DOCSLIB.ORG

Northeast Corridor Capital Investment Plan Fiscal Years 2021-2025

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Northeast Corridor Capital Investment Plan Fiscal Years 2021-2025 Northeast Corridor Capital Investment Plan Fiscal Years 2021-2025 October 2020 Congress established the Northeast Corridor Commission to develop coordinated strategies for improving the Northeast’s core rail network in recognition of the inherent challenges of planning, financing, and implementing major infrastructure improvements that cross multiple jurisdictions. The expectation is that by coming together to take collective responsibility for the NEC, these disparate stakeholders will achieve a level of success that far exceeds the potential reach of any individual organization. The Commission is governed by a board comprised of one member from each of the NEC states (Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, and Maryland) and the District of Columbia; four members from Amtrak; and five members from the U.S. Department of Transportation. The Commission also includes non-voting representatives from four freight railroads, states with connecting corridors, and several commuter operators in the region. Contents Letter from the Co-Chairs 1 Introduction 3 FY21-25 Capital Investment Plan 6 NEC Investment Summary 6 NEC Infrastructure Investments with Funding Available in FY21-25 8 NEC Infrastructure Investments with Funding Needs in FY21-25 16 Funding Needs beyond FY21-25 21 Project Information Appendix 22 Capital Renewal 22 Special Projects 152 Newarkiv Penn| NEC Station Capital Investment Plan: FY21-25 Letter from the Co-Chairs We are enduring the most difficult times any of our agencies have experienced. The COVID-19 pandemic has cost so much for Northeast Corridor stakeholders: fewer customers, lost revenue, and less certainty for our futures. Most grievously, we have lost staff members to the virus. Despite these hardships, our agencies and their employees have carried on, keeping systems running as safely as possible, in particular to support the movement of the essential workers who have kept our healthcare system and our economy as functional as possible. Although the pandemic has created tremendous uncertainty for our industry, it has not changed the imperative to bring the Northeast Corridor to a state of good repair and lay a foundation for growth once the current crisis eases and life returns to normal. Capital plans have always played—and will continue to play—a key role in advancing these goals, yet they also represent a snapshot in time and can be challenging to prepare under normal circumstances. This document, the FY21-25 NEC Capital Investment Plan, was developed during the first six months of the pandemic; as such, it reflects the Commission’s best available information during an extremely volatile and dynamic period where stakeholders have even less clarity than usual on what funding might be available to support our operations and capital programs. The Commission approved the Capital Investment Plan mindful of these uncertainties and will report adjustments to plan through its quarterly reporting process. It is our hope and expectation that the advancement of NEC capital investments will play an important role in supporting the industry’s recovery and energizing the regional economy. Looking beyond the five-year time frame, the Commission has been hard at work on CONNECT NEC 2035, a planning process that will provide a roadmap for implementing phase one (i.e., the first 15 years) of the Federal Railroad Administration’s long-term vision for the corridor established in the 2017 NEC FUTURE Record of Decision. Key to this planning process will be an unprecedented project delivery analysis—an assessment of the track outage and workforce requirements to build all identified infrastructure projects by 2035 while maintaining, at minimum, pre-COVID-19 service levels. When CONNECT NEC 2035 is completed by the fall of 2021, the Commission will begin using it as a roadmap for the annual NEC Capital Investment Plan. As these planning efforts progress and mature, much work remains to improve capital planning, reporting, and plan adherence at NEC stakeholder agencies, but the commitment to make those improvements remains strong. During these difficult times, Commission members are committed to working together and with Congress to maintain essential operations, spend capital dollars as efficiently as possible, and plan for our future. We look forward to continued partnership and brighter days to come. Ronald Batory Kevin S. Corbett Administrator, Federal Railroad Administration Executive Director, NJ TRANSIT Co-Chair, Northeast Corridor Commission Co-Chair, Northeast Corridor Commission Northeast Corridor Commission | 1 2 | NEC Capital Investment Plan: FY21-25 Introduction The Northeast Corridor Each day, the Northeast Corridor—both the NEC main line and connecting corridors to Harrisburg, PA; Spuyten Duyvil, NY; and Springfield, MA—hosts the passenger rail operations of eight commuter railroads and Amtrak’s intercity services. The 457-mile main line railroad still includes many bridges and tunnels that date back to the period between the Civil War and the New Deal. Located in the most densely populated region of the United States, the NEC is a vital transportation asset. Between fiscal years 2016 and 2019, the NEC hosted over 800,000 average daily trips. However, fiscal year 2020 presented significant challenges to its riders and operating agencies due to the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. Since March 2020, NEC commuter and intercity passenger rail, like other transportation modes across the United States, has experienced steep ridership declines as the nation used social-distancing, telework, and travel advisories to slow the spread of the disease. As a result of these measures, a global recession is on-going without a clear end in sight. Unemployment in the metro areas along the Northeast Corridor alone rose by 10 percentage points during the third quarter of federal fiscal year 2020 compared to the same period last year.1 When the economy returns to full strength in the coming years, the NEC rail system will continue to serve as a vital transportation asset and driver of economic growth. Capital investment in the NEC will ensure a well-functioning railroad to enable workers to commute to jobs, people to connect with family and friends, and the region to attract businesses in a globally competitive economy. 