IV. SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
A. Introduction
The stated purpose of the proposed action is to provide needed intermodal
connections associated with planned development of the downtown waterfront
area. The existing Amtrak station is in a somewhat isolated location, and the
intent is to create a transportation center in a location that is closer to the Light
Rail Rapid Transit (LRRT) and more compatible with current and proposed
development plans for the waterfront area in downtown Buffalo.
As discussed in Chapter III, one feasible build alternative has been identified in
addition to the null alternative. This remaining build alternative is evaluated here
for social, economic, and environmental considerations in addition to the null
alternative, which forms the baseline for comparison. This chapter identifies the
potential impacts and evaluates the two alternatives as follows, for each issue.
Alternative 1: No-Build Alternative
Alternative 3: BITC at Memorial Auditorium
The project build-alternative includes the construction of a new Amtrak station at
the front of the lobby of the Memorial Auditorium, using the existing lobby.
Detailed descriptions of the alternatives are found in Chapter III of this Report.
1. National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and State Environmental Quality
Review Act (SEQRA) Classifications
The construction of a new Buffalo Intermodal Transportation Center and
Amtrak Station is anticipated to be a Class III action in accordance with
NEPA and the U.S. Department of Transportation regulations found in 23
CFR 771.115. NEPA Class III projects are actions in which the significance of
the environmental impacts is not clearly established. All actions which are
not Class I (may significantly affect the environment) or Class II (do not
individually or cumulatively have a significant affect on the environment) are
Class III and require the preparation of an Environmental Assessment (EA) to
determine the appropriate environmental review document required. Class III
actions may result in a FONSI (finding of no significant impact) or may result
in the conclusion that reclassification as a Class I action is necessary, thereby
requiring an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). It is assumed that an EA
will be adequate for this project.
The construction of a new BITC facility in the proposed location would be a
Type I action in accordance with SEQRA and the implementing regulations
under 6 NYCRR Part 617. Although most aspects of the project would place
it in the Unlisted category, 6NYCRR part 617.4(b)(9) states that any Unlisted
action that is substantially contiguous to a historic site eligible for the State or
Buffalo Intermodal Transportation Center
Environmental Assessment
Page IV-1
National Register of Historic Places is a Type I action. This project is located
contiguous to the former site of the Erie Canal, eligible for listing on the State
and National Registers. A Type I action requires the completion of a Full
Environmental Assessment Form (EAF), and supporting documentation, for
review by involved agencies for their determination of significance.
NEPA and SEQRA regulations are very similar in their language and intent.
The Environmental Assessment prepared to comply with NEPA will also
provide supporting documentation for the Full EAF.
2. Lead Agency, Involved Agencies, and Public Participation
The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) is assumed to be the designated
Lead Agency for the review and approval process under NEPA. The City of
Buffalo is assumed to be the Lead Agency for the SEQRA process.
Below is the preliminary list of Involved Agencies:
The Project Steering Committee is comprised of the following:
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
City of Buffalo
Niagara Frontier Transportation Authority (NFTA)
Buffalo Economic Renaissance Corporation (BERC)
The Technical Advisory Committee is comprised of the following:
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
CSX Transportation (formerly Conrail)
Empire State Development Corporation (ESDC)
Erie County Department of Environment and Planning (ECDEP)
Erie County Industrial Development Agency (ECIDA)
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
Federal Railway Administration (FRA)
Greater Buffalo Niagara Regional Transportation Council (GBNRTC)
National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak)
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
(NYSDEC)
New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT)
New York State Office of General Services (NYSOGS)
New York State Thruway Authority (NYSTA)
A preliminary list of other interested Parties includes:
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Buffalo Municipal Housing Authority
Buffalo Niagara Partnership
Buffalo Sewer Authority
Development Downtown, Inc.
Buffalo Intermodal Transportation Center
Environmental Assessment
Page IV-2
The general public, in addition to the constituents of the aforementioned
agencies, are represented by:
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
US Congress member Jack Quinn
NYS Assembly member Sam Hoyt
Erie County Legislator Charles M. Swanick
Neighborhood group from the Marine Drive apartment complex
B. Social, Economic, and Environmental Consequences
1. Social Consequences
a. Affected Environment
The affected environment includes the immediate study area and
surrounding land uses. These are described in detail in Chapter II.C
Conditions and Needs.
The proposed Buffalo Intermodal Transportation Center will have an
effect on the immediate environment, but the effects can also be discussed
in a more general way to include the downtown waterfront as a whole, as
well as the larger city and metropolitan areas. These will be discussed in
through the remainder of Chapter IV.
The study area is comprised of the both the existing Amtrak station and
the proposed build location for Alternative 3 as shown previously in
Figure II-3. The land uses in the study area include transportation (below
grade Amtrak line; ground level LRRT; and the elevated I-190 New York
State Thruway, Skyway and the various interchange ramps), vacant
structures (Memorial Auditorium), and surface parking lots (under the I190, and immediately to the east of the Marine Drive Apartments).
The Memorial Auditorium site alternative provides an opportunity for
adaptive reuse of the building and impetus for further renovation, but may
also limit other plans for the site, including large-scale reuse or possible
demolition.
The land uses directly adjacent to the study area are transportation,
recreation, commercial and light industrial. The study area is roughly
bounded by:
ƒ
Hanover Street, the Naval and Serviceman’s Park, and the Inner
Harbor development project to the south of Memorial Auditorium;
the I-190 and Buffalo News building to the south of the existing
station;
Buffalo Intermodal Transportation Center
Environmental Assessment
Page IV-3
ƒ
the Donovan Bldg to the east of the Memorial Auditorium; the
Ellicott Street I-190 on-ramp to the east of the Amtrak station;
ƒ
Upper Terrace, Exchange Street, Dunn Park baseball stadium, and
the HSBC tower building to the north; and
ƒ
Commercial Street and surface parking for the Marine Drive
Apartment towers to the west.
b. Local Planning
The project is proposed to be consistent with various land use plans and
regulations targeted toward preservation, protection, and revitalization of
the city. These include:
ƒ
The City of Buffalo Comprehensive Plan (in progress). A
comprehensive plan for the City of Buffalo by the City’s
Department of Strategic Planning proposed to be completed in
2001.
