4.2: social conditions chapter 4.2.1: land use · land use within the ¼-mile study area is...

4.2.1-1

4.2: Social Conditions

Chapter 4.2.1: Land Use

4.2.1-1 INTRODUCTION

This chapter describes land uses in the vicinity of the Project site and assesses the alternatives’ consistency with existing and future development patterns and population characteristics. This chapter also provides a context for the analyses presented in subsequent chapters of this Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS).

4.2.1-2 METHODOLOGY

For this assessment, a study area extending approximately ¼ mile from the Project site was used (see Figure 4.2.1-1). This is the area where proposed changes to the railroad right-of-way have the greatest potential to affect nearby land uses. Where appropriate, the land use study area was adjusted to reflect natural boundaries. For the western study area boundary, the ¼-mile perimeter extends beyond the Letchworth State Park boundary on the west, and so the western boundary of the land use study area was adjusted to follow the park boundary, since the densely vegetated park creates a natural buffer between the rail right-of-way and any land uses west of the park.

The Project site and study area are located within two towns and two counties: the Town of Genesee Falls (which includes the hamlet of Portageville), in Wyoming County, and the Town of Portage, in Livingston County. For the demographics analysis, the study area encompasses the towns closest to the Project site: the Town of Genesee Falls (on the west side of the Project site) and the Town of Portage (on the east side of the Project site) (see Figure 4.2.1-2). For these areas, information was gathered from the U.S. Census Bureau’s 1990, 2000, and 2010 Census. Household estimates for 2010 were obtained from ESRI Demographic and Income Profile Reports.

4.2.1-3 EXISTING CONDITIONS

4.2.1-3-1 Land Use

Land use within the ¼-mile study area is predominantly railroad right-of-way and a portion of Letchworth State Park (see Figure 4.2.1-1). In addition, east of the Genesee River, the study area includes residential dwellings, agricultural land, and vacant rural land.

Letchworth State Park

The existing bridge is located on private property within the boundaries of the larger Letchworth State Park. The bridge is at the southern end of Letchworth State Park, an approximately 14,350-acre park along the Genesee River in Wyoming and Livingston Counties. As described in more detail in Chapter 4.4.12, “Parks and Recreational Resources,” the park is generally wooded with winding roads and hilly terrain. Within the park, the Genesee River flows from south to north through a deep gorge and over three waterfalls that are in the southern section of the park. The Upper Falls is the southernmost waterfall in the park and is just north of the existing bridge. Most of the developed park facilities are on the west side of the river. The south end of

Letchworth State Park

Genesee River

Genesee River

Genes

ee R

iver

Genes

ee R

iver

PortagevillePortageville

PARK RD

WYOMING COUNTYLIVINGSTON COUNTY

PORTAGE ST

PORTAGEVILLE RD

10.17.12

Land UseFigure 4.2.1-1

N

PORTAGEVILLE BRIDGE

Proposed Project

1/4-Mile Perimeter

County Boundary

Single-Family Residential

Mobile Home

Farmland

Parkland

Vacant Rural Land

Vacant with Improvements

SCALE

0 1000 2000 FEET

Portage

10.17.12

Demographic Study AreaFigure 4.2.1-2

N

PORTAGEVILLE BRIDGE

Proposed Project

Demographic Study Area

County

County Subdivison

Major/Local Road

Railroads

SCALE

0 4000 8000 FEET

Portageville Bridge DEIS PIN 4935.79.101

4.2.1-2

the park, including the study area, is notable for its scenery and a concentration of the park’s historic structures and sites. According to the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (OPRHP), it is the most intensely used area of the park and supports the greatest number of visitors.