1 Local Area Unemployment Statistics, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2020 Northeast Corridor Commission | 3 The Northeast Corridor Commission Congress established the Northeast Corridor Commission to develop coordinated strategies for improving the Northeast’s core rail network in recognition of the inherent challenges of planning, financing, and implementing major infrastructure improvements that cross multiple jurisdictions. The expectation is that by coming together to take collective responsibility for the NEC, these disparate stakeholders will achieve a level of success that far exceeds the potential reach of any individual organization. The Commission is governed by a board comprised of one member from each of the NEC states (Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, and Maryland) and the District of Columbia; four members from Amtrak; and five members from the U.S. Department of Transportation. The Commission also includes non-voting representatives from freight railroads, states with connecting corridors, and several commuter operators in the region. The NEC Commuter and Intercity Rail Cost Allocation Policy In September 2015, the Commission adopted the NEC Commuter and Intercity Rail Cost Allocation Policy. The Policy outlines a partnership built on three pillars. First, it established a framework for allocating approximately $1.3 billion annually in shared operating costs and capital normalized replacement values among the NEC’s four right-of-way owners and nine passenger rail operators. The agencies’ financial obligations are calculated annually through the NEC Commission’s Cost Allocation Model and are based on agencies' relative use of NEC infrastructure. Right-of-way owners use agencies’ capital obligations, referred to as Baseline Capital Charges, to fund capital renewal investments associated with right-of-way basic infrastructure assets, such as track, structures, electric traction systems, and communication and signal systems. Second, the Policy established a framework for transparency, collaboration, and accountability, including a first-ever corridor-wide capital planning and reporting process. The NEC Capital Investment Plan is a key component of that NEC-wide process and is required by the most recent federal transportation law, Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act (49 U.S.C. §24904(a)(1)). The final pillar of the Policy outlines a stable federal partnership framework from the perspective of Amtrak, NEC states, and Commuter Authorities, which, if implemented, should provide dependable and adequate funding to help restore the NEC to a state-of-good-repair, beyond the vital funds appropriated by Congress annually. 4 | NEC Capital Investment Plan: FY21-25 The NEC Capital Investment Plan The NEC Capital Investment Plan (CIP) integrates NEC infrastructure investments planned by each NEC owner and operator over a five-year period into a single planning document to develop a complete picture of corridor activities. The plan combines anticipated investments based on available funding with capital investments that could occur with additional funding given available resources. Year One of
Load more

Recommended publications
  • GATEWAY PROGRAM OVERVIEW and UPDATE John D
    January 12, 2017 GATEWAY PROGRAM OVERVIEW AND UPDATE John D. Porcari, Interim Executive Director Gateway Program Development Corporation 1 GATEWAY PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION » Incorporated in the state of New Jersey under Title 15A:2-8 New Jersey Domestic Nonprofit Corporation Act. » For coordinating, developing, operating, financing, managing, owning or otherwise engaging in activities to effectuate the transportation project between Penn Station, Newark, New Jersey, and Penn Station, New York, New York currently referred to as the “Gateway Program.” » Four trustees appointed by US DOT, Amtrak, NJ TRANSIT, and NYS DOT, respectively. Gateway Program Development Corporation 2 HOW IT WILL WORK Federal NJ Other/ Amtrak PANYNJ Grants TRANSIT Private Federal Gateway Program Development Loans Corporation Project Delivery NJ Amtrak TRANSIT PANYNJ Consultants/ Contractors Gateway Program Development Corporation 3 WHAT IS THE GATEWAY PROGRAM? » Hudson Tunnel Project » New Hudson River Tunnel » Rehabilitation of Existing North River Tunnel » Replacement of Portal Bridge » Expansion of Penn Station, New York » Capacity and Renewal Projects in New Jersey » Sawtooth Bridges/ Harrison » Portal South Bridge » Secaucus Station and Loops » Operating Rail Yard in NJ » Newark-Secaucus Improvements Gateway Program Development Corporation 4 WHY DO WE NEED GATEWAY? »Existing North River Tunnel, Completed in 1910 Gateway Program Development Corporation 5 SUPERSTORM SANDY CAUSED IRREPARABLE DAMAGE » Superstorm Sandy forced 4-day closure of the NEC in October 2012. » Ongoing damage to internal components requires complete renewal of inundated tunnels. » Tunnel reconstruction requires closure of each tube for outages of ~1.5 years. » Without new tunnel in place, closure would devastate service. » Rebuilding of the existing North River Tunnel will not begin until the new Hudson Tunnel is built and commissioned.