ƒ
The 1977 Buffalo City Plan, which defines the downtown area of
the city as the waterfront, central business district, and Theater
District.
ƒ
Waterfront Redevelopment Project No. N.Y. R-35 Urban Renewal
Plan. The proposed site location for the BITC project is located
within the waterfront redevelopment area;
ƒ
New York State Coastal Management Zone (CMZ). The proposed
location for the BITC project is adjacent to the CMZ;
ƒ
The Buffalo Waterfront Revitalization Program is a Local
Waterfront Revitalization Plan (LWRP) under the CMZ;
ƒ
The City of Buffalo Zoning Ordinance (Chapter LXX). The
proposed site location for the BITC project are located within the
Institutional Light Industrial District (I-I);
ƒ
The 1985 Buffalo Regional Center Master Plan, with emphasis on
the Buffalo Place concept;
ƒ
The 2010 Long Range Transportation System Plan for Erie and
Niagara Region (December 1994);
ƒ
The 2025 Long Range Transportation System Plan by GBNRTC
for assessing Erie and Niagara Region transportation needs; and
Buffalo Intermodal Transportation Center
Environmental Assessment
Page IV-4
ƒ
Destination Downtown Buffalo 2002 (March 2000) a finding of
fact, priority recommendations and conclusions of parking
available, effectiveness and a comprehensive review of parking
access for downtown Buffalo.
The project is proposed to be consistent with other local development
plans that have resulted in, or are expected to result in, an increased use
and economic development of downtown Buffalo, including the following.
Additional detail for many of these projects is provided in Chapter II.C.
ƒ
The Buffalo Inner Harbor Project, currently scheduled to be
completed in 2003. This proposed project was the subject of a
Final EIS published in February 1999. Since that time, the
archeological resources of the original Erie Canal have been found
to be intact to the extent that the Inner Harbor plan will be
redesigned to incorporate them. The Buffalo Inner Harbor plan
boundaries include Hanover Street on the north and Main Street on
the east;
ƒ
Cobblestone District reuse/redevelopment;
ƒ
Webster Block development by Adelphia National Operations
Center.
ƒ
Waterfront Village Office Expansion;
ƒ
DL&W Terminal Redevelopment;
ƒ
The currently proposed
Transportation Center;
ƒ
The HSBC Arena, a 20,000-seat indoor stadium that is home to
Buffalo’s professional sports teams, major concerts, and special
events;
ƒ
Memorial Auditorium Adaptive Reuse. A 1993 design charrette
explored potential uses for the vacated Memorial Auditorium
including use as the Buffalo Harbor Center, or a convention center,
hotel, sports/health club, offices, or parking;
ƒ
Proposed Inner-Outer Harbor Bridge and Outer Harbor mixed use
development;
ƒ
Downtown Buffalo Strategic Plan (September 1999 for the City of
Buffalo Department of Community Development);
Buffalo Intermodal Transportation Center
Environmental Assessment
renovation
of
the
Metropolitan
Page IV-5
ƒ
New Convention Center proposals; and
ƒ
NYSDOT Southtowns Connector Project (Scoping Report for
DEIS, December 1999).
Alternative 1: No-Build Alternative
The No-Build Alternative will not provide any benefits to the planning
efforts, nor further plans for transportation, recreational, or economic
improvements.
Alternative 3: BITC at Memorial Auditorium
This build alternative proposes to further the concept of intermodal
transportation connections, access to recreation, and economic
development in the city center and the region. Although all the local
development plans listed above are important, the Buffalo Inner Harbor
project is most directly tied to the proposed BITC project. The proposed
BITC is intended to serve as a gateway to the City of Buffalo for arriving
inter-city passengers and as gateway access to the Inner Harbor as an
intra-city trip destination.
Alternative 3 has been conceived specifically to create an intermodal
facility that will provide a convenient integration of several modes of
transportation and, furthermore, to provide access to the water modes of
transportation planned for the future Buffalo Inner Harbor marina.
Alternative 3 provides convenient access to the Inner Harbor amenities as
currently planned, by integrating the proposed BITC with the proposed
“transit plaza” at the south end of the Aud site as envisioned in the Inner
Harbor plan. The existing and planned bicycle and pedestrian trails run
through the proposed transit plaza, where bicycle parking and other
amenities will be located. Thus, the pedestrian and bicycle components of
the intermodal facility are included directly in the Alternative 3 scenario.
Alternative 3 also places the BITC close to water taxis, tour boat slips, and
transient boat docking facilities planned for the Inner Harbor.
c. Community Cohesion
The proposed project will not split or divide neighborhoods, isolate a
portion of a neighborhood or an ethnic group, or separate residents from
community facilities. The nearby Marine Drive Apartments are the only
residential population near the project location area.
Alternative 1: No-Build Alternative
The No-build alternative will not change existing neighborhoods or
community cohesiveness.
Buffalo Intermodal Transportation Center
Environmental Assessment
Page IV-6
Alternative 3: BITC at Memorial Auditorium
The proposed build alternative is not expected to cause an adverse impact
to neighborhoods or community cohesiveness.
d. Changes in Travel Patterns or Accessibility
Alternative 1: No-Build Alternative
Under the No-Build Alternative, travel patterns would not change, and the
downtown Amtrak Station will remain unwelcoming and isolated from the
downtown and waterfront areas.
Alternative 3: BITC at Memorial Auditorium
A new Buffalo Intermodal Transportation Center as proposed in
Alternative 3 would bring together several choices of transportation at a
single location.
Some changes in travel patterns would be expected due to the relocation of
the Amtrak Station and construction of a new intermodal facility along
with other development projects planned for the surrounding properties.
