UNITED WE STAND

The page you are viewing was Last Updated on:  Tuesday, March 28, 2000

Second Q. 2000

Southern Beltway Projects - FAQ

1) Why is the Southern Beltway proposed as a toll road? Would tax money be used to support it? What other sources of funding might be tapped?

State lawmakers, to "facilitate vehicular traffic within and across the Commonwealth," authorized the Turnpike Commission to undertake the planning and construction of several new limited-access toll roads when they passed Act 61 in 1985 and Act 26 in 1991. Act 26 added the Southern Beltway to the list. It also established, for the first time, a continuous source of outside funding to help the Commission advance proposed expansions of the Pennsylvania toll road system - a 14 percent share of the Pennsylvania Oil Company Franchise Tax that amounts to about $40 million annually. The PTC also is receiving $28 million a year in vehicle registration fees from the Pennsylvania Motor License Fund as a result of legislation passed in April 1997. Any highway operated by the Turnpike Commission must be a toll road. The long-term benefit of assigning the construction and maintenance of new roads to the Turnpike Commission is that toll revenues (not tax dollars) would cover operation and maintenance costs. Tolls provide a stream of revenue that is not available to the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT). The Turnpike Commission has received and will attempt to procure additional state and federal tax dollars to help cover design and construction costs. Before 1987, no federal tax dollars could be used for the development of new toll roads. Today, new toll road projects are eligible for up to 80 percent federal funding. The Commission also may issue bonds to help finance new construction projects.  Funds have been committed to complete Environmental Impact Statements for each of the three Southern Beltway projects and to advance the Pa. Route 60-to-U.S. Route 22 Project through final design. The availability of funding will be a critical factor in determining the timetable for completion of the projects.  

2) What studies have been completed to show that a highway system of this magnitude will be needed in the future?

A Needs Study was conducted in 1993 by the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission. It projected traffic conditions for the year 2020 and identified serious problems such as substandard highway conditions, lack of access and congestion. The Needs Study for the Southern Beltway corridor found that:

* Only substandard and congested two-lane roads are available for east-west travel through the corridor. These substandard roads provide poor circumferential mobility to adjacent job sites and planned growth areas. 

* There is no circumferential transit service and none is planned.  

* There is poor east-west mobility from the Monongahela River Valley to Interstate 79 and the Pittsburgh International Airport area, and poor east-west truck access to redevelopment sites in the Mon Valley.

* The deficient roadway network has created safety problems that will worsen as traffic increases and reduces opportunities for orderly economic development. As population grows and businesses move into the area, commuter and truck traffic will increase and most of the east-west highways will become severely congested.   

The study, as well as various agencies involved in the collaborative decision making process, concluded there is a need to examine transportation improvements because of existing problems and the lack of good circumferential and east-west roadways needed to support development in the Southern Beltway corridor. In addition, the Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission's Long-Range Transportation Plan targets growth for northern Washington County and the Pittsburgh International Airport area.

3) Has the decision been made to build an east-west beltway? How are such decisions made and who makes them? What studies will be completed in making that determination and what are the time frames for completion of those studies?

State lawmakers authorized and directed the Turnpike Commission to build the Southern Beltway in Act 26 of 1991. The Turnpike Commission must prepare Environmental Impact Statements for each of the three independent projects that would connect to form the 30-mile beltway and obtain final environmental clearance for each project in the form of a Record of Decision that would be issued by the U.S. Department of Transportation's Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) on each EIS. A Record of Decision for the Pa. Route 60-to-U.S. Route 22 Project was issued May 11, 1998. A Record of Decision (ROD) represents federal permission to build each project. A previous milestone in the planning process occurred in September 1996, when SPRPC, the Metropolitan Planning Organization for a six-county area including Allegheny and Washington, addressed the Congestion Management System (CMS) evaluation and the Major Investment Study (MIS) prepared for the entire Southern Beltway corridor. These studies were required under regulations promulgated as a result of the 1991 U.S. Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA).  

The purpose of a CMS evaluation is to gauge how far reasonable travel demand reduction and operational strategies can go toward eliminating the need for additional single-occupancy vehicle capacity in the study corridor. Examples of CMS strategies include high-occupancy vehicle facilities, new or improved public transit, stricter parking management, ride sharing and employer-implemented travel management programs such as staggered work hours or flex-time. The CMS analysis for the Southern Beltway Transportation Projects showed that these strategies alone would not fully satisfy the need for additional highway capacity and that alternatives to increase highway capacity should be studied further. If construction of a new highway is approved, a second phase of the CMS evaluation will identify reasonable CMS strategies that should be incorporated along with additional highway capacity.