    [Show full text]
  • Amtrak's Rights and Relationships with Host Railroads
    Amtrak’s Rights and Relationships with Host Railroads September 21, 2017 Jim Blair –Director Host Railroads Today’s Amtrak System 2| Amtrak Amtrak’s Services • Northeast Corridor (NEC) • 457 miles • Washington‐New York‐Boston Northeast Corridor • 11.9 million riders in FY16 • Long Distance (LD) services • 15 routes • Up to 2,438 miles in length Long • 4.65 million riders in FY16 Distance • State‐supported trains • 29 routes • 19 partner states • Up to 750 miles in length State- • 14.7 million riders in FY16 supported3| Amtrak Amtrak’s Host Railroads Amtrak Route System Track Ownership Excluding Terminal Railroads VANCOUVER SEATTLE Spokane ! MONTREAL PORTLAND ST. PAUL / MINNEAPOLIS Operated ! St. Albans by VIA Rail NECR MDOT TORONTO VTR Rutland ! Port Huron Niagara Falls ! Brunswick Grand Rapids ! ! ! Pan Am MILWAUKEE ! Pontiac Hoffmans Metra Albany ! BOSTON ! CHICAGO ! Springfield Conrail Metro- ! CLEVELAND MBTA SALT LAKE CITY North PITTSBURGH ! ! NEW YORK ! INDIANAPOLIS Harrisburg ! KANSAS CITY ! PHILADELPHIA DENVER ! ! BALTIMORE SACRAMENTO Charlottesville WASHINGTON ST. LOUIS ! Richmond OAKLAND ! Petersburg ! Buckingham ! Newport News Norfolk NMRX Branch ! Oklahoma City ! Bakersfield ! MEMPHIS SCRRA ALBUQUERQUE ! ! LOS ANGELES ATLANTA SCRRA / BNSF / SDN DALLAS ! FT. WORTH SAN DIEGO HOUSTON ! JACKSONVILLE ! NEW ORLEANS SAN ANTONIO Railroads TAMPA! Amtrak (incl. Leased) Norfolk Southern FDOT ! MIAMI Union Pacific Canadian Pacific BNSF Canadian National CSXT Other Railroads 4| Amtrak Amtrak’s Host Railroads ! MONTREAL Amtrak NEC Route System
    [Show full text]
  • FY20-Fed-State-SOGR-Project-Recipients
    FY 2020 Federal-State Partnership for State of Good Repair Grant Program California — San Diego Next Generation Signaling and Grade Crossing Modernization Up to $9,836,917 North County Transit District Replaces and upgrades obsolete signal, train control, and crossing equipment on a 60-mile section of North County Transit District right-of-way the carrier shares with Amtrak intercity service and freight rail. Brings signal and train control components into a state of good repair, including installing new signal houses, signals, and cabling. Replaces components at more than 15 grade crossings along the corridor. California — Pacific Surfliner Corridor Rehabilitation and Service Reliability Up to $31,800,000 Southern California Regional Rail Authority Rehabilitates track, structures, and grade crossings in Ventura County and northern Los Angeles County on infrastructure used by Amtrak intercity service, Metrolink commuter service, and BNSF freight service. Work for member agency Ventura County Transportation Commission includes track, tie, ballast, and culvert replacements, grade crossing rehabilitation, and tunnel track and structure replacements. Reduces trip times, increases reliability, and improves safety by reducing need for slow orders and conflicts at grade crossings in the corridor. Connecticut — Walk Bridge Replacement Up to $79,700,000 Connecticut Department of Transportation & Amtrak Replaces the Connecticut-owned movable Norwalk River Bridge, built in 1896, with two, independent, two-track, vertical lift rail bridges in Norwalk, Connecticut. Includes associated embankment and retaining wall improvements on the bridge approaches, new catenary structures, and signal system upgrades. The existing bridge is beyond its useful life and prone to malfunctions, especially during opening or closing. The replacement will reduce slow orders, reduce the risk of service disruptions, and improve resiliency to extreme weather events.