This is expected to have a beneficial impact by improving access to long
distance rail travel as well as connections to various other modes of travel
including: LRRT; intra-city bus (Metro Bus); taxis and limousines;
passenger car; bicycle; and water taxis. Encouraged by new amenities,
rail passengers would be more likely to take the train directly downtown
instead of getting off at the Depew Station and taking a bus or cab
downtown.
The relocation of the Amtrak Station to an intermodal facility at a central
location will improve accessibility, convenience, and safety in the
downtown area not only for local residents, but also for visitors to Buffalo
and the Western New York region.
e. Impacts on School Districts, Recreation Areas, Churches, or Businesses
Alternative 1: No-Build Alternative
The No-build alternative would have no impacts to schools, recreation
areas, churches, or businesses.
Alternative 3: BITC at Memorial Auditorium
There are no expected impacts to schools or churches from Alternative 3,
as there are none near the study area.
There are no businesses in the study area, and there are no expected
impacts to any of the surrounding businesses, including the news and
snack stand in the Donovan building, the Buffalo News, HSBC, and the
tenants in the HSBC Tower.
Buffalo Intermodal Transportation Center
Environmental Assessment
Page IV-7
Alternative 3 will provide improved access to recreational opportunities
for visitors as well as for current residents of the larger metropolitan area.
The new facility at a central location is expected to serve as a gateway to
the Buffalo Inner Harbor from various modes of transportation. These
include connections to bicycle routes, walking trails, and watercraft.
f. Impacts on Police, Fire Protection and Ambulance Access
The City of Buffalo provides professional police and fire protection to all
areas within the city limits, including the study area.
Alternative 1: No-Build Alternative
This alternative does not impact emergency services access.
Alternative 3: BITC at Memorial Auditorium
Alternative 3 does not involve any changes to emergency access in the
long term. In addition to city services, NFTA Transit Police will provide
protection, as needed to the completed project.
g. Impacts on Highway Safety, Traffic Safety, and Overall Public Safety
Alternative 1: No-Build Alternative
Significant impacts to highway and traffic safety are not expected under
the No-build alternative. The existing Amtrak Station is in a somewhat
isolated location with minimal security for waiting passengers, especially
during the evening hours when the station is closed, and the walk to the
nearest LRRT station is nearly one-quarter mile distance. The No-build
alternative will not address existing public safety issues in the project
location area.
Alternative 3: BITC at Memorial Auditorium
Significant impacts to highway and traffic safety are not expected under
Alternative 3. This alternative may benefit overall public safety by
improving greater security and passenger services due to the centralizing
of Amtrak, the LRRT, intra-city buses, and automobile drop-off for
downtown activities.
h. General Social Groups Benefited or Harmed
Social groups may be defined in various ways including age, race, wealth,
ethnicity, place of residence, occupation, and family status. Residents of
the Marine Drive apartments (partially subsidized housing for middle to
lower income individuals, many of whom are senior citizens) are the only
residents in the vicinity of the study area. Prior to the public meetings a
special effort was made to reach out to residents of the Marine Drive
Apartments to provide input to the proposed project.
Buffalo Intermodal Transportation Center
Environmental Assessment
Page IV-8
Alternative 1: No-Build Alternative
The No-Build Alternative will not impact the existing social groups in the
immediate area.
Alternative 3: BITC at Memorial Auditorium
All the social groups considered, in the immediate vicinity and in the
metropolitan region, are expected to benefit from increased recreational
access and intermodal transportation connections spurred by Alternative 3.
The on-site improvements proposed in Alternative 3 will have a positive
effect on area residents with the beautification of their surroundings.
i. Environmental Justice In Minority and Low Income Populations
Consistent with Executive Order 12898, disproportionately high and
adverse human health or environmental effects of actions on minority and
low-income populations must be identified. Environmental Justice
concerns are addressed for the BITC following guidance found in Interim
Final Guidance for Incorporating Environmental Justice Concerns in
EPA’s NEPA Compliance Analyses.
The guidance document states that minority populations should be
identified where either the minority population of the affected area
exceeds 50 percent, or the minority population percentage of the affected
area is meaningfully greater than the minority population percentage in the
general population.
The project area is found entirely within Census Tract 13.01 and is
predominantly commercial containing only 4 persons in residence. The
only other census tract relevant to the proposed project is Census Tract
72.02, which contains the Marine Drive Apartments and the Waterfront
Village condominiums adjacent to the Erie Basin Marina. Demographic
data for the populations in these two census tracts includes minority and
low-income information as presented in the following tables. Minority
population information is from the Census 2000 data. Income data is
taken from the Final EIS for the Buffalo Inner Harbor Project (February
1999), as this information from the Census 2000 is not yet available.
Buffalo Intermodal Transportation Center
Environmental Assessment
Page IV-9
Table 4-1
Minority Population in the Project Area and the City of Buffalo1
Census Tract
Total
Population
White
African
American
Other 2
Total
Minority
13.01
72.023
City of Buffalo
4
1,267
292,648
4
1,129
159,300
0
97
108,951
0
41
24,397
0
138
133,348
Percent
Minority
Population
0%
11%
46%
1 – From the 2000 Census
2 – Includes Native American, Pacific Islander, Asian, and Hispanic.
3 - Contains the Marine Drive Apartments.
According to census totals, the minority population of each census tract is
less than 50 percent and less than the 46 percent minority population in the
City of Buffalo. Therefore, Alternative 3 would not result in a
disproportionate impact to minority groups.
The low-income population is based on the 1990 census, because the 2000
census data is not yet available. Based on the available information,
Census tract 72.02 does contain a majority percentage of predominantly
low-income residents. These are likely concentrated in the Marine Drive
Apartments, since the Waterfront Village condominiums are generally
acknowledged to represent an upper-income development.
There are no identifiable long-term adverse impacts to the project, and it is
not expected to increase health risks to the affected community, including
low-income groups.
The BITC project represents an investment in the community, provides
greater mobility and improves quality of life.
