-C^D.Sk: FH9/3 /^\^Q. .- FINAL ENVIFiONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/REPORT UMASS/AMHERST Old Colony Railroad Rehabilitation Project from Boston to Lakeville, Plymouth and Scituate, Massachusetts EXECUTIVE SUMMARY March 1992 coiiiarrM)*' SEP 91992 (EOEA 5840) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION URBAN MASS TRANSPORTATION ADMINISTRATION and the MASSACHUSETTS BAY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2014 https://archive.org/details/oldcolonyrailroaOOunit OLD COLONY RAILROAD REHABILITATION PROJECT FROM BOSTON TO LAKEVILLE, PLYMOUTH AND SCITUATE, MASSACHUSETTS FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT/REPORT AND SECTION 106 EVALUATION FOR THE MAIN LINE, MIDDLEBOROUGH LINE, AND PLYMOUTH LINE (EOEA 5840) Submitted Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act 42 U.S.C. 4332(2) (c) and in Accordance with the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act M.G.L. Ch. 30 Sec. 61, 62-62H by the U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION and the MASSACHUSETTS BAY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY Date of Approval For FTA Mr. Leonard Braun Director, Eastern Area Region II Federal Transit Administration 26 Federal Plaza Suite 2940 New York, NY 10278 March 12, 1992 Date of Approval For MBTA J. Haley/ Manager isetts Bi *ansportation Authority iO Park Plaza Boston, MA 02116 OLD COLONY RAILROAD REHABILITATION PROJECT FROM BOSTON TO LAKEVILLE, PLYMOUTH AND SCITUATE, MASSACHUSETTS COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS WILLIAM F. WELD GOVERNOR PAUL CELLUCCI LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR RICHARD L. TAYLOR SECRETARY, TRANSPORTATION AND CONSTRUCTION JOHN J. HALEY, JR. GENERAL MANAGER, MASSACHUSETTS BAY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ES.O EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This summary highlights the important issues in the Old Colony Railroad Rehabilitation Project, including discussions of the purpose and need for the project, the definition of the alternatives examined and the selection of the Preferred Alternative, the transportation and environmental impacts resulting from implementation of the alternatives examined, proposed mitigation, and finally, the evaluation of the alternatives' effectiveness in meeting the project goals and objectives, i.e. equity, financial feasibility and cost- effectiveness. ES.l BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR ACTION ES.1.1 The Old Colony Railroad Rehabilitation Project Study Area The Old Colony study area includes 32 communities and extends from Braintree south toward the Cape Cod Canal, to Buzzards Bay, and from Massachusetts Bay west to Route 24 (Figure ES-1). These communities, along with Quincy and Boston, represent the area which would be affected by the transportation alternatives examined in this study. The study area encompasses approximately 450 square miles. The Old Colony study area is now experiencing, and is projected to continue to experience, population and development growth. In 1980, the total population of the study area was approximately 600,000 people. The growth rate of the study area is significantly greater than the expected growth rate for the Boston Metropolitan Area as a whole. Population growth rates in most towns within the study area are expected to be above the rate of growth for Metropolitan Boston. The Old Colony study area work force has a strong orientation to Boston. A substantially higher proportion of the work force commutes to Boston and Cambridge for work than do their counterparts from north and west of Boston. From the Old Colony study area, 16 percent of total work trips are to Boston or Cambridge, compared to 7.7 percent from the North Corridor and 11.9 percent from the West Corridor. Because of the study area's population growth, and the heavy reliance on Boston for employment, access to Boston is an important Old Colony study area priority. Reduced travel time to Boston, increased transit availability to more communities, and reduction in highway congestion would be significant benefits for Old Colony study area residents. ES.l. 2 Purpose and Need for the Proposed Action The Old Colony study area has serious transportation problems. Area highway and transit facilities do not meet the existing and future needs for access to Boston. Although the study area is served by limited access ES-1 MASSACHUSETTS BAY TRANSPORT ATK3N AUTHORTTY Old Colony Railroad Rehabilitation Project Figure ES-1 Old Colony Study Area Communities ES-2 highways and many major and minor roadways, the study area experiences severe highway congestion daily. This results in significant travel delays and inconvenience. Traffic congestion is a problem in the Old Colony study area. All Old Colony primary highways operate at Level of Service (LOS) C or worse during peak hour periods. For the Southeast Expressway, LOS F (force flow conditions) last from 6:00 to 10:00 AM and 4:00 to 7:00 PM. The peak period travel time on the ten-mile stretch of the Expressway from Braintree to downtown Boston is typically 25 to 40 minutes, with an average speed of 15 to 25 miles per hour. Occasional delays caused by accidents or breakdowns can add further to this travel time. Other roadways such as I-93/Route 128, Route 3A in Weymouth, Route 53 in Hanover, and Route 44 in Taunton already operate consistently at LOS D during the peak morning and afternoon traffic periods. Based on traffic growth trends, both Routes 3 and 24 are expected to operate at LOS E by the Year 2000. The rush hour is expanding, beginning earlier, and ending later in both the morning and afternoon. Many of the population centers, especially those of coastal communities, are located a considerable distance from the major highways, requiring a drive of five miles or more over secondary roads at reduced speeds. For example, in 1984, the average peak period driving time from Hingham to Boston, a straight-line distance of about 12 miles, was 50 minutes. MBTA Red Line rapid transit service through Quincy and Braintree runs approximately every 8.5 minutes during peak hours, but extends only into the northernmost portion of the study area, i.e. Boston (Dorchester), Quincy, and Braintree. Red Line travelers from towns further south drive their cars as far as these Red Line stations. Parking lots and garages at Red Line stations are regularly filled to capacity on weekdays prior to 7:30 AM. Traffic congestion on major north-south routes leading to the stations is a factor in overall slow travel times. In 1984, the average travel time (including allowances for waiting time at bus and rapid transit stations) between Hingham and Boston, a distance of 12 miles, by MBTA Red Line feeder bus and rapid transit, was 62 minutes. Red Line trains currently operate at or near capacity during peak hours. Private express bus service, existing MBTA feeder service, service provided by other transit agencies, and a private, non-profit vanpool company contribute to the area's transit options, but are subject to severe congestion on the highway system. In this environment, transit has a difficult time competing with the private automobile. An Environmental Protection Agency mandated freeze on the total number of commercial off-street parking spaces has been in effect in downtown Boston since the early 1970's in a deliberate attempt to discourage automobile commuting as a means of improving air quality. While some adjustments to the freeze are under consideration, there is little space for additional parking, and the costs of providing adequate parking are prohibitively high. Meanwhile, new office and other development is creating additional demand for available parking spaces. This displaces much of the fringe parking which formerly served some of the overflow parkers from the core of the downtown area. The lack of parking presents a very serious constraint on further automobiles commuting into downtown Boston. ES-3 ES.1.3 Brief History of Planning and Pro.iect Development Extensive passenger railroad service was established in southeastern Massachusetts in the mid-nineteenth century. In 1845, rail service spread through southeastern Massachusetts along all three of what became the Old Colony lines. After World War I, faced with increasing competition from automobiles, ridership and service on the Old Colony lines declined. When the Southeast Expressway opened and the state railroad subsidy was discontinued in 1959, service on the Old Colony lines was discontinued. A 1960 fire destroyed the railroad bridge over the Neponset River. While the State resumed commuter rail service in the 1960's to other areas surrounding Boston, the Old Colony study area continues to be without such service. In 1984, the Massachusetts Legislature directed the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority to study the possibility of restoring commuter rail to southeastern Massachusetts. The Old Colony Feasibility Study was undertaken and it concluded that the restoration of commuter rail service would be feasible. It also developed a number of alternatives worthy of further examination. In 1985, communities along the Greenbush Line demonstrated their support for restoring Old Colony commuter rail service in non-binding referenda. Following the review of the Feasibility Study, the Governor and the Legislature directed the MBTA to proceed with the environmental studies required to enable the restoration of commuter rail service on the Old Colony lines. This Old Colony Railroad Rehabilitation Project, which includes the study of the possible environmental impacts which could result from restoring Old Colony commuter rail service or expansion of express bus service, is a result of that directive. Project planning and development has included extensive consultation with local officials and residents, property owners, developers and other interested parties. The siting and conceptual design of the 21 proposed commuter rail stations and the three layover facilities was conducted through a thoughtful and inclusive public process. ES.1.4 Purpose of the Final Environmental Impact Statement/Report The purpose of this Final Environmental Impact Statement/Report (FEIS/FEIR) for the Old Colony Railroad Rehabilitation Project is to identify a Preferred Alternative selected from all the