Within the land use study area, the main park road (known as Park Road) runs along the west side of the Genesee River and across the Norfolk Southern right-of-way beneath the existing bridge. Other recreational features within the ¼-mile study area west of the river include a small parking area, the Highbridge Parking Area, on the west side of the park road just south of the bridge (on the Project site) that can be used to access the Gorge Trail. Approximately half of the Highbridge Parking Area is within the Norfolk Southern right-of-way and half is on parkland. In addition, the Mary Jemison Trail (Trail #2) begins at the parking area (within Norfolk Southern’s right-of-way) and can be accessed from there. Another trail, the Gorge Trail (Trail #1) is also accessible from the parking area. The Gorge Trail begins just south of the existing bridge, within Norfolk Southern right-of-way, passes beneath the bridge and continues along the western edge of the river between the road and the water. Farther north along the Gorge Trail, the viewing area at the Upper and Middle Falls Picnic Area, which provides views of the Upper Falls and existing bridge, is also within the land use study area. On the east side of the river, a walking trail (the Genesee Valley Greenway Trail, Trail #7) passes through the railroad right-of-way and beneath the existing bridge. No other developed park features fall within the study area on this side of the river.

Land Use Outside the Park

On the east side of the Genesee River, a portion of the ¼-mile study area is private property that is surrounded by, but not part of, Letchworth State Park (see Figure 4.2.1-1). Within the ¼-mile study area there are four single-family homes and a mobile home located along Portageville Road, which runs north of the railroad right-of-way, and an additional mobile home on the north side of Route 436. The balance of the private land in the study area (i.e., the land around these six residential units) is agricultural or vacant rural land. Just beyond the ¼-mile study area boundaries, there are three additional single-family homes, rural vacant land, and agricultural land within the private outparcels.

Access to the agricultural land in the study area on the east side of the river is from Portageville Road, which connects to Route 436 just beyond the railroad right-of-way almost a mile east of the Village of Portageville. Portageville Road extends across the Norfolk Southern rail right-of-way as an unpaved road that provides access to the vacant rural land on the south side of the right-of-way. It also provides access to the east side of Letchworth State Park for park employees and is not a public entrance.

Outside of the study area, the nearest village is the hamlet of Portageville (located within the Town of Genesee Falls). Portageville is along the south side of the park close to the Genesee River. This small hamlet has a small network of streets with residences and limited commercial development, including a gas station, two inns, a post office, and a church.

4.2.1-3-2 Comprehensive Plans and Zoning

Wyoming County and Livingston County do not have any comprehensive plans that encompass the study area, the hamlet of Portageville, or Letchworth State Park. The Town of Portage and the Town of Genesee Falls do not have zoning regulations.

4.2: Social Conditions Chapter 4.2.1: Land Use

4.2.1-3

4.2.1-3-3 Demographics and Affected Population

Population

In the demographics study area, the 2010 population is estimated to be 1,322 (see Table 4.2.1-1). This is similar to the 2000 population (1,319 residents) and slightly less than the 1990 population of 1,381. In comparison, the population of the bi-county region (Wyoming and Livingston Counties together) increased slightly (see Table 4.2.1-1).

Table 4.2.1-1Population (1990, 2000, and 2010)

Geographic Area 1990 2000 2010

Percent Change

1990-2000 2000-2010

Study Area 1,381 1,319 1,322 -4.5% 0.2%

Portage 893 859 884 -3.8% 2.9%

Genesee Falls 488 460 438 -5.7% -4.8%

Bi-County Region 104,879 107,752 107,548 2.7% -0.2%

Livingston County 62,372 64,328 65,393 3.1% 1.7%

Wyoming County 42,507 43,424 42,155 2.2% -2.9%

Sources: 1990 and 2000 U.S. Census, Summary File 1; and 2010 Census Redistricting Data Summary File.

Households

In 2010, there are an estimated 494 households in the study area. Approximately 63.2 percent of the households are in Portage and 36.8 percent are in Genesee Falls. As shown in Table 4.2.1-2, the number of households has been fairly constant since 1990, while the number of households in the bi-county region has increased slightly during that period.