2. Economic Consequences
a. Impacts on Regional and Local Economics
Alternative 1: No-Build Alternative
The No-Build Alternative would not work toward achieving the project
objective of meeting the expected future needs of transportation providers
and passengers at the time of completion of the various downtown
economic development projects now in their planning or implementation
stages.
Buffalo Intermodal Transportation Center
Environmental Assessment
Page IV-10
Alternative 3: BITC at Memorial Auditorium
One benefit of the proposed project is to improve access to the City of
Buffalo and provide intermodal transit opportunities for existing and
future patrons and employees of businesses in the city and region. This
access may provide opportunities for improvement of the local and
regional economy. A new facility may have a positive affect on property
values in the immediate area. In addition, public expenditures, new
employment, and retail sales volume would increase during construction
of a new Intermodal center. This project will compliment the proposed
development at the Inner Harbor project and the Cobblestone District.
The proposed design in Alternative 3 specifically restricts the project to a
limited area in the lobby area of the Memorial Auditorium, making
available the majority of the building as a flexible space for future
development, seen as an important catalyst for improvement of the local
economy.
b. Impacts on Existing Businesses
Alternative 1: No-Build Alternative
The No-Build Alternative will have no impact on existing businesses.
Alternative 3: BITC at Memorial Auditorium
Alternative 3 will have no adverse impact on existing businesses in the
long term. Minimal short-term impacts due to construction would be
experienced, as there are no street-level businesses within the project
location area. Access to buildings near the project site will be maintained
at all times during construction.
c. Impacts on the Established Business District
Alternative 1: No-Build Alternative
The No-Build Alternative will have no impact on established business
districts in the area.
Alternative 3: BITC at Memorial Auditorium
Positive benefits to the business districts located near the project location
are expected to occur once the project is completed. As a result of
increased visitor access to proposed waterfront activities and improved
connectivity of long distance travelers with local transportation modes, the
nearby business districts will be more convenient to reach, and patrons
will have better access to eating, shopping and recreation amenities.
Buffalo Intermodal Transportation Center
Environmental Assessment
Page IV-11
d. Relocation Impacts
Alternative 1: No-Build Alternative
The No-Build Alternative will have no relocation impacts.
Alternative 3: BITC at Memorial Auditorium
Outside the project objective to relocate the Amtrak train station to a more
centralized place, there are no relocations necessary for the build
alternative, as the proposed site is not currently occupied.
3. Environmental Consequences
a. Surface Waters/Wetlands/Floodplains
Alternative 1: No-Build Alternative
The No-Build Alternative will have no impact on surface water-related
resources.
Alternative 3: BITC at Memorial Auditorium
There are no surface waters, wetlands, or floodplains in the study area;
therefore, no impacts will occur, and no approvals or permits are required
for the build alternative. The Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) for the
project area as depicted on Community Panel number 360230 0020,
effective date November 18, 1981, indicates that all areas of the project
are outside the 100- and 500-year flood boundaries.
b. Coastal Zone Management
Alternative 1: No-Build Alternative
The No-Build Alternative will have no impact on coastal zone
management.
Alternative 3: BITC at Memorial Auditorium
The extreme southwest corner of the Memorial Auditorium site is within
the New York State Coastal Area established by the New York
Department of State (NYSDOS) pursuant to the U.S. Coastal Zone
Management Act of 1972 and as defined by the program adopted by New
York State in 19 NYCRR Parts 600-601 and in Executive Law, Article 42;
however, Alternative 3 does not include construction activities in this area.
Since the build alternative would not affect the Coastal Area, the policies
of the New York State Coastal Management Program (CMP) do not apply.
c. Water Source Quality
Alternative 1: No-Build Alternative
The No-Build Alternative will have no impact on existing or potential
drinking water supplies.
Buffalo Intermodal Transportation Center
Environmental Assessment
Page IV-12
Alternative 3: BITC at Memorial Auditorium
There are no mapped groundwater aquifers or surface water resources in
the study area, therefore, significant water quality impacts will not occur.
Correspondence with the NYSDEC has confirmed this finding
(see Chapter VI).
The closest drinking water resource in the area is Lake Erie near the
mouth of the Niagara River. The intake, which supplies drinking water to
the City of Buffalo, is located approximately 6,000 feet offshore from the
Erie Basin Marina and will not be affected by the proposed project.
Drainage in the study area is tied into the Hamburg Drain via 10" and 12"
main lines. The Hamburg Drain is a large (16'x13') drainage structure that
runs beneath the Memorial Auditorium in the abandoned Commercial Slip
and Hamburg Canal and discharges to the Buffalo River Harbor that
eventually flows into Lake Erie and the Niagara River. The drain functions
as a storm drain and as a combined sewer overflow at times of high flow.
Alternative 3 is not expected to a have long term impact on storm water
quality. The proposed site is currently paved with impervious material
and is drained by the existing system; therefore, there would be no net
increase in storm water conveyance. The Hamburg Drain is not in the area
of reconstruction and will not be impacted by the build alternative.
d. General Ecology and Wildlife
Alternative 1: No-Build Alternative
The No-Build Alternative will have no impact on ecology or fish and
wildlife resources.
Alternative 3: BITC at Memorial Auditorium
There is no significant wildlife habitat within the urban project study area;
therefore, no impacts from the build alternative are anticipated.
Correspondence from the NYSDEC and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Department confirmed this finding (see Chapter VI).
e. Historic and Cultural Resources
Alternative 1: No-Build Alternative
The No-Build Alternative will not affect historic and cultural resources.
Alternative 3: BITC at Memorial Auditorium
Alternative 3 is not expected to have a significant adverse impact on
historical and cultural resources, although a final determination by the
State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) at the New York State Office
Buffalo Intermodal Transportation Center
Environmental Assessment
Page IV-13
of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (OPRHP) will not be made
until the final design is complete. Consultation with SHPO was initiated
earlier in the conceptual stage of the project and has continued throughout
the site assessment and preliminary design process. Correspondence with
the OPRHP is included in Chapter VI. The following discussion applies
to Alternative 3.