The MIS considered the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of various transportation improvement alternatives and how the alternatives would mesh with the national, state and local goals for the study area and the region. It is used to determine the mode (highway, transit, etc.) and general location for transportation improvements.

An integrated CMS/MIS report was prepared for the entire Southern Beltway corridor. On September 30, 1996, SPC (then the Southwestern Pennsylvania Regional Planning Commission or SPRPC) endorsed the findings and recommendations in the integrated CMS/MIS report, advancing the concept of a tolled expressway for more detailed study.

A Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) must be prepared and circulated for each project. FHWA must approve the DEIS for circulation. Then, a Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) must be prepared for each project. Each FEIS must address comments received on each DEIS and be submitted to FHWA for a Record of Decision.

To ensure that they qualify for federal funding, the Southern Beltway projects are being advanced according to Pennsylvania's 10-Step Transportation Project Development Process. The 10-Step Process was formulated to ensure compliance with the 1969 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The U.S. Route 22-to-Interstate 79 Project is in Step 5 (Development and Review of Detailed Alternatives). The Interstate 79-to-Mon/Fayette Expressway Project also is in Step 5. Step 5 is a more detailed examination of alternatives that are carried forward for further study at the end of the Phase I consensus process. The Phase II consensus process concludes between Step 5 and Step 6. Step 6 is preparation and circulation of the DEIS. Step 7 is the analysis of comment received on the DEIS. The alternative selection process concludes between Step 7 and Step 8. Step 8 is preparation and distribution of the FEIS. The FEIS for each Southern Beltway project will identify a preferred alternative for addressing transportation deficiencies in the study area. Identification of a preferred alternative is a collaborative process involving various transportation, regulatory and review agencies and the general public. The Record of Decision from FHWA is the final decision on what project, if any, will be built in each study area. Records of Decision target dates are First Quarter 2002 for the U.S. Route 22-to-I-79 Project and First Quarter 2003 for the I-79-to-Mon/Fayette Expressway Project.

4) Is it proper for the proposed Southern Beltway to be broken into three separate projects?

As part of the 10-Step Process for preparation, circulation and approval of

Environmental Impact Statements, regular meetings are held with state and federal environmental review agencies. The Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission also is following FHWA guidelines regarding the establishment of logical termini for transportation improvement projects. The environmental review agencies concurred in 1993 that the logical termini for the three Southern Beltway projects are Pa. Route 60, U.S. Route 22, Interstate 79 and the Mon/Fayette Expressway. They also agreed that three Environmental Impact Statements should be prepared, one for each project. Each Southern Beltway project would have independent utility and would not require the completion of any other. They are three stand-alone projects that meet all FHWA guidelines for determining logical termini. Nonetheless, the projects are being planned so they could work together as a cohesive whole for regional benefit.  

5) Can you blend non-toll highways into the toll road system?

At present, the Turnpike Commission is not authorized to convert a non-tolled highway to a toll road. The Turnpike Commission has no plans to convert Interstate 70 or I-79 to toll roads. The same would apply to other roads such as Routes 519 and 136, unless the Turnpike Commission is mandated to do so by future legislation. A highway system can include a mixture of toll and non-toll roads. For example, Pa. Route 60 runs north and south from Pittsburgh International Airport to I-80 in Mercer County. A 17-mile portion of Route 60 was built and is maintained by the Turnpike Commission. That portion is a toll road. The remainder is a non-toll road built and maintained by PennDOT. It's all Route 60.  

6) You are the voice of the Turnpike Commission, bringing information to us as the citizens of an affected community. What are the best channels of communication back to the decision makers?

It's important that residents realize their input is an important part of the decision making process. The best channels of communication are providing written or oral comments at public meetings and public hearings. It also is prudent for residents to keep in contact with local municipal officials, who are briefed regularly on the status of the Southern Beltway projects. For more information about public involvement, call the Turnpike Commission's Western Regional Office at (724) 755-5000.

7) We want to decide what is best for our municipality. However, it seems that other municipalities are determining our fate as to where the road will end up. What can we do to serve the best interests of our residents?

