Welcome to the

Public Meeting

Roybal Campus 2025 Master Pla

Draft Environmental Impact Statem

(DEIS)

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CD

March 20, 2014
2

Agenda• Introduction and Background• Master Plan Development and 

Selection of Preferred Alternative

• NEPA and Public Involvement• DEIS Alternatives• Impacts and Mitigation• How to Submit Comments• Verbal Comments
3

Draft Environmental Impact Statement 

The CDC has prepared a 

Draft Environmental Impact 

Statement (DEIS) to assess 

the potential impacts 

associated with the 

implementation of the Roybal 

Campus 2025 Master Plan. 

The previous 2000-200Plan has been successimplemented. The new Plan is needed in order be able to respond quicor increased mission rethrough additional campconstruction or reconfigmeet new public health at home and abroad.
4

What is NEPA?

• Requires Federal age

take environmental faconsideration when msignificant decisions(large-scale Campus Development Plans, fexample)

• Public disclosure of po

significant impacts to and built environmentFederal activities

• Actively solicits public 

participation

The National Environmental 

Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) 

establishes national policy 

for the protection of the 

environment. NEPA 

provides for consideration of environmental issues in 

federal agency planning and 

decision-making.
5

NEPA Process

Notice of Intent

December 17, 2012

Scoping of EIS

Prepare Draft EIS

Publish Draft EIS

45-Day Public Review 

Ends April 10, 2014

Address Comments, Prepare 

and Publish Final EIS

30-Day Review Period

Issue Record of Decision

We are here

F

Opportunity for Public InputNEPA EIS Process
6

DEIS Alternatives - No Action Alter• NEPA requirement• Maintain current intensity of uses• No new construction 2015-2025• Retain 1996 parking cap of 3,300• 1% projected annual campus growth 

(Approx. 6,200 total employees)

• 0.5-1.5% annual background 

roadway growth rate plus future proposed developments for study area
7

DEIS Alternatives-Master Plan Preferred Alternat(Proposed Action)

• Laboratory construction (350,000 – 450,000 

gsf of laboratory space) 

• 1,600 space new parking deck for a total of 

4,500 spaces on campus.

• Reorganization of transshipping facility• Existing laboratory renovation• Infrastructure improvements:

- New chilled water storage- Stormwater detention- Additional open/green space- New elevated pedestrian walkways

• Projected campus population of 6,800 

employees
8

EIS Study Area
9

Natural Environment• Air Quality• Noise• Natural Resources: Geology, 

Topography, and Soils, Water Resources, Vegetation and Wildlife

Infrastructure• Transportation: Traffic, Parking 

Transit and Pedestrian Circulation

• Utilities• WasteResources Examined in the EIS 

Built Environment• Land Use, Zoning, • Socioeconomics • Community Facilitie

and Services

• Cultural Resources• Urban Design and V

Resources
10

ImpactsSocioeconomics• No significant adverse impacts• No displacement of residents or 

businesses

• No environmental justice impacts• Temporary increase in construction 

jobs and construction spending

• Increase in post-construction jobs, 

potential for 1,485 new employees by 2025

Land Use, Zoning, Public Policy• No significant adverse impacts• Minor increase in density of 

institutional uses

Community Services• No significant adverse impacts• Increase in vehicular traffic

Air Quality• No significant adverse im• Minor increases in air em

greenhouse gases, in coair quality regulations anpermits

Noise• No significant adverse im• Minor increase in noise f

sources and operations, impact threshold levels

• Temporary construction Natural Resources• No adverse impacts• Improved quality of storm
11

ImpactsUrban Design and Visual Resources• No significant adverse impacts• Introduction of new structure similar 

in height and mass to existing buildings 

Waste• No significant adverse impacts• Moderate increase in waste 

generated, waste disposal would occur in compliance with applicable regulations

Utilities• No significant adverse impacts• Increase in utility usage, not to 

exceed existing capacity 

Construction• No significant adverse im• Temporary increase in fu

emission and constructioemissions

• Temporary noise impacts• Temporary soil and grad• Implementation of BMPs 

impacts.
12

Detailed Traffic Analysis

Traffic screening identified intersections to be included in analysis:• Consulted with GDOT, DeKalb County, GRTA, ARC, Emory University • Intersections projected to experience highest increase in traffic as a result o

implementing the Master Plan Preferred Alternative

-CDC employee origin-destination study

• Congested intersection locations/potential for traffic impacts

-Existing traffic conditions plus considerable background growth (Nonrelated)

• 23 intersections chosen for detailed analysis 

Existing Traffic Operations:• 14 of 23 intersections 

studied found to contain failing movement(s) (Level of Service F) in 2012 

No Action Alternative Operations:• 17 of 23 intersections 

studied projected to contain failing movement(s) in 2025
13

Traffic Impacts- Preferred Alternat

• With the projected background growth by the year 2025 and the lack of tran

improvements, the majority of intersections and roadways serving the Cliftoanticipated to function at unacceptable levels of service with long vehicle decongestion. 

• New vehicle trips generated as a result of implementation of the Master Pla

Alternative are anticipated to further exacerbate poor traffic conditions. 

• 19 of 23 intersections 

studied projected to contain failing movement(s) in 2025 with the Master Plan Project
14

Traffic MitigationPotential Mitigation MeasuresGeneral Roadway System Improvements• Signalization• Signal Optimization/Retiming• Lane Restriping• Widening (only approaches that may 

have sufficient right-of-way)

Intersection Improvements• Clifton Rd./Briarcliff Rd.• Clifton Rd./Old Briarcliff Rd.• Clifton Rd./CDC Main Entrance• North Decatur Rd./Clifton Rd.Major Initiatives• Provision of Mass Transit• Peak–Period Transit Priority Lanes

Alternative Strategies for the C

Transportation Demand Manag• Employee-Based Transportat• Carpooling/Van Pooling• Bicycling and Pedestrian Activ• Campus AmenitiesPolicy Initiatives• Parking Management Strateg

Determined)

• Marketing the Use of Park an• Transit Reimbursement/Comm

Program

TDM is typically employed to increase overall traefficiency by encouraging a shift from single-occnon-single occupancy travel modes, or shifting apeak commuting periods. 
15

DEIS Comments

• Tonight at public meeting, 

provided.

• Federal eRulemaking Port

http://www.regulations.govFollow the instructions for comments.

• Mail: George F. Chandler, 

Centers for Disease ContrPrevention, 1600 Clifton RMailstop A-22Atlanta, Georgia 30333

• Instructions: All submissio

must include the agency nDocket Number. All relevareceived will be posted withttp://www.regulations.gov personal information proviFor access to the docket tbackground documents or received, go to http://www

Written comments 

identified by Dcket No. 

CDC-2012-0013 can be 

submitted by any of 

the following methods 

on or before April 10, 

2014:
16

DEIS Comments• If you wish to make a verbal statement and have not alrea

please hold up your hand and a CDC staff member will assregistration

• Commenters will be identified from their registration sheet 

particular order

• Please stand when your name is called and a CDC repres

bring a microphone to you. When you receive the microphclearly state your name and the organization you work for, 

here as a private citizen

• Please limit your comments to no more than three (3) minu• An alert will be given, if you approach the three (3) minute