    [Show full text]
  • Transportation on the Minneapolis Riverfront
    RAPIDS, REINS, RAILS: TRANSPORTATION ON THE MINNEAPOLIS RIVERFRONT Mississippi River near Stone Arch Bridge, July 1, 1925 Minnesota Historical Society Collections Prepared by Prepared for The Saint Anthony Falls Marjorie Pearson, Ph.D. Heritage Board Principal Investigator Minnesota Historical Society Penny A. Petersen 704 South Second Street Researcher Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 Hess, Roise and Company 100 North First Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 May 2009 612-338-1987 Table of Contents PROJECT BACKGROUND AND METHODOLOGY ................................................................................. 1 RAPID, REINS, RAILS: A SUMMARY OF RIVERFRONT TRANSPORTATION ......................................... 3 THE RAPIDS: WATER TRANSPORTATION BY SAINT ANTHONY FALLS .............................................. 8 THE REINS: ANIMAL-POWERED TRANSPORTATION BY SAINT ANTHONY FALLS ............................ 25 THE RAILS: RAILROADS BY SAINT ANTHONY FALLS ..................................................................... 42 The Early Period of Railroads—1850 to 1880 ......................................................................... 42 The First Railroad: the Saint Paul and Pacific ...................................................................... 44 Minnesota Central, later the Chicago, Milwaukee and Saint Paul Railroad (CM and StP), also called The Milwaukee Road .......................................................................................... 55 Minneapolis and Saint Louis Railway .................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • NORTHEAST CORRIDOR New York - Washington, DC
    NORTHEAST CORRIDOR New York - Washington, DC September 5, 2017 NEW YORK and WASHINGTON, DC NEW YORK - NEWARK - TRENTON PHILADELPHIA - WILMINGTON BALTIMORE - WASHINGTON, DC and intermediate stations Acela Express,® Reserved Northeast RegionalSM and Keystone Service® THIS TIMETABLE SHOWS ALL AMTRAK SERVICE FROM BOSTON OR SPRINGFIELD TO POINTS NEW YORK THROUGH WASHINGTON, DC. Also see Timetable Form W04 for complete Boston/Springfield to Washington, DC schedules, and Timetable Form W06 for service to Virginia locations. FALL HOLIDAYS Special Thanksgiving timetables for the period, November 20 through 27, 2017, will appear on Amtrak.com shortly and temporarily supersede these schedules. 1-800-USA-RAIL Amtrak.com Amtrak is a registered service mark of the National Railroad Passenger Corporation. National Railroad Passenger Corporation, Washington Union Station, 60 Massachusetts Ave. N.E., Washington, DC 20002. NRPC Form W2–Internet only–9/5/17. Schedules subject to change without notice. Depart Depart Depart Depart Depart Arrive Depart Depart Depart Depart Depart Arrive Train Name/Number Frequency New York Newark Newark Intl. Air. Metropark Trenton Philadelphia Philadelphia Wilmington Baltimore BWI New Carrollton Washington Northeast Regional 67 Mo-Fr 3 25A 3 45A —— 4 00A 4 25A 4 52A 5 00A 5 22A 6 10A 6 25A 6 40A 7 00A Northeast Regional 151 Mo-Fr 4 40A R4 57A —— 5 12A 5 35A 6 04A 6 07A 6 28A 7 27A 7 40A D7 59A 8 14A Northeast Regional 111 Mo-Fr 5 30A R5 46A —— 6 00A 6 26A 6 53A 6 55A 7 15A 8 00A 8 15A D8 29A 8 50A Acela Express 2103 Mo-Fr
    [Show full text]
  • Passaic River Navigation Update Outline
    LOWER PASSAIC RIVER COMMERCIAL NAVIGATION ANALYSIS United States Army Corps of Engineers New York District Original: March, 2007 Revision 1: December, 2008 Revision 2: July, 2010 ® US Army Corps of Engineers LOWER PASSAIC RIVER RESTORATION PROJECT COMMERCIAL NAVIGATION ANALYSIS TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Study Background and Authority…………………………………………………1 2.0 Study Purpose……………..………………………………………………………1 3.0 Location and Study Area Description……………………………………………..4 4.0 Navigation & Maintenance Dredging History…………………………………….5 5.0 Physical Constraints including Bridges…………………………………………...9 6.0 Operational Information………………………………………………………….11 6.1 Summary Data for Commodity Flow, Trips and Drafts (1980-2006)…..12 6.2 Berth-by-Berth Analysis (1997-2006)…………………………………...13 7.0 Conclusions………………………………………………………………………26 8.0 References………………………………………………………………………..29 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Dredging History………………………………………………………………...6 Table 2. Bridges on the Lower Passaic River……………………………………………..9 Table 3. Channel Reaches and Active Berths