Preliminary Engineering / Environmental Impact StatementNorthwest Corridor LRT Line to Irving and DFW Airport

Final Environmental Impact Statement 2-1Chapter 2 Alternatives Considered

2.0 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED

This chapter describes the alternatives considered during the Northwest Corridor Major InvestmentStudy (MIS) and the alternatives considered in the Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statement(EIS).

Two alternatives were considered in this EIS, a No-Build Alternative and an LRT Alternative. TheNo-Build Alternative includes transportation and transit projects that have a reasonable expectationof funding and are programmed for implementation. The No-Build Alternative is used as a basisfor determining the potential environmental impacts that would be associated with the proposedLRT Alternative. The proposed action, referred to throughout this Final EIS as the LRT Alternative,is a 9.3-mile light rail transit project derived from the MIS LPIS, and subsequently modified. Bothalternatives are described in detail in Section 2.2 of this chapter.

2.1 MAJOR INVESTMENT STUDY (MIS) ALTERNATIVESThe Northwest Corridor MIS covered a large study area that included both the FarmersBranch/Carrollton corridor, a long identified and defined candidate travel corridor for transitimprovements, and the Irving/DFW corridor, an emerging transit corridor. The MIS alternativesserved both travel corridors. As noted previously, a separate EIS was prepared for the FarmersBranch and Carrollton corridor. Thus, the discussion below focuses on the MIS alternativesdeveloped for the Northwest Corridor LRT Line to Irving and DFW Airport.

2.1.1 Screening and Selection ProcessThe screening and selection process for the Northwest Corridor MIS consisted of two distinctphases: Conceptual and Detailed Evaluation. The Conceptual phase considered single-modeelements and evaluated their performance. The most promising were carried forward to theDetailed Evaluation phase. The Detailed Evaluation phase refined each element and groupedthem into “packages” of strategies to address transportation needs. The packages were analyzed,and from these a single Locally Preferred Investment Strategy (LPIS) was selected. The No-Build and Transportation System Management/Transportation Demand Management (TSM/TDM)Alternatives were carried through the entire evaluation process for comparison. LRT andCommuter Rail were carried forward as rail technologies to consider. Many alignment alternativeswere considered. High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Lane and highway widening options were alsocarried forward into the Conceptual and Detailed Evaluation.

2.1.2 Conceptual MIS AlternativesThe conceptual alternatives considered during the Northwest Corridor MIS focused on the range ofLRT and Commuter Rail options available to serve corridor travel needs. The No-Build, TSM/TDM,and HOV/highway options were carried forward to the Detailed Evaluation.

Commuter rail alternatives emphasized use of existing railroad rights-of-way. Within theIrving/DFW Corridor, these alignments generally followed the east-west Cotton Belt alignment fromDFW Airport to Carrollton, the north-south BNSF alignment from its junction with the TrinityRailways Express (TRE) to Carrollton, and a “North Irving / Las Colinas Connector” option thatwould connect the Las Colinas development to the UP right-of-way being studied as an alignmentfor the Farmers Branch and Carrollton segment via the Mañana Spur.

Several LRT alternatives were evaluated. More LRT alternatives were defined given the flexibilityof LRT to deviate from railroad rights-of-way, provide a greater number of stations, and provideappropriate vertical separation from streets. LRT alignments generally followed existing freewayswithin the corridor, including IH 35E, SH 114, and IH 635. The first two options provided a directconnection to the Dallas central business district (CBD) via interlining with the Farmers Branch /Carrollton alignment.

Preliminary Engineering / Environmental Impact StatementNorthwest Corridor LRT Line to Irving and DFW Airport

Final Environmental Impact Statement 2-2Chapter 2 Alternatives Considered

The full evaluation of conceptual alternatives is documented in the Conceptual Definition ofAlternatives and Conceptual Evaluation Results Report (DART, March 1999). Based on theevaluation results a range of alternatives was defined for the detailed evaluation as described inthe following section. The key alignment decisions resulting from the conceptual evaluation are asfollows:

Use an alignment that branches off from the Farmers Branch / Carrollton alignment somewherenorth of Dallas Love Field and generally follows SH 114 to DFW Airport;

Continue to study alignment options between the Farmers Branch / Carrollton alignment andLas Colinas (the “Las Colinas / North Irving Connector”); and

Continue to study access options for DFW Airport.

