20094 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 64 / Tuesday, April 3, 2012 / Notices 

information is then provided to the FAA 

decision making authority to make FAA 

employment and/or pilot certification/ 

revocation determinations. 

Respondents: Approximately 270 

subjects of investigation. 

Frequency: Information is collected as 

needed. 

Estimated Average Burden per 

Response: 5 minutes. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden: 23 

hours. 

ADDRESSES: Send comments to the FAA 

at the following address: Ms. Kathy 

DePaepe, Room 126B, Federal Aviation 

Administration, AES–200, 6500 S. 

MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 

73169. 

Public Comments Invited: You are 

asked to comment on any aspect of this 

information collection, including (a) 

whether the proposed collection of 

information is necessary for FAA’s 

performance; (b) the accuracy of the 

estimated burden; (c) ways for FAA to 

enhance the quality, utility and clarity 

of the information collection; and (d) 

ways that the burden could be 

minimized without reducing the quality 

of the collected information. The agency 

will summarize and/or include your 

comments in the request for OMB’s 

clearance of this information collection. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on March 27, 

2012. 

Albert R. Spence, 

FAA Assistant Information Collection 

Clearance Officer, IT Enterprises Business 

Services Division, AES–200. 

[FR Doc. 2012–7934 Filed 4–2–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Transit Administration 

Intent To Prepare an Environmental 

Impact Statement on the DurhamOrange Light Rail (LRT) Project, 

Durham and Orange Counties, NC 

AGENCY: Federal Transit Administration 

(FTA), United States Department of 

Transportation (USDOT). 

ACTION: Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare 

an Environmental Impact Statement 

(EIS). 

SUMMARY: The Federal Transit 

Administration (FTA) and the Research 

Triangle Regional Public Transportation 

Authority, dba ‘‘Triangle Transit,’’ 

intend to prepare an Environmental 

Impact Statement (EIS) to study a 

proposed premium transit service 

corridor in Durham and Orange 

Counties, North Carolina. The EIS will 

be prepared in accordance with the 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA: 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) of 1969 

and the regulations implementing NEPA 

set forth in 40 CFR Parts 1500–1508 and 

23 CFR Part 771, as well as provisions 

set forth in the Safe, Accountable, 

Flexible, and Efficient Transportation 

Equity Act: A Legacy for Users 

(SAFETEA–LU). The purpose of this 

Notice is to: (1) Advise the public that 

FTA is serving as the lead Federal 

agency; (2) provide information on the 

proposed project, purpose and need for 

the project, and alternatives to be 

considered; and (3) invite public and 

agency participation in the EIS process. 

DATES: Comment Due Date: Written or 

electronic comments on the scope of the 

EIS, including the purpose and need for 

transportation action in the corridor, 

and alternatives and impacts to be 

considered should be sent to the project 

team (see ADDRESSES below) by Monday, 

June 18, 2012. 

Scoping Meetings Dates: Scoping 

meetings will be held during the week 

of April 30, 2012 at the following times 

and locations. The scoping meeting 

locations are accessible by transit and to 

persons with disabilities. Confirmed 

times and locations will also be 

published in local notices and on the 

project Web site. 

Elected Officials and Partners 

Meeting: Tuesday, April 24, 2012; 10 

a.m.–12 p.m. noon; Extraordinary 

Ventures Center, 200 S. Elliott Rd., 

Chapel Hill, NC 27514. 

Agency Meeting: Thursday, May 3, 

2012; 1 p.m. to 3 p.m.; Durham Armory, 

212 Foster St., Durham, NC 27701. 

Public Scoping Meetings: Wednesday 

May 2, 2012; 4 p.m.–7 p.m.; 

Extraordinary Ventures Center, 200 S. 

Elliott Rd., Chapel Hill, NC 27514. 

Thursday, May 3, 2012; 4 p.m.–7 p.m.; 

Durham Armory, 212 Foster St., 

Durham, NC 27701. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments on the 

scope of alternatives and impacts to be 

studied should be sent to the project 

team via one of the following methods: 

Mail to Durham-Orange LRT Project, 

P.O. Box 580, Morrisville, North 

Carolina 27560; fax to Durham-Orange 

LRT Project at 919.461.1415; or email to 

info@ourtransitfuture.com. Comments 

may also be offered at the public 

scoping meetings. The addresses for the 

public scoping meetings are included 

above. All meeting locations are 

accessible by transit and to persons with 

disabilities. The project team must be 

contacted by Wednesday, April 25, 2012 

regarding special needs such as signing 

or translation service for languages other 

than Spanish. Spanish translation 

services will be provided at the public 

meetings. The times and locations for 

the public scoping meetings will also be 

provided through display 

advertisements in local newspapers; 

newsletters that will be mailed to 

persons on the project database that 

have expressed an interest in the 

project; email notifications; media 

releases that will be distributed to all 

print and electronic media serving the 

corridor; and posting of information on 

the project Web site. 

