The Mopac South Environmental Study needs to be elevated from an Environmental Assessment (EA) to an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). An EA is appropriate where there are not significant impacts to the natural and human environment. There are definite and significant impact associated with this project.
The toll authority is obligated to provide information about the actual work done or that will be done to avoid unnecessary impacts to the natural and human environment, not merely summary statements.
The MoPac South project should “be constructible without unnecessary impacts to the natural and human environment.” CTRMA has failed to provide the public with sufficient information to prove that the Mopac South project will be constructible without unnecessary impacts to the natural and human environment. CTRMA needs to clearly provide the public with specific information about the studies of areas where there could be impact to the natural and human environment.
Threatened and Endangered Species
With respect to threatened and endangered species, the “Environmental Study Update” flyer available in the Mopac South Environmental Study Virtual Open House states: “Field surveys were conducted in the project area. No listed threatened or endangered species were encountered.” There are pictures of birds, karst species, fresh water mussels, and salamanders shown on the flyer.
The data currently provided in the Environmental Study is insufficient to support CTRMA’s claims. Endangered salamanders are known to exist at Barton Springs Pool (https://tpwd.texas.gov/huntwild/wild/species/bartonspringssalamander/).
Areas of Austin have been designated as preserves for the Golden Cheek Warbler
(https://www.austintexas.gov/ecoweb/golden-cheeked-warbler). Both of these endangered species are known to be located near the project area or their environments. With respect to salamanders in Barton Springs, the Edwards Aquifer recharge zone feeds Barton Springs, a known habitat of endangered species and any development in that zone will impact the water quality in Barton Springs and the habitat of this species.
The environmental study merely states that “field surveys were conducted in the project area”, but does not indicate the scope of this work. There is no indication of which portions of the project area were surveyed or how the surveying work was performed. The report is disturbingly ambiguous, providing no parameters or structure. Given that endangered species are known to be proximate to the project area, CTRMA needs to provide the public with more information about the actual studies that were performed to assess whether threatened or endangered species are present in the project area.
Water Quality
With respect to Water Quality, the “Environmental Study Update” available in the Mopac South Environmental Study Virtual Open House states “The Mobility Authority plans to meet water quality standards on this project to protect the Barton Springs segment of the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone, as required by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. Water quality treatment measures on MoPac could be enhanced by this project by implementing the latest, most modern technologies available: Permeable Friction Course (PFC) Pavement, Water Quality Ponds, Vegetative Controls, Hazardous Materials Traps.”
First, at the next open house, CTRMA needs to inform the public whether the latest, most modern technologies available for water quality treatment will actually be used on the project, or if there is some specific condition that would trigger their use. CTRMA’s current statement implies that the use of these modern technologies is conditional or optional.
Second, at the next open house, CTRMA needs to inform the public of what the water quality standards are (including code sections and other requirements) that CTRMA understands as required by TCEQ for protecting the Barton Springs segment of the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone. In addition, CTRMA needs to provide the public with a map showing which portion of the project is the “Barton Springs segment of the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone”.
Third, at the next open house, CTRMA needs to inform the public of what the water quality standard are (including code sections and other requirements) that CTRMA understands as required by TCEQ for protecting the portion of the project that are not the “Barton Springs segment of the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone”.
Fourth, at the next open house, CTRMA needs to inform the public of what additional measures will be taken to protect the water quality of Lady Bird Lake and protect the lake from pollutants and run off during and after construction.
Traffic Noise
With respect to Traffic Noise, the “Environmental Study Update” available in the Mopac South Environmental Study Virtual Open House states: “Given the 98% projected population growth in Travis and Hays counties, traffic noise along MoPac is going to continue to increase over time, regardless of whether or not we build improvements. A detailed noise analysis will be conducted once a recommended Express Lane configuration has been determined. The community will be engaged in next steps after the analysis is complete.”
During the November Open House at Hill Country Middle School, the CTRMA staff and CTRMA’s noise consultant were asked by members of the public, during a Q&A session, if any of the alternatives would create more noise or if any would create the least amount of noise. The noise consultant stated that there actually is preliminary noise data for the project, but it was not available for public consumption. He also stated that based on the preliminary data, there is no plan that provides any more or less noise than any other because for all the plans, the noise would be mitigated, but that we could not rely on his statement.
During the next open house, CTRMA should provide the public with noise impact data pre and post mitigation for each of the 6 alternatives and any other alternatives. The public has received no notice of whether any of the 6 alternatives would emit, pre or post mitigation, more noise than any of the other alternatives. The public has been provided with an answer of “you can’t have that information”, regarding an issue that will impact the enjoyment of park land in Austin and in Rollingwood, along with the enjoyment of private property along Mopac. CTRMA has failed to provide the public with information that proves that CTRMA can meet the goal of “Be constructible without unnecessary impacts to the natural and human environment.”
In addition, CTRMA has failed to establish that all 6 of the alternatives would have the same traffic noise impact. CTRMA must evaluate the noise impact of all alternatives against no build, not just a recommended configuration against no build.
Furthermore, CTRMA has presented 6 alternatives, 3 of which include elevated lanes traveling along the eastern boundary of Rollingwood, as well as impacting Zilker Park. CTRMA has failed to establish that pre or post mitigation, the 3 alternatives with elevated lanes in the Cesar Chavez to Barton Skyway corridor would have the same traffic noise impact as the 3 alternatives without elevated lanes in this corridor.
It is deceptive for CTRMA to state: “The community will be engaged in next steps after the analysis is complete.” When CTRMA staff are asked to clarify what these “next steps” include, at multiple Open House meetings I have participated in during the previous Open House period and this Open House period, the public has been informed that only those residents closest to Mopac will have a vote on whether to implement noise mitigating measures. It is inaccurate and deceptive for CTRMA to state that “the community” will be engaged in next steps after the analysis is complete when there is a small selection of residents who may be able to participate in the process. In addition, when CTRMA staff are asked which properties would qualify for votes on noise mitigation options for the corridor between Lady Bird Lake and Bee Caves Road, the Zilker Club House has been designated as “the community” that would get a voice on noise mitigation measures for Mopac South – we have been told multiple times that no one in Rollingwood will get to vote on noise mitigation measures.
Since there is no guarantee to the communities adjacent to Mopac that any noise mitigation barriers will be implemented, at the next open house, CTRMA needs to provide the public with full noise analysis of pre and post mitigation noise impacts for each of the alternatives presented.
In addition, at the next open house, CTRMA needs to stop deceiving the public and identify who “the community” is that would actually have a vote on the use of noise mitigation barriers along Mopac South.