of the Lower Passaic River………………18 Table 4: Most Active Berths, by Volume (tons) Transported on Lower Passaic River 1997-2006………………………………………………………………………..19 Table 5: Summary of Berth-by-Berth Analysis, below RM 2.0, 1997-2006.....................27 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1a. Federal Navigation Channel (RMs 0.0 – 8.0)………………………………….2 Figure 1b. Federal Navigation Channel (RMs 8.0 – 15.4)………………………………...3 Figure 2. Downstream View of Jackson Street Bridge and the City of Newark, May 2007………………………………………………………………………………..5 Figure 3. View Upstream to the Lincoln Highway Bridge and the Pulaski Skyway, May 2007………………………………………………………………………………..8 Figure 4. View Upstream to the Point-No-Point Conrail Bridge and the NJ Turnpike Bridge, May 2007……………………………………………………………......10 Figure 5. Commodities Transported, Lower Passaic River, 1997-2006…………………12 Figure 6.
    [Show full text]
  • Rail Deck Park Engineering and Costing Study
    Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................. 1 1.0 BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................... 8 1.1 Purpose ..................................................................................................................... 8 1.2 Alignment with Other Initiatives ................................................................................. 8 1.3 Project Team ............................................................................................................. 9 City of Toronto.................................................................................................. 9 Build Toronto.................................................................................................... 9 WSP Canada Group Limited............................................................................ 9 2.0 STUDY METHODOLOGY.............................................................................................. 10 2.1 Study Area............................................................................................................... 10 2.2 Data Gathering ........................................................................................................ 10 3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS............................................................................................... 12 3.1 Topography & Landforms.......................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Passaic River Navigation Update Outline
    LOWER PASSAIC RIVER COMMERCIAL NAVIGATION ANALYSIS United States Army Corps of Engineers New York District Original: March, 2007 Revision 1: December, 2008 Revision 2: July, 2010 ® US Army Corps of Engineers LOWER PASSAIC RIVER RESTORATION PROJECT COMMERCIAL NAVIGATION ANALYSIS TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Study Background and Authority…………………………………………………1 2.0 Study Purpose……………..………………………………………………………1 3.0 Location and Study Area Description……………………………………………..4 4.0 Navigation & Maintenance Dredging History…………………………………….5 5.0 Physical Constraints including Bridges…………………………………………...9 6.0 Operational Information………………………………………………………….11 6.1 Summary Data for Commodity Flow, Trips and Drafts (1980-2006)…..12 6.2 Berth-by-Berth Analysis (1997-2006)…………………………………...13 7.0 Conclusions………………………………………………………………………26 8.0 References………………………………………………………………………..29 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Dredging History………………………………………………………………...6 Table 2. Bridges on the Lower Passaic River……………………………………………..9 Table 3. Channel Reaches and Active Berths of the Lower Passaic River………………18 Table 4: Most Active Berths, by Volume (tons) Transported on Lower Passaic River 1997-2006………………………………………………………………………..19 Table 5: Summary of Berth-by-Berth Analysis, below RM 2.0, 1997-2006.....................27 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1a. Federal Navigation Channel (RMs 0.0 – 8.0)………………………………….2 Figure 1b. Federal Navigation Channel (RMs 8.0 – 15.4)………………………………...3 Figure 2. Downstream View of Jackson Street Bridge and the City of Newark, May 2007………………………………………………………………………………..5 Figure 3. View Upstream to the Lincoln Highway Bridge and the Pulaski Skyway, May 2007………………………………………………………………………………..8 Figure 4. View Upstream to the Point-No-Point Conrail Bridge and the NJ Turnpike Bridge, May 2007……………………………………………………………......10 Figure 5. Commodities Transported, Lower Passaic River, 1997-2006…………………12 Figure 6.