Table 4.2.1-2Households (1990, 2000, and 2010)

Geographic Area

Total Households Percent Change

1990 2000 Est. 2010 1990-2000 2000-2010

Study Area 486 478 494 -1.6% 3.3%

Portage 312 308 312 -1.3% 1.3%

Genesee Falls 174 170 182 -2.3% 7.1%

Bi-County Region 35,094 37,056 37,155 5.6% 0.3%

Livingston County 21,197 22,150 22,420 4.5% 1.2%

Wyoming County 13,897 14,906 14,735 7.3% -1.1%

Sources: 1990 and 2000 U.S. Census, Summary File 1; 2010 estimates were obtained from ESRI Demographic and Income Profile Reports.

The average household size in the study area in 2010 is 2.70 people per household. This is higher than the average household size in the bi-county region (2.56 people per household). In both the study area and the bi-county region, the average household size has decreased between 1990 and 2010.


4.2.1-4

Income and Poverty

Information on the income characteristics of the study area is provided in Chapter 4.2.3, “Social Groups Benefitted or Harmed.”

4.2.1-4 EFFECTS ASSESSMENT

4.2.1-4-1 Alternative 1 - No Action Alternative / Maintenance Alternative

Land Use

Alternative 1 would result in no changes to land use from existing conditions. Norfolk Southern would not acquire any new private land or parkland. This alternative would avoid the need to acquire parkland and private rural vacant land. Norfolk Southern would also not transfer its existing property to the park. With no change from existing conditions, there would be no effects to land use in the study area.

Comprehensive Plans and Zoning

Since Wyoming County and Livingston County do not have comprehensive plans for the study area, and since the Town of Portage and the Town of Genesee Falls do not have zoning regulations, these would not be affected under any Project alternatives. In addition, the application of any such plans and regulations to the Project would be pre-empted by federal law.

Demographics and Affected Population

The No Action Alternative would not affect the population characteristics of the demographics study area.

4.2.1-4-2 Alternative 4 - New Bridge on Parallel Alignment / Remove the Existing Bridge

Land Use

Alternative 4 would shift the rail right-of-way approximately 75 feet south of the existing bridge. This would convert to rail use some land that is currently parkland and vacant rural land that is in close proximity to the existing rail right-of-way.

With Alternative 4, Norfolk Southern would acquire parkland to be used for the new right-of-way and to provide sufficient area around the bridge for construction, access for inspection and maintenance, and security. Norfolk Southern would transfer existing right-of-way to OPRHP to become part of Letchworth State Park, as required by Section 6(f) of the Land and Water Conservation Act of 1964. The park area that would be affected consists predominantly of undeveloped wooded land that is already in close proximity to the existing rail right-of-way (for more information, see Chapter 5, “Section 6(f) Evaluation”). As described in Chapter 4.4.9, “General Ecology and Wildlife Resources,” use of this land would require removal of trees and other vegetation.

As described in Chapter 3, “Project Alternatives,” as part of the Project, the Highbridge Parking Area, which is currently south of the railroad tracks and bridge, would be shifted to the north side of the new bridge and enlarged to accommodate more park patrons. In addition, Park Road would be shifted slightly westward as it passes beneath the bridge, and the trailheads for the Mary Jemison and Gorge Trails would be relocated slightly. These changes would not change the land use of the study area, and would not adversely affect these park features (for more

4.2: Social Conditions Chapter 4.2.1: Land Use

4.2.1-5

information on effects on park features, see Chapter 4.4.12, “Parks and Recreational Resources”).

The new right-of-way, like the existing right-of-way, would pass above Park Road and the Gorge Trail (on the west side of the river) and Genesee Valley Greenway Trail (on the east side), which would not be affected by its presence. (For information on effects to these trails during construction, see Chapter 4.5, “Construction Impacts.”) Other park uses within the land use study area would not be affected by the new bridge in Alternative 4. For a discussion of changes to view from the scenic overlook at the south end of the Upper and Middle Falls Picnic Area, see Chapter 4.13, “Visual Resources.”