2.1.3 Detailed MIS AlternativesThe Detailed Evaluation phase considered the alternatives carried forward from the conceptualphase. The No-Build and TSM/TDM Alternatives were carried forward through the DetailedEvaluation for comparison purposes. Several highway widening and HOV Lane Alternatives werealso defined. The Final MIS Report (DART, October 2000) documents these as well as the railalternatives in detail.

The evaluation of the detailed alternatives focused on ridership, costs, and cost-effectiveness.Several refinements were made throughout the process to optimize these factors, while minimizingpotential social, economic and environmental impacts.

Commuter Rail Alternatives ConsideredThe Commuter Rail Alternative defined for detailed evaluation in the MIS was the “North Irving /Las Colinas Connector” using the Mañana railroad spur to connect Las Colinas to the UPRRrailroad east of IH 35-E. The BN railroad option linking Irving to the TRE was also retained forpossible study. These commuter rail options did not provide service to DFW Airport.

LRT Alternatives ConsideredLRT alternatives for the corridor continued to be based on an alignment that generally followed SH114 from Texas Stadium to DFW Airport. The Mañana Spur was carried as the base option for theconnection between the Farmers Branch/Carrollton alignment and Texas Stadium, but analignment option which passed by Texas Stadium and the University of Dallas was alsoconsidered. An alignment following Northwest Highway was dropped from consideration.Alignments connecting into DFW Airport would continue to be studied.

Based on the detailed evaluation results, the rail element of the LPIS was selected to reflect LRT inthe Northwest Corridor as shown in Figure 2-1. In addition to the rail element, the LPISrecommended highway and HOV improvements to the IH 35E and SH 114 freeway corridors andLRT in the Farmers Branch and Carrollton corridor. These recommendations are fully documentedin the Final MIS Report (DART, October 2000).

2.1.4 Rationale for Choosing the Locally Preferred Investment Strategy (LPIS)The Northwest Corridor MIS resulted in the identification of a Locally Preferred Investment Strategy(LPIS) that included TSM/TDM elements, Highway and HOV lane improvements, and Light RailTransit. TXDOT, NCTCOG, DART, and/or local jurisdictions will accomplish the TSM/TDM,Highway and HOV lane elements of the LPIS through separate efforts. The LRT element of theLPIS was divided into two projects: the LRT Line to Farmers Branch and Carrollton and theIrving/DFW Line. Each of the two rail lines has independent utility in meeting transportation needsof the Study Area. The Farmers Branch/Carrollton Line EIS was completed in October 2003, andis now under construction.

Source: DART, Northwest Corridor Major Investment Study, 2000. Figure 2-1LPIS Rail Element

NW Corridor LRT Line to Irving/DFWEnvironmental Impact Statement

Preliminary Engineering / Environmental Impact StatementNorthwest Corridor LRT Line to Irving and DFW Airport

Final Environmental Impact Statement 2-4Chapter 2 Alternatives Considered

Depending on financial constraints, DART anticipates that line to begin operations in 2010. Thefocus of this EIS is solely on the LRT Line to Irving and DFW Airport.

The rationale for selecting the LPIS was based on a comprehensive evaluation and trade-offanalysis, and an extensive public and agency involvement program as documented in the FinalMIS Report (DART, October 2000). Key findings that support the selection of the LPIS include:

LRT alternatives were more cost-effective and had higher system-wide and corridor transitridership than Commuter Rail;

Public and agency input supported LRT over Commuter Rail, given the ability to have morestations, penetrate key activity centers, and influence land use planning;

The Mañana Spur alignment, while being cheaper to construct and more cost-effective from acost-per-rider standpoint, does not carry as many riders as the Texas Stadium / University ofDallas alignment;

The Texas Stadium / University of Dallas alignment has more public support and moreeconomic development potential than the Mañana Spur alignment.

Based on the above findings, the DART Board approved the Northwest Corridor LPIS on February22, 2000. Although the Mañana Spur was determined to be the technically preferred alignment,economic development potential and community support favored the Texas Stadium / University ofDallas alignment. Given DART financing limitations, the DART Board conditionally approved theTexas Stadium/UD alignment based on the following:

That the City of Irving enters into an interlocal agreement with DART to set forth fundingobligations by the City and by DART. The City will be responsible for $60 million (1999)towards implementation, while DART will fund the remainder.