    [Show full text]
  • From the Lancaster Chapter, Inc., N.R.H.S
    1935 - 2016 VOLUME 47 NUMBER 12 D ISTRICT 2 - CHAPTER WEBSITE : WWW .NRHS 1. ORG DECEMBER 2016 NEW YORK CENTRAL CHRISTMAS 1950 ADVERTISING POSTER MERRY CHRISTMAS FROM THE LANCASTER CHAPTER , INC ., N.R.H.S. Lancaster DispatcherPage 2 December 2016 THE POWER DIRECTOR “NEWS FROM THE RAILROAD WIRES ” skilled, is fallible, which is why technology was developed to backstop human vulnerabilities," said NTSB Chairman Christopher Hart in a statement released in May. "Had positive train control been in place on that stretch of track, this entirely preventable tragedy would not have happened." AMTRAK NOTCHES RIDERSHIP, REVENUE RECORDS FOR FISCAL 2016 By Bob Johnston, Oct. 21, 2016 - Trains News Wire WASHINGTON — Amtrak broke revenue and ridership records in its 2016 fiscal year despite dire predictions that passenger patronage would suffer with continued low fuel prices. Amtrak carried about 31.2 million passengers, up 1.3 percent from 2015, generating $2.2 billion in ticket revenue, up 0.03 percent, according to recent reports from the national passenger railroad. Those numbers not only beat last year, in which the May 2015 derailment of Northeast Regional train No. 188 shut down the Northeast Corridor near Philadelphia for several days, but also edged 2014. That year saw 30.9 million passengers and was the record year using data generated from hand-held scanners. In January, then-Amtrak President Joe Boardman announced company-wide austerity measures and a revised forecast, which projected a $167.3-million ticket revenue shortfall compared with the amount originally budgeted. When the final tally came in, however, revenue beat the revised downward forecast by 3.3 percent, but was still off 4.3 percent from the original 2016 AMTRAK SETTLES PHILADELPHIA CRASH fiscal year projection.
    [Show full text]
  • Transit Oriented Development Final Report | September 2010
    FTA ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS DRAFT/FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT DANBURY BRANCH IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT FINAL REPORT | SEPTEMBER 2010 In Cooperation with U.S. Department CONNECTICUT South Western Regional Planning Agency of Transportation DEPARTMENT OF Federal Transit TRANSPORTATION Administration FTA ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS DRAFT/FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT DANBURY BRANCH IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT FINAL REPORT | SEPTEMBER 2010 In Cooperation with U.S. Department CONNECTICUT South Western Regional Planning Agency of Transportation DEPARTMENT OF Federal Transit TRANSPORTATION Administration Abstract This report presents an evaluation of transit-oriented development (TOD) opportunities within the Danbury Branch study corridor as a component of the Federal Transit Administration Alternatives Analysis/ Draft Environmental Impact Statement (FTA AA/DEIS) prepared for the Connecticut Department of Transportation (CTDOT). This report is intended as a tool for municipalities to use as they move forward with their TOD efforts. The report identifies the range of TOD opportunities at station areas within the corridor that could result from improvements to the Danbury Branch. By also providing information regarding FTA guidelines and TOD best practices, this report serves as a reference and a guide for future TOD efforts in the Danbury Branch study corridor. Specifically, this report presents a definition of TOD and the elements of TOD that are relevant to the Danbury Branch. It also presents a summary of FTA Guidance regarding TOD and includes case studies of FTA-funded projects that have been rated with respect to their livability, land use, and economic development components. Additionally, the report examines commuter rail projects both in and out of Connecticut that are considered to have applications that may be relevant to the Danbury Branch.
