|
Hello District 8 Neighbors, Today is the last day to send comments to the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) about their Draft Environmental Impact Statement (Draft EIS) for the Downtown 10 project, their proposed $1.3 billion widening of I-10 from Executive Center to Copia.
I will start off with the transparent message that I strongly oppose this project. In my role on the Policy Board of the El Paso Metropolitan Planning Organization MPO (a level of government that few know exists but that makes decisions about hundreds of millions of transportation dollars from the state and federal governments), I have repeatedly voted against allocating funding to the project from sources that are discretionary at the local level. At the very least, I believe TxDOT must make significant changes to their preferred plan in order to protect the public. I’m happy to explain my opinions.
The National Environmental Policy Act, or NEPA, is a federal law that requires agencies like TxDOT to study the environmental and community impacts of major projects before they decide whether or how to move forward. It is meant to guarantee transparency, public participation, and fair consideration of possible plans called “alternatives”. NEPA exists to protect people and places affected by government decisions. TxDOT’s 141-page Draft Environmental Impact Statement (Draft EIS) is a part of the NEPA process, and I don’t feel that the preferred alternative identified in the document adequately considers the huge negative impact on District 8 residents, businesses, schools, and institutions.
The project design identified in the Draft EIS (called Alternative I) proposes acquisition of properties along Yandell Drive to the north of the highway, including the Holocaust Museum, Triumph High School, part of St. Clement's Parish School property, office buildings, other local businesses, and four apartment buildings with 70 total residential units. This is in order to widen the trenched portion of the highway to add just one additional lane in each direction. The project would also turn Yandell and Wyoming into high-speed frontage roads with continuous turning lanes and ‘Texas turnarounds’, greatly increasing traffic speeds on what currently function as important parts of the Downtown street grid.
All of this is with the stated goal of reducing congestion, but it is widely accepted scientific consensus that widening highways does not lead to less traffic. Here’s a wide variety of sources of many different types saying so and directly citing the scientific literature, including Vox, Transportation for America, the Rocky Mountain Institute (RMI), Scientific American, Wired, the State Smart Transportation Initiative (SSTI), Streetsblog, and the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC).
Shifting topics, you may have seen that the El Paso County Commissioners Court recently approved sending a letter to TxDOT expressing concerns over the safety of the design proposed in Alternative I. I was happy to see that they chose to do so. I’ll take this opportunity to remind everyone that still on the record and even included in TxDOT’s own documentation in the appendices of the Draft EIS is a letter from the City of El Paso describing a Resolution approved unanimously by the City Council that formally asks TxDOT for multiple design considerations as they developed their preferred alternative: To consider design elements that are more representative of an urban environment. To maintain as much north-south connectivity as possible over I-10 To support the vision that the future of Downtown, as envisioned by the City’s strategic plan and other adopted planning documents, is one of a vibrant, walkable urban core. To prioritize elements within the project that retain and enhance connections to Downtown and the surrounding communities. To consider that many of the proposed alternatives, as presented, clearly give priority to traffic that will simply pass through our Downtown core to the detriment of traffic and connectivity directly to and within the Downtown area; and To eliminate continuous turning lanes and “Texas turnarounds” throughout the project area, as they create numerous conflict points and pose a serious safety concern in what is the most walkable area of El Paso.
Most of these considerations that the City asked for in very plain language, and that the County just reiterated, are entirely ignored in TxDOT’s preferred Alternative I. What TxDOT calls “enhanced multimodal access” consists largely of a single cycle track and narrow sidewalks next to major frontage roads. The new design adds more high-speed one-way frontage roads, more ramps, and wider travel lanes, while leaving pedestrians and cyclists with minimal protection directly beside heavy traffic. That is not a meaningful improvement for people moving across the corridor on foot or on a bicycle or on anything but a large motor vehicle. The project is expected to have a duration of five or more years, during which time there will be progressive closures of highway lanes. I can hardly imagine the level of prolonged disruption to local businesses, Downtown events, residents of neighborhoods like Sunset Heights and Rio Grande, and spillover traffic onto Mesa Street and other alternative routes.
A new bypass route known as the Borderland Expressway, running north through the Anthony Gap, is already under construction, and that will greatly reduce the amount of through traffic travelling through the City on I-10. I wish that TxDOT would be open to the idea of designating this new route as the mainline I-10, with the existing path through the City being re-designated as a ‘Business Route’, as has been done in other cities such as Montgomery, AL and Syracuse, NY. The new Border Highway/Loop 375 segment parallel to I-10 that was completed a few years ago also already provides an alternate route for incident management. Neither of these projects was adequately considered in the traffic demand modelling that TxDOT used to justify the widening of I-10.
I want to be clear — nobody is doubting the need for modernization of I-10 from Executive Center to Copia. The pavement needs reconstruction. The bridges are near the end of their service life and need replacement. New highway standards require slightly taller bridge clearances. My contention is that all of this can be done within the existing highway footprint, and that that the massive extra expense, time, displacement, and disruption needed to add additional lanes is not worth it or even needed.
If this issue is important to you, whether you agree with me or not, I urge you to send your comments to TxDOT. Today (Tuesday 10/14 by 11:59 PM) is the last day to do so before the public comment period closes. There are multiple ways to do so. You can use this online comment form, this printable comment card, or simply send an email to downtown10@txdot.gov with your thoughts. More information and copies of all documents can be found here on the TxDOT website.
If you need inspiration or are short on time, feel free to copy/paste or rework some of these core ideas into your comments: TxDOT’s preferred “Alternative I” ignores key requests previously made by both the City and County to design for safety, walkability, and connectivity. I oppose any design that turns Yandell and Wyoming into high-speed frontage roads, as this would endanger pedestrians and cyclists in our most walkable area. Acquiring properties like the Holocaust Museum, St. Clement’s School, Triumph High School, and multiple apartment buildings for one extra lane in each direction is unjustified. The proposed widening would destroy existing housing and local businesses while offering little to no traffic benefit. Widening I-10 will worsen air pollution, heat, and noise for neighborhoods already bearing the heaviest environmental burdens. The Draft EIS does not meaningfully consider alternatives that meet safety and modernization needs within the existing footprint. TxDOT’s claim of “enhanced multimodal access” is misleading because narrow sidewalks beside high-speed frontage roads are not safe or accessible. Five or more years of construction closures will devastate Downtown businesses, events, and residents. TxDOT’s future traffic modeling fails to adequately account for new routes like the Borderland Expressway and Loop 375, which already reduce through-traffic on I-10. The Borderland Expressway should be designated as the new I-10, with the existing Downtown alignment re-designated as a Business Route, as done in other U.S. cities. Modernization of bridges, pavement, and clearances can occur within the existing highway footprint without widening. This project prioritizes drivers passing through El Paso over the people who live and work here. TxDOT’s Draft EIS does not take a “hard look” at less harmful and more sustainable alternatives, as required under NEPA.
Finally, I have seen and heard a lot of confusion in the community about TxDOT’s proposed highway and the separately proposed Downtown Deck Plaza. They are two totally different projects proposed by different entities, with totally unlinked proposed funding, and with separate planning processes. I made a handy chart explaining who is proposing what and where each project currently stands. Check it out below.
Good wishes,
|