Outside of the park, Alternative 4 would affect a small area of privately owned land on the east side of the Genesee River. Norfolk Southern would acquire less than an acre of private land to accommodate the eastern approach to the new bridge. The private landowner would be compensated by Norfolk Southern. This land is currently vacant, and its conversion to railroad right-of-way would not adversely affect the overall use of the area, particularly since this area represents a very small portion of the 60.3-acre lot. The private dirt road that crosses the rail right-of-way in this area would remain in place, and the at-grade crossing would be shifted slightly farther south.

The area of railroad right-of-way that would be transferred to OPRHP would be abandoned for transportation purposes and therefore subject to the State’s preferential right to acquire abandoned railroad property under New York State Transportation Law § 18. It is anticipated that the New York State Department of Transportation will assign the right to acquire this property to OPRHP.

Overall, Alternative 4 would shift a transportation land use slightly farther south than its existing location. For adjacent and nearby portions of the surrounding study area, this slight shift would not result in a change in terms of land use compatibility. The rail right-of-way would be shifted slightly farther from the nearest residential use on Portageville Road, and would remain adjacent to parkland regardless of the shift. Overall, the change would not have an adverse effect on land uses in the study area.


Since Wyoming County and Livingston County do not have comprehensive plans that affect the study area, and since the Town of Portage and the Town of Genesee Falls do not have zoning regulations, Alternative 4 would have no impact on comprehensive plans or zoning. In addition, the application of any such plans and regulations to the Project would be pre-empted by federal law.


The slight shift in the railroad alignment proposed in Alternative 4 would not adversely affect the population characteristics of the demographics study area.

4.2.1-4-3 Alternative 5 - New Bridge on Parallel Alignment / Convey the Existing Bridge to New Owner

Land Use

Alternative 5 would have effects similar to Alternative 4 with respect to land use. Like Alternative 4, this alternative would shift the rail alignment slightly southward from its existing location. This alternative would require the same acquisition of parkland and private property as Alternative 4. However, in this alternative, the land transferred from Norfolk Southern to OPRHP or another


4.2.1-6

suitable entity to become part of Letchworth State Park would include the former rail bridge, which would be retained and maintained by OPRHP or some other entity. Assuming that the existing bridge would be utilized as recreational resource (such as a pedestrian path), its use would change from a transportation purpose to a recreational purpose.


Since Wyoming County and Livingston County do not have comprehensive plans that affect the study area, and since the Town of Portage and the Town of Genesee Falls do not have zoning regulations, these would not be affected under any Project alternatives. In addition, the application of any such plans and regulations to the Project would be pre-empted by federal law.


The slight shift in the railroad alignment proposed in Alternative 5 would not adversely affect the population characteristics of the demographics study area.

4.2.1-5 SUMMARY OF AVOIDANCE, MINIMIZATION, AND MITIGATION

Alternatives 4 and 5 would convert some parkland to transportation use, but replacement land would be provided to Letchworth State Park as required by Section 6(f). With both Build alternatives, a small parking lot (the Highbridge Parking Area) would be relocated within close proximity to its current location, and would continue to serve as access point to two trails. The trailheads for two trails near the bridge would also be shifted slightly, as would Park Road. These changes would not adversely affect land use or recreational features in the study area.

4.2.2-1

Chapter 4.2.2: Neighborhood and Community Cohesion

The Project site is located on private property encompassed within Letchworth State Park. The closest community is the Hamlet of Portageville, which is approximately one mile south of the existing Portageville Bridge. The Project would not divide neighborhoods, isolate part of a neighborhood, generate substantial new development, or otherwise affect community cohesion. Since the Project does not require the acquisition of occupied dwellings or businesses, it would not displace residents or employees. Overall, therefore, the Project would not result in significant adverse impacts on neighborhood character and stability.

4.2.3-1

Chapter 4.2.3: Social Groups Benefited or Harmed

4.2.3-1 INTRODUCTION

This chapter describes social characteristics of the demographic study area to determine whether the Project may benefit or adversely affect certain specific segments of the population. In accordance with the New York State Department of Transportation’s (NYSDOT) guidelines for analyzing social groups benefited or harmed, this analysis evaluates whether the Project may benefit or adversely affect elderly and/or disabled people, transit-dependent people, pedestrians or bicyclists.

