SBCT Final EIS - Govsupport.us

Chapter 4 − Impact Methodology• Non-compliance with the objectives, policies, or guidance of federal, state, and local land use,recreation, and natural resource management plans;• Conversion of important farmland to nonagricultural uses;• Impacts to the public’s right of access to recreation areas both during project construction andlong-term.4.8 TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION4.8.1 Resource-specific Impact Analysis MethodologyThe traffic impact analysis describes the potential impacts from transporting troops and equipment onpublic roads to training ranges, from increased traffic associated with the increased activity andnumber of military personnel and their families stationed at the Army installations, and fromconstruction traffic. The analysis includes impacts on local intersections, long-term traffic volumes,and construction traffic on the local circulation network. Impacts on local roads and circulation,parking, public access for recreation, and traffic safety also were evaluated. The objectives of theimpact analysis are to quantify the impacts of the project alternatives on traffic and transportationresources, and to identify and evaluate potential strategies to mitigate traffic impacts.4.8.2 Resource-specific significance criteriaFactors considered in determining whether each project alternative would have a significant impact totraffic / transport include the extent or degree to which its implementation would result in:• Intersection operations - increase congestion at intersections currently operating at (or anticipatedto operate at) capacity;• Roadway segment operations – increased traffic on public roads that would disrupt or alter localcirculation patterns;• Construction traffic effects - lane closures or impediments that would disrupt or alter localcirculation patterns; or• Increase parking demand exceeding the supply.4.9 SOCIOECONOMICS, ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE, ANDPROTECTION OF CHILDREN4.9.1 Resource-specific Impact Analysis MethodologyThe ROI was defined for each project alternative to include the counties or regional areas in whichthe majority of people potentially affected by changes at the installations reside. Each of the projectalternatives were reviewed and evaluated to identify potential impacts (positive or negative) onsocioeconomic conditions in the ROI. Potential disproportionate effects to low-income or minoritypopulations and the potential for increased adverse health effects to children were assessed toevaluate environmental justice effects.Impacts on population, business sales volume, employment, and income were evaluated bothqualitatively and quantitatively using the Economic Impact Forecast System (EIFS), a computerbasedeconomic tool that calculates multipliers to estimate the direct and indirect effects resultingfrom a given action. For each economic indicator, the model produces a standard range of values, orFebruary 2008 4–12 2/25th SBCT Final EIS