That the City sponsor and conduct a Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) land use study forthe Irving/Las Colinas LRT corridor to maximize transit supportive land use opportunities, thusenhancing ridership and cost-effectiveness. The study should be completed by December 1,2000.

That the UD/Texas Stadium alignment will continue into Preliminary Engineering afterDecember 1, 2000 only if all of the outside funding commitments have been executed. If not,the Mañana Spur will be reconsidered as the preferred alignment.

On March 8, 2002, The City of Irving and DART executed an interlocal agreement reconfirming thestipulations of the LPIS approval. This agreement identified the roles and responsibilities of thetwo parties in designing and funding the Texas Stadium/UD alignment. The City of Irving hascompleted its obligation to conduct a land use study with the publishing of the NorthwestCorridor/Las Colinas Land Use Study (City of Irving December 2000). The Northwest Corridorpreliminary engineering effort was officially initiated on May 11, 2005 with the Federal Registerpublishing of a Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for the refinedalignment.

As shown in Figure 2-1, the LPIS alignment for the Irving/DFW LRT Line crossed the Trinity River,paralleled Spur 482 and SH 114 to the north, crossed to the south side of SH 114 at the GeorgeBush Turnpike (SH 161), and terminated at the north end of DFW International Airport east ofInternational Parkway and south of SH 114. It recommended further consideration and refinementof the LRT alignment in the Texas Stadium / University of Dallas / South Las Colinas area. The

Preliminary Engineering / Environmental Impact StatementNorthwest Corridor LRT Line to Irving and DFW Airport

Final Environmental Impact Statement 2-5Chapter 2 Alternatives Considered

George Bush Turnpike (SH 161) was the preferred interim terminus for the alignment, with theultimate terminus being the terminal area of DFW Airport.

2.1.5 Alignment Modifications Since Completion of the MISSince completion of the MIS in 2000, several factors have contributed to revising the alignment ofthe Irving/DFW LRT Line. Among these factors was consideration of alternative ways to providerail service to DFW International Airport. The DFW International Airport Rail Planning andImplementation Study (NCTCOG, 2002) was a study jointly conducted by The North CentralTexas Council of Governments (NCTCOG), Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport (DFWIA),DART, Fort Worth Transportation Authority (FWTA) and the Texas Department of Transportation(TxDOT) to determine the feasibility and possible routes for providing LRT and commuter rail to theCentral Terminal Area of the airport. This report recommended that rail lines should terminate atthe “13th Station” of the airport Automated People-Mover (APM) system, between Terminals D andF (see Figure 2-2). The study identified alignments for future commuter rail from the north and thesouth along International Parkway. The study also identified three options for the DARTIrving/DFW LRT Line to enter the airport from the north, south, or central (directly from the east viaa tunnel). No preference for any the three LRT alignments was made nor recommended; the studynoted that DART would determine the preferred alignment during the Irving/DFW PE/EIS. Thestudy’s purpose and recommendations did have the effect of proposing a different terminus for theIrving/DFW LRT Line, the “13th Station” or airport’s Central Terminal Area, rather than at the northend of the airport. The DFW International Airport Rail Planning and Implementation Study canbe reviewed at www.nctcog.org/trans/transit/planning/studies/index.asp.

In addition to the regional recommendation of a new terminus at DFW with multiple access options,other factors supported consideration of alternative alignments. In the North Irving sub-areabeyond the Las Colinas Urban Center, the area traversed by the MIS alignment is characterized bya circuitous street configuration and large business campus development. This developmentpattern, which is not necessarily conducive to rail transit, has continued since the selection of theLPIS. Continued new campus-style office development has become an impediment toimplementing the MIS alignment. This has been exacerbated by significant freeway developmentalong SH 114 and the recently constructed SH 161. Plans to expand SH 114 and its interchangewith SH 161 have further constrained right-of-way availability.

The lack of transit-supportive land uses along the MIS alignment outside of the Las Colinas UrbanCenter, combined with right-of-way limitations and the new airport access options, promptedconsideration of alternative LRT options through North Irving. Working with the City of Irving,property owners, and other stakeholders, DART considered options that could be more effectivelyimplemented and would better serve the activities in the corridor.