alternatives considered, discuss comments received on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Report (DEIS/DEIR), describe citizen involvement, and specify procedures to be followed to ensure that all proposed environmental mitigation measures are implemented. The Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Report, on which the Final Environmental Impact Statement/Report is based, identified, described, analyzed, and assessed all pertinent impacts resulting from the alternatives examined. The intent of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Report was ES-4 to report to all interested agencies, officials, and citizens the findings of the transportation, engineering, environmental and financial analyses and to fully disclose impacts. It discussed alternatives to avoid or minimize harm and suggested mitigation measures where impacts occur. All alternatives were evaluated on their ability to meet the region's transportation needs. The Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Report was reviewed by the Citizens Advisory Committee established by the Secretary of the Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs, was circulated to federal, state, and local agencies, and was made available for review by the public at large. During the 76 day public comment period three public hearings were held and almost 2,000 written comments were received. Based on the information provided in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Report and the comments received, a Preferred Alternative was selected for presentation in this Final Environmental Impact Statement/Report. The Preferred Alternative selected to be presented in this Final Environmental Impact Statement/Report is a modified version of Alternative 3b "Commuter Rail from South Station to Middleborough and Plymouth". This Final Environmental Impact Statement/Report responds to comments received on the Main Line, the Middleborough Line, and the Plymouth Line, the three commuter rail elements of modified Alternative 3b. The Greenbush Line is a fourth commuter rail element making up a more extensive project described in Alternative 3d "Commuter Rail Service from Boston to Middleborough, Plymouth and Greenbush (Scituate). Although the Greenbush Line remains an important future possible commuter rail corridor, environmental studies for the other Old Colony rail corridors, the Main, Middleborough and Plymouth Lines, are now prepared and are unencumbered by unresolved issues. Therefore the MBTA is proposing a current action project, restoration of commuter rail service to Boston on the Middleborough and Plymouth Lines that meet regional and MBTA goals by providing mass transit options to more than two thirds of the Old Colony area, improves air quality, brings other important transportation benefits to 26 communities in the Old Colony area and can be advanced immediately towards implementation. ES.2 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED ES.2.1 Initial Screening A variety of alternatives were initially examined as potential solutions to the Old Colony study area transportation problems. Among these were proposals for trackless trolleys on paved Old Colony rights-of-way; electric light rail vehicles on Old Colony rights-of-way; electrification of commuter rail service; buses on paved Old Colony rights-of-way; extension of the Red Line along a Route 3 alignment; commuter rail service to mid-points on all three lines; permanent transfer service to the Red Line in Braintree; and a busway. As the study progressed, potential costs and benefits, engineering implications, environmental concerns, and community needs resulted in the selection of a small set of alternatives to be examined in detail. ES-5 ES.2.2 Alternatives Analyzed The alternatives that have been examined in detail are: Alternative 1: No-Build. No further transportation improvements would be made beyond those now funded or committed. The No-Build Alternative constitutes the base line against which all the other alternatives are evaluated. This alternative includes existing transportation facilities and services. It includes committed facilities and services such as the Third Harbor Tunnel and Central Artery Depression, completion of Route 44, Route 3 widening between Weymouth and Duxbury, increased parking at Quincy Adams Red Line station, construction of additional maintenance and storage facilities, and expansion of commuter boat parking, and other improvements to the pier and passenger facilities at Hingham Shipyard, and the completion of the South Station Transportation Center. Alternative 2: Transportation Systems Management (TSM). Improvements to express bus service to Boston and construction of additional park-ride lots. The emphasis in this alternative is on more express buses on shorter peak hour headways from new and expanded park and ride lots. New and expanded express bus service would be provided for the Route 24, 18, 3 and 3A/123 corridors. Fifteen new and expanded park and ride facilities are proposed, creating approximately 3,600 additional parking spaces. Ninety additional suburban coaches would be required as well as facilities for maintenance. Alternatives 3a through 3d: Restoration of commuter rail service, with locomotive powered push-pull commuter rail trains operating from South Station to terminals in Middleborough/Lakeville, Plymouth, and Greenbush in Scituate. Several combinations of commuter rail service have been considered. Alternative 3a represents commuter rail service only on the Middleborough Line. Alternative 3b would have service on the Middleborough and Plymouth Lines. Alternative 3c would include commuter rail service on the Middleborough and Greenbush Lines. Alternative 3d calls for restoration of commuter rail service on all three lines, Middleborough, Plymouth, and Greenbush. Depending upon the alternative selected, restoration of commuter rail service would call for: 0 Use of 29 to 65 coaches and 5 to 14 locomotives 0 Construction of layover facilities at terminals in Middleborough, Plymouth, or the Greenbush Area of Scituate 0 Construction of 7 to 21 stations and parking lots 0 Provision of handicap access at all stations 0 Installation of signals, communications, gates, bells and other safety and security devices 0 The rehabilitation of 30 to 51 railroad bridges and construction of a new Neponset River Bridge 0 Removal and replacement of old ballast and ties, installation of continuously welded rail with elastomeric fasteners 0 Implementation of the TSM bus service elements and park and ride elements in corridors not served by commuter rail and maintenance ES-6 of commuter boat headways. Commuter rail service parameters would include: approximately half-hour headways in the peak direction during the morning and evening peak periods, and one and one half to two hour service, off-peak. The first inbound train would depart the outer terminal between 5:30 and 6:00 AM and the last outbound train would leave South Station between 10:30 and 11:00 PM weekdays. Service would be limited on Saturdays and no Sunday service is proposed. ES.2.3 The Preferred Alternative The preparation of a Final Environmental Impact Statement/Report requires the presentation of a Preferred Alternative. The Preferred Alternative presented in this Final Environmental Impact Statement/Report is modified Alternative 3b "Commuter Rail from South Station to Middleborough and Plymouth" (Figure ES-2). The alternative consists of three commuter rail components (1) the Main Line from Braintree to South Station in Boston through Quincy and Boston which serves commuter rail traffic from all other lines, (2) the Middleborough Line providing service to Middleborough and intermediate communities with seven stations, and (3) the Plymouth Line providing service to Plymouth and intermediate communities with seven stations. Some new or expanded bus service on Route 3 is also provided as part of this alternative. Bus service improvements formerly associated with this alternative but specific to the Greenbush Line corridor have been deferred, which constitutes the modification to the service provided under this alternative. For the purpose of providing comparable alternatives in the balance of the document. Alternative 1 "No-Build" and Alternative 2 "Transportation Systems Management" (Figure ES-3) have been retained and Alternative 3a "Commuter Rail from South Station to Middleborough" (Figure ES-4) has also been modified to remove Greenbush related improvements. Modified Alternative 3b "Commuter Rail from South Station to Middleborough and Plymouth" (Figure ES-2) will require the reconstruction of sixty-two miles of railroad right-of-way, the construction of passing tracks in certain areas, the construction of fourteen stations, the construction of layover facilities at the end of each line, the rehabilitation of numerous railroad bridges and the construction of a new Neponset River Bridge, and the use of 9 locomotives and 46 coaches. All information on project benefits and impacts presented in the DEIS/DEIR and all comments received on the DEIS/DEIR were assessed and considered in the determination of the Preferred Alternative - modified Alternative 3b "Commuter Rail from South Station to Middleborough and Plymouth." This alternative was found to make a significant contribution toward achieving the locally adopted transportation goals of the region of (1) improving transportation services to improve mobility, (2) providing transit services which are cost-effective, and (3) providing a more equitable distribution of transportation. This alternative is also effective in solving the specific transportation problems of the Old Colony study area of (1) lack of transportation capacity to serve downtown Boston, (2) severe congestion on ES-7 MASSACHUSETTS BAY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY Old Colony Railroad Rehabilitation Project Figure ES-2 Alternative 3b - Modified Proposed Commuter Rail and Express Bus Service N iiiiiiiii Exist. Bus Service (Maintained) I"™"' New or Expanded Bus Service Commuter Rail SCALE IN MILES < New or Expanded Lot Prospect iveTrain Terminal Existing Bus Ter m i n a I (Maintained) Prospective Train Station 1.e Bus Route (see Table 11-11) Lot (see Table 11-6) ES-8 1® MASSACHUSETTS BAY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY Old Colony Railroad Rehabilitation Project Figure ES-3 Proposed Private Carrier Express Bus Service TSM Alternative ■ New or Expanded Service I Existing Service (Maintained) New or Expanded Lot Existing Bus Terminal (Maintained) Bus Route (see Table 11-4') Park-Ride Lot (see Table il-6) — N ES-9 [ MASSACHUSETTS 111 TRANSPORTATION I \^_^ AUTHORITY Old Colony Railroad Rehabilitation Project ^ Figure ES-4 Alternative 3a - Modified Proposed Commuter Rail and Express Bus Service V J New or Expanded Bus Service Commuter Rail New or Expanded Lot Train Terminal Existing Bus T e r m i n a I (Maintained] Prospective Train Station I.e Bus Route (see Table 11-8) 4 Park-Rfde Lot (see Tatale 11-6) At ES-IO highways and transit facilities serving the study area, and (3) inequitable distribution of transportation benefits. While the contribution and effectiveness of modified Alternative 3b "Commuter Rail from South Station to Middl eborough and Plymouth" is recognized through its choice as the Preferred Alternative to present in this Final Environmental Impact Statement/Report, it is also recognized that the Greenbush Line remains an important future possible commuter rail corridor. However, because environmental studies for the Main, Middleborough and Plymouth Lines, modified Alternative 3b, are now prepared and unencumbered by unresolved issues, the MBTA is proposing a current action project, restoration of commuter rail service to Boston on the Middleborough and Plymouth Lines. The Old Colony rail service will meet regional and MBTA goals by providing mass transit options to more than two thirds of the Old Colony Study Area, improving air quality and increasing transit accessibility. The Greenbush Line, which is not an element of modified Alternative 3b, but an element of the more extensive project described under Alternative 3d "Commuter Rail Service from Boston to Middleborough, Plymouth and Greenbush (Scituate)", has the potential to provide a significantly greater geographical extent of transportation service and a significantly greater level of ridership than that provided by modified Alternative 3b alone. The Greenbush Line, because of its potential for significant environmental and cultural impacts on the areas to which it would provide service, will be thoroughly assessed in a supplemental environmental document. ES.2.4 Capital and Operations and Maintenance Costs Listed in Table ES-1 are costs for construction, rolling stock, and yearly operations and maintenance cost for each alternative. The mid-point of construction column accounts for inflation. The capital costs for 1995 and Year 2000 are shown. The difference reflects additional rolling stock required to support Year 2000 ridership levels. For the operations and maintenance cost, both bus and rail components of each alternative are shown. ES.3 TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS One of the primary objectives is to improve transportation service in the Old Colony study area. A summary of the transportation impacts is presented in Table ES-2 and discussed in the following sections. ES.3.1 Transit Service ES.3. 1(a) Travel Time The rail alternatives, because of the use of dedicated rights-of-way, would generally be more effective in reducing transit travel times than the TSM Alternative, in which express buses would continue to use the congested ES-11 TABLE ES-1 Capital and Operation and Maintenance Cost of Pro.iect Alternatives Capital Cost 1995 Service Level Year 2000 Service Level Alternative 1989 $ Mid Pt. 1989 $ Mid Pt. TSM $ 38,036,148 $ 49,142,650 $ 38,036,148 $ 49,142,650 3a (MOD) $223,823,540 $281,019,529 $229,451,540 $289,770,966 3b (MOD) $359,123,781 $453,036,672 $373,988,369 $476,123,438 Year 2000 Operation and Maintenance Cost (1989 $) Alternative No-Build TSM 3a (MOD) 3b (MOD) Express Bus $12,284,604 $16,456,779 $13,390,627 $10,910,906* Commuter Rail $ 6,830,174 $12,875,749 Total $12,284,604 $16,456,779 $20,220,801 $23,786,655 * Negotiations with private bus carriers concerning their participation in this service are continuing. The estimated operation and maintenance costs for express bus operation will change based on the results of these negotiations. ES-12 CO O I— CO O m O UJ CX _i (_) LU • lU > x -> < ■ O on UJ Q£ z: •< a. t— w O o o z CO o Q_ H CO — >- UJ — Q. LU < CO LU pO Z ^ 3 < < I— o a: LU UJ z t- Q. CD < Z 3 O (/) — (/) LU LU LU — LU 3: Z 3 O O — CO 3 ^ O I- O O a o u CO ES-13 roadways. The TSM Alternative would result in travel time savings of 10 or more minutes to three communities. The Preferred Alternative presented in this FEIS/FEIR, modified Alternative 3b, would result in travel time savings of 10 or more minutes to eighteen communities. ES.3.2(b) Other Service Level Impacts The No-Build Alternative would result in increased isolation of Old Colony study area residents from downtown Boston employment opportunities. With this alternative, no Old Colony residents would live within 40 minutes transit travel time to downtown Boston. The TSM Alternative would slightly improve access to Boston, with the greatest improvement enjoyed by Marshfield, Middleborough, and Lakeville residents. The number of Old Colony study area residents within 40 minutes of transit travel time to downtown Boston would rise to just over 4 percent for the TSM Alternative. The commuter rail alternatives, in addition to clearly improving the accessibility of the outlying communities, are particularly suited to improving the accessibility of the near-in communities. The Preferred Alternative presented in this FEIS/FEIR, modified Alternative 3b, would increase the number of residents within 40 minutes of transit travel time to downtown Boston to about 40 percent, thus reversing the isolation trend of the study area. The use of dedicated rights-of-way, together with the use of durable railroad equipment, would provide the highest level of service reliability. Modified Alternative 3b would increase the passenger miles on dedicated rights-of-way in the Old Colony study area by two and a half times as compared to the No-Build. Therefore, it would greatly increase the reliability of transit service. ES.3.2 Transit Patronage Peak period transit ridership is projected to increase by 23 percent during the period 1985 to 2000 under the No-Build Alternative. Much of the ridership increase would occur on express buses serving the southern sections of the study area. Commuter boat and rapid transit (Red Line) ridership also are projected to increase moderately. The TSM Alternative would result in an increase by approximately 30 percent in transit ridership (1985-2000), all occurring in increased express bus ridership. Approximately 700 peak period auto trips would be diverted to transit under the TSM Alternative. Modified Alternative 3b, the Preferred Alternative presented in this FEIS/FEIR, would increase peak period transit ridership by 68%. ES-14 Bus service would be impacted by implementation of the rail alternatives. Modified Alternative 3b would divert some bus riders to commuter rail. Affected bus routes include those in Bridgewater, Middleborough, Brockton, Whitman, Weymouth, Pembroke, Plymouth, and Kingston Old Colony study area MBTA Red Line feeder buses would lose riders to commuter rail , as well . The Middleborough Line would be the more heavily used of the two Old Colony commuter rail lines in modified Alternative 3b, capturing over 60 percent of the total AM peak period rail ridership with about 4,700 inbound riders. The Plymouth Line would have AM peak period ridership of almost 2,800 or 40 percent of the total of over 7,500 riders. ES.3.3 Access Modes to Transit Facilities It is estimated that for modified Alternative 3b, approximately 2,200 daily AM inbound commuter rail passengers would walk to a commuter rail stations to board a train. It is projected that 3,200 would park at stations, 1,700 would be dropped-off, and 400 would arrive in some other fashion (i.e., bus, bicycle, taxi, or as a passenger riding with someone else). ES.3.4 Roadway Network Impacts The implementation of the commuter rail alternatives can be expected to have a positive, although modest impact on the congested highways in the study area. Modified Alternative 3b would increase the transit mode share for work trips to Boston and Cambridge by 7 percent compared to No-Build. This would result in a reduction in total highway traffic volumes. The maximum benefit of reduced auto demand accrues at the northern end of the study area, i.e. Braintree, Randolph, Weymouth, Quincy and Boston. Arterial streets and those leading to highway interchanges would experience noticeable benefit. By the Year 2000, given a continuation of the observed rapid growth in the South Shore communities, congestion will increase substantially above existing levels on all study area roadways providing access to the Southeast Expressway, Route 128, and the Boston/Cambridge employment market. The TSM Alternative is projected to result in 700 auto diversions in the AM peak period and will have a negligible effect on highway congestion. Under modified Alternative 3b, highway congestion would be reduced by diverting 4,600 AM peak period automobile trips to transit. Under modified Alternative 3b, Southeast Expressway rush hour congestion periods, i.e. stop and go conditions, would be reduced by 9 percent in the AM period and 12 percent in the PM period compared to the No-Build. There would also be a significant reduction at Route 18 in Weymouth as automobile trips are diverted at commuter rails stations to the south. ES.3.5 Freight Railroad Impacts This FEIS/FEIR assumes continued service where it exists today. No freight operator has approached the MBTA regarding operating rights along right-of-way ES-15 not presently in service. Should freight operators wish to add service in areas not currently served, e.g. the Main Line roughly between the Boston Globe siding in Boston and the Patriot Ledger siding in Quincy, the MBTA will insist the requesting operator complete a MEPA process before considering the granting of freight operating rights. ES.4 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS This section discusses the significant environmental impacts of the proposed alternatives in the Old Colony study area. Avoidance of impacts and mitigation also are summarized. Table ES-3 provides comparative information on