The Scoping Information Booklet is 

available on the project Web site at 

http://www.ourtransitfuture.org/ 

index.php/projects/durham-orange/. 

The booklet is also available in 

hardcopy form by contacting the project 

team as indicated below. 

Additional scoping information or 

other project information may be 

requested by calling the project hotline 

at 1–800–816–7817, visiting the Web 

site at http://www.ourtransitfuture.org/ 

index.php/projects/durham-orange/, or 

by mailing a request to Durham-Orange 

LRT Project, P.O. Box 580, Morrisville, 

North Carolina 27560. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Brian C. Smart, Environmental 

Protection Specialist, Federal Transit 

Administration, 230 Peachtree Street 

NW., Suite 800, Atlanta, GA 30303, 

telephone (404) 865–5607. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Scoping 

In accordance with Section 6002 of 

SAFETEA–LU, FTA and Triangle 

Transit invite comment on the scope of 

the EIS, specifically on the proposed 

project’s purpose and need, the 

alternatives to be evaluated that may 

address the purpose and need, and the 

impacts of the alternatives considered. 

Specific suggestions related to 

additional alternatives are welcome and 

will be considered in the development 

of the scope of the EIS. Scoping 

comments may be made at the scoping 

meetings or in writing no later than 

Monday, June 18, 2012 (see DATES and 

ADDRESSES above). 

Scoping materials will be available at 

the meeting or in advance of the 

meeting by contacting the project team 

as indicated above. If you wish to be 

placed on the mailing list to receive 

further information as the project 

continues, contact the project team (see 

ADDRESSES above). 

The relationships between concurrent 

projects such as the NC 54/I–40 Corridor 

Study and other projects will be 

considered in the EIS. 

Subsequent to the completion of the 

Scoping Summary document and prior 

to initiation of the DEIS, a concluding 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 64 / Tuesday, April 3, 2012 / Notices 20095 

stakeholders meeting will be held 

during which interested federal, state 

and local government agencies will 

collectively process all input and 

formally develop the final scope of the 

EIS. 

II. Purpose and Need for the Proposed 

Project 

The purpose of the proposed 

premium high-capacity transit 

investment in the Durham-Orange 

Corridor is to provide a transit solution 

that addresses the following mobility 

and development needs: 

• Need to enhance mobility: The 

Durham-Orange Corridor is forecast to 

absorb a significant share of the region’s 

population and employment growth, 

which will translate into increased 

travel demand. By 2035, the corridor is 

projected to add about 74,000 people 

and 81,000 jobs, which is expected to 

generate 255,000 additional daily trips, 

many of which will be made on local 

roadways. These trips will increase 

congestion during the highest AM and 

PM travel periods. Alternatives to the 

auto are needed to address the limited 

capacity of the roadway system to 

accommodate increased travel demand. 

• Need to expand transit options 

between Durham and Chapel Hill: Most 

bus service in the Durham-Orange 

Corridor is concentrated in downtown 

Durham and downtown Chapel Hill. 

Transit connecting these urban centers 

and serving the residential areas and 

retail developments between them is 

limited to two Triangle Transit routes 

and the Duke University Robertson 

Scholars Express Bus. Currently, these 

buses operate in mixed traffic along 

increasingly congested roadways, have 

limited capacity, and are not 

competitive with the auto for most trips. 

Furthermore, the Study Area does not 

currently offer the type of high quality 

premium transit service that is an 

attractive alternative to driving, 

particularly under congested conditions. 

• Need to serve population with high 

propensity for transit use: University 

students and employees, as well as 

transit-dependent populations, are a 

significant percentage of the population 

in the Durham-Orange Corridor. 