After further discussion with stakeholders in the corridor, DART developed three alternativealignment options through North Irving that could be combined with the three airport accessoptions. These options included a north option that essentially duplicated the MIS alignmentthrough North Irving, a central alignment that paralleled SH 114, and south option, which utilizesright-of-way that was preserved for rail access to DFW Airport in the original Las Colinas MasterPlan. All three options serve the general northwest-southeast travel patterned identified in theNorthwest Corridor Needs Assessment (December 1997) and evaluated in the Final MISReport (DART, October 2000). Figure 2-3 depicts the three basic alignment options with thevarious airport access options.

ROYAL LN

BELT LINE RD

JOHN CARPENTER FWY

WALNUT HILL LN

ESTERS RD

STORY RD

RIVERSIDE DR

HIDDEN RIDGE DR

UV114

Cottonwood B ranch

Hackberry Creek

UV161

VALLE

Y VIEW

LN

ROCHELLE BLVD

PRESIDENT GEORGE BUSH TPKE

N MACARTHUR BLVD

WALNUT HILL LN

BELT LINE RD

Irving

N O' CONNOR RD

CARBON RD

MACARTHUR BLVD

DFW InternationalAirport

&-348

N. MacArthur Blvd

G1E52

Figure 2-3

NW Corridor LRT Line to Irving/DFWEnvironmental Impact Statement

North Irving Sub-Area Alternatives Considered0 2,000 4,0001,000

Feet ´Source: Parsons, 2005

LegendNorthCentralSouthConnection Options

Preliminary Engineering / Environmental Impact StatementNorthwest Corridor LRT Line to Irving and DFW Airport

Final Environmental Impact Statement 2-8Chapter 2 Alternatives Considered

A series of three public meetings were held in January, April, and November 2004 to presentalignment and other design options, analysis of those options, and to solicit public input intopossible changes. This analysis was also discussed in Agency and Public Scoping Meetings heldon May 25, 2005 and June 29, 2005, respectively. The analysis indicates that the south alternativehas many advantages over the other two options, which have not received much support and aremore complex, longer, and more expensive than the south option. The north option, which issimilar to the MIS alignment, with right-of-way limitations and an absence of transit destinations,received little public support. Although the central alignment had some potential to improve trafficon SH 114 and some promising transit destinations, it too had significant right-of-way limitations.With the impending reconstruction of SH 114, this option was not supported by the City of Irving,TxDOT or the general public.

The south alignment, which is the least complex and provides the shortest, most direct route toDFW International Airport, received the most public and agency support. These factors tend tolower cost and increase ridership. The south alignment serves good transit destinations, includingNorth Lake College, and provides opportunities for future transit oriented development. DART hasreceived strong public and agency support for the south option. Recent System Planning levelridership analysis indicates that the south alternative, when compared to the north alternative (MISequivalent) produced 1,000 more corridor riders and 2,000 additional system wide riders.

During the alignment refinement phase of the project, the North Irving sub-area alignments wereconsidered in conjunction with the three airport access options. Given the complexity of servingthe airport, no clear-cut preferred DFW access option had emerged. Upon consultation with DFWInternational Airport, the FTA, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), NCTCOG, and the City ofIrving, a decision has been made to phase the project with Phase I terminating prior to entering theCentral Terminal Area of the airport. The FTA and DART have determined that terminating theproject evaluated in this EIS at Belt Line Road is appropriate. All alignment options through theNorth Irving sub-area, termination points and the phasing of the project were discussed during theScoping process.

The south alignment terminating at Belt Line Road has emerged from the alignment refinementanalysis as the revised preferred alignment. This alignment and a future alignment that wouldserve the Central Terminal Area of DFW Airport have independent utility (see Federal RegisterNotice of Intent in Appendix D). The North Irving Sub-area alternatives, including presentationmaterial and public and agency scoping comments, are documented in the Scoping SummaryReport (DART, September 2005).

As a result of the proposed action, the FAA has agreed to participate in the project’s NEPA reviewas a cooperating agency because construction of the project requires the use of airport property fornon-aviation purposes. As a cooperating agency, the FAA assumes responsibility to independentlyreview the environmental documents prepared by FTA and DART, and to assess whether thedocumentation meets the standards for adequacy under NEPA. The purpose of FAA action inconnection with the proposed LRT line on airport grounds is to ensure that the proposed alterationsto the airport do not adversely affect the safety, utility, or efficiency of the airport. Upon completionof the EIS, it is anticipated that DFW International Airport will request an approval of a revisedAirport Layout Plan (ALP). FAA must approve any revision or modification to an ALP before therevision or modification takes effect.