DOCSLIB.ORG

Working Groups Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Working Groups Report OCTOBER 2020 WORKING GROUPS REPORT SPONSORED BY THE POINT OF THE MOUNTAIN STATE LAND AUTHORITY TABLE OF CONTENTS THE POINT 1 POINT OF THE MOUNTAIN STATE LAND AUTHORITY 2 THE POINT WORKING GROUPS 3 WORKING GROUP MEETINGS 4 SUMMARIES OF WORKING GROUP CONCLUSIONS 7 APPENDIX A-D 2 THE POINT The Utah Legislature has directed the repurposing of the approximately 700-acre Draper Correctional Facility site following the move of the inmates to a new location in 2022. This site, known as The Point, is in the heart of Silicon Slopes, one of the most dynamic high-tech centers in the United States. Sitting at the intersection of major highways, served by a young, educated workforce, surrounded by more than 20,000 acres of undeveloped land in area communities, and with easy access to the majestic Wasatch Mountains, this development project has rightfully been called a “once-in-a-generation” opportunity. Widely recognized as one of the most important economic development opportunities in state history, The Point offers unprecedented potential to create an innovation hub that fosters technological advancement, includes vibrant and iconic mixed-use urban areas, demonstrates environmentally sustainable practices, and encourages active living through recreational amenities and welcoming open space. The Point will drive Utah’s economy and enhance quality of life statewide. 1 POINT OF THE MOUNTAIN STATE LAND AUTHORITY The Utah Legislature created the Point of the Mountain State Land Authority (“Authority”) in 2018 to oversee planning and development of The Point (Utah Code 11-59). The legislation creates an 11-person board with decision-making and land-use authority for The Point. It also directs the Authority to focus on job creation, workforce development, quality of life for residents, workforce housing, environmental sustainability, high-quality transit, recreational opportunities, and creating a nationally recognized research center. To ensure it fulfills its responsibilities consistently with legislation and public expectations, the Authority adopted the following guiding principles: 1. Promote the Public Interest – We are dedicated to making life better—economically and socially—for all Utahns. We advance the public welfare ahead of any individual interest. 2. Set the Standard – We are building a high-quality community; a leading example of thoughtful, sustainable, and creative development that helps advance residents’ interests. 3. Think Regionally – Regional success is paramount. While our focus is on the site, we analyze the broader impact of our actions, seeking to catalyze regional opportunity and solve regional challenges. 4. Take the Long View – Committed to Utah’s enduring success, we build for the future. We invest our resources for sustained, not just quick, returns. 5. Be Open and Transparent – Because all Utahns own the site, all have a stake in its development. We respect and seek input from all stakeholders, recognizing that our actions affect others. We conduct the public’s work in public and keep them informed. 6. Act with Integrity – We base our decisions on sound data and the law, and act with uncompromising integrity, always. Promote Be Open and the Public Think Regionally Transparent Interest GUIDING Set the Take the Long View Act with Integrity PRINCIPLES Standard 2 WORKING GROUPS To advance the guiding principles and inform the master-planning process, the Authority created five working groups focused on priority areas: • Stakeholder (local elected officials) • Education, Research & Innovation • Environment & Air Quality • Infrastructure & Land Use • Economic Development, Recruitment & Investment Two Authority board members chaired each of the Working Groups, with the exception of the Environment & Air Quality Working Group, chaired by Scott Baird, executive director of the Utah Department of Environmental Quality and Kerry Kelly, assistant professor of Chemical Engineering at the University of Utah and former chair of the Utah Air Quality Board and Air Quality Policy Advisory Board. Each Working Group is composed of members carefully selected for their experience, diversity, expertise, and commitment to Utah’s future. The chairs and members of each Working Group are listed in Appendix A. The members of these Working Groups are an extension of the board, contributing additional knowledge, key relationships, and vision. They are also an extension of the public, promoting a broader range of priorities and perspectives. Members of the Working Groups participated conscientiously and dedicated significant time and thought to help achieve The Point’s significant potential. WORKING GROUP PRIMARY TASKS Identify a short list of Key Vision Elements to be addressed in the 1 framework master plan for The Point Identify additional ideas to include in this report to inform the Authority 2 board and master planning team 3 Provide ongoing advice and feedback during the master-planning process Help the Authority build relationships with potential target 4 companies and investors 5 Serve as champions of the project with their colleagues and the public 3 WORKING GROUP MEETINGS July The individual Working Groups met the fourth week of each month beginning in July. During the first round of meetings, the Authority provided a detailed description of the project history, legislative direction, public process to date, the status of the Authority’s work, and the proposed role of the Working Groups. In free-flowing discussions, the members then shared a range of ideas for The Point relevant to the group’s particular area of focus. Staff organized the ideas generated during the July meetings and, through an online poll, asked the Working Groups to supplement and prioritize their group’s concepts in preparation for the August meetings. During the August meetings, each group reviewed the results of their ranking exercise, collectively refined their ideas, and identified the ideas most critical to success. Staff coalesced the priorities into six Key Vision Elements: 1. Create an iconic, vibrant, mixed-use community, with a focus on quality of life and healthy living, with a strategic balance of jobs and housing to limit off-site trip generation. Include active, welcoming places for people to gather day and night for recreation, dining, culture and entertainment. 2. Serve the site with a high-quality, future-focused, multi-modal transportation system, with an emphasis on convenience, safety, access, regional traffic reduction, limited parking, emissions reduction, and active transportation. 3. Promote enduring statewide economic development through job creation, workforce development, and revenue generation. Create a community that will attract and nurture top talent and outstanding anchor companies, as well as smaller local businesses. 4. Advance innovation by creating a place that promotes a culture of creativity and ingenuity, attracts outstanding talent and investment, promotes solution-oriented research, fosters the growth of promising early-stage companies, eliminates regulatory barriers, and facilitates interdisciplinary industry and academic partnerships to generate and commercialize new ideas. 5. Create a model of sustainable development that, relative to traditional development, significantly reduces air emissions (including GHG), water pollution, water and energy use, and takes advantage of on- and off-site renewable energy resources (including an on-site 4 geothermal resource). Explore a net-zero-ready development. 6. Coordinate closely with others to ensure the development fits well with regional plans and infrastructure, advancing the interests of the broader community and not just the site. Promote regional trail, transportation, and green infrastructure connections through the area and facilitate thoughtful regional growth. The Authority is in the process of selecting a planning team to create a framework master plan for The Point. Staff incorporated the Key Vision Elements into the solicitation document, which indicated that the Authority will evaluate teams in large part on how well they address the Key Vision Elements. August At the August meetings, the Authority asked for volunteers from some of the Working Groups to form subgroups and meet during September to further refine their priority ideas. The following subgroups formed (coordinator listed in parentheses): Education, Research & Innovation • Innovation District (Brenner Adams) • University and Private Sector Partnerships (Donna Milakovic) Environment & Air Quality • Reducing Pollution (Glade Sowards) • Preserving Resources (Moriah Jackson) • Creating a Livable Community (John Mackey) Infrastructure & Land Use • Placemaking (Ted Knowlton) • Transportation (Hugh Van Wagenen) • Coordinated Non-transportation Infrastructure (Soren Simonsen) September During the September meetings, the subgroups pre sented more detailed descriptions of priority ideas, identified other entities who could help advance the ideas, and outlined next steps. The full Working Group provided feedback to the subgroups and, with some changes, adopted the subgroup reports. Those brief reports are included in Appendix C. The Stakeholder Working Group discussed issues constituents have raised regarding The Point and ways those issues can be addressed. The Economic Development, Recruitment & Investment Working Group heard presentations from the Governor’s Office of Economic Development and the Economic Development Corporation of Utah regarding the industry sectors the state targets to 5 recruit to Utah.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Audit Template for Inland Port Sustainability Our Mission
    Kentucky Transportation Center Research Report KTC -14-11/MTIC1-14-1F Audit Template for Inland Port Sustainability Our Mission We provide services to the transportation community through research, technology transfer and education. We create and participate in partnerships to promote safe and effective transportation systems. © 2014 University of Kentucky, Kentucky Transportation Center Information may not be used, reproduced, or republished without our written consent. Kentucky Transportation Center 176 Oliver H. Raymond Building Lexington, KY 40506-0281 (859) 257-4513 fax (859) 257-1815 www.ktc.uky.edu Audit Template for Inland Port Sustainability Prepared for: Multimodal Transportation & Infrastructure Consortium by the Kentucky Transportation Center 11/21/2014 This Page Left Intentionally Blank. Audit Template for Inland Port Sustainability Authors: Principal Investigator: Doug Kreis, PE, MBA, PMP Researcher(s): Sarah McCormack, MSc, CTL Research Engineer Christopher Van Dyke, MA Research Analyst Bryan Gibson, PhD Research Associate Multimodal Transportation and Infrastructure Consortium P.O. Box 5425 Huntington, WV 25703-0425 Phone: (304) 696-2313 • Fax: (304) 696-6088 Disclaimer: The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors, who are responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the information presented herein. This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation’s University Transportation Centers Program, in the interest of information exchange. The U.S. Government assumes
    [Show full text]
  • SEASONS: the 2012 Annual Report for the City of Greer
    TEAM GREER SEASONS: The 2012 Annual Report for the City of Greer The City of Greer, South Carolina Founded: 1876 Population: 25,515 (2010 Census) Government: Council City Administrator: Edward Driggers Mayor: Rick Danner City Council: Jay Arrowood Wayne Griffin* Kimberly Bookert Lee Dumas Wryley Bettis Judy Albert * - Mayor pro tempore Area: Total 21.76 square miles Land 19.99 square miles Water 1.77 square mile Elevation 1,024 ft. Departments: Administration Building and Development Standards Fire Municipal Court Parks and Recreation Police Public Services Fiscal Year 2012 Budget: $17,588,375 Greer City Council District Representatives DISTRICT 1 DISTRICT 2 DISTRICT 3 DISTRICT 4 DISTRICT 5 DISTRICT 6 Jay Wayne Kimberly Lee Wryley Judy Arrowood Griffin Bookert Dumas Bettis Albert CONTENTS 9 6 New Map Caps Redistricting Process After seven months of work and public discussion about the 10 redistricting process, Greer City Council successfully completed the arduous task with the Department of Justice’s approval. 7 Transit Oriented Development 101 A national planner helped Upstate elected officials, planners, and residents consider the future of the Highway 29 corridor. 11 14 8 Students Connect with Upstate Soldiers Soldiers in Kosovo received a special Thanksgiving greeting from a group of young artists and wordsmiths in Greer. 9 Concussion Training for Coaches Injuries are nothing new to NFL players and concussions are at the top of the list. What happens when youth league 20 players emulate their heroes when it comes to taking hits? 10 City Website Among ‘Best of the Best’ Departmental Reports A new design and creative features helped the City of Greer 22 Finance website earn honors from the Horizon Interactive Awards.
    [Show full text]
  • 1St First Society Handbook AFB Album of Favorite Barber Shop Ballads, Old and Modern
    1st First Society Handbook AFB Album of Favorite Barber Shop Ballads, Old and Modern. arr. Ozzie Westley (1944) BPC The Barberpole Cat Program and Song Book. (1987) BB1 Barber Shop Ballads: a Book of Close Harmony. ed. Sigmund Spaeth (1925) BB2 Barber Shop Ballads and How to Sing Them. ed. Sigmund Spaeth. (1940) CBB Barber Shop Ballads. (Cole's Universal Library; CUL no. 2) arr. Ozzie Westley (1943?) BC Barber Shop Classics ed. Sigmund Spaeth. (1946) BH Barber Shop Harmony: a Collection of New and Old Favorites For Male Quartets. ed. Sigmund Spaeth. (1942) BM1 Barber Shop Memories, No. 1, arr. Hugo Frey (1949) BM2 Barber Shop Memories, No. 2, arr. Hugo Frey (1951) BM3 Barber Shop Memories, No. 3, arr, Hugo Frey (1975) BP1 Barber Shop Parade of Quartet Hits, no. 1. (1946) BP2 Barber Shop Parade of Quartet Hits, no. 2. (1952) BP Barbershop Potpourri. (1985) BSQU Barber Shop Quartet Unforgettables, John L. Haag (1972) BSF Barber Shop Song Fest Folio. arr. Geoffrey O'Hara. (1948) BSS Barber Shop Songs and "Swipes." arr. Geoffrey O'Hara. (1946) BSS2 Barber Shop Souvenirs, for Male Quartets. New York: M. Witmark (1952) BOB The Best of Barbershop. (1986) BBB Bourne Barbershop Blockbusters (1970) BB Bourne Best Barbershop (1970) CH Close Harmony: 20 Permanent Song Favorites. arr. Ed Smalle (1936) CHR Close Harmony: 20 Permanent Song Favorites. arr. Ed Smalle. Revised (1941) CH1 Close Harmony: Male Quartets, Ballads and Funnies with Barber Shop Chords. arr. George Shackley (1925) CHB "Close Harmony" Ballads, for Male Quartets. (1952) CHS Close Harmony Songs (Sacred-Secular-Spirituals - arr.
    [Show full text]
  • Inland Port Zoning Modifications Per HB 2001
    Staff Report PLANNING DIVISION DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY and NEIGHBORHOODS To: Salt Lake City Planning Commission From: Daniel Echeverria, [email protected], 801-535-7165 Tracy Tran, [email protected], 801-535-7645 Date: September 26, 2018 Re: PLNPCM2018-00601 Inland Port Text Amendments Zoning Text Amendment PROPERTY ADDRESS: Multiple PARCEL ID: Multiple MASTER PLAN: Northwest Quadrant, Northwest ZONING DISTRICT: Multiple REQUEST: A proposal by Mayor Jackie Biskupski to modify zoning requirements related to inland port land uses as required by Utah Code 11-58-205(5). This statute gives the City until December 31, 2018 to allow an inland port and associated uses as permitted or conditional uses subject to standards that are determined by the municipality and consistent with the policies and objectives of the inland port authority. RECOMMENDATION: Based on the analysis and findings of this report, it is the opinion of staff that the proposed zoning text amendments meet the standards for a zoning ordinance amendment. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission forward a favorable recommendation of petition PLNPCM2018-00601 to the City Council. ATTACHMENTS: A. Inland Port Jurisdictional Lands and Zoning Map B. Proposed Inland Port Overlay Zoning Ordinance Text C. Northwest Quadrant Overlay Zoning for Reference D. Conditional Use Standards for Reference E. M-1 Zoning District Land Use Table for Reference F. Analysis of Standards G. Department Review Comments H. Suggested Lighting Ordinance (from David Scheer) I. Public Process and Comments SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 406 WWW.SLCGOV.COM PO BOX 145480 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84114-5480 TEL 801-535-7757 FAX 801-535-6174 PLNPCM2018-00601 1 Date Published: 9/20/2018 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This zoning text amendment proposal was initiated by Mayor Jackie Biskupski in response to the State Legislature adopting modifications to Utah Code 11-58 “Utah Inland Port Authority Act” (HB2001) during a special session of the legislature held in July 2018.
    [Show full text]
  • Visual Metaphors on Album Covers: an Analysis Into Graphic Design's
    Visual Metaphors on Album Covers: An Analysis into Graphic Design’s Effectiveness at Conveying Music Genres by Vivian Le A THESIS submitted to Oregon State University Honors College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Honors Baccalaureate of Science in Accounting and Business Information Systems (Honors Scholar) Presented May 29, 2020 Commencement June 2020 AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF Vivian Le for the degree of Honors Baccalaureate of Science in Accounting and Business Information Systems presented on May 29, 2020. Title: Visual Metaphors on Album Covers: An Analysis into Graphic Design’s Effectiveness at Conveying Music Genres. Abstract approved:_____________________________________________________ Ryann Reynolds-McIlnay The rise of digital streaming has largely impacted the way the average listener consumes music. Consequentially, while the role of album art has evolved to meet the changes in music technology, it is hard to measure the effect of digital streaming on modern album art. This research seeks to determine whether or not graphic design still plays a role in marketing information about the music, such as its genre, to the consumer. It does so through two studies: 1. A computer visual analysis that measures color dominance of an image, and 2. A mixed-design lab experiment with volunteer participants who attempt to assess the genre of a given album. Findings from the first study show that color scheme models created from album samples cannot be used to predict the genre of an album. Further findings from the second theory show that consumers pay a significant amount of attention to album covers, enough to be able to correctly assess the genre of an album most of the time.
    [Show full text]
  • Job Creation Factors for Inland and Near Dock Intermodal Facilities
    Job Creation Factors for Inland and Near Dock Intermodal Facilities Chad Miller1, Brian Richard2, MD Sarder3,Tulio Sulbaran4, and Martin Lipinski5 1,2,3,4University of Southern Mississippi Center of Logistics, Trade, and Transportation 118 College Ave. #5022 Hattiesburg, MS 39406 (601) 266-6666; fax (601) 266-6071; email [email protected] 5University of Memphis Intermodal Freight Transportation Institute 3815 Central Ave, Memphis, TN 38152 (901) 678-3279; fax (901) 678-0404; email [email protected] ABSTRACT The major driving forces behind the establishment of intermodal facilities include number of jobs that will be created by the facility, freight performance improvement, and other economic benefits to the region. Job creation is the most tangible benefit that stakeholders use to justify the development of such facilities. This project explores different job creation factors for intermodal facilities in terms of facility types, management structures, financing options, and activitiesperformed. Near port and hinterland type facilities are analyzed separately. This project tests several hypotheses statistically to find the correlations among different job creation factors. The result shows that the public landlord model facility creates more jobs than the private operator model. The result also shows that facilities connected with well-established transportation network systems usually produce more jobs. INTRODUCTION In today’s growing global economy, intermodal facilities have become increasingly popular as a method of increasing efficiency and decreasing costs across the entire spectrum of supply chain operations. Regions across the country are seeking to establish intermodal facilities as a means to fostereconomic development and jobs. In order for a facility to be considered intermodal it must be accessible by more than one mode of transportation such as truck, rail, ship/barge, or plane.
    [Show full text]
  • Four Corners Intermodal Transloading Equinox 4Cite
    FOUR CORNERS INTERMODAL TRANSLOADING EQUINOX 4CITE Final November 2016 4CITE Public Involvement Plan October, 2016 TABLE OF CONTENTS Scenario C .................................................................................................................................... 15 Scenario D .................................................................................................................................... 15 Scenario E .................................................................................................................................... 15 Project Overview ................................................................................................................................ 1 C. Scenario Network Performance ................................................................................................... 15 A. Objectives ...................................................................................................................................... 1 Analysis Assumptions ................................................................................................................... 15 B. Study Area ..................................................................................................................................... 1 Level of Service Methodology ....................................................................................................... 19 Stakeholder and Public Outreach ....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Engagement Report Inland Port Proposed Zoning Modifications Qualtrics Survey Results
    Engagement Report Inland Port Proposed Zoning Modifications Qualtrics Survey Results Considering Typical uses of an inland port: · Rail lines that transfer freight to another mode of transportation, such as trucks · Large cranes that move freight between different transportation modes and temporary storage · Warehouses and distribution centers · Manufacturing facilities · Temporary storage of goods and materials awaiting distribution Do you see potential impacts to: Air Quality Yes No 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 # Field Choice Count 1 Yes 96.06% 390 2 No 3.94% 16 406 1 Do you see potential impacts to: Water, Sewer, or other Public Utilities Yes No 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 # Field Choice Count 1 Yes 89.37% 353 2 No 10.63% 42 395 2 Sensitive Natural Environments Yes No 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 # Field Choice Count 1 Yes 89.00% 356 2 No 11.00% 44 400 3 Salt Lake City Neighborhoods Yes No 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 # Field Choice Count 1 Yes 77.63% 302 2 No 22.37% 87 389 4 Do you have any other potential impacts you are concerned about? Not enough transparency the state doing whatever it wants w/o regard to the city or its residents Who benefits from the proposed “economic development”? Growth is to large for our area. We want a good area to enjoy. Increased population in valley, increased GHG emissions how it was created, who is on the boards, the facts that meetings are nt open My community has been footing the bill for all these public utility upgrades they say are required anyway but likely would not be.
    [Show full text]
  • 00:00:00 Music Music “Crown Ones” Off the Album Stepfather by People Under the Stairs
    00:00:00 Music Music “Crown Ones” off the album Stepfather by People Under The Stairs 00:00:06 Oliver Wang Host Hello, I’m Oliver Wang. 00:00:08 Morgan Host And I’m Morgan Rhodes. You’re listening to Heat Rocks. Rhodes Every episode we invite a guest to join us to talk about a heat rock. You know, fire, combustibles, albums that bump eternally. Today we will be deep diving together into the cult classic 1971 album by Karen Dalton, In My Own Time. 00:00:24 Music Music “Take Me” off the album In My Own Time by Karen Dalton. Sad, slow music with crooning, raspy, vibrating vocals. Take me to your darkest room Close every window and lock every door [Music fades out as Morgan speaks.] 00:00:46 Morgan Host Turn to your neighbor and say, “I thank God I don’t look like what I’ve been through.” I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard that over the years; and more than an acknowledgement of the virtue of melanin, it is meant to suggest that whatever else a close read of your backstory might reveal, pain doesn’t always show on your face. ‘Cause sometimes it shows up in your voice, as it did with Karen Dalton on her album for Paramount records, In My Own Time. Karen Dalton sounded like what she’d been through. Raspy world- weariness, longing and sadness, even on songs meant to be happy like Holland-Dozier’s “How Sweet It Is.” Karen Dalton did two things for sure on this album: uncovered pain on an album of covers, and spent those covers strumming her pain with her fingers, in blues, in folk, in gospel, and in rock.
    [Show full text]
  • SLC 2019 Resident Survey Results
    SALT LAKE CITY RESIDENT SURVEY OFFICIAL 2019 SURVEY OF SALT LAKE CITY RESIDENTS 1. Salt Lake City residents consistently report a high quality of life over time. 2. On average, residents rank investing in affordable housing programs as their highest priority city initiative. 3. 95% of respondents rank improving air quality as their highest environmental priority. 4. A majority of respondents believe Salt Lake City has job opportunities for them, but they also believe that the City can do more to attract businesses. 5. A plurality of residents would prefer to receive information regarding SLC via email. Fewer than a quarter report following the City’s social media accounts. 6. There is currently a general lack of knowledge regarding the Inland Port Project. Residents who follow the city’s social media accounts and use the city website report greater understanding of what the project is. 7. Favorability of the port is heavily divided with an average score of 42 on a scale of 0-100. Currently, greater understanding of the port is associated with less favorable opinions of it. 7FINDINGS TO REMEMBER SURVEY OBJECTIVES RESEARCH GOALS § Track approval of the City and the services it offers over time § Evaluate neighborhood perceptions regarding safety and city maintenance § Explore residents’ priorities regarding current City initiatives, including attitudes about public transit and the conditions of streets and roads § Examine from which communication channels residents most commonly receive information about the City and which modes they would prefer § Quantify understanding of and attitudes toward the Utah Inland Port SURVEY METHODOLOGY SAMPLING, MODE, & MARGIN OF ERROR § 1,297 residents within the boundaries of Salt Lake City participated in this survey.
    [Show full text]
  • Inland Port Logistics Center Road Improvements
    IInnllaanndd PPoorrtt LLooggiissttiiccss CCeenntteerr RRooaadd IImmpprroovveemmeennttss D.O.T. National Infrastructure Investments FY2016 TIGER VIII Discretionary Grant Program Application TIGER VIII DISCRETIONARY GRANT PROGRAM APPLICATION PROJECT TITLE: INLAND PORT LOGISTICS CENTER ROAD IMPROVEMENTS TYPE OF PROJECT: Road – New Capacity TYPE OF APPLICATION: Capital APPLICANT: CANAVERAL PORT AUTHORITY Local Government LOCATION OF PROJECT: Cocoa, Florida 32926 Brevard County Congressional District: FL‐15th District PROJECT AREA: Urban Area AMOUNT OF TIGER FUNDS REQUESTED: $9,672,638 APPLICATION AND PROJECT CONTACT INFORMATION: Captain John W. Murray Chief Executive Officer Phone: (321) 783‐7831 Extension 233 Fax: (321) 783‐4651 Email: [email protected] Canaveral Port Authority 445 Challenger Road, Suite 301 Cape Canaveral, FL 32920 Table of Contents I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................................ 3 II. PROJECT LOCATION ............................................................................................................. 4 III. PROJECT PARTIES ................................................................................................................. 7 IV. GRANT FUNDS AND SOURCES/USES OF PROJECT FUNDS ................................................ 8 V. SELECTION CRITERIA ............................................................................................................ 8 A. Primary Criteria ‐ LONG‐TERM OUTCOMES ....................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Central New York Inland Port Market Feasibility Study
    FINAL REPORT CENTRAL NEW YORK INLAND PORT MARKET FEASIBILITY STUDY potenti PREPARED FOR: NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SUBMITTED BY: RSG CENTRAL NEW YORK INLAND PORT MARKET FEASIBILITY STUDY PREPARED FOR: NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION CONTENTS 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................. 1 Purpose and Background ................................................................................................................ 1 Principal Findings ............................................................................................................................. 1 2.0 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND .......................................................................................... 6 2.1 | Physical Requirements .................................................................................................................. 6 2.2 | Central New York Inland Port Proposals: History ......................................................................... 7 3.0 INFORMATION SOURCES .............................................................................................................. 8 4.0 TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE AND OPERATIONS .................................................. 10 4.1 | Rail Service ................................................................................................................................. 10 4.2 | Highway ......................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]