10.07.2015 Views

SBCT Final EIS - Govsupport.us

SBCT Final EIS - Govsupport.us

SBCT Final EIS - Govsupport.us

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS
  • No tags were found...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Chapter 5 – Environmental Consequencesconstruction, impacts to traffic on public roadways would be temporary and are expected to be lessthan significant.Intersection Operations. Traffic volumes at signaled intersections on-post would increase slightlybeca<strong>us</strong>e of the stationing of 663 additional Soldiers and their families at FTC. Capacity improvementsmay be required along three major post roadways, Chiles, O-Connell and Pr<strong>us</strong>sman, on which thereare ten signaled intersections. Increased traffic volumes at FTC’s active entry control points would beminimized by opening Gate 6 and Gate 19 to reduce traffic at the other entry control points. With theopening of these gates, impacts to traffic on public roadways are expected to be less than significant.Roadway Segment Operations. Traffic volumes would increase slightly on both the regional roadwaysand on the roads within the FTC property beca<strong>us</strong>e of the additional personnel stationed at FTC. The2/25 th <strong>SBCT</strong> would increase the number of Soldiers stationed at FTC by approximately 663 Soldiers.Beca<strong>us</strong>e access to FTC is provided off I-25, Academy Boulevard, or SH 115, these roadwaysexperience the largest daily traffic-volume increases on their segments adjacent to the installation.The roadway network in the area in and around the City of Fountain would likely experience thehighest percent traffic-volume increases beca<strong>us</strong>e a large number of Soldiers reside in this area andadditional residential development is projected for this area in the future.In addition, in the immediate proximity of FTC at SH 16, I-25 is near capacity (CDOT 2006a) and SH16 is currently operating at LOS E (over capacity). Additional traffic on SH 16 would potentiallyreduce the LOS to F (unacceptable); however, CDOT has proposed reconstruction of SH 16. Underthis alternative, the additional personnel would represent a less than one percent increase inpopulation compared to the existing personnel in the ROI; therefore, very little additional traffic islikely to affect SH 16. Impacts to vehicular traffic on SH 16 are expected to be less than significantfor this alternative. Impacts to traffic on public roadways are expected to be significant, but mitigableto less than significant.New facilities constructed at FTC could change travel patterns on the installation roads. The trafficincreases on the FTC property would primarily affect Constitution Avenue (east of I-25) to the north,the southern boundary of Fort Carson to the south, Marksheffel Road (south of Airport Road) to theeast, and approximately 1 mile west of SH 115 (between Academy Boulevard and I-25) to the west.Beca<strong>us</strong>e the additional personnel would represent an increase of less than 1 percent compared to thecurrent population, impacts to traffic on both on-post and public roadways are expected to be lessthan significant. No mitigation would be required.Measures are continually revised and reviewed to respond to new or increasing impacts to traffic,including those below, which would further reduce traffic impacts.• Implementation of standard traffic control procedures during construction and limitingconstruction vehicle movements during r<strong>us</strong>h hours and within administrative, ho<strong>us</strong>ing, and schoolareas would minimize temporary construction impacts.• Implementation of the suggested transportation improvements outlined in the FTC TransportationStudy would minimize impacts of increased traffic volumes.• Implementation by local agencies of programmed improvements contained in the PPACGTransportation Improvement Plan would accommodate FTC traffic growth.• Continue to coordinate with Mountain Metropolitan Transit to assess whether Fort Carson’stransit needs would accommodate for increased b<strong>us</strong> <strong>us</strong>age.February 2008 5-153 2/25th <strong>SBCT</strong> <strong>Final</strong> <strong>EIS</strong>

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!