In addition, this chapter also supports the environmental review requirements for federal agencies (e.g., the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and National Park Service) that may issue permits or other regulatory approvals required for implementation of the Project. It provides the information required for an environmental justice determination in accordance with Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations (February 11, 1994).

4.2.3-2 METHODOLOGY

In order to satisfy Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations (February 11, 1994), an environmental justice analysis has been prepared to identify and address any disproportionately high and adverse impacts on minority or low-income populations that could result from the Project. Executive Order 12898 also requires federal agencies to work to ensure greater public participation in the decision-making process. Refer to Chapter 4.1, “Process, Agency Coordination, and Public Participation,” for a description of outreach efforts to environmental justice communities.

The environmental justice analysis for the Project follows the guidance and methodologies recommended in the federal Council on Environmental Quality’s (CEQ) Environmental Justice Guidance under the National Environmental Policy Act (December 1997).

4.2.3-2-1 CEQ Guidance

CEQ, which has oversight of the federal government’s compliance with Executive Order 12898 and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), developed its guidance to assist federal agencies with their NEPA procedures so that environmental justice concerns are effectively identified and addressed. Federal agencies are permitted to supplement this guidance with more specific procedures tailored to their particular programs or activities.

The CEQ methodology involves collecting demographic information on the area where a project may cause adverse impacts; identifying low-income and minority populations in that area using census data; and identifying whether a project would result in disproportionately high and adverse impacts on minority or low-income populations. Disproportionately high and adverse impacts are those that are significant, affect minority or low-income communities, and that appreciably exceed those of the general population or non-minority and non-low-income populations. Mitigation measures should be developed and implemented for any disproportionately high and adverse significant impacts. Under NEPA, the potential for


4.2.3-2

disproportionately high and adverse impacts on minority and/or low-income populations should then be one of the factors the federal agency considers in making its finding on a project.

4.2.3-2-2 Study Area Definition

For the evaluation of environmental justice for the Project, the study area consists of the Town of Genesee Falls and the Town of Portage, which are municipalities located in Wyoming County and Livingston County, respectively. For this analysis, the two towns are the smallest census unit available and best represent the area where the Project has the potential to result in adverse impacts.

4.2.3-2-3 Identification of Environmental Justice Population

Data were gathered from the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2010 Census Redistricting Data (Public Law 94-171) Summary File, 2005-2009 American Community Survey, and Census 2000 for the study area. For comparison purposes, data for Wyoming County, Livingston County, and New York State were also obtained. Minority and low-income communities were identified as follows:

Minority Communities: The guidance documents define minorities to include American Indian or Alaskan natives, Asian and Pacific Islanders, Black persons, and Hispanic persons. This environmental justice analysis also considers minority populations to include persons who identified themselves as being either “some other race” or “two or more races” in the 2010 Census. Following CEQ guidance, minority populations are identified where either: 1) the minority population of the affected area exceeds 50 percent of the total population; or 2) the minority population percentage of the affected area is meaningfully greater than the minority population percentage in the general population or other appropriate unit of geographic analysis. For this analysis, the statistical reference area is Wyoming County for the Town of Genesee Falls and Livingston County for the Town of Portage. In 2010, approximately 7.8 percent and 9.8 percent of the population was minority in Livingston County and Wyoming County, respectively. Therefore, those areas of the county with higher percentages of minority populations than these thresholds are considered minority communities in this environmental justice analysis.