selected, quantifiable impacts by Alternative. ES.4.1 Economic and Secondary Development Downtown Boston is the major financial and service center in New England. Over 300,000 people currently commute to Boston each day on congested highways and the crowded rapid transit system. Traffic congestion along primary arteries such as the Southeast Expressway will continue to worsen. If steps are not taken, the lack of adequate transportation capacity between downtown and the suburbs will constrain the ability of downtown Boston to grow and prosper. The TSM and No-Build Alternatives would result in the least improvement in roadway congestion and would provide the least support for continued economic development and access to jobs. Modified Alternative 3a and modified Alternative 3b divert automobile trips to transit and would contribute to improved accessibility. Modified Alternative 3b, the Preferred Alternative, provides this accessibility to the greatest part of the Old Colony study area. Enhanced commuter rail service is compatible with continuing economic growth in the study area. The Old Colony study area would become a more attractive residential location as accessibility to Boston is improved. Potential results of this improved accessibility are higher property values, more housing starts, increases in property values, and increasing tax revenues to the study area communities. There is concern that the reinstitution of commuter rail service could have an adverse impact on the value of homes located adjacent to the line, but not near a commuter rail station. However, commuter rail service has not had this impact in other parts of the metropolitan area where commuter rail service is available nor has it prevented developers from building marketable housing units adjacent to operating commuter rail rights-of-way. Increased demand for commercial development and other services and facilities can also be expected. Local planning officials, however, would be able to address new development issues and manage growth with existing zoning and master planning regulatory authority now in place in all Old Colony study area communities. ES-16 TABLE ES-3 Summary of Environmental Impacts 0 Commercial or Industrial Di spl acements 0 Number of Residential Di spl acements 0 Residential Buildings with Significant Adverse Noise Impacts Before Mitigation 0 Residential Buildings with Adverse Noise Impacts After Mitigation 0 Residential Buildings with Annoyance Level Vibration Impacts Before Mitigation 0 Residential Buildings with Annoyance Level Vibration Impacts After Mitigation 0 Wetlands Resources Impacts before Mitigation 0 Section 4(f) Sites Requiring Evaluation 0 Public Grade Crossings Where Increased Use will Occur Alternative ISM 3a (MOD) 3b (MOD) 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 3 4 0 0 0 0 383 519 0 212 311 0 11 18 0 2 2 0 17 42 ES-17 ES.4.2 Community Impacts ES.4.2(a) Community Disruption There would be no community disruption with the No-Build or TSM Alternatives other than the disruption that occurs from increasing traffic congestion. There are limited community disruption impacts associated with modified Alternative 3a and modified Alternative 3b, the Preferred Alternative. The commuter rail elements of modified Alternative 3b, the Main Line, the Middleborough Line, and the Plymouth Line - are all presently active rail corridors. The increased use of existing grade crossings is perceived as a community disruption in some areas. There are 42 such grade crossings involved in modified Alternative 3b. ES.4.2(b) Safety and Security Design and operation of the commuter rail alternatives has been planned to ensure the safety and security of patrons, employees, and equipment. The Old Colony commuter rail stations have been planned in locations with moderate to high activity levels. The Halifax station site and the Middleborough/ Lakeville station site have limited nearby activity now, but development is proposed adjacent to each in the near future. All stations would be well lighted. Fencing would be constructed along the right-of-way where residential, recreational, or school properties abut the right-of-way, and at other locations where land uses adjacent to the right-of-way may create safety hazard concerns. ES.4.3 Land Acquisition and Displacement The acquisitions for the TSM Alternative would be limited to those required for the park and ride lots. Acquisition for the rail alternatives would include station parking lots, express bus parking lots, station access roads, and minor roadway realignments. Based on MBTA experience, and following the Federal Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act, it is expected that the one business which would be displaced in modified Alternative 3b, the Preferred Alternative, could be successfully relocated. ES.4.4 Traffic and Parking ES.4.4(a) Traffic Impacts at Stations Traffic impacts would be concentrated in the immediate vicinity of station entrances. Auto arrivals to stations tend to be clustered in the 5 minutes preceding or following train arrivals. The heaviest station traffic would be experienced in 15 minute periods each half hour, during the peak hours. ES-18 At most locations, Old Colony station traffic would represent moderate increases over existing volumes. Some level of street modification/ improvement would be required at most stations and is included in the station traffic plans. ES.4.4(b) Traffic Impacts at Grade Crossings Service on the Middleborough and Plymouth Lines under modified Alternative 3b, the Preferred Alternative, would involve a total of 42 public grade crossings. The crossings would be equipped with automatic signal systems with gates, bells, and flashing lights. Up to 13 private grade crossings would be equipped with warning signs. Three of these private crossings would be equipped with gates and bells because of their high use. The proposed protection system is consistent with the existing MBTA commuter rail system and has effectively mitigated safety hazards at grade crossings. The most significant impact at grade crossings is expected to be road traffic delays during train pass-bys. On the average, 7.5 percent of peak hour traffic using a grade crossing street would be stopped by train pass-bys. The average delay at most locations would be like that of a long red phase on a traffic signal, or about one minute. With service on the Middleborough and Plymouth Lines under modified Alternative 3b, the Preferred Alternative, four grade crossing locations exhibit the potential for queue backups into a nearby intersection. Specific mitigation measures have been proposed for each of these locations. ES.4.5 Air Quality All alternatives are consistent with the goals of the Massachusetts State Implementation Plan (SIP). The TSM reduction in vehicle miles travelled and consequent emission reduction, compared to the No-Build Alternative, would be less than 0.2 percent. Commuter rail service under modified Alternative 3b, the Preferred Alternative, would reduce vehicle miles travelled, and consequently emissions, by 2 percent. Diesel engines emit nitrogen oxides, hydrocarbons and unburned carbon particles, sulfur oxides, and small amount of unburned fuel. Emissions from diesel engines settle out of the atmosphere quickly, and have few known short-term local impacts, aside from the odor of vaporized fuel. The significance of low concentrations of these pollutants on public health and the environment has not been well documented. Automobile emissions are a major source of pollution. The reduction in automobile traffic due to the diversion of automobile trips to commuter rail would result in reductions in automobile emissions and, therefore, improvements in regional air quality. All of the commuter rail alternatives would decrease total emissions of carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons, and nitrogen oxides. Modified Alternative 3b, the Preferred Alternative, would result in the greatest reduction of total emissions. This alternative would result in ES-19 the elimination of 1,850 tons per year of carbon monoxide; 190 tons per year of hydrocarbons; and 170 tons per year of nitrogen oxides over the No Build Alternative. These totals are small percentages of total regional emissions. At a local level, increased levels of carbon monoxide concentrations at congested intersections is an issue of concern. On the basis of air quality modeling procedures, there are no projected violations of carbon monoxide concentration standards for any of the intersections affected by any automobile traffic associated with modified Alternative 3b, the Preferred Alternative. ES.4.6 Noise No noise impacts were identified in the TSM Alternative. In modified Alternative 3b, the Preferred Alternative, a significant adverse impact would result at four residential buildings at which commuter rail generated noise would be at or above the impact criterion of 65 dBA (Ldn). Project-generated noise at all of these locations would be above the ambient noise level by at least 3 dBA. One building would qualify for installation of a noise barrier under modified Alternative 3b conditions based on a preliminary estimate of cost and physical feasibility of this mitigation measure. The noise abatement measures to be considered at other impacted locations include installation of acoustical barriers, double glazing of windows, installation of air conditioners and other alterations to reduce indoor noise exposure. The actual technique for noise mitigation at all noise impacted locations is being discussed with each individual property owner, and the specific characteristics of mitigation would be designed on a case-by-case basis. Implementation of mitigation measures such as noise barriers and building modifications is not expected to fully mitigate adverse noise impacts at all locations. Further refinement to these mitigation measures will occur during the final design of the Project. All decisions on noise mitigation measures would be made in consultation with affected property owners, local officials, and FTA staff. ES.4.7 Vibration There are no buildings along the Old Colony right-of-way that would be subject to vibration induced damage. Without mitigation, five hundred and nineteen buildings would be within the zone subject to annoyance levels of vibration under modified Alternative 3b