Historic Buildings/Structures/Districts – Initial correspondence with
SHPO identified one building in the project area, the Memorial
Auditorium, to be potentially eligible for listing on the National Register
of Historic Places (NRHP). Additional information was subsequently
submitted to SHPO in the form of photographs of the existing building and
a historical perspective on the construction of the building to complete
their evaluation. Based on this information, SHPO has no further
concerns regarding impacts to the Aud or other historic buildings,
structures, or districts. Therefore, the build alternative will not impact
existing historic structures or districts eligible for listing on the NRHP.
Archeological Resources- A Phase 1A sensitivity assessment was
completed for the study area and provided to SHPO for review. The
findings show that significant impacts to archeological resources from
Alternative 3 are not expected. The Phase 1A Archeological Assessment
report is included in Appendix B and is summarized here.
Precontact Remains
The results of the Phase 1A indicate the potential presence of
archeological remains associated with the prior occupation and
development that occurred in the study area. The proximity of streams
and waterways as well as the location of reported sites in this portion of
Buffalo indicates a potential for the presence of precontact archeological
deposits. The more sensitive areas for undisturbed deposits would be in
historically undeveloped or less intensively developed areas.
Although the presence of intact deposits cannot be discounted at this time,
Alternative 3 is not likely to impact precontact deposits, since the
Memorial Auditorium site has been heavily disturbed by historic and
existing occupation, including the modern installation of underground
utilities.
Historic Remains
Portions of the Memorial Auditorium and Perry Street were built over the
former Erie Canal, Hamburg Canal, and the Prime and Commercial Slips,
canals that linked the Erie Canal and the Buffalo Harbor (see Figure IV-1).
The former Erie Canal and all associated canals have been determined
eligible for listing on the NRHP.
Buffalo Intermodal Transportation Center
Environmental Assessment
Page IV-14
The BITC study area lies in the area of earliest historic development in the
City of Buffalo. The construction of the Erie Canal in 1825 served as an
impetus for the predominantly commercial development that occurred in
the immediate vicinity. From the early 19th century through to the mid-20th
century, the study area was occupied by dwellings, stores, stables, saloons,
a church and many commercial enterprises. These structures were razed at
different times for construction of subsequent structures, including the
Memorial Auditorium, the Dante/Marine Drive apartments, and the
Donovan State Office Building. A comparison of historic 19th and 20th
century maps, particularly detailed Sanborn insurance maps, with existing
conditions, indicates that large portions of the study area have been
disturbed to varying extents by construction of the existing buildings and
installation of utilities. Although the results of archeological surveys
indicate there is potential for in situ historical archeological remains at the
Memorial Auditorium site, Alternative 3 is not likely to impact historic
deposits, since this site has been heavily disturbed by the existing
occupation, including the modern installation of underground utilities.
An early coordination meeting with SHPO was held to discuss potential
impacts to archeological resources from Alternative 3, where it was
discussed with SHPO that a Phase 1B assessment would not likely be
required for this alternative. However, a subsurface archeological
screening of limited scope is planned during final design to verify that
significant archeological resources will not be disturbed.
Buffalo Intermodal Transportation Center
Environmental Assessment
Page IV-15
Figure IV-1 from Inner Harbor Project
Buffalo Intermodal Transportation Center
Environmental Assessment
Page IV-16
f. Visual Resources
Alternative 1: No-Build Alternative
The No-Build Alternative will have no impact to view sheds in the study
area.
Alternative 3: BITC at Memorial Auditorium
The project study area is located in an urban environment, and the
proposed alternatives are located within or adjacent to large multi-story
buildings. The project area is currently fortified with major view
obstructions. Major obstructions to the current views are the piers and
roadways of the elevated highways (I-190, ramps, Skyway/NY Route 5),
the Memorial Auditorium, the Donovan Building, The Buffalo News
Building, Marine Drive Apartments and the HSBC Office Tower.
Alternative 3 would have no significant impact to view sheds, since most
of the development would take place within the existing Memorial
Auditorium structure and below ground level.
g. Parks and Recreational Facilities
Alternative 1: No-Build Alternative
The No-Build Alternative will have no impact to parks or recreational
facilities, and neither a 6(f) nor a 4(f) statement are required.
Alternative 3: BITC at Memorial Auditorium
No parklands or recreation areas lie within the study area. The build
alternative is proposed to augment the nearby parks and recreational
facilities at the waterfront by providing direct access from various modes
of transportation centered at the intermodal facility. Therefore, there will
be no adverse impacts to these resources from Alternative 3.
Section 6(f) Statement
An assessment was performed on whether the provisions of Section 6(f) of
the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act (LWCFA) of 1965 apply to
any land in or adjacent to the study area. The LWCFA protects parks that
have utilized LWCF monies for projects. No LWCF projects have been
performed in the study area. The closest LWCF Parkland is Veteran’s
Park, located to the southwest of the Memorial Auditorium site away from
any proposed construction. Alternative 3 will not affect the LWCF
parkland; therefore, a Section 6(f) evaluation will not be required for this
project.
Buffalo Intermodal Transportation Center
Environmental Assessment
Page IV-17
Section 4(f) Statement
Section 4(f) of the US Department of Transportation Act of 1996, as
amended, prohibits the use of publicly owned parkland, recreation areas,
wildlife or waterfowl refuges, or historic sites of national, state, or local
significance for a federally funded transportation project, unless it can be
demonstrated that there are no feasible and prudent alternatives to avoid
use of such resources and that all possible planning has been done to
minimize harm to 4(f) resources.
There are no such parkland, recreation areas, or wildlife refuges in the
project area. Impacts to archeological resources in the project area are not
expected from Alternative 3.
Further archeological study will be performed as explained in paragraph
IV.B.3.e to verify that deposits are not present.
h. Farmlands
Alternative 1: No-Build Alternative
The No-Build Alternative will have no impact to farmlands, as there are
none in the vicinity of the proposed project.