    [Show full text]
  • NEC One-Year Implementation Plan: FY17 Contents
    Northeast Corridor One-Year Implementation Plan Fiscal Year 2017 September 2016 Congress established the Northeast Corridor Commission to develop coordinated strategies for improving the Northeast’s core rail network in recognition of the inherent challenges of planning, financing, and implementing major infrastructure improvements that cross multiple jurisdictions. The expectation is that by coming together to take collective responsibility for the NEC, these disparate stakeholders will achieve a level of success that far exceeds the potential reach of any individual organization. The Commission is governed by a board comprised of one member from each of the NEC states (Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, and Maryland) and the District of Columbia; four members from Amtrak; and five members from the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). The Commission also includes non-voting representatives from four freight railroads, states with connecting corridors and several commuter operators in the Region. 2| NEC One-Year Implementation Plan: FY17 Contents Introduction 6 Funding Summary 8 Baseline Capital Charge Program 10 1 - Boston South Station 12 16 - Shore to Girard 42 2 - Boston to Providence 14 17 - Girard to Philadelphia 30th Street 44 3 - Providence to Wickford Junction 16 18 - Philadelphia 30th Street - Arsenal 46 4 - Wickford Junction to New London 18 19 - Arsenal to Marcus Hook 48 5 - New London to New Haven 20 20 - Marcus Hook to Bacon 50 6 - New Haven to State Line 22 21 - Bacon to Perryville 52 7 - State Line to New Rochelle 24 22 - Perryville to WAS 54 8 - New Rochelle to Harold Interlocking 26 23 - Washington Union Terminal 56 9 - Harold Interlocking to F Interlocking 28 24 - WAS to CP Virginia 58 10 - F Interlocking to PSNY 30 25 - Springfield to New Haven 60 11 - Penn Terminal 32 27 - Spuyten Duyvil to PSNY* 62 12 - PSNY to Trenton 34 28 - 30th St.
    [Show full text]
  • Virginia Service-Boston-Norfolk-March162020
    Effective March 16, 2020 VIRGINIA SERVICE - Southbound serving BOSTON - NEW YORK - WASHINGTON DC - CHARLOTTESVILLE - ROANOKE - RICHMOND - NEWPORT NEWS - NORFOLK and intermediate stations Amtrak.com BOOK TRAVEL, CHECK TRAIN STATUS, ACCESS YOUR ETICKET AND MORE THROUGH THE Amtrak app. 1-800-USA-RAIL Northeast Northeast Northeast Silver Northeast Northeast Service/Train Name4 Palmetto Cardinal Carolinian Carolinian Regional Regional Regional Star Regional Regional Train Number4 65 67 89 51 79 79 95 91 195 125 Normal Days of Operation4 FrSa Su-Th Daily SuWeFr SaSu Mo-Fr Mo-Fr Daily SaSu Mo-Fr 5/24,7/2, 5/25,7/3, 5/25,7/3, Will Also Operate4 9/6 9/7 9/7 5/24,7/2, 5/25,7/3, 5/25,7/3, 5/25,7/3, Will Not Operate4 9/6 9/7 9/7 9/7 R B y R B y R B y R s d y R B y R B y R B R s y R B R B On Board Service4 Q l å OQ l å O l å O l å O l å O l å O y Q å l å O y Q å y Q å Symbol 6 R95 Boston, MA ∑w-u Dp l9 30P l9 30P 6 05A 6 30A 36 05A –South Station Boston, MA–Back Bay Station ∑v- 9 36P 9 36P 6 10A 6 35A 3R6 10A Route 128, MA ∑w- l9 50P l9 50P 6 20A 6 45A 3R6 20A Providence, RI i1 ∑w- l10 22P l10 22P 6 45A 7 10A 36 45A Kingston, RI b2 ∑w- 10 48P 10 48P 7 06A 7 31A 37 06A Westerly, RI >w- 11 05P 11 05P 7 20A 7 45A 37 20A Mystic, CT > 11 17P 11 17P 7 30A 37 30A New London, CT (Casino b) ∑v- 11 31P 11 31P 7 43A 8 07A 37 43A Old Saybrook, CT ∑w- 11 53P 11 53P 8 02A 8 27A 38 02A Greenfield, MA >w 5 45A 5 45A Northampton, MA >v 6 10A 6 10A Holyoke, MA >v t 6 25A 6 25A Springfield, MA ∑v- Ar 6 53A 7 25A 6 53A Dp 7 05A 7 05A Windsor Locks, CT > 7 24A 7 44A 7 24A Windsor, CT > 7 29A 7 49A 7 29A Valley Flyer Train 495 Hartford, CT ∑v- Valley Flyer Train 495 7 39A 7 59A 7 39A Berlin, CT >v 7 49A 8 10A 7 49A Meriden, CT >v 7 58A 8 19A 7 58A Wallingford, CT > 8 06A 8 27A 8 06A Amtrak Hartford Line Train 405 New Haven, CT–State St.
    [Show full text]