhood traffic like I-290 did. That was atestament of the late ‘50s and ‘60s, of putting aline on the map and saying, ‘Build a road here , ’instead of mitigating the disruptions to theneighborhood.” Route 146 marks a change in

practice from hacking highways through com-munities and natural areas to one where publicinput and environmental protection are primaryg o a l s .

“This project was really outside the box forMass. Hi g h w a y,” said Stephen Bi s h o p, exe c u t i ved i rector of the Blackstone Valley No rt h e r nGa t eway Project. “It’s not just for moving avehicle from Point A to Point B. They looked atthis highway project as a way to connect to thec o m m u n i t y. Route 146 was looked at as ano p p o rtunity to re v i t a l i ze Qu i n s i g a m o n dVi l l a g e . ”

Local leaders hope Route 146 will become are n owned historic parkway that will attracttourism. En v i ronmental re v i ew pro c e d u res havee n s u red that the natural and human history ofthe region will be highlighted, rather than swe p ta w a y, by the Route 146 pro j e c t .

“This pro j e ct was re a l ly outside the box for Ma s s.Hi g h way . . . Rte. 146 was loo ked at as an oppo rt u n i ty to rev i t a l i ze Quinsigamond Vi l l a g e.”

- Stephen Bishop, Blackstone Valley Northern Gateway Project.

Massachusetts, Route 146REVITALIZING AN URBAN PARKWAY CORRIDOR

Blackstone River — one of thelocal treasured places.

16