Alternative 3: BITC at Memorial Auditorium
There are no farmlands in or near the project study area. No further review
for impact to farmlands is required for the build alternative.
i. Air Quality
Alternative 1: No-Build Alternative
The No-Build Alternative will have no impact on air quality in or near the
study area.
Alternative 3: BITC at Memorial Auditorium
Under the Clear Air Act Amendments of 1990 (CAAA90), and based on
air-quality monitoring of sites in the Niagara Frontier region, the USEPA
designated Erie County as “in attainment” status for all of the
transportation-related pollutants except ozone, and as in non-attainment
status for ozone. It should be noted that all of Upstate New York, as well
as the remainder of the State, is included in the 12-state Northeast Ozone
Transport Region (for ozone generated in the Midwest) established by the
CAAA90.
Buffalo Intermodal Transportation Center
Environmental Assessment
Page IV-18
Conformity
The conformity requirements for local transportation plans are found in
Section 176 of the CAAA90 and in 40 CFR Parts 51 and 93, Criteria and
Procedures for Determining Conformity to State or Federal
Implementation Plans of Transportation Plans, Programs, and Projects
Funded or Approved Under Title 23 U.S.C. or the Federal Transit Act.
The proposed project is defined as a future capital project as part of the
State Transportation Improvement Plan (STIP Project No. 5T1242) and is
expected to be funded when the design and funding sources have been
finalized. Being a public transit project, it is expected that the build
alternative would tend to reduce area wide traffic and reduce overall
vehicle emissions. Therefore, it is also expected that the project will be
determined to be in conformity and compliance with all local
transportation plans. Correspondence from the Greater Buffalo Niagara
Region Transportation Commission (GBNRTC) can be found in Chapter
VI.
Air Quality Analysis
NYSDOT Environmental Procedures Manual (EPM) screening methods
were used to determine if the proposed alternatives would require a
microscale air quality analysis. The microscale analysis is designed to
predict concentrations of carbon monoxide on a localized basis, since high
concentrations are generally limited to within a relatively short distance of
roadways.
The traffic study performed for the project study area and nearby
roadways indicated that the current and projected future design-year levelof-service (LOS) for the intersections studied within the study area are
LOS C or better (indicating stable flow as defined by the Highway
Capacity Manual). Because there are acceptable levels of service and
because there are no sensitive receptors in the immediate area, a
microscale air quality analysis is not necessary for the proposed project.
j. Noise
The project is located in an urban environment with existing noise
producers including: the elevated highway traffic, local traffic, the LRRT,
and the train tracks.
Alternative 1: No-Build Alternative
There will be no impacts to noise levels in or near the study area as a
result of the No-Build Alternative.
Buffalo Intermodal Transportation Center
Environmental Assessment
Page IV-19
Alternative 3: BITC at Memorial Auditorium
The build alternative will not result in a significant impact to noise levels
in or near the study area. The following discussion pertains to Alternative
3.
FTA Noise Analysis
According to the screening procedure presented in the FTA Transit Noise
and Vibration Impact Assessment guidance manual (DOT-T-95-16), a
quantitative Federal Transit Administration (FTA) assessment for noise is
not required for Alternative 3. The qualitative assessment revealed that no
noise sensitive land uses are present within the FTA-defined area of
project noise influence. The closest noise sensitive land uses are the
museums and monuments (Land Use Category 3) of the Naval Park at
over 800 feet to the south of the project at the centerline of the railroad
tracks. Therefore, no FTA noise impacts are expected for the proposed
project and no further assessment is necessary.
FHWA Noise Analysis
Furthermore, a FHWA noise analysis and abatement assessment is not
required or appropriate for the build alternative, as the project will not
include the construction of a new highway or significant alteration of an
existing highway.
The project includes the installation of new mechanical and utility systems
at the site. Potential noise generated from new facilities (such as potential
noise from HVAC systems) will be addressed during the design process of
each system. Design criteria will not permit excessive noise generation
from any of the new or renovated systems.
k. Vibration
Alternative 1: No-Build Alternative
There will be no vibration impacts in or near the study area as a result of
the No-Build Alternative.
Alternative 3: BITC at Memorial Auditorium
The vibration screening procedure presented in the FTA Transit Noise and
Vibration Impact Assessment guidance manual (DOT-T-95-16) was
followed to assess this proposed project for potential vibration impacts.
The vibration screening procedure for rail projects indicates that transit
projects that do not involve vehicles, such as a station rehabilitation, do
not have the potential for vibration impacts unless the track system will be
modified (e.g., tracks moved or switches modified). The track will not be
moved or modified for any of the build alternatives. Therefore, no rail
vibration impacts are expected for the proposed project.
Buffalo Intermodal Transportation Center
Environmental Assessment
Page IV-20
l. Energy
Alternative 1: No-Build Alternative
The No-Build alternative would not foster use of public transportation and
would not provide reduced energy use benefits.
Alternative 3: BITC at Memorial Auditorium
A quantitative energy analysis is not required for the proposed project,
since the primary goals of the build alternative will serve to enhance the
use of mass transit. A qualitative analysis of indirect and direct energy
consumption impacts follows.
The most substantial contributor to direct energy consumption is traffic
flow. Alternative 3 would provide a direct connection from the Amtrak
station to the LRRT line, which should foster the use of mass transit.
Therefore, any impacts to energy consumption from Alternative 3 will be
beneficial by reducing the vehicular traffic flow in the immediate area.
Indirect impacts are essentially limited to the energy required to build and
maintain the facility. Because the build alternative will move existing
transportation facilities to a new, nearby location, long-term indirect
energy impacts due to maintenance are not expected.
m. Hazardous Materials Assessment
Alternative 1: No-Build Alternative
The No-Build alternative will not generate any potentially contaminated
soil or groundwater.