Expanding transit services and 

increasing access to each of the 

university campuses and medical 

centers, which offer pedestrian-friendly 

environments, limited parking, and free 

transit passes, will support increased 

mobility options for university students, 

employees and other patrons. Also, 

expanding reliable mobility options for 

lower income populations and transit 

users who may not be able to drive will 

enhance economic opportunities 

through improved access to major jobs 

centers along the corridor. Providing a 

transit option that supports the mobility 

of these groups satisfies an important 

need. 

• Need to foster compact 

development: Local governments 

recognize the need to limit sprawl and 

manage growth within the Study Area. 

Durham City/County, Chapel Hill, and 

Orange County have developed plans 

and implementation strategies that call 

for more compact, walkable, higher 

density, mixed-use development within 

the corridor. However, the existing 

transit infrastructure throughout the 

corridor is not fully supportive of these 

land use plans and implementation 

strategies and cannot facilitate long-term 

economic development. A proposed 

fixed guideway transit investment can 

channel future growth, provide a 

superior transit option appropriate for 

high density development, and help 

local communities realize their future 

goals and objectives. 

III. Study Area Description 

Located in both Durham and Orange 

counties, the Durham-Orange Corridor 

Study Area extends approximately 17 

miles, beginning in southwest Chapel 

Hill and encompassing the UNC 

campus, downtown Chapel Hill, 

suburban areas along NC 54, US 15–501, 

NC 147 (Durham Freeway), I–40, Duke 

University, and downtown and east 

Durham. 

IV. Alternatives Analysis and Results 

The Durham-Orange County Corridor 

Alternatives Analysis (AA) Report 

(available at http:// 

www.ourtransitfuture.org/index.php/ 

projects/durham-orange/d-o-mapsreports#aa) responds to Federal 

regulations for transit projects seeking 

New Starts funding (Title 49 United 

States Code [U.S.C.] 5309.) The DurhamOrange County Corridor AA considered 

a Transportation Systems Management 

(TSM) Alternative, Bus Rapid Transit 

(BRT) alternatives, and a light rail 

alternative. The BRT and light rail 

routes included alignments on new 

location and within the right-of-way of 

existing roads, with a variety of station 

locations. All of the alternatives that 

were evaluated would run from the 

terminus at the UNC Hospitals 

eastwards to Fordham Boulevard, east 

along NC 54, north parallel to I–40 and 

then within the US 15–501corridor to 

Erwin Road. The corridor follows Erwin 

Road past Duke University and Medical 

Center and turns east parallel to NC 147 

through downtown Durham and 

terminates at Alston Avenue in east 

Durham. These alternatives were 

evaluated based upon their ability to 

meet the project’s purpose and need 

statement (stated above), and 

considering factors such as ridership 

and transportation operations, land use, 

expansion potential, economic 

development potential, public and 

agency support, environmental impacts, 

technical and financial feasibility and 

cost. Triangle Transit conducted the AA 

in coordination with the jurisdictions 

and agencies with interests in the 

corridor, including Durham and Orange 

counties, the Town of Chapel Hill, City 

of Durham, Durham-Chapel HillCarrboro Metropolitan Planning 

Organization (DCHC MPO), and the 

North Carolina Department of 

Transportation. 

The AA concluded by identifying the 

most promising alternatives for further 

analysis. It identified LRT as the only 

mode that most fully satisfies the 

Purpose and Need for premium transit 

service in the Durham-Orange Corridor 

related to enhancing mobility, 

expanding transit options between 

Durham and Chapel Hill, serving 

populations with high propensity for 

transit use, and fostering compact 

development and economic growth. 

While an exclusive-running BRT 

Alternative has the potential to meet the 

project’s purpose and need and is 

competitive in meeting most project 

goals, it does not perform as well as LRT 

in relation to supporting local and 

regional economic development, 

planned growth management initiatives, 

travel time savings, and cost 

effectiveness of expanding ridership 

capacity. Local and regional 

stakeholders place a high level of 

importance on economic development 

potential and focusing growth within 

the proposed transit corridor through 

transit-oriented development. The LRT 

Alternative has a high-level of 

demonstrated public support and a 

proven record of producing local and 

regional economic development benefits 

by enhancing and focusing growth 

within LRT corridors. On February 8, 

2012, the DCHC MPO Transportation 

Advisory Committee (TAC) (MPO’s 

policy board) unanimously adopted the 

LRT Alternative as the preliminary 

locally preferred alternative (LPA). The 

Alternatives Analysis findings are 

available on the project Web site at 

http://www.ourtransitfuture.org/ 

index.php/projects/durham-orange. 