No municipality is determining the fate of another in terms of where the proposed Southern Beltway might be built. No municipality is being sacrificed for another. Input from one municipality is just as important and valuable as input provided by residents of a neighboring municipality. Certainly, anyone associated with a specific municipality  can be expected to be primarily concerned with the project's potential impacts on that municipality. What might appear to be harmful in the short-term might ultimately be beneficial over the long-term. Location and design of the Southern Beltway will require a proper balancing of environmental and socio-economical impacts with engineering considerations and cost factors. A public works investment that improves the quality of life on a regional level likely will improve the quality of life on a local level too. Input to the project development process should be made with vision and foresight. Conditions that will exist in the design year 2030 may not be readily apparent now.

8) What's in it for us as residents of the study area?

The Southern Beltway would better connect parts of the region to other parts of the region and better connect the region as a whole to the National Highway System. It would improve access to job centers and population centers. It also would reduce traffic congestion and improve safety on many local roads. Regions and communities that are well connected to the transportation infrastructure are more attractive to prospective employers and prospective residents. Increased mobility contributes to economic development. Job growth and housing starts broaden the tax base that supports our local governments and public schools. This has happened elsewhere in the Pittsburgh region. Municipalities near the Parkway North (Interstate 279) have benefited greatly from opportunities created by improved access.  

Of the 14 major metropolitan regions in the Northeast, nine have interstate-link beltways and all nine saw job and population growth between 1980 and 1990. Four others have interstate grid systems and they too enjoyed job growth. Only one city of the 14, Pittsburgh, has neither an interstate beltway nor a grid system. Pittsburgh was the only major metropolitan region in the Northeast that experienced a decline in both jobs and population between 1980 and 1990.

9) What other alternatives are being considered, if any? If no other alternatives are being considered, farther north or south, why aren't they? If they aren't, what can our citizens do to ensure that other alternatives are looked at and evaluated on merit, cost and effectiveness?

The Turnpike Commission is considering a number of ideas. Prospective alignments may be refined based on an analysis of potential impacts and public input. Some minor shifting to the south may be feasible for the Interstate 79-to-Mon/Fayette Expressway Project. However, an alternative as far south as Interstate 70 and Pa. Route 136 would not meet identified project needs and would not provide mobility and access to the areas the Southern Beltway Projects are intended to serve. To ensure consistency with SPC’s Long-Range Transportation Plan, it is most likely that alternatives will be developed in northern Washington County.  

10) Can you explain why a special agreement was entered into with Peters Township? Why, when asked by other townships for the same agreement, did the Turnpike Commission say that the terms of the Peters agreement apply to all local municipalities?

The Turnpike Commission's agreement with Peters Township does not preclude location of the Southern Beltway in Peters Township. It states that the Turnpike

Commission will map possible toll road alignments only to the southeast of Peters

Township's densely populated areas. Our initial assessment of aerial photographs led to the conclusion that an alignment through the densely populated areas would be excessively disruptive and, therefore, unreasonable. Data on existing community and environmental features was collected for the entire township. Our agreement with Peters also states that the Turnpike Commission will not initiate or seriously consider any potential alignments through Peters without first meeting with the Peters Township Board of Commissioners. The Turnpike Commission has extended the same courtesy to other local municipalities - to meet individually with officials at their request. While it may not always be feasible, the Turnpike Commission will attempt to avoid any densely populated area.

11) Why do other municipalities find potential beltway alignments threading through their most densely populated neighborhoods?            

As noted in the response to the previous question, the Turnpike Commission only agreed not to map through densely populated areas of Peters Township, which constitutes about one-third of the township. The preliminary alignments do traverse some populated areas of other municipalities. Because of concerns raised at the public meetings in October 1995, the Turnpike Commission is gathering more detailed information to evaluate possible alternatives farther to the north and determine if our initial assessment was correct. Again, the Turnpike Commission will always try to develop alignments that minimize adverse impacts and maximize highway access and utility.

12) What environmental features and land uses are protected from highway development?

Many features and land uses are afforded protection by state and/or federal laws. These include parks, wetlands, streams, historic structures and productive agricultural lands. Protection does not necessarily mean total avoidance. Generally, the Turnpike Commission must show that there is no reasonable alternative to impacting these resources. Our goal is to first avoid these resources. If that is not reasonable, the goal is to minimize impacts and mitigate unavoidable impacts. Protected resources are not untouchable but require additional studies to ensure that the taking of resources is the most prudent action.

13) What kind of protection does this process afford to property owners who are trying to sell their property or who might need to do so in the foreseeable future, until this is settled?