conditions. Approximately 600 buildings may currently experience a high level of vibration because of existing freight operation on jointed rail along the Middleborough and Plymouth Lines. For these buildings, the commuter rail alternatives would likely reduce vibration intensities below current levels because the jointed tracks will be replaced with continuously welded rail. However, the frequency of events causing vibration annoyance will increase from the current ES-20 railroad traffic levels by an additional twelve round trips per day on each of the lines. Aside from the residences where annoyance impacts would be experienced, no sensitive activities which would be affected by vibration have been identified. Measures to mitigate vibration impacts would be undertaken at all impacted areas. The use of either wood ties or the use of ballast mats in selected areas where impacts are anticipated is proposed as a mitigation measure. These measures would reduce the number of residences subject to annoyance levels of vibration to 311. ES.4.8 Water Quality ES.4.8(a) Station and Parking Lot Runoff Seven of the commuter rail stations proposed under modified Alternative 3b, the Preferred Alternative, would require internal drainage systems and hooded catch basins to separate out gasoline, silt, and litter from runoff water prior to discharge into water bodies. The use of salt would be restricted at the Hanson Station and the Abington Station because of their proximity to public water supply wells and at the Kingston/Route 3 Station because it lies within a "Sole Source Aquifer". At the layover facilities in Middleborough and Plymouth, drip pans would be placed under the locomotives' engines. Any runoff would be collected in a closed system and filtered in oil -water separators, consistent with water quality regulations. All designs would be reviewed with the appropriate local conservation commissions and the Corps of Engineers, as required. ES.4.8(b) Railbed Pollutants Lubricating oils, diesel fuel, particulates of carbon, and brake lining material would be deposited in low concentrations in the railbed. The non- volatile portions would be trapped in the railbed ballast. They are not anticipated to migrate into wetlands, waterways or groundwater. ES.4.8(c) Herbicides Herbicides would be used to control vegetation along the Old Colony rights-of-way. Their use is controlled by the Massachusetts Rights-of-Way Management Regulations (333 CMR 11.00). Sensitive areas where no spraying would occur would be delineated in consultation with local conservation commissions as part of a yearly operational plan for the right-of-way. Vegetative management plans for the MBTA's existing commuter rail system have been approved by the Massachusetts Department of Food and Agriculture. ES-21 ES.4.9 Waterway Crossings A new bridge would be required at the Neponset River crossing in Boston and Quincy under modified Alternative 3b, the Preferred Alternative. The Neponset River Bridge is an element in all commuter rail alternatives. It would require Coast Guard and Army Corps of Engineers coordination and permitting. The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection's Chapter 91 Waterways Review and local conservation commission review would be required. ES.4.10 Wetlands Wetlands resource areas would be impacted at 18 locations by the construction of modified Alternative 3b, the Preferred Alternative. These locations include station sites, passing track locations, and areas adjacent to the existing right-of-way. Reduction in the size of wetlands or filling would occur at five station sites at Holbrook/ Randolph, Bridgewater, South Weymouth, Abington, and Hanson, at the Middleborough Layover Facility and at one passing track location on the Plymouth Line. Alternative locations of these stations and passing tracks were considered to avoid and minimize impacts on wetlands resources. The other locations are associated with construction of the railroad rights-of-way. The MBTA has minimized the amount of wetlands to be filled at these locations through design measures. Replacement wetlands would be created or other compensatory measures undertaken For a more extensive discussion of wetlands, please refer to the Methods and Results Report: Wetlands Impact Assessment . The applicable conservation commission and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers would be consulted in designing all mitigation measures in a manner consistent with Section 404 of the U.S. Clean Water Act and the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act. ES.4.11 Floodplain Encroachment Two stations proposed under modified Alternative 3b, the Preferred Alternative, lie within 100-year inland floodplains, one on the Middleborough Line (Holbrook/Randolph) , and one on the Plymouth Line (Whitman). Alternative locations for these stations were considered to avoid and minimize the impacts on floodplains. Encroachment would be mitigated by creating compensatory flood storage areas within the vicinity of each site in consultation with the local conservation commission. ES.4.12 Areas of Critical Environmental Concern One Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC), is crossed on existing embankments of the Old Colony rights-of-way to be used in modified Alternative 3b. The Cranberry Brook Watershed in Braintree and Holbrook is crossed by the Middleborough Line. No adverse effects on the ACEC are anticipated to result from this crossing. ES-22 ES.4.13 Scenic Rivers No scenic rivers are crossed by the existing rights-of-way of the Old Colony Railroad to be used in modified Alternative 3b, the Preferred Alternative. ES.4.14 Coastal Zone The Old Colony rights-of-way to be used in modified Alternative 3b pass through the coastal zone in five cities and towns. All ecologically sensitive resources would be protected and all applicable federal, state, and local regulations would be followed. Along with coordination discussed in previous sections, a federal consistency determination would be filed with the Massachusetts Coastal Zone Management office of the Executive Office of Environmental Affairs. ES.4.15 Energy The project alternatives would have minimal impacts on regional energy consumption. The major factors are a reduction in automobile travel and increased transit service. A reduction of regional consumption of approximately 27,000 gallons of gasoline per year would occur with the commuter rail service as proposed under modified Alternative 3b. ES.4.16 Aesthetics Design of facilities required for modified Alternative 3b would be done in a manner to minimize negative visual impacts. Two locations would require special design consideration: the Brockton station access stairways and ramps at the historic railroad viaduct; and the Neponset River Bridge. Design of these sensitive facilities would be reviewed with the involved agencies, commissions, and interest groups. ES.4.17 Parklands and Conservation Areas The Metropolitan District Commission Sign Shop Parcel, designated for recreation purposes, and now named Pope John Paul II Park, would be directly affected by the construction of the Neponset River rail bridge, required in modified Alternative 3b, for use as a temporary construction staging area. After construction of the bridge, the MBTA would return the parcel to the MDC with improvements, including permission to use the abandoned Milton Secondary right-of-way as a bike path, thus enhancing the MDC Sign Shop Parcel's integration into the MDC park system. A Section 4(f) Evaluation of the use of the MDC Sign Shop Parcel will be completed prior to the completion of final design. No direct impacts to conservation areas have been identified. In all communities, special care would be taken to avoid indirect impacts to conservation areas. ES-23 ES.4.18 Historic Resources Section 4(f) of the DOT Act (49 U.S.C. 303) and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act provide for the protection of historic properties and resources on, or eligible for, the National Register of Historic Places . ES. 4. 18(a) Historic Bridge Structures Coordination has been conducted with involved agencies in planning for reconstruction of eleven historic bridge structures, two non-contributing bridges in the Brockton Viaduct, and one non-eligible bridge in the Quincy Historic District. The State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) has found the proposed rehabilitation plans for the bridges to be adequate, and no adverse effects are expected. A Memorandum of Agreement which includes provisions relating to Historic Bridge Structures has been executed. Construction of the access stairway and ramps at Brockton Station would be coordinated with the SHPO and the Brockton Historic Commission. The SHPO and various historic commissions will participate in the design review process for these facilities. ES. 4. 18(b) Archaeological Sites Archaeological surveys and field investigations have been conducted at several proposed station locations. The Middleborough/Lakeville Station site contains important prehistoric cultural resources. A Section 4(f) Evaluation of the use of the Middleborough/Lakeville Station site will be completed prior to the completion of final design. Three sites were identified as potentially containing important prehistoric cultural resources: two sites were identified as potentially containing historic cultural resources. A Memorandum of Agreement which includes provisions relating to archaeological resources has been executed. If significant resources were uncovered, they would be evaluated and either excavated or preserved in place. Decisions on the treatment of archaeological resources would be made in consultation with the SHPO. ES. 4. 