Low-Income Communities. The percentage of individuals living below the poverty level in each county segment was used to identify low-income communities. Since the available guidance documents do not specify thresholds to be used to identify low-income communities, all segments of the county whose percentage of individuals below poverty level was meaningfully greater than that of Livingston County or Wyoming County were considered low-income communities. In Livingston County, approximately 12.3 percent of individuals were living below the poverty level, so, for a conservative approach, any area in Livingston County with more than 12.3 percent of its individuals below the poverty level was considered low-income and, therefore, a potential environmental justice area. In Wyoming County, approximately 10.5 percent of its individuals were living below the poverty level. Therefore, any segment of Wyoming County with more than 10.5 percent of its individuals living below the poverty level was considered to be low-income and a potential environmental justice area.

4.2.3-3 EXISTING CONDITIONS

4.2.3-3-1 Elderly and Disabled

Table 4.2.3-1 shows the age distribution and disability status of residents in the study area, bi-county region (constituting Wyoming and Livingston Counties), and New York State. In 2010, the population above 65 years in age represented approximately 9.0 percent of the population in

4.2: Social Conditions Chapter 4.2.3: Social Groups Benefited or Harmed

4.2.3-3

Portage. This was lower than the percentage of residents in this age group in Livingston County (12.7 percent). In Genesee Falls, approximately 17.4 percent of the residents were above 65 years in age. This was higher than Wyoming County, where 13.0 percent of residents were in this age group.

Table 4.2.3-1Age Distribution and Disability Status (in Percent)

Geographic Area

Age Distribution Percent with a

Disability1School Age (Under 18)

Working Age (Ages 18-64) Over 65

2000 2010 2000 2010 2000 2010 2000

Study Area 30.3 22.2 57.9 65.4 11.8 12.4 20.9

Portage 30.7 21.4 58.4 69.6 10.8 9.0 22.1

Genesee Falls 29.3 23.4 57.0 59.2 13.7 17.4 18.6

Bi-County Region 23.7 20.6 64.6 66.6 11.7 12.8 17.5

Livingston County 23.4 20.3 65.2 67.0 11.4 12.7 17.2

Wyoming County 24.1 20.9 63.8 66.1 12.2 13.0 17.9

New York State 21.5 23.2 62.4 63.7 12.9 13.2 20.6

Note: 1 Universe: Civilian non-institutionalized population 5 years and over.

Sources: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 2000 Census, Summary Files 1 and 3; 2005-2009 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates.

In 2000, approximately 22.1 percent of Portage’s non-institutionalized civilian population above 5 years of age had a disability. This was higher than Livingston County (17.2 percent) and the State (20.6 percent). In Genesee Falls, 18.6 percent of the non-institutionalized civilian population above 5 years of age had a disability. This was slightly higher than Wyoming County (17.9 percent), but lower than the State (20.6 percent).

4.2.3-3-2 Transit Dependent, Pedestrians, and Bicyclists

Letchworth State Park, the Genesee Valley Greenway Trail, and the Finger Lakes Trail provide recreational trail facilities for pedestrians and bicyclists. These trails and paths are generally used for recreational purposes and are not considered commuter facilities.

Although the existing Portageville Bridge is meant to serve only rail traffic, pedestrians illegally trespass on the existing bridge for a view of the waterfalls and to traverse the river between the east and west portions of Letchworth State Park. However, there is a park trail with a pedestrian crossing over the Genesee River in the park north of the Project site near Lower Falls.

There are no intercity passenger rail or commuter rail services on the Southern Tier route between Port Jervis and Buffalo.

4.2.3-3-3 Low-Income, Minority, and Ethnic Groups (Environmental Justice)

Table 4.2.3-2 shows the ethnic and income characteristics for populations in the study area as well as for Livingston and Wyoming Counties and the State of New York.