Alternative 3: BITC at Memorial Auditorium
The proposed building site for Alternative 3 has a small potential for
encountering buried materials during excavation for construction that may
be classified as hazardous waste or contaminated materials. The following
discussion pertains to Alternative 3.
Hazardous Waste and Contaminated Materials – The Alternative 3
building site is located in a former mixed-use area of Buffalo that has
included historical industrial, commercial, residential, and recreational
properties and has been covered with layers of fill materials during
successive waves of development over the last two centuries. These fill
materials were placed pre-dating current environmental regulations and
disposal laws. Therefore, there is a possibility that fill materials may
contain some solid or hazardous wastes, which could be encountered
during excavation activities.
Buffalo Intermodal Transportation Center
Environmental Assessment
Page IV-21
A preliminary screening (Phase I) for the Hazardous Waste/ Contaminated
Materials Assessment was completed for this project, consisting of a
records review. Sanborn Insurance Maps, other historical maps, and Polk
Directories were studied, along with soil boring logs from the Light Rail
Rapid Transit (LRRT) and the Memorial Auditorium construction records.
Alternative 3 would likely encounter fill materials as documented in
boring logs completed for construction of the Memorial Auditorium in the
late 1930s. The depth of the fill reportedly varies between 10 to 18 feet
across the property, generally increasing in thickness to the north. Soils to
be excavated for the passageway to the existing rail tunnel will be sampled
during final design and characterized for potential contamination in
preparation for proper handling during construction. Construction impacts
and their mitigation is discussed in section IV.B.3.n., Construction
Impacts.
Asbestos – Asbestos-containing materials (ACM) are present in the
Memorial Auditorium and would be disturbed during renovations
proposed in Alternative 3. An asbestos survey of the structure was
conducted in 1998 covering visible and accessible materials. Asbestos
was identified in the pipe insulation, floor tile, and transite pipe.
Additional ACM may be located in the area of building renovation, and
may also be associated with the underground utilities and roadways. The
extent of asbestos abatement cannot be determined until the areas of
renovation, demolition, and reconstruction have been identified. A
confirmatory review and full asbestos survey for potential ACM will be
conducted according to NYS Rule 56 of the Labor Code for the preferred
alternative prior to renovation during final design.
n. Construction Impacts
During construction, all necessary utility services will be maintained
including water, sanitary and storm water, electrical, gas, and
communication lines. The water main relocation will require minimal
disruption and there is not expected to be any delay in service, as the new
water main will be constructed before the old one is taken out of service.
Emergency access for fire, ambulance, and police vehicles to the project
area must be maintained at all times to provide adequate public safety.
Amtrak and LRRT delays during construction are expected to be minimal.
Short-term impacts to surface water, air quality, and noise levels would be
expected to occur at manageable levels during construction of the build
alternative.
Buffalo Intermodal Transportation Center
Environmental Assessment
Page IV-22
Short-term impacts to storm water during construction of the proposed
build alternative will be minimal, as there is a limited amount of
excavation and site grading required. Most of the work will be done under
cover. However, measures will be taken during construction to mitigate
potential discharges of pollutants and sediments into the Buffalo Inner
Harbor and best management practices for sedimentation control and
erosion protection will be in place.
Soil erosion and sediment control specifications and/or a formal plan will
be developed to be consistent with the most recent State Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (SPDES) guidance. Plans will call for the
use of sedimentation and erosion control measures such as silt fences and
drainage drop inlets where appropriate; measures for surface protection of
exposed soils; re-vegetation plans and paving schedules; and critical time
periods during the times of year when certain activities should be avoided.
Currently, if construction is to disturb more than five acres of land,
coverage under SPDES is required. However, pending regulations remove
the lower threshold so that all construction projects will require coverage.
Alternative 3 will not disturb a significant area of land, and coverage is not
currently required, but coverage with a Notice of Intent (NOI) prior to
construction will be required if the pending regulations are in effect by the
time of construction.
Fugitive dust and mobile source emissions will be of short term and
should be restricted to periods of heavy construction and earthwork
movement. Fugitive dust emissions will be minimal since most of the
proposed building area is currently paved and impermeable. Good
engineering practices such as staging land disturbances so that only part of
the site is under active construction at one time; frequent use of water
trucks during hot, dry, and windy periods; covers on all dump trucks
hauling soils; speed and access restrictions; and temporary vegetation of
any exposed soil piles should moderate dust emissions. Construction
vehicle emissions will be unavoidable, but may be minimized during the
construction phase by requiring vehicles to shut off their motors while
waiting. Motor vehicle emissions would be minimized by redirecting
traffic around the construction site through the use of temporary traffic
control measures.
Potential disturbances to Marine Drive Apartments residents in the
vicinity of the study area, including low-income groups, may occur due to
temporary nuisance impacts of construction such as noise, dust, vibration,
and increased vehicular emissions, traffic delays, and temporary loss of
parking. However, these will be minimal, as Alternative 3 will be
constructed nearly 1000 feet from the nearest residence.
Buffalo Intermodal Transportation Center
Environmental Assessment
Page IV-23
Short-term noise impacts will be associated with the construction of
Alternative 3. Many factors control noise levels, including the type and
numbers of machinery in operation, construction schedule, and distance
from noise receptors. Construction noise is regulated by Chapter 293-4(l)
of the City of Buffalo Noise Code, and by EPA standards for construction
equipment. These regulations require that certain vehicles meet noise
emission standards and construction activities be limited to defined time
periods. Engineering and institutional controls will be implemented to
further reduce noise levels by employing such measures as properly
silencing and/or enclosing all stationary site equipment; restricting idling
trucks; and proper scheduling to limit the amount of unnecessary vehicles
at the site.
Alternative 3 will involve renovation of the existing Memorial Auditorium
structure. Most of this renovation work will occur inside the structure
with negligible construction noise impacts.
The nearest non-transient noise receptors are the occupants of the
Donovan Office Building. The residents at the Marine Drive Apartments,
including low income groups, are most likely to be temporarily impacted
by increased noise levels from construction for the build alternative.