IV. Potential EIS Alternatives 

The results of the AA have led FTA 

and Triangle Transit to consider for 

inclusion in the EIS the following range 

of alternatives, on which FTA and 

Triangle Transit request public and 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

20096 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 64 / Tuesday, April 3, 2012 / Notices 

agency comments. The EIS will evaluate 

the following alternatives between the 

University of North Carolina (UNC) 

Hospitals and east Durham: A No-Build 

alternative; a Transportation System 

Management (TSM) alternative 

consisting of an enhanced bus network 

that provides a level of transit service 

and capacity roughly equivalent to that 

of a fixed-guideway transit service; and 

a Light Rail Transit (LRT) alternative 

consisting of a new fixed-guideway rail 

alignment and support facilities. 

Scoping will be accomplished through 

correspondence with interested persons, 

organizations, and federal, state, and 

local agencies, and through public and 

agency meetings. The FTA and Triangle 

Transit invite interested individuals, 

organizations, and federal, state and 

local agencies to participate in defining 

the alternatives to be evaluated and 

identifying any significant social, 

economic, and/or environmental issues 

related to the alternatives. 

1. No-Build 

The No-Build alternative includes all 

highway and transit facilities identified 

in the fiscally constrained joint DurhamChapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan 

Planning Organization (MPO)—Capital 

Area MPO 2035 Long-Range 

Transportation Plan (LRTP), with the 

exception of the comprehensive systemwide rail transit network, part of which 

is the subject of this EIS. The No-Build 

alternative is used as a starting point to 

provide a comparison of all Build 

alternatives in terms of costs, benefits, 

and impacts. 

2. Transportation System Management 

The TSM alternative is required for 

inclusion in the EIS by the FTA when 

federal funds are sought for capital 

improvements. The primary purpose of 

the TSM alternative is to develop an 

enhanced and robust bus network in the 

Durham-Orange Corridor that provides a 

level of transit service and capacity 

roughly equivalent to that of a fixedguideway improvement. The intention 

is to compare the efficiency and costeffectiveness of a significant bus 

network in the corridor with fixedguideway improvements to determine 

the impact on transit ridership, travel 

time, and other measures. The backbone 

of the TSM alternative would be a new 

bus route operating between UNC 

Hospitals and east Durham, covering a 

distance of approximately 19 miles from 

Chapel Hill to Durham. Buses would 

operate at 10-minute headways in the 

peak periods and 20-minute headways 

in the off-peak periods. Travel time 

between the UNC Hospitals in Chapel 

Hill and Alston Avenue in east Durham 

is estimated to be 57 minutes. The highfrequency bus route would closely 

follow that of the LRT alternative, as 

described below. 

3. Light Rail Transit 

The LRT alternative would operate 

light rail transit vehicles between UNC 

Hospitals and east Durham, covering a 

distance of approximately 17.1 miles. 

The LRT would operate at 10-minute 

frequencies during peak hours and 20- 

minute frequencies during off-peak 

hours. LRT travel time is estimated to be 

35 minutes between the UNC Hospitals 

Station in Chapel Hill and the Alston 

Avenue Station in east Durham. The 

alignment would be double-tracked 

throughout, with one track for each 

direction of travel. The alignment would 

primarily run at-grade in a dedicated 

right-of-way parallel to existing 

roadways, with elevated sections 

throughout to mitigate potential traffic 

impacts and/or impacts to 

environmental resources. 

V. Probable Effects 

The EIS evaluation will analyze the 

social, economic, and environmental 

impacts of the alternatives. Major issues 

to be evaluated include air quality, 

noise and vibration, aesthetics, 

community cohesion impacts, potential 

natural resource impacts, and possible 

disruption of neighborhoods, businesses 

and commercial activities. The impact 

areas and level of detail addressed in 

the EIS will be consistent with the 

requirements of SAFETEA–LU Section 

6002 and the FTA/Federal Highway 

Administration environmental 

regulation (Environmental Impact and 

Related Procedures, 23 CFR Part 771 

and 40 CFR Parts 1500–1508) and other 

environmental and related regulations. 

Among other factors, the EIS will 

evaluate the following: 

• Transportation service including 

future corridor capacity. 

• Transit ridership and costs. 

• Traffic movements and changes, 

and associated impacts to local 

facilities. 

• Community impacts such as land 

use, displacements, noise and vibration, 

neighborhood compatibility and 

aesthetics. 