4.2.3-4

Table 4.2.3-2Ethnicity and Income Characteristics

Geographic Area Population

Race and Ethnicity (Percent) Economic Profile

White Black American

Indian Asian Other Hispanic1 Minority

2005-2009 Median

Household Income in the Past

Year2

Percent Below

Poverty Level3

Study Area 1,322 97.5 0.2 0.4 0.5 1.4 0.7 2.9 $41,543 14.1

Portage 884 97.3 0.3 0.6 0.1 1.7 0.8 3.2 $42,162 19.1

Genesee Falls 438 97.9 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.7 0.5 2.3 $40,557 6.8

Bi-County Region 107,548 92.9 3.7 0.3 0.9 2.2 2.8 8.6 $52,745 11.6

Livingston 65,393 93.8 2.4 0.3 1.2 2.2 2.8 7.8 $53,892 12.3

Wyoming 42,155 91.6 5.6 0.3 0.4 2.1 3.0 9.8 $51,020 10.5

New York State 19,378,102 65.7 15.9 0.6 7.3 10.5 17.6 41.7 $57,577 13.8

Notes: 1 An ethnic group can include members of all different racial categories.

2 The median household income reported for the study area are weighted averages of those reported for the county subdivisions or counties in the study areas. Median household income is presented in constant 2011 dollars using the U.S. Department of Labor’s March 2011 Consumer Price Index for the Northeast urban area.

3 Percent of persons with incomes below the established poverty level; poverty level varies depending on household size.

Sources: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 2010 Census Redistricting Data (Public Law 94-171) Summary File, and 2005-2009 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates.

In 2010, approximately 3.2 percent of the population in the Town of Portage was minority. In comparison, approximately 7.8 percent of the population in Livingston County was minority. The percentage of the population that was minority in the Town of Portage was lower than the percentage of Livingston County’s population that was minority. Therefore, the Town of Portage is not considered a minority community for this environmental justice analysis.

Approximately 2.3 percent of the population in the Town of Genesee Falls was minority. This is lower than the minority population in Wyoming County (9.8 percent). Therefore, the Town of Genesee Falls is not considered a minority community for this environmental justice analysis.

Approximately 19.1 percent of the people in the Town of Portage were living below the poverty level as compared with 12.3 percent of the population in Livingston County. This segment of the county had a higher percentage of people living below the poverty level compared with the entire county and compared with the state (13.8 percent). Using conservative criteria identified in Section 4.2.3-2-3 above, the Town of Portage is considered a low-income community for this environmental justice analysis.

Approximately 6.8 percent of the population in the Town of Genesee Falls was living below the poverty level. This is lower than the percentage of residents in Wyoming County (10.5 percent) and New York State (13.8 percent). Using conservative criteria identified in Section 4.2.3-2-3 above, the Town of Genesee Falls is not considered a low-income community for this environmental justice analysis.

Because the Town of Portage meets the criteria for low-income communities as defined in this analysis, Executive Order 12898 is considered in implementation of the Project alternatives.

4.2: Social Conditions Chapter 4.2.3: Social Groups Benefited or Harmed

4.2.3-5

4.2.3-4 EFFECTS ASSESSMENT

4.2.3-4-1 Alternative 1 - No Action Alternative / Maintenance Alternative

Elderly and Disabled

With Alternative 1, the existing bridge would remain in service and would be subject only to regular maintenance. There would be no change to conditions for elderly and/or disabled population compared to existing conditions. Therefore, this alternative would have no significant adverse impacts to the elderly and/or disabled population in the study area.

Transit Dependent, Pedestrians, and Bicyclists

Alternative 1 would maintain access to the trails beneath the bridge. The use of the existing bridge by pedestrians and cyclists would continue to be prohibited; however, it is possible that people may continue to illegally trespass across the bridge. Therefore, the safety concern of pedestrians and bicyclists crossing the bridge would continue with Alternative 1.

Low-Income, Minority, and Ethnic Groups (Environmental Justice)

A portion of the study area is a potential environmental justice area. With Alternative 1, the existing bridge would remain in service and would be subject only to regular maintenance. There would be no change in environmental conditions with Alternative 1, and therefore, there would be no disproportionate adverse effects to environmental justice communities.

4.2.3-4-2 Alternative 4 - New Bridge on Parallel Alignment / Remove the Existing Bridge


Alternative 4 involves the construction of a new railroad bridge and demolition of the existing railroad bridge. The new bridge would continue to serve freight traffic and would not impact the mobility of elderly or disabled persons. Therefore, Alternative 4 would not have significant adverse impacts on the elderly or disabled population of the study area.