18(c) Historic Properties and Districts Except for the Adams National Historic Site in Quincy, where no effect was found, there would be no potential impacts to historic properties or districts along the Old Colony rights-of-way utilized in modified Alternative 3b. ES.4.19 Cultural and Community Facilities No cultural or community facilities would be displaced by any of the alternatives. None of the alternatives would change the use, appreciation of or access to any community facilities. One school, Bridgewater State College (BSC), would be affected by modified Alternative 3b as a result of development of commuter rail parking on BSC-owned property for Bridgewater Station on the Middleborough Line. MBTA has worked with BSC to provide student parking and to segregate the commuter areas from the student areas. ES-24 ES.4.20 Construction Impacts Impacts for construction activities would be short-term in nature. They include impacts on air quality, noise and vibration, wetlands and water resources, traffic, safety and security, and economic factors. Impacts would be avoided or mitigated through detailed construction planning and required use of standard and community specific procedures that minimize impacts for construction. Under modified Alternative 3b, there would be a requirement for approximately 5,000 person years of construction related labor. ES.5 EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES This section compares the alternatives examined. Criteria used in this comparison are: cost-effectiveness in reaching the goals and objectives of the Old Colony study area; effectiveness in solving the region's transportation problems; financial feasibility and fairness in distributing the benefits and costs of the alternatives considered. ES.5.1 Attainment of Goals and Objectives ES.5. 1(a) Effectiveness Each alternative has been evaluated for its effectiveness in achieving the regional and project goal of increasing the mobility of Old Colony study area residents. The evaluation process has included such measures as: reduction in transit travel time; increases in transit accessibility; increases in transit reliability and comfort; increases in transit ridership; reductions in parking demand; relief of highway congestion; and provision of transit service for those with special needs. In general, the TSM alternative is less effective than the commuter rail alternatives. The Preferred Alternative, modified Alternative 3b, provides a high degree of overall effectiveness with respect to all the criteria. The TSM Alternative would increase annual transit passenger miles (one passenger carried one mile) by about seven percent, as compared to the No- Build Alternative. All the rail alternatives would have greater increases in transit passenger miles. Modified Alternative 3b would increase total transit passenger miles by 35 percent over that achieved by the No-Build Alternative. In reducing average transit travel time to downtown Boston for Old Colony study area residents, the rail alternatives would be the most effective. The TSM Alternative would provide a slight improvement over the No-Build Alternative, reducing average transit travel time from the study area to downtown Boston by two minutes. Modified Alternative 3b would reduce average transit travel times to downtown Boston by 8 minutes, about a 15 percent reduction over the No-Build Alternative travel times. Accessibility to Boston would be most effectively improved by the commuter rail alternatives. Accessibility would be improved in two ways. First, the rail alternatives would increase the number of Old Colony study area residents who would be within 40 minutes transit travel time of downtown ES-25 Boston. The greatest accessibility improvement would be attained with modified Alternative 3b where 40 percent of study area commuters would be within 40 minutes transit travel time of downtown Boston. The Middleborough Line would be the most effective in increasing transit accessibility for residents distant from Boston. Secondly, a great number of Old Colony study area communities and residents would have convenient access to transit services. One-out-of-three potential commuter rail riders would be within walking distance of a commuter rail station. Express buses planned for the TSM Alternative would remain in mixed traffic and would continue to be subject to congestion delays. Commuter rail alternatives would be the most effective in providing reliable transit service. The use of dedicated rights-of-way would result in a superior level of comfort and a higher level of on-time arrival reliability for the commuter rail alternatives. The commuter rail alternatives would attract the most riders to transit. According to MBTA forecasts, the Middleborough Line and the Plymouth Line proposed under modified Alternative 3b would carry 7,500 AM peak period riders a day. The TSM Alternative would have a negligible effect on highway congestion. Modified Alternative 3b would divert over 2,000 auto trips from the Southeast Expressway and over 1,000 auto trips from portions of Route 3, Route 18, and Route 24. In order to gauge the magnitude of these demand reductions, it is useful to note that the theoretical capacity of a limited access highway such as Route 3 or the Southeast Expressway is 1,800 vehicles per lane per hour. This demand reduction would probably be rapidly offset as drivers now unable to use the roadways because of capacity constraints fill the vacated space on the roadways. The TSM Alternative would have an insignificant impact on parking demand, reducing downtown Boston parking demand by only 1 percent of the current parking capacity and having no impact on Red Line parking demand. The rail alternatives would reduce downtown Boston parking demand and reduce parking demand at Red Line stations. A 6 percent reduction on the basis of current downtown Boston parking capacity and a 2 percent reduction on the basis of current Red Line South Shore parking capacity are projected to result from modified Alternative 3b. The TSM and commuter rail alternatives would provide accessible transportation for those with special transportation needs. The rail alternatives would provide a higher degree of transit service to those with special needs. Access by high-level platforms to commuter rail trains at all Old Colony system stations and at South Station greatly increases accessibil ity. ES.5.1(b) Equity The rehabilitation of the Old Colony rail lines would help to resolve inequities in the existing Metropolitan Boston transportation system. Old Colony study area residents contribute to the existing MBTA commuter rail ES-26 service subsidy as Massachusetts taxpayers, but receive no commuter rail service. Rehabilitation of two of the lines serving the area as proposed under modified Alternative 3b would contribute to eliminating this inequity. With implementation of any of the commuter rail alternatives, some local residents might be negatively impacted because of noise, visual intrusion, or traffic near stations. Many more residents would be benefitted by improved access and transportation services. The Old Colony study area would benefit from the greater transportation options, wider employment opportunities, traffic reductions and improvements in air quality. ES.5.2 Cost-Effectiveness Cost-effectiveness analysis establishes the degree to which the benefits of a project are commensurate with the capital and operating and maintenance costs required to attain them. A project may be considered cost-effective so long as its cost per unit of benefit does not exceed the price that decision- makers are willing to pay. The two cost-effectiveness measures presented below account for annualized total project costs and benefits. They should not be interpreted as representing annual operating subsidy costs. They should be used to compare alternatives and to assess total project costs. The first cost-effectiveness measure is an estimate of the "added cost per new transit rider." Using this measure, the TSM Alternative would cost $16.49 for each new transit trip. In the Preferred Alternative, modified Alternative 3b, the Main Line cost would be spread out between the Middleborough and Plymouth Lines, resulting in a lower cost per new transit rider ($15.95) than the TSM Alternative. The second cost-effectiveness measure, "added cost per hour of user benefit", gives a higher weight to the transit travel time savings received by both new and existing riders. Under this measure, modified Alternative 3a has the highest cost-effectiveness, $29.45 per hour of user benefit, because of the significant travel time savings accrued by Middleborough Line riders. The TSM Alternative proved least cost-effective, $49.24 per hour user benefit, due to the minimal travel time improvements associated with enhanced bus service operating on congested area roadways. Modified Alternative 3b has a value of $36.24. ES.5.3 Financial Feasibility Financial feasibility refers to the ability of the MBTA and the State to meet all of their financial commitments to continue existing transit service, fund expected future maintenance and replacement costs, and have sufficient financial resources remaining to fund the capital and operating and maintenance costs of the Old Colony Project Preferred Alternative, modified Alternative 3b. Given MBTA's assumptions of expected costs and revenues, it appears that the MBTA and the State have the financial capacity to undertake the Old Colony Project Preferred Alternative, modified Alternative 3b. After examination of MBTA's ability to pay for or finance all costs of continuing the current MBTA ES-27 service and funding its Plant Maintenance and Replacement Program, the MBTA determined that sufficient revenues would be available to fund Old Colony study area improvements. In conducting the financial capacity assessment, every attempt was made to use realistic assumptions and forecasts. Nevertheless, actual values of key variable could vary from those which were used. Selected tests were done to determine how sensitive the conclusions are to changes in input variables and assumptions. The following factors were determined to be the most sensitive: 0 State Assistance. If the State does not continue to increase its support for the MBTA, the financial future of the MBTA would be jeopardized unless other sources for funding were found. The projected growth rate of 8.0 percent per year used in assessing financial capacity is well under recent trends (12 percent). 0 Control of Operating Costs. The 6 percent rate used in the financial capacity assessment is supported historically. Increases significantly greater than this would require additional revenue. Changes in other input variables could affect the MBTA's ability to accomplish other system improvements within the currently programmed time frame. Further financial planning has been undertaken to test for risk and uncertainty in the MBTA's assumptions and to identify, as necessary, additional sources of funding. ES.5.4 Financing Plan The MBTA proposes to pay the capital costs of the Old Colony Project from two sources: federal grants (approximately 50 percent of the total, or $228 million), and MBTA bonds (the remaining amount). All operating costs, as well as the debt service on MBTA bonds, would be part of the MBTA annual budget, and would be paid through established means. 