The excavation of the passageway and other site work proposed will entail
mitigation measures incorporated into the contract documents to reduce
construction noise. All construction practices will conform to the
requirements found in the City of Buffalo Noise Ordinance, thus
minimizing construction noise to the lowest practicable levels. No work is
anticipated to take place during evening or night-time hours, thus reducing
noise impacts to the Marine Drive apartment residents.
A small increase in noise levels is expected along a few defined truck
routes to be used by construction vehicles. Based on the proposed
construction schedule, it is anticipated that the Inner Harbor Development,
Naval and Military Park, and museum will still be under final construction
and not open to the public during the major construction activities for the
BITC.
Based on a Phase 1, environmental assessment, the excavation of an open
or closed tunnel from the Memorial Auditorium to the existing railroad
tunnel and site grading operations is unlikely to encounter solid waste or
contaminated materials.
However, a subsurface investigation during final design will be conducted
to categorize the soils and verify the findings.
Buffalo Intermodal Transportation Center
Environmental Assessment
Page IV-24
If any hazardous materials are found, mitigation measures would be in
conformance with the applicable federal, state, and local regulations,
especially the NYSDEC hazardous waste handling and disposal
regulations in 6 NYCRR Part 375, et al, the solid waste disposal
regulations in 6 NYCRR Part 360, et al, and the USDOT regulations for
transport of solid and hazardous waste found in 49 CFR Parts 100 through
199.
Renovation of the Memorial Auditorium will encounter asbestoscontaining materials with the potential for release of asbestos fibers. The
exposure of the public to this material will be negligible since most of the
work will take place indoors. Furthermore, asbestos abatement practices
will be employed as mitigation measures for worker and public safety,
including wrapping and enclosure of relevant materials, and air monitoring
will take place. These will be in conformance with applicable federal,
state, and local regulations, including EPA 40 CFR Part 61 Subpart M,
OSHA 29 CFR 1926.1101, and NYS Department of Labor Industrial Code
Rule 56.
o. Anticipated Environmental Permits and Approvals
During early coordination with the involved agencies, the permits and/or
approvals were discussed and any necessary permits and/or approvals will
be obtained during the final design process.
ƒ
US Department of the Interior - Section 4(f) determination.
ƒ
New York State Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic
Preservation (NYSOPRHP) - Consultation under Section 106
(National Historic Preservation Act) and New York State 14.09
compliance requirements.
ƒ
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
(NYSDEC) - Parts 360, 364, 370-374 – Solid waste and hazardous
wastes treatment, storage, disposal, and waste hauler permit(s) for
potentially contaminated soils excavated during construction.
ƒ
NYSDEC - Article 17, SPDES General Permit, (Section 402 of
Clean Water Act) for storm water discharges from construction
activities.
ƒ
New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) Temporary Use/Occupancy Permit for proposed construction on
lands situated under the Buffalo Skyway.
Buffalo Intermodal Transportation Center
Environmental Assessment
Page IV-25
ƒ
NYSDOT – Highway Work Permit authorizing work within a
NYS highway right-of-way.
ƒ
New York State Thruway Authority (NYSTA) – Temporary
Use/Occupancy Permit for proposed construction on lands situated
under the New York State Thruway.
ƒ
Erie County Health Department – Approval of all waterline
installations and connections.
ƒ
City of Buffalo Department of Public Works (DPW) – Dual Permit
that covers the purpose and intent of the project and is reviewed by
the DPW and Department of Community Development (DCD),
Division of Planning.
ƒ
City of Buffalo DPW – General Permits for traffic, utilities,
sidewalks, curb cuts, and other project changes to the current
configuration of the area.
ƒ
City of Buffalo – Technical Permit for deviations from standard
City of Buffalo design practices if required.
ƒ
Buffalo Sewer Authority/Buffalo Water Authority – Design
approvals for sewer line, water line, and required connections.
4. Indirect/Secondary and Cumulative Impacts
a. Indirect/Secondary Impacts
The purpose of the relocation of the Amtrak station to a new intermodal
facility is to provide easier access for inter-city travelers to both the city
center and the metropolitan area, and to make the experience pleasant,
convenient, and safe. A successful project should result in an increase in
quality of life for the users of the facility, with secondary impacts to
include a related increase in economic development to serve a growing
number of visitors, residents, and downtown employees that find the
facility to be an attractive addition to the downtown and waterfront area.
b. Cumulative Impacts
The discussion of cumulative impacts considers the direct impacts of the
subject project in combination with the indirect impacts and the impacts of
other past projects, currently committed projects, and potential future
actions. There are positive cumulative impacts expected from the
proposed action.
Buffalo Intermodal Transportation Center
Environmental Assessment
Page IV-26
Currently committed projects in the immediate area include the Inner
Harbor Development and construction of the Adelphia office building on
the Webster block. Both projects are planned to bring large numbers of
people downtown to the waterfront area. The Inner Harbor Development
will consist of 12.5 acres of open space, recreational, entertainment,
museum, retail, and some light office space. The proposed Adelphia
building is scheduled to involve the construction of a 25- to 30-story office
building scheduled to house 1500 to 2500 Adelphia employees in their
northeast operational headquarters.
Construction of the intermodal hub will assist with access to these
facilities by providing for convenient, multi-modal transportation
solutions, thereby retaining and increasing economic viability of these
nearby projects.
Other projects proposed for the vicinity include private development of the
main hall of the Memorial Auditorium; road reconstruction projects in the
surrounding area including Perry, Pearl, and Commercial Streets private
development on a portion of the Donovan site; the Marine Drive parking
structure; and public/private partnerships that envision the adaptive reuse
of the DL&W Terminal and the Cobblestone Historic District.
The various projects are generally cooperative with each other and should
result in an improved environment in the city’s waterfront area,
stimulating growth, and raising the quality of experiences for all visitors.
Buffalo Intermodal Transportation Center
Environmental Assessment
Page IV-27