The new bridge would pass above the Gorge Trail and Genesee Valley Greenway Trail, which would not be affected by its presence. The southern trailheads for the Gorge Trail and Mary Jemison Trail would be relocated slightly to accommodate the new railroad alignment required for the bridge. Trail access would be maintained with these minor changes to the trails. Pedestrians and cyclists would be prohibited from using the new bridge. Automatic gates, fencing, or other safety devices would be implemented to limit access to the bridge and deter trespassing. The existing bridge would be removed.


Alternative 4 is limited to building a new rail bridge in Letchworth State Park approximately 75 feet south of an existing bridge and removing the existing bridge. As described elsewhere in this document, this alternative would primarily affect the park and adjacent land with limited impacts to area residents. Therefore, Alternative 4 would not be expected to have disproportionate impacts on environmental justice communities.


4.2.3-6

4.2.3-4-3 Alternative 5 - New Bridge on Parallel Alignment / Convey the Existing Bridge to New Owner


Alternative 5 involves the construction of a new railroad bridge, like Alternative 4, but also involves the conveyance of the existing railroad bridge to a new owner for an alternative use (if a suitable owner can be identified). The new bridge would continue to serve freight traffic and would not impact the mobility of elderly or disabled persons. Therefore, Alternative 5 would not have significant adverse impacts on the elderly or disabled population of the study area.


Like Alternative 4, the new bridge would pass above the Gorge Trail and Genesee Valley Greenway Trail, which would not be affected by its presence. The southern trailheads for the Gorge Trail and Mary Jemison Trail would be relocated slightly to accommodate the new railroad alignment required for the bridge. Trail access would be maintained with these minor changes to the trail. Also similar to Alternative 4, Alternative 5’s new bridge would serve only rail traffic. Pedestrians and bicycles would be prohibited from using the new bridge. Automatic gates, fencing, or other safety devices would be implemented to limit access to the bridge and deter trespassing on the railroad right-of-way and new river crossing.

Under Alternative 5, the existing bridge would be conveyed to a new owner and could be converted to pedestrian use if a suitable new owner is identified. The new owner would make the necessary changes to use and maintain the bridge for non-rail use. The maintenance, repair, and future use of the existing bridge would be the responsibility of its future owners (and subject to separate permits and approvals). If converted to pedestrian use, the bridge would serve recreational purposes and would not be a commuter facility. The new recreational use of the existing bridge would enhance recreational hiking/walking and cycling opportunities within Letchworth State Park.


Alternative 5 is limited to building a new rail bridge in Letchworth State Park south of the existing bridge, and conveying the existing bridge to a suitable new owner. As described elsewhere in this document, this alternative would primarily affect the park and adjacent land with no or limited impacts to area residents. Therefore, Alternative 5 would not be expected to have disproportionate impacts on environmental justice communities.

4.2.3-5 SUMMARY OF AVOIDANCE, MINIMIZATION, AND MITIGATION

No impacts were identified affecting elderly and disabled populations; transit-dependent, pedestrian, and bicycle populations; or minority and low-income populations. Therefore, avoidance, minimization, or mitigation is not required.

4.2.4-1

Chapter 4.2.4: Schools, Recreational Areas, and Places of Worship

This chapter identifies whether the Project would result in significant adverse impacts on schools, recreational facilities, or places of worship. There are no schools, school properties, or places of worship on or adjacent to the Project site; therefore, further analysis of potential impacts to such facilities is not necessary.

The Project site is on private property encompassed by Letchworth State Park, which includes a variety of recreational resources. Detailed analysis of the potential impacts of the Project on the park and its recreational facilities is provided in Chapter 4.4.12, “Parks and Recreational Resources.”

4.2: social conditions chapter 4.2.1: land use · land use within the ¼-mile study area is...

Documents