• Resource impacts including impacts 

to historic and archeological resources, 

parklands, cultural resource impacts, 

environmental justice, and natural 

resource impacts including air quality, 

wetlands, water quality, wildlife, and 

vegetation. 

The proposed impact assessment and 

evaluation will take into account both 

positive and negative impacts, direct 

and indirect impacts, short-term (during 

the construction period) and long-term 

impacts, and site-specific as well as 

corridor-wide and cumulative impacts. 

Mitigation measures will be considered 

for any significant environmental 

impacts identified. Other potential 

impacts may be added as a result of 

scoping and agency coordination efforts. 

VI. FTA Procedures 

The EIS is being prepared in 

accordance with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA), as amended, and implemented 

by the Council on Environmental 

Quality (CEQ) regulations (40 CFR Parts 

1500 to 1508) and FHWA environmental 

impact regulations (49 CFR Part 622, 23 

CFR Part 771, and 23 CFR Part 774) and 

Section 6002 of the Safe, Accountable, 

Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity 

Act—A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA– 

LU) of 2005. This EIS will also comply 

with requirements of Section 106 of the 

National Historic Preservation Act of 

1966, as amended (36 CFR Part 800), 

Section 4(f) of the U.S. Department of 

Transportation Act of 1966 (23 CFR 

771.135), the 1990 Clean Air Act 

Amendments, Executive Order 12898 

(Federal Actions to Address 

Environmental Justice in Minority and 

Low-Income Populations), Executive 

Order 11990 (Protection of Wetlands), 

the regulation implementing Section 7 

of the Endangered Species Act (50 CFR 

Part 402), and other applicable federal 

laws, rules, and regulations. This EIS 

will also satisfy local and state 

environmental review requirements. 

Regulations implementing NEPA, as 

well as provisions of SAFETEA–LU, call 

for enhanced agency and public 

involvement in the EIS process. An 

invitation to all Federal and non-Federal 

agencies and Native American tribes 

that may have an interest in the 

proposed project will be extended. In 

the event that an agency or tribe is not 

invited and would like to participate, 

please contact Brian Smart at the 

contact information listed above. The 

public coordination and outreach efforts 

will include public meetings, open 

houses, a project Web site, stakeholder 

advisory and work groups, and public 

hearings. 

The project sponsor may identify a 

locally preferred alternative in the DEIS 

when made available for public and 

agency comments. Public hearings on 

the DEIS will be held. On the basis of 

the DEIS and the public and agency 

comments received, the Project Sponsor 

will identify the locally preferred 

alternative in the FEIS. The FEIS will 

serve as the basis for federal and state 

environmental findings and 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 64 / Tuesday, April 3, 2012 / Notices 20097 

determinations needed to conclude the 

environmental review process. 

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance 

Program Number 20.205, Highway Planning 

and Construction. The regulations 

implementing Executive Order 12372 

regarding intergovernmental consultation on 

Federal programs and activities apply to this 

program.) 

Issued on: March 27, 2012. 

Yvette G. Taylor, 

Regional Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2012–7897 Filed 4–2–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Transit Administration 

Intent To Prepare an Environmental 

Impact Statement for the Georgia 

Multi-Modal Passenger Terminal 

AGENCY: Federal Transit Administration 

(FTA), United States Department of 

Transportation (USDOT). 

ACTION: Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare 

an Environmental Impact Statement 

(EIS). 

SUMMARY: The FTA and the Georgia 

Department of Transportation (GDOT) 

intend to prepare an Environmental 

Impact Statement (EIS) for a proposed 

transit terminal project in Atlanta, 

Fulton County, Georgia. The EIS will be 

prepared in accordance with the 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA: 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) of 1969 

and the regulations implementing NEPA 

set forth in 40 CFR Parts 1500–1508 and 

23 CFR Part 771, as well as provision of 

the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, and 

Efficient Transportation Equity Act—A 

Legacy for Users (SAFETEA–LU). 

The purpose of this Notice is to: 

• Advise the public of FTA serving as 

the lead Federal agency; 

• Provide information on the 

proposed project, purpose and need for 

the project, and alternatives to be 

considered; and 

• Invite public and agency 

participation in the EIS process. 

The EIS will examine alternatives to 

provide a facility to serve as a 

destination and transfer point for a 

variety of regional and local 

transportation services in Downtown 

Atlanta. 