0 Federal Grants. A June 1988 understanding between FTA and the MBTA established the Old Colony project as eligible for funding as a rail modernization project under Section 3, at a federal participation rate of 50 percent, within the limits of the current allocation to the MBTA. (That is, "rail mod" funds allocation to Boston would not be increased to accommodate this project.) Section 9 (formula grant) capital funds could also be used to fund a portion of this project. The MBTA agreed not to seek an increase in Section 3 funding to compensate for the Old Colony Project in order to cover other, more routine capital replacement and system modernization projects. These will be financed with the MBTA's Section 9 apportionment and state/local funds. ES-28 0 MBTA Bonds. The 1988 Transportation Bond authorization specifically authorized $195,850,000 in MBTA bonds to be used for the Old Colony Project. An additional $85 million in MBTA Bonds was authorized for the project in the 1991 bond bill. These bonds would be issued as part of larger bond issues as the project requires cash to pay construction bills. Current MBTA practice is to issue short-term notes ("bond anticipation notes") to cover cash needs for capital projects, then to issue long term bonds as is convenient to refund the short-term notes. After 1996, the Old Colony Project would result in a net operating cost (net of fare revenue) of approximately $9.4 millon per year (1996 dollars), and would require annual debt service of $19.4 million per year (current dollars) . ES.6 COMMENTS AND RESPONSES Significant public discussion and review of the project plans and alternatives has occurred during project development. The MBTA has conducted a public involvement program that has included hundreds of MBTA-sponsored meetings, meetings with local boards and commissions, special briefings, and local review sessions. These meetings have been opportunities to gather citizens' comments and guidance in the development of the project alternatives. This program has benefitted from a high degree of media coverage supporting the public meetings process and informing the public. Project information has been distributed at almost all public meetings. Informational materials have been distributed at Red Line stations and other public facilities in the Old Colony study area. The public comment period for the DEIS/DEIR lasted 76 days and three public hearings were held. As a result of the high level of public involvement in the project development process and the high level of awareness about the project in the Old Colony Study area, almost two thousand comments were received by either the MBTA, FTA , or the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act Unit of the Executive Office of Environmental Affairs. Comments related to the Main Line, the Middleborough Line, and the Plymouth Line, the three elements of modified Alternative 3b, the Preferred Alternative, are addressed in this FEIS/FEIR. Because of the large volume of comments received on the Greenbush Line, a "Summary of Greenbush Line Related Comments" has been provided in Chapter X, Section 10.9. Comments related to the Greenbush Line will be addressed in a supplemental environmental document concerning Greenbush Line issues. The Old Colony Railroad Rehabilitation Project Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) has participated in the project scoping, the refinement of alternatives, and the review of all draft DEIS/DEIR and FEIS/FEIR materials. CAC comments have guided the MBTA and provided a regional forum for discussion of project elements and analysis results. ES-29 ES.7 CHANGES FROM THE DEIS/DEIR The FEIS/FEIR contains the text presented in the DEIS/DEIR as it has been revised to address comments concerning the Main Line, the Middleborough Line, and the Plymouth Line - the three elements of modified Alternative 3b, the Preferred Alternative. Changes and additions from the DEIS/DEIR text are indicated by italicized text with bars in the margin. Deletions are noted by dots. The principal changes made to the DEIS/DEIR text are listed here as required by the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act regulations. 0 Chapter I Purpose and Need This chapter is essentially unchanged except that the chronology of events involved in the environmental assessment process is updated to reflect the completion of the DEIS/DEIR review process. 0 Chapter II Alternatives Considered The principal change to this chapter is the addition of an entirely new Section 2.5 "The Preferred Alternative" in which the Preferred Alternative, a modified version of Alternative 3b "Commuter Rail from South Station to Middleborough and Plymouth" is identified, described, and the reasons for its selection presented. Also added to this chapter is Section 2.6 "The Deferral of the Greenbush Corridor" in which the postponement of the consideration of issues related to commuter rail service to a supplemental environmental document is discussed. Consistent with this deferral of issues related to the Greenbush Line corridor, further comparison of alternatives is limited to the No-Build Alternative, the Transportation Systems Management Alternative, and those commuter rail alternatives that do not include service in the Greenbush Line corridor, namely modified Alternative 3a and modified Alternative 3b. In Section 2.2 "Alternatives Analyzed" several changes are made to the descriptions in 2.2.3 "Commuter Rail Alternatives:" - Under common system elements, the general station description has been revised to indicate the provision of 730 foot long high-level platforms at all station sites rather than the low-level platforms previously proposed. This change is in conformance with general MBTA policy concerning improved patron service and handicapped accessibility. This overall change has been reflected in all individual station descriptions in this section and in all station conceptual plans in Chapter VIII "Conceptual Plans." - The description of three stations which were considered during project development but were later dropped from the project have been deleted. These station sites are Westdale Station and Middleborough/Route 44 Station on the Middleborough Line and a local Kingston Station on the Plymouth Line. These stations site were not included in ridership ES-30 projections, operations planning, or cost estimates. - - The description of the Abington Station is completely revised to reflect the choice of a new station site about a mile and a half to the south as requested by comment LA-1, Town of Abington, Board of Selectmen. It is shown on a revised Figure VIII-B9 "Abington Station, Conceptual Site Plan" in Chapter VIII. - The description of the Kingston/Route 3 Station is completely revised to reflect the choice of a new station site in the Marion Drive area of Kingston as requested by comment LA-10 , Town of Kingston, Office of the Selectmen. It is shown on a revised Figure VIII-B13 "Kingston/Route 3 Station, Conceptual Site Plan" in Chapter VIII. - The description of the Plymouth station is completely revised to reflect the choice of a new station site as requested by Comment 0-9 Cordage Park Co. and CO-16, Plymouth Development and Industrial Commission. It is shown on a revised Figure VIII-B14 "Plymouth Station, Conceptual Site Plan" in Chapter VIII. - A description of the Middleborough Line layover facility has been provided. It is shown on Figure VIII-B7a "Middleborough Layover Facility" in Chapter VIII. - A description of the Maintenance-of-Way Facility in Abington on the Plymouth Line has been provided. It is shown on Figure VIII-B8a in Chapter VIII. - A description of the Plymouth Line layover facility has been provided. It is shown on Figure VIII-B14a "Plymouth Layover Facility" in Chapter VIII. - A description of the Greenbush Line layover facility has been provided. It is shown on Figure VIII-21a in Chapter VIII. - Revisions to the descriptions of traffic mitigation measures are provided for several of the station sites. An expanded description of the consideration given to busways as part of the TSM option is provided in 2.2.2(c) "New and Expanded Express Bus Service" in response to Comment RA-12, Joint Transportation Planning Group of SRPEDD, BOS-8, Stephen Anzuoni for SEMPCA, LA-9, City of Quincy, and others. An expanded discussion of the sizing of parking facilities, the constraints on parking supply, reasons for the constraints, and possible expansion options is provided in 2.2.3 "Commuter Rail Alternatives" in response to Comments LA-2, Boston Transportation Department, RA-5, South Shore Coalition, and others. 0 Chapter III Affected Environment In this chapter, references to those areas and those resources which are related only to the Greenbush Line corridor have been dropped. These ES-31 areas and resources will be discussed in a supplemental environmental document concerning that element of the project. Under Section 3.2.2(d) "Private Carrier Bus System", bus ridership and other information to private bus service in the study area has been revised based on information provided by the private bus carriers. Under Section 3.3.2(d) "Vibration Measurement Program", information on the vibration propagation characteristics determined by recent measurements in the study area is presented. Under Section 3.3.3(a) "Water Resources", the recently designated "Plymouth-Carver Sole Source Aquifer" is described. 