Uncertainty about where a proposed roadway might be located is a byproduct of the Environmental Impact Statement Process because the process requires early consideration of a broad range of transportation improvement alternatives.  Unfortunately, this uncertainty may affect real estate transactions and other commerce. One way the Turnpike Commission can minimize this difficulty is to try to reduce the number of alternatives being considered. The best way to remove this uncertainty is to pursue completion of the Environmental Impact Statements phase in an expeditious manner. When the EIS phase is completed, uncertainty about a project's location is greatly reduced. Exact right-of-way plans are developed in the final design phase. 

14) Generally explain the acquisition process for a property that has to be purchased by the Turnpike Commission. What protection in the way of barriers and natural foliage is put in place to protect properties that are left along the route of a new highway. Could sections of our municipality to be left isolated or with only one way in and out?

Owners of properties that are required for a highway’s right-of-way are notified during final design in a timely manner and in accordance with existing laws. The Turnpike Commission is required to offer no less than fair market value for any property and is committed to providing the full measure of just compensation in every instance. An appraisal will be done on the Commission's behalf by an independent, licensed real estate appraiser. Local real estate trends and the value of comparable properties will be considered in the determination of a "fair market value." The Commission will reimburse a property owner up to $500 for any reasonable expenses incurred for an appraiser, engineer or attorney who would be retained by the property owner. The Commission also provides money for relocation expenses. Booklets that explain the Turnpike Commission's Property Acquisition Process can be obtained by writing or calling The Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission, Western Regional Office, 2200 North Center Avenue, New Stanton, Pa. 15672-9602.

In order to protect properties left along a route, the Turnpike Commission will retain as much natural foliage as feasible. If a new toll road is approved for construction, the Turnpike Commission will work closely with local municipal officials to ensure that proper access is provided to all areas of the municipality.  

15) Where would the interchanges on the Southern Beltway be located?

The selected alternative for the Pa. Route 60-to-U.S. Route 22 Project identifies  interchanges with  those two termini plus with U.S. Route 30 southeast of Clinton and with Bald Knob Road/Ridge Road/Burgettstown Road just north of the Washington County line. It's too early in the process to be able to say anything definite about interchange locations for the two other Southern Beltway projects. The Turnpike Commission recommends that concerned citizens attend public meetings and offer their suggestions regarding preliminary alignments and placement of interchanges. We also will work closely with local municipal officials to gain their views on preliminary alignments and the location of interchanges.

16) Why is the state proposing costly new highway construction projects when it seems that Pennsylvania's existing roads aren't being properly maintained?

Without question, transportation needs are many and funds are limited. Pennsylvania essentially has the same amount of miles of state-maintained roads (40,849) as all of New York, New Jersey and the New England states combined  (41,025). Yet, the state spends about 70 percent less on new construction and less than half as much to maintain existing roads. State lawmakers and transportation officials have a difficult task in balancing needs and selecting the proper investments in Pennsylvania's transportation infrastructure. Existing highways should be maintained to a high quality. New roads are needed too. Giving motorists more choices and improving access to all areas helps everybody.                     

17) What rights does the Turnpike Commission have to enter private property for test borings and other purposes? Can the Turnpike Commission enter my property against my will? What if my property is damaged or disturbed as a result of entry? If the Turnpike Commission uncovers hazardous materials on my property, can I be forced to pay for cleanup?      

During the preliminary design phase, the Turnpike Commission may need to enter private property to conduct various routine field studies and surveys. While the Turnpike Commission does have the legal right to enter private property for these reasons under the Eminent Domain Code, we do so with the utmost care and concern for personal property. Every effort is made to protect private property and coordinate our entry with the property owner to minimize disruption to the property and its use. If any damage is created by our entry to the property, it is repaired and restored to the property's condition prior to our entry at no cost to the property owner.

Regarding discovery of hazardous materials on private property, relevant state environmental statutes and regulations contain no requirements that the Turnpike Commission report that discovery to any governmental agency. In the unusual circumstance that a previously undocumented contaminated site is discovered, the property owner(s) first would be notified of the contamination found. If this information proves to be important in the selection of a transportation improvement alternative, it may be reported in the environmental documentation for the highway project in accordance with requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The Pennsylvania Hazardous Sites Cleanup Act (HSCA) and the Federal Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) address who is financially responsible for cleanup of hazardous sites. Typically, landowners are responsible for cleanup of contaminants found on their property if they were responsible for placing the contaminants there. Landowners have been held not liable for cleanup if they purchased the contaminated property after the contamination occurred and without knowledge of its presence.              

#   #   #