DATES: The date, time, and location for 

the public scoping meetings are as 

follows: 

April 24, 2012 

4 p.m. to 7 p.m. 

Georgia Railroad Freight Depot, The 

Freight Room, 65 Martin Luther King Jr. 

Drive SE., Atlanta, GA 30303. 

May 1, 2012 

11 a.m. to 2 p.m. 

Georgia State University Student 

Center, Court Salon, 44 Gilmer Street, 

Atlanta, GA 30302. 

May 3, 2012 

4 p.m. to 7 p.m. 

Antioch Baptist Church North, 540 

Cameron M. Alexander Blvd. NW., 

Atlanta, Georgia, 30318. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments on the 

project should be sent to: 

Jonathan Cox, Georgia Department of 

Transportation, One Georgia Center, 600 

West Peachtree Street NW., Atlanta, 

Georgia 30308. Telephone: (404) 631– 

1197. Email: jocox@dot.ga.gov. 

Brian Smart, Federal Transit 

Administration, 230 Peachtree Street 

NW., Suite 800, Atlanta, GA 30327. 

Telephone: 404–865–5607. Email: 

brian.smart@dot.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In 

accordance with Section 6002 of 

SAFETEA–LU, FTA and GDOT invite 

comment on the scope of the EIS, 

specifically on the project’s purpose and 

need, the alternatives to be evaluated 

that may address the purpose and need, 

and the potential impacts of the 

alternatives considered. 

1. Scoping 

On April 24, 2012, May 1, 2012, and 

May 3, 2012, public scoping meetings 

will be held to solicit public comments 

on the scope of the EIS. Oral and written 

comments will be accepted from the 

public at the scoping meeting. If special 

services such as translation, including 

sign language, are needed, please 

contact Jonathan Cox at the number 

listed above. 

A notice of the public scoping briefing 

will be published in local newspapers 

and on the project Web site 

(www.georgiap3.com/mmpt). The notice 

will also identify the closing date of the 

public comment period on the scope of 

the EIS. 

2. Description of the Project Area 

The historic hub of Atlanta’s freight 

railroads lies just west of the Five Points 

intersection in Downtown Atlanta. 

While some lines remain active, others 

have been converted to passenger use by 

the Metropolitan Atlanta Regional 

Transportation Authority (MARTA) or 

are abandoned. Portions of Atlanta’s 

massive rail yards were decked over for 

large-scale public and private 

developments, including CNN Center, 

the Georgia World Congress Center, 

Philips Arena, and the Georgia Dome. 

In-between Five Points and the CNN 

Center, a portion of the former rail yards 

serve as parking or vacant land. The 

street grid crosses these parcels on 

viaduct such that the parking and 

vacant land is 20 feet or so below 

ground elevation. This area of parking 

and vacant land is commonly referred to 

as the ‘‘Gulch.’’ 

The EIS will focus on an area 

bounded by Centennial Olympic Park 

Drive to the west, Trinity Avenue to the 

south, Peachtree Street to the east, and 

Marietta Street to the north. Many 

blocks in this area are surface or 

structured parking or vacant buildings 

or lots. A few parcels contain office or 

commercial uses. 

3. Purpose and Need 

The Atlanta region lacks a 

transportation hub that provides a 

central facility and transfer point for its 

variety of existing and future inter-city, 

regional and local modal services. At 

the same time, the Gulch creates a large 

void in the downtown that physically 

and psychologically isolates 

surrounding destinations and districts 

from one another. 

The purpose of the Georgia Multimodal Passenger Terminal is to 

establish a multimodal hub to enhance 

regional mobility and connectivity 

among existing and proposed transit 

systems; to establish new connections 

between downtown neighborhoods; and 

to provide the opportunity to fill the 

Gulch, which will create an activity 

center and link existing and planned 

residential, employment and 

entertainment destinations in and near 

Downtown Atlanta. 

The EIS will evaluate alternatives that 

address the following project goals: 

(1) Provide a facility to serve as a 

destination and transfer point for a 

variety of regional and local 

transportation services; 

(2) Improve passenger and freight 

connectivity in and within downtown 

Atlanta; and 

(3) Attract new or renewed 

investment in a transit-centered 

environment. 

4. Alternatives 

FTA and GDOT will consider all 

reasonable alternatives to provide a 

multi-modal passenger terminal, and 

potentially related development that 

meet the purpose and need defined 

above. The alternatives considered will 

include at least a No Build Alternative 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES