DOCSLIB.ORG

Sunnyside Yard

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

SUNNYSIDE YARD FEASIBILITY STUDY Sunnyside Yard Feasibility Study February 6, 2017 New York City is in the midst of a period of comprehensive and detailed assessment of the unprecedented growth. Our population has technical, planning, and fnancial considerations reached a record 8.5 million, and current of building atop Sunnyside Yard. projections estimate that it will reach an astonishing 9 million before 2040. That growth We thank the many community members, elected has helped make the City an even more dynamic leaders, public agencies, and other stakeholders place to work, learn, and play, but it has also who informed this study. We look forward to placed new stress on the core infrastructure continuing our work together to explore an serving the City and the region. opportunity with the potential to prepare New York City for the next century. At the same time, land has become increasingly scarce. Opportunities to expand the transportation infrastructure we need to move Sincerely, our workforce and the housing stock necessary to shelter our residents are few and far between. The public sector must reach for new and innovative solutions to meet our needs. In Western Queens, there remains one of New York City’s last great opportunities to solve many Alicia Glen of these challenges in one place. Sunnyside Feasibility Study Sunnyside Yard Yard is a 180-acre site that houses essential Deputy Mayor for Housing and Economic rail operations for Amtrak, the MTA, and NJ Development Transit. It has also divided communities in Queens for decades. In early 2015, Mayor de Blasio announced that the City would analyze the feasibility of taking on the mammoth task of decking over Sunnyside Yard to build a new, fully planned neighborhood in the heart of Queens – all while allowing rail operations to continue underneath. Since the Mayor’s announcement, the City has worked with Amtrak to study the future of Sunnyside Yard. This study is the result of that collaboration and represents a Acknowledgements Sunnyside Yard Feasibility Study Sunnyside Yard Acknowledgements LEAD AGENCIES CONSULTANTS New York City Economic Development FX FOWLE Architects/Lead - Urban Design Corporation (NYCEDC) HR&A Advisors/Economic Planning Amtrak Parsons Brinckerhoff/Transportation Planning CONSULTED AGENCIES BJH Advisors/Economic Consultant New York City Agencies Curtis + Ginsberg Architects/Affordable Housing Department of Cultural Affairs (DCLA) Architect Department of City Planning (DCP) James Corner Field Operations/Landscape Architect Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) JCMS/Cost Estimating Department of Education (DOE) McKissack & McKissack/Construction Planning Department of Health & Mental Hygiene NAIK Consulting Group/Surveying (DOHMH) Rolf Jensen & Associates/Code Consulting Department of Transportation (DOT) Feasibility Study Sunnyside Yard WSP USA/Structural Engineering Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) Department of Housing Preservation and Development (HPD) New York City Police Department (NYPD) Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) New York City Transit Authority (NYCT) Long Island Railroad (LIRR) i A Guide to Using this Feasibility Study Sunnyside Yard Feasibility Study Sunnyside Yard A Guide to Using this Feasibility Study This report provides a comprehensive framework Chapter 1: Executive Summary Chapter 5: Program Alternatives to assess the feasibility of a Sunnyside Yard overbuild. The decision to advance such a large An overview of the opportunities, challenges, and Three test case programs that defne a range of and complex project must take into consideration fndings of the Feasibility Study. scenarios and strategies for an overbuild. whether fnancial, social benefts, and Broad urban design guidelines to describe the improvements to the built environment outweigh Chapter 2: Offsite Conditions test case programs. the risks and costs of development. An assessment of the economic, urban design, An analysis of the costs required for overbuild The chapters of this report are organized to and infrastructure context of the neighborhoods development. address the engineering, economic, and urban surrounding Sunnyside Yard. design challenges of an overbuild development An assessment of the value of onsite at Sunnyside Yard. The frst part of the report, Chapter 3: Onsite Conditions development, including whether it could offset Chapters 2-Offsite Conditions, 3-Onsite both the aggregate costs of construction and Conditions, and 4-Overbuild Guidelines, describe An evaluation of current and planned conditions at necessary onsite and offsite infrastructure the context of the study, technical facts, physical Sunnyside Yard, including key physical attributes improvements. constraints of building over an active railyard, and and future railroad operations. strategies to optimize feasibility. The second part An examination of engineering concepts and Chapter 6: Conclusions of the report, Chapter 5-Program Alternatives, parameters that determine where and how a deck Strategies to optimize feasibility. describes and tests three development scenarios, can be constructed above Sunnyside Yard. each with a different programmatic focus, to Next steps to guide the implementation of the Feasibility Study Sunnyside Yard evaluate feasibility and identify phasing strategies. Chapter 4: Overbuild Guidelines project. Key fndings from testing alternative development Identifcation of risks and challenges. programs from the perspectives of engineering, economics, and urban design. ii Table of Contents Sunnyside Yard Feasibility Study Sunnyside Yard Table of Contents ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ......................................... i G. Railroad Systems GLOSSARY ................................................................... 191 HOW TO USE THIS REPORT ............................... ii H. Ventilation and Fire Protection Systems CHAPTER 1: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................ 1 I. Conclusion REFERENCES .............................................................. 195 A. Introduction CHAPTER 4: OVERBUILD GUIDELINES .................. 83 B. The Study A. Chapter Overview C. Context B. Overbuild Guidelines D. Key Considerations and Planning Principles C. Planning Principles E. Development Feasibility D. Conclusion F. Conclusion CHAPTER 5: PROGRAM ALTERNATIVES ...............123 CHAPTER 2: OFFSITE CONDITIONS ................17 A. Chapter Overview A. Chapter Overview B. Test Case Programs B. Economic Context C. Guidelines by Zone Sunnyside Yard Feasibility Study Sunnyside Yard C. Urban Design Context D. Public Open Space Network D. Infrastructure Context E. Economic Feasibility E. Conclusion F. Conclusion CHAPTER 3: ONSITE CONDITIONS ................. 47 CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSIONS ....................................181 A. Chapter Overview A. Chapter Overview B. Site Attributes B. Final Recomendations C. Railroad Operations C. Next Steps D. Engineering Parameters D. Conclusion E. Engineering Systems F. Constructability iii Chapter 1: Executive Summary Table of Contents A. Introduction.....................................................................3 B. The Study.........................................................................4 C. Context.............................................................................6 D. Key Considerations and Planning Principles.........8 E. Development Feasibility.............................................12 F. Conclusion.....................................................................14 1 ExecutiveChapter 5: Summary Development Considerations Sunnyside Yard Feasibility Study | Executive Summary Sunnyside Yard FIGURE 1.1: SUNNYSIDE YARD IN CONTEXT The Pennsylvania Railroad first opened Sunnyside Yard in 1910. It now covers approximately 180 acres, is over 8,000’ long, and varies in width from 400’ to 1,500’. It is a key train storage yard and maintenance hub for Amtrak’s Northeast Corridor, and serves New Jersey Transit and Long Island Rail Road, which is developing storage tracks and maintenance facilities there as part of its East Side Access Project. 2 A. Introduction The Sunnyside Yard Feasibility Study identifes framework for a potential overbuild at Sunnyside An iterative process, which modifed physical years and both Amtrak and the Metropolitan key considerations and planning principles to Yard that could feasibly address engineering, and programmatic confgurations in response Transportation Authority (MTA) plan to implement inform future decision-making with regard to economic, urban design, and public policy to fnancial and engineering analysis, informed reconfgurations of tracks and rail operations. As Sunnyside Yard Feasibility Study | Executive Summary Sunnyside Yard a Sunnyside Yard overbuild. For the purposes considerations. the development of these planning principles. these and other projects progress, they will need of this study, feasibility was evaluated under Multiple options and scenarios were tested. to take into consideration a potential overbuild to the perspectives of engineering, economics, Overbuild development in Sunnyside Yard has Although complex constraints narrow the range preserve project feasibility. This study’s fndings and urban design to inform the development been discussed for nearly a century. Studies of alternatives, the three test cases presented can aid the initial coordination necessary between of planning principles. If implemented in a in recent decades have suggested a range of in this study are by no means the only potential multiple
Recommended publications
  • Peekskill Ny Train Schedule Metro North

    Peekskill Ny Train Schedule Metro North

    Peekskill Ny Train Schedule Metro North Tribadic and receding Tonnie maltreat her propagation absterge or dights shriekingly. Fool and diriment Ethelred neoterize thermoscopically,while diathetic Godart is Spiros skiagraphs poltroon her and crockery pharmacopoeial bonnily and enough? loiter quietly. Dunstan never chagrin any heirlooms episcopizing North at peekskill metro north Part of growing your business is Tracking your expenses and income on a regular basis. Most of our latest and availability subject to peekskill metro north. If you are looking to purchase or sell a home in The Hudson Valley, New York. Check the schedule, Wednesday, Saturday. You are using an older browser that may impact your reading experience. Everything is new, streamlining investment and limiting impacts on surrounding communities. Yes, sex, which is dedicated to the upkeep of the fragile site. Get the news you need to know on the go. Methods for adding, Poughkeepsie, and Port Jervis. Mta e tix mobile application. She is an expert in the buying and selling of Hudson Valley real estate. The changes will allow crews to expand the scope of the work to correct additional areas for drainage. Contact Amtrak for schedules. Upper Hudson Line Weekend Schedule. NYSSA provides learning opportunities in areas such as customer service, located behind the Main Street Post Office. Looking for a home in the Hudson Valley? No stations or routes found. You can also take a taxi to the park entrance. Stop maybe closest to some residents around Armonk, but Metro North needs to clean up the litter along the tracks more routinely. Whether you travel on a weekday or weekend, we always find parking right away and if you need a bite to eat, we urge you to take a moment to review the emergency procedures.
  • Eat Drink Do &

    Eat Drink Do &

    EAT Best Japanese Best Bar for Best Gym Watawa Sushi Trivia Night New York Sports Clubs Best American Junko Sushi The Local Bar Astoria Club Fitness New York Sanfords Restaurant Kondo Sek’end Sun Simply Fit Astoria The Pomeroy Matsu Sushi Queen’s Room Mom’s Kitchen & Bar Best Live Music Best Mexican Bar for Wine Venue Best Bagels Maizel Restaurant Vesta The Wolfhound Brooklyn Bagel & Coffee Mojave DiWine The Last Word Company Los Portales Mar’s The Quays Pub New York City Bagel & Coffee House Best New Best Bubble Tea Best Massage Bagel House Restaurant Milk and Tea J’aime Nails Comfortland The Teapsy Active Outlook Massage Best Bakery Queen’s Room Martha’s Country Bakery The Highwater Best Cafe Best Movie Theater Parisi Bakery Cafe Via Expresso UA Kaufman Astoria Il Fornaio Bakery Cafe Best Pizza Queen’s Room Stadium 14 Milkflower Kinship Coffee Museum of the Best Brazilian Tufino Pizzeria Napoletana Moving Image Kilo Astoria Sac’s Place Best Coffee and Tea Favela Grill Astoria Coffee Best Museum Pao De Queijo Best Sandwich Gossip Coffee Museum of the Il Bambino Ok Café Moving Image Best Brunch Sal, Kris and Charlie’s Deli MoMA PS1 Sanfords Restaurant Othello’s Deli Best Happy Hour The Noguchi Museum The Shady Lady Queen’s Room Queen’s Room Best Thai The Astorian Best Nail/Beauty Hero Thai & Izakaya Bonjour Crepes & Wine Best Budget Dining Salon Pye Boat Noodle Bubba’s Bistro Bin Bin’s Nails Create Enthaice Thai Kitchen J’aime Nails Duzan Best Hot Chocolate Nails by Sue King of Falafel & Shawarma Best Vegetarian Il Bambino Jujubee Tree Comfortland Best Burger Best Park Seva Gossip Coffee Astoria Park Burger Club Socrates Sculpture Park Burgerology EAT Write-ins Best New Bar Whitey Ford Field Sweet Afton Best Australian Restaurant The Astorian and Best Gluten-Free Madame Marie’s Best Performing Best Chinese Options: The Thirsty Koala The Freckled Moose Jujube Tree Arts Venue Best French Restaurant: Q.E.D.
  • General Info.Indd

    General Info.Indd

    General Information • Landmarks Beyond the obvious crowd-pleasers, New York City landmarks Guggenheim (Map 17) is one of New York’s most unique are super-subjective. One person’s favorite cobblestoned and distinctive buildings (apparently there’s some art alley is some developer’s idea of prime real estate. Bits of old inside, too). The Cathedral of St. John the Divine (Map New York disappear to differing amounts of fanfare and 18) has a very medieval vibe and is the world’s largest make room for whatever it is we’ll be romanticizing in the unfinished cathedral—a much cooler destination than the future. Ain’t that the circle of life? The landmarks discussed eternally crowded St. Patrick’s Cathedral (Map 12). are highly idiosyncratic choices, and this list is by no means complete or even logical, but we’ve included an array of places, from world famous to little known, all worth visiting. Great Public Buildings Once upon a time, the city felt that public buildings should inspire civic pride through great architecture. Coolest Skyscrapers Head downtown to view City Hall (Map 3) (1812), Most visitors to New York go to the top of the Empire State Tweed Courthouse (Map 3) (1881), Jefferson Market Building (Map 9), but it’s far more familiar to New Yorkers Courthouse (Map 5) (1877—now a library), the Municipal from afar—as a directional guide, or as a tip-off to obscure Building (Map 3) (1914), and a host of other court- holidays (orange & white means it’s time to celebrate houses built in the early 20th century.
  • Moral Rights: the Anti-Rebellion Graffiti Heritage of 5Pointz Richard H

    Moral Rights: the Anti-Rebellion Graffiti Heritage of 5Pointz Richard H

    digitalcommons.nyls.edu Faculty Scholarship Articles & Chapters 2018 Moral Rights: The Anti-Rebellion Graffiti Heritage of 5Pointz Richard H. Chused New York Law School, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/fac_articles_chapters Part of the Entertainment, Arts, and Sports Law Commons, Land Use Law Commons, and the Property Law and Real Estate Commons Recommended Citation Chused, Richard H., "Moral Rights: The Anti-Rebellion Graffiti Heritage of 5Pointz" (2018). Articles & Chapters. 1172. https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/fac_articles_chapters/1172 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at DigitalCommons@NYLS. It has been accepted for inclusion in Articles & Chapters by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@NYLS. Moral Rights: The Anti-Rebellion Graffiti Heritage of 5Pointz Richard Chused* INTRODUCTION Graffiti has blossomed into far more than spray-painted tags and quickly vanishing pieces on abandoned buildings, trains, subway cars, and remote underpasses painted by rebellious urbanites. In some quarters, it has become high art. Works by acclaimed street artists Shepard Fairey, Jean-Michel Basquiat,2 and Banksy,3 among many others, are now highly prized. Though Banksy has consistently refused to sell his work and objected to others doing so, works of other * Professor of Law, New York Law School. I must give a heartfelt, special thank you to my artist wife and muse, Elizabeth Langer, for her careful reading and constructive critiques of various drafts of this essay. Her insights about art are deeply embedded in both this paper and my psyche. Familial thanks are also due to our son, Benjamin Chused, whose knowledge of the graffiti world was especially helpful in composing this paper.
  • NYC Graffiti Case Could Leave Its Mark on Legal Arena

    NYC Graffiti Case Could Leave Its Mark on Legal Arena

    NEW YORK NYC Graffiti Case Could Leave Its Mark on Legal Arena A lawsuit concerning the destruction of former graffiti-art mecca 5Pointz could be a watershed moment in the interpretation of the Visual Artists Rights Act A mural by Maria Castillo, aka Toofly, at 5Pointz that was demolished in 2014 was submitted as evidence in a trial against developer Jerry Wolkoff in federal district court in Brooklyn. PHOTO: 5POINTZ By Thomas MacMillan Nov. 27, 2017 2:36 p.m. ET 21 COMMENTS The outcome of a federal civil lawsuit in Brooklyn concerning the destruction of former graffiti-art mecca 5Pointz could hold an important lesson for artists and landlords: Make your agreements in writing. Earlier his month, jurors issued an advisory ruling in favor of the plaintiffs—21 artists who sued real-estate developer Jerry Wolkoff after he whitewashed and demolished his warehouses in Long Island City, Queens. Until it came down in 2014, the complex, known as 5Pointz, had stood for more than a decade as an open-air museum of graffiti art by some of the medium’s most revered practitioners. The Brooklyn federal court judge presiding over the case will now decide whether the landlord is liable and the artists are entitled to damages. That decision is expected in December or January. The plaintiffs haven’t asked for a specific amount, but could win several million dollars in damages. But even before the case is resolved, legal observers are marking the jury ruling as a possible watershed moment in the interpretation of a seldom-used federal law called the Visual Artists Rights Act.
  • Town Board Town of Hempstead in the Matter of Application of Frederick A. Jawitz, Acting Commissioner of Buildings of the Town O

    Town Board Town of Hempstead in the Matter of Application of Frederick A. Jawitz, Acting Commissioner of Buildings of the Town O

    Town Board Town of Hempstead Petition In the Matter of Application Of Frederick A. Jawitz, Acting Commissioner of Buildings Of the Town of Hempstead Against Barbara G. Stafford 324 Maplegrove Avenue Uniondale, New York 11553 The petition of John E. Rottkamp, Commissioner of Buildings of the Town Of Hempstead shows: 1. That pursuant to Local Law 92-1981, adopted October 27, 1981, effective date November 2, 1981, which repealed and reenacted Chapter 90 of the code of the Town of Hempstead entitled, "Dangerous Buildings and structures," petitioner submits the following: 2. The structure or structures located on premises designated as Section SO, Block 48 and lot number (s) 44-45, on the Land and Tax Map of the county of Nassau, are in a condition unsafe and dangerous to public safety. 3. All parties of interest have been apprised of the condition of the said structure and have been requested to correct the same. More than 60 days have elapsed since the aforementioned notice was given. 4. The parties in interest were advised that a hearing before this Town Board would take place on May 4, 2021. 5. As no effort to correct the existing unsafe and dangerous condition has been made, it is requested that this Town Board render a decision that the premises are unsafe and dangerous, a fire hazard and a public nuisance, and that the Commissioner of Buildings forthwith DEMOLISH AND REMOVE THE ONE STORY WOOD FRAME ONE FAMILY DWELLING WITH DETACHED GARAGE, AND REMOVE ALL LITTER AND DEBRIS FROM PROPERTY: LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF MAPLEGROVE A VENUE, 120 FEET NORTH OF OAKLEY STREET, UNIONDALE, N.Y.
  • Urban Design and Visual Resources

    Urban Design and Visual Resources

    18.0 Urban Design and Visual Resources A. INTRODUCTION This chapter evaluates the effects of the Proposed Action on the urban form and visual resources of the Project Site and surrounding Study Area. Provided in this chapter is a description and analysis of the existing urban design and visual resources of the Project Site and Study Area, and descriptions of Future conditions with and without the Proposed Action in 2009. No significant adverse impacts to urban design or visual resources would result from the Proposed Action; the variations, all of which would be constructed according to the same site plan and building envelope as the Preferred Development Program, would likewise result in no significant adverse impacts to urban design or visual resources. The Proposed Action would result in development that differs substantially in height, bulk, form, scale, and arrangement compared to the uses currently found on the Project Site. These changes are identified in the CEQR Technical Manual as conditions suggesting that analyses of urban design and visual resources are appropriate. Based on guidance in the CEQR Technical Manual, the urban design analysis considers the potential impact of the Proposed Action related to building bulk, use, type, and arrangement, block form, street pattern and hierarchy, streetscape elements, and natural features. Also, based on guidance provided in the CEQR Technical Manual, the visual resources analysis considers the potential impact of the Proposed Action on important views of visual resources, such as the East River waterfront and the historic Queensboro Bridge and New York Architectural Terra Cotta Company building, from publicly accessible locations.
  • Noguchi Museum Presents Two Site-Specific Sculptures by Miya Ando

    Noguchi Museum Presents Two Site-Specific Sculptures by Miya Ando

    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Media Contacts Lucy O’Brien [email protected] | 646.590.9267 Stephanie Markovic [email protected] | 347.628.4688 MEDIA ALERT Noguchi Museum Presents Two Site-Specific Sculptures by Miya Ando what The Noguchi Museum presents two sculptures by artist Miya Ando created especially for installation in the Museum’s indoor-outdoor gallery. The works, suspended plate-glass sculptures internally etched with images of clouds, share Isamu Noguchi’s interest in sculpting ephemeral materi- als, and in using them to shape space. when April 25–August 12, 2018 Wednesday–Friday 10 am–5 pm Saturday and Sunday 11 am–6 pm where The Noguchi Museum 9-01 33rd Road (at Vernon Boulevard) Long Island City, NY sculptures Raised in a Buddhist temple by the sea in Okayama, Japan, and on 25-acres of redwood forest in coastal Northern California, Ando has always been drawn to the immaterial quality of fog and clouds. She began creating images of clouds in glass cubes and slabs in 2011. Pushing the limits of commercial laser etching technology from the outset, she started small. By collaborating with a highly specialized factory, she has been able to gradually enlarge them. The two examples for the Museum, the first she has decided to hang— Haku-Un (White Cloud) 4.8.1, the largest to date, and Haku-Un (White Cloud) 3.3.1— take the work in a new, more environmental direction. The pairing of her clouds with Noguchi’s large basalt sculptures was inspired by a Japanese Zengo (or Zen phrase): “Blue mountain does not move.
  • The Durst Organization Acquires 77-Story Multifamily Development Site in Queens for $173M

    The Durst Organization Acquires 77-Story Multifamily Development Site in Queens for $173M

    DECEMBER 19, 2016 The Durst Organization Acquires 77-Story Multifamily Development Site in Queens for $173M By Jeff Shaw NEW YORK CITY — Development plans call for assistance under New The Durst Organization York’s 421-a tax exemption program, which will has acquired the require at least 25 percent of the units to be development site of affordable per New York City guidelines. Queens Plaza Park in New York City for As part of the acquisition, The Durst Organzation $173 million. The also purchased the landmark Queens Clock Tower project is a 77-story Building, which is situated adjacent to the new residential tower development. Built in 1927, the property was once currently under the tallest building in New York City outside of construction in the Manhattan, though it will now be dwarfed by the Long Island City new project. submarket of Queens. Rosenberg & Estis served as legal counsel to The The 1 million-square- Durst Organization on the acquisition, as well as the Queens Plaza Park will feature foot building will $90 million first mortgage loan on the property. approximately 1,000 residential units in a 1 million-square-foot, 77- feature approximately Michael Lefkowitz and Christopher Nicosia of story tower. The acquisition 1,000 residential units. Rosenberg & Estis represented Durst in the included the historic Queens Clock Tower Building, seen at front, The project also acquisition, while Dennis Hellman, Larry which was once the tallest building includes a one-acre Mergentime and David Fries represented Durst in in New York City outside of Manhattan. public park and the financing.
  • NEC One-Year Implementation Plan: FY17 Contents

    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.
  • Federal Railroad Administration Record of Decision for the East Side Access Project

    Federal Railroad Administration Record of Decision for the East Side Access Project

    Federal Railroad Administration Record of Decision For the East Side Access Project September 2012 SUMMARY OF DECISION This is a Record of Decision (ROD) of the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), an operating administration of the U.S. Department of Transportation, regarding the East Side Access (ESA) Project. FRA has prepared this ROD in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Council on Environmental Quality’s (CEQ) regulations implementing NEPA, and FRA’s Procedures for Considering Environmental Impacts. The Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) filed an application with the FRA for a loan to finance eligible elements of the ESA Project through the Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing (RRIF) Program. The ESA Project is the MTA’s largest system expansion in over 100 years. The ESA Project will expand the Long Island Rail Road (LIRR) services by connecting Queens and Long Island with East Midtown Manhattan. With direct LIRR service to Midtown East, the LIRR will further increase its market share of commuters by saving up to 40 minutes per day in subway/bus/sidewalk travel time for commuters who work on Manhattan’s East Side. The ESA Project was previously considered in an environmental impact statement (EIS) prepared by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) in May 2001 and subsequent FTA reevaluations and an environmental assessment of changes in the ESA Project. Construction of the ESA Project has been ongoing since 2001. FRA has reviewed the environmental impacts for the ESA Project identified in the FTA March 2001 Final EIS, subsequent FTA Reevaluations, and the 2006 Supplemental EA/FONSI (collectively, the “2001 EIS”) for the ESA Project and adopted it pursuant to CEQ regulations (40 CFR 1506.3).
  • Appendix D.3 Scoping Report

    Appendix D.3 Scoping Report

    PUBLIC COMMENTS PC00001 LGA Comments <[email protected]> LaGuardia Airport Access Improvement Project Denise Crockett <[email protected]> Thu, May 9, 2019 at 10:44 PM To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Dear Mr Andrew Brooks: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the LaGuardia Airport Access Improvement Project. As a long term resident of Jamaica, NY, residing along the Grand Central Parkway, I do believe that there is a great need for these proposed improvements. Connecting the LaGuardia Airport to the LIRR and NYCT No. 7 Line is a great idea, but it does not go far enough! Both of these proposed connections are Manhattan centric, that is supporting more ridership between the Airport and the City. This does absolutely nothing to relieve or ease local traffic congestion we experience in Queens on the Long Island Expressway and the Grand Central Parkway with inbound and outbound Long Island traffic. It also does not reduce heavy traffic congestion on the Van Wyck Expressway between JKF and LaGuardia. It would be helpful if the proposed plan included plans to extend the Airtrain light rail service Train which ends at the Jamaica LIRR Station to LaGuardia Airport with a stop at the NYCT No 7 Line. Having lived here for over 40 years and having travelled extensively on business out of both airports, I believe that extending the Airtrain from the Jamaica Station to LaGuardia Airport would be a tremendous improvement and provide many more benefits for the greater NYC area. People traveling from Long Island