0 Chapter IV Transportation Impacts In this chapter, transportation impacts are described in relation only to the No-Build Alterative, the Transportation Systems Management Alternative, and those commuter rail alternatives that do not include service in the Greenbush Line corridor, namely modified Alternative 3a and modified Alternative 3b. 0 Chapter V Environmental Consequences In this chapter, references to impacts which are related only to commuter rail service on the Greenbush Line have been dropped since the Greenbush Line service is not included as part of the Preferred Alternative. Impacts related to transportation service in the Greenbush Line corridor will be discussed in a supplemental environmental document. A description of measures to be taken for the protection of fisheries and marine habitat during the construction of the Neponset River Bridge is provided at 5.3.10 "Mitigation - Waterways Crossings" in response to Comment FA-1, National Marine Fisheries Service. General information developed and conclusions reached in a new support document Methods and Results Report: Wetlands Impact Assessment have been reported in 5.3.11 "Wetlands" and 5.3.12 "Mitigation-Wetlands" in response to Comments FA-8, Environmental Protection Agency, FA-1, National Marine Fisheries Service, FA-9, Department of the Interior, and others. Statements indicating the completion of the necessary reviews of historic bridges and the executing of a Memorandum of Agreement with provisions relating to historic bridges are included in 5.4.2 "Historic Resources. " Statement indicating the completion of the necessary review of potential archaeological resources and the execution of a process Memorandum of Agreement on further investigation are included in 5.4.2 "Historic Resources". An expanded discussion on herbicide applications as part of maintenance of the commuter rail right-of-way is provided at 5.3.7(c) "Herbicide ES-32 Applications" in response to comments FA-8, Environmental Protection Agency, SA-10, Department of Food and Agriculture, SA-5, Robert Ambler, State Representative, SA-7, James T. Brett, State Representative, LA-25, Boston Redevelopment Authority, LA-33, City of Boston, Environment Department, and others. An expanded discussion on the local impact of diesel exhaust is provided in 5.3.1 "Air Quality" in response to Comment FA-8, Environmental Protection Agency, LA-25, Boston Redevelopment Authority, LA-21, Braintree Planning Board, LA-33, City of Boston, Environment Department, CO-10, Dorchester Allied Neighborhood Association, and others. General changes to reflect new traffic mitigation measures associated with the Abington station site, the Kingston/Route 3 Station site and the new Plymouth station site are included in 5.2.1 "Traffic Impact at Stations". The measures associated with the previous station sites are deleted. General changes to reflect refinements in the traffic mitigation measures associated with various station sites are included in 5.2.1 "Traffic Impact at Stations." The discussion of potential impacts from elevated carbon monoxide concentrations at area intersections due to increased traffic volumes from commuter rail stations in section 5.3.1 "Air Quality" and Section 5.3.2 "Mitigation - Air Quality" is revised based on reanalysis using a new model, the CAL3QHC model . The discussion of potential noise impacts at areas adjacent to the right-of-way in Section 5.3.3 "Noise" and Section 5.3.4 "Mitigation - Noise Impacts" is revised based on a redefinition of impact areas using newly available, more detailed mapping of these areas. Proposed mitigation measures are also specified. The discussion of potential residential annoyance vibration impacts at areas adjacent to the right-of-way in Section 5.3.5 "Vibration Results" and Section 5.3.6 "Mitigation - Vibration" is revised based on reanalysis using new information from field measurements of vibration propagation characteristics in the study area. Proposed mitigation measures are also specified. 0 Chapter VI Evaluation of Alternatives An expanded description of the financial feasibility and funding sources for the project is provided under 6.1 "Financial Feasibility" and 6.2 "Comparison of Alternatives" in response to Comment SA-8, MBTA Advisory Board, RA-6, Metropolitan Area Planning Commission, CO-8, South Shore Chamber of Commerce, RA-5, South Shore Coalition, and CO-11, Dorchester Allied Neighborhood Association. This description reflects information developed and conclusions reached in a new support document Methods and Results: Financial Feasibi! i tv. ES-33 Significant changes to the "Financial Feasibility" section are as follows: V - The debt service (capital and interest) and operating costs for the Old Colony Project included in the financial capacity assessment correspond to the Preferred Alternative, modified 3b, instead of Alternative 3d. - Use of the most recently available financial information (Fiscal Year 1991 approved budget) as a base. - The discussion of the proposed financing plan is expanded to present a full description of proposed mechanisms to address all costs of the Preferred Alternative, modified 3b. In the "Comparison of Alternatives" section, compared alternatives include only the No-Build Alternative, the Transportation Systems Management Alternative (TSM), and those commuter rail alternatives that do not include service in the Greenbush Line corridor, namely modified Alternative 3a and modified Alternative 3b. 0 Chapter VII Exhibits This chapter is unchanged with the exception of the addition of the Memorandum of Agreement on historic bridges and on archaeological resources which is shown as "Exhibit T". 0 Chapter VIII Conceptual Plans A number of minor revisions have been made throughout the drawings. Significant changes are as follows: - Route Plans The extent of the Plymouth-Carver Sole Source Aquifer is shown on Figure VIII-Al, Figure VIII-AP4, and Figure VIII-AP5 as response to Comment FA- 8, Environmental Protection Agency. - Station Plans Figure VIII-B7a "Middl eborough Line Layover Facility" is a new drawing. Figure VIII-B8a "Maintenance-of-Way Facility " is a new drawing. Figure VIII-B14a "Plymouth Line Layover Facility" is a new drawing. Figure VIII-B21a "Greenbush Line Layover Facility" is a new drawing. All station conceptual plans have been revised to reflect the universal use of high level platforms. Figure VIII-B4 "Brockton Station, Conceptual Site Plan", now includes details of a stair and ramp structure providing access to the station ES-34 pi atform. Figure VIII-B9 "Abington Station, Conceptual Site Plan" is a replacement drawing to reflect the choice of a new station site. Figure VIII-B13 "Kingston/Route 3 Station, Conceptual Site Plan" is a replacement drawing to reflect the choice of a new station site. Figure VIII-B14 "Plymouth Station, Conceptual Site Plan" is a replacement drawing to reflect the choice of a new station site. Figure VIII-B8 "South Weymouth Station, Conceptual Site Plan" is revised to reflect an expanded parking area. Figure VIII-B6 "Bridgewater Station, Conceptual Site Plan" is revised to reflect changes in parking area configuration. - Traffic Mitigation Plans Figure VIII-C12 "Abington Station Entrance at Route 123" is a new drawing. Figure VIII-C3a "Union Street Mill Street (Randolph) and Center Street (Holbrook)" is a revised drawing. Figure VIII-Cll "South Weymouth: Route 18, Route 58, and Pond Street" is a revised drawing. Figure VIII-C12 "Abington: Birch Street and Station Entrance" Figure VIII-C13, "Plymouth Street (Route 58) and Station Driveway", and Figure VIII-C14 "Abington: North and Birch Street" are deleted. These traffic mitigation measures relate to the former Abington station site which has been changed. Figure VIII-C18 "Kingston: Alt. 1, Evergreen and Summer Street (Rte. 3A)" has been eliminated. Alternative 2 for improvements at this intersection has been selected and is shown as Figure VIII-C18. Figure VIII-C18a "Kingston: Independence Mall Way and Cranberry Road" is a new drawing showing mitigation measures along the access route to the new Kingston/Route 3 Station site. Figure VIII-C18b "Kingston: Route 3/Route 3A Interchange" is a new drawing showing improvements along the new railroad right-of-way in Kingston. Figures related to traffic mitigation measures associated with commuter rail stations along the Greenbush Line have been deleted. These include Figure VIII-C19 through Figure VIII-C31 Figure VIII-C32 "Braintree: Pearl Street Grade Separation, Alternative 1" has been eliminated. Alternative 2 for improvements in this area has been selected and is shown as Figure VIII-C32. ES-35 0 Chapter IX Noise and Vibration Mitigation Measures This chapter is entirely new. 0 Chapter X Comments and Response This chapter, containing the comments received during the public comment period and responses to them, is entirely new. 0 Additional Information New documents - Methods and Results Report: Wetlands Impact Assessment, and Methods and Results Report: Financial Feasibility . Technical Memorandum: Review of Issues Related to Potential Water Supply Resources Impacts . Technical Memorandum: Advisory Board Response . Technical Memorandum: Environmental Study of the Revised Configuration of the Plymouth Line Terminal Area, Technical Memorandum: Review of Issues Related to Potential Impacts on Historic and Parklands Resources in the City of Quincv . and Air Qual ity Analysis Support Document , are added to the "Reference Documents" list. Some of the other reference documents have been updated. ES.8 ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED A number of issues remain to be resolved as part of continuing project development. They include: 0 Preparation of a supplemental environmental document which will address the comments raised concerning commuter rail service on the Greenbush Line. In addition to responses to comments on the Greenbush Line, the supplemental environmental document will include Section 4(f) Evaluations relating to the Scituate Tennis Courts and the Lincoln Historic District in Hingham and statements indicating the completion of the necessary reviews of historic structures and the issuing of a Memorandum of Agreement on design issues relating to historic structures. 0 Coordination with appropriate federal, state, and local officials, and with interested citizens as the project continues to be designed and constructed. 0 Required permits and licenses for construction of the Neponset River Bridge and other elements of modified Alternative 3b "Commuter Rail from South Station to Middleborough and Plymouth." The continued development of the Preferred Alternative will require continued coordination with the Army Corps of Engineers, the Coast Guard, DEP, CZM and the local conservation commissions. 0 Coordination with property owners concerning mitigation of noise and vibration impacts. ES-36