Congressional Record—House H1034
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
The Trainmaster the Oregon Rail Heritage Center Opens
The Trainmaster The Official Publication of the Pacific Northwest Chapter October 2012 National Railway Historical Society Portland, Oregon The Oregon Rail Heritage Center Opens Photo by Arlen Sheldrake October 2012 Pacific Northwest Chapter National Railway Historical Society The Trainmaster Page 1 Photos by Trent Stetz Over 160 enthusiastic ORHF volunteers welcomed and hosted over 6,300 excited guests (with 3,622 on Saturday 22nd and 2,737 on Sunday 23rd) at the opening weekend of the Oregon Rail Heritage Center near the new Portland Streetcar Central Loop extension stop at OMSI. Oregon rail history was brought alive by the three historic steam locomotives, the 1941 Southern Pacific 4449, the 1938 Spokane, Portland and Seattle 700, and the 1905 Oregon Rail and Navigation 197 which were all on display in their new engine house accompanied on site by two diesel locomotives, a PA-1 and RSD-5, and six heritage passenger cars outside. The 4449 was steamed up with its head poked out the engine house door and gave an occasional toot to the delight of the attendees. The weekend visitors got to view the cabs of both 4449 and 700. A very extensive Lego exhibit included a model of the Portland Customs house as well as Portland Union Station. The Operation Lifesaver trailer was on hand to educate the guests. The kids enjoyed a Chuggington Station play area. Tours were given of three heritage passenger cars including the 1941 SP "James J. Gilmore" parlor/lounge round end observation, the 1954 SP "Gordon Zimmerman" Baggage Car, and the 1950 SP&S Mount Hood Sleeper-Lounge Car. -
The Transfer Newsletter Spring 2013.Cdr
Oregon Electric Railway Historical Society Volume 18 503 Issue 2 Spring 2013 Reminder to members: Please be sure your dues In this issue: are up to date. 2013 dues were due Jan 1, 2013. Willamette Shore Trolley - Back on Track.................................1 If it has been longer than one year since you renewed, Interpretive Center Update - Greg Bonn...............................2 go to our website: oerhs.org and download an Vintage Trolley History - Richard Thompson.............................3 application by clicking: Become a Member Pacific NW Transit Update - Roy Bonn...............................8 Spotlight on Members: Charlie Philpot ................................11 Setting New Poles - Greg Bonn..............................................12 Willamette Shore Trolley ....back on track! See this issue in color on line at oerhs.org/transfer miles from Lake Oswego to Riverwood Crossing with an ultimate plan to extend to Portland. Also see the article on page 3 on the history of the cars of Vintage Trolley. Dave Rowe installing wires from Generator to Trolley. Hal Rosene at the controls of 514 on a training run emerging Gage Giest painting from the Elk Rock Tunnel on the Willamette Shore line. the front of Trolley. Wayne Jones photo The Flume car in background will be After a several-year hiatus, the Willamette Shore our emergency tow Trolley is just about ready to roll. Last minute electrical and vehicle if the Trolley mechanical details and regulatory compliance testing are breaks down on the nearing completion. With many stakeholders involved and mainline. many technical issues that had to be overcome, it has been a challenge to get the system to the 100% state. Dave Rowe and his team have been working long hours to overcome the obstacles of getting Gomaco built Vintage Trolley #514, its Doug Allen removing old stickers from side tag-along generator, track work, electrical systems, crew of Trolley training, safety compliance issues, propulsion, braking, and so many other details to a satisfactory state to begin revenue service. -
Portuguese Trams Imported by Gales Creek Enterprises
Volume 25 Issue 1 Spring 2020 Reminder to members: Please be sure your dues are In This Issue up to date. 2020 dues were due Jan 1, 2020. If it has Portuguese Trams – Richard Thompson ……………..…..…………….…1 been longer than one year since you renewed, go to Oregon Electric Railway Historical Society News…………………………2 Willamette Shore Trolley Update – Dave Rowe …………………..……..12 our website: oregontrolley.com and download an Donation Request ……………..…………………………………..…..……14 application by clicking: Become a Member. Portuguese Trams It has been 25 years since the OERHS departed Glenwood, yet the following story should be of interest to Imported by Gales Creek newer members because a Portuguese streetcar joined the collection at Powerland in 2006. Porto No. 210 (renumbered Enterprises (1974-1993) 201 before arrival) is not a part of the Trolley Park story, of course, but it is similar to the streetcars that were kept there. Richard Thompson Car 210 was one of a series built during 1938-45 to replace the Brill and St. Louis Car Company classics. A sense of familiarity might also come from the fact that vintage Beginning in 1974, Gales Creek Enterprises (GCE), Portuguese trams share a kinship with our beloved Council headed by Oregon Electric Railway Historical Society Crest cars 503 and 506. (OERHS) co-founder Paul Class, provided at least 70 vintage streetcars to launch trolley operations in a half-dozen American cities. In the process Paul almost single-handedly started what we now call the “heritage streetcar” movement. His company imported many streetcars from Australia and Brazil, but the largest part of that pioneering effort involved trams from Portugal. -
Provo/Orem BRT Before and After Study: Initial Conditions Report Matthew M
Provo/Orem BRT Before and After Study: Initial Conditions Report Matthew M. Miller, Mercedes Beaudoin, and Reid Ewing University of Utah, Metropolitan Research Center 2 of 142 Report No. UT‐17.XX PROVO-OREM TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (TRIP) Prepared for: Utah Department of Transportation Research Division Submitted by: University of Utah, Metropolitan Research Center Authored by: Matthew M. Miller, Mercedes Beaudoin, and Reid Ewing Final Report June 2017 ______________________________________________________________________________ Provo/Orem BRT Before and After Study: Initial Conditions Report 3 of 142 DISCLAIMER The authors alone are responsible for the preparation and accuracy of the information, data, analysis, discussions, recommendations, and conclusions presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, endorsements, or policies of the Utah Department of Transportation or the U.S. Department of Transportation. The Utah Department of Transportation makes no representation or warranty of any kind, and assumes no liability therefore. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors acknowledge the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) for funding this research through the Utah Transportation Research Advisory Council (UTRAC). We also acknowledge the following individuals from UDOT for helping manage this research: Jeff Harris Eric Rasband Brent Schvanaveldt Jordan Backman Gracious thanks to our paid peer reviewers in the Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering, Brigham Young University: Dr. Grant G. Schultz, Ph.D., P.E., PTOE. Dr. Mitsuru Saito, Ph.D, P.E., F. ASCE, F. ITE While not authors, the efforts of the following people helped make this report possible. Data Collection Proof Reading/Edits Ethan Clark Ray Debbie Weaver Thomas Cushing Clint Simkins Jack Egan Debolina Banerjee Katherine A. -
Department of Transportation
Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration Denver Airports District Office DRAFT SECTION 303(c)/4(f) DE MINIMIS FINDING For the Provo Municipal Airport City of Provo, Utah County, Utah I. Introduction - Section 4(f) Section 4(f) was initially codified in Title 49 United States Code (USC) § 1653(f) (Section 4(f) of the USDOT Act of 1966). In 1983, § 1653(f) was reworded and recodified as Title 49 USC § 303 but is still commonly referred to as Section 4(f). Congress amended Section 4(f) in 2005 when the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) was enacted. Section 4(f) declares that “it is the policy of the US Government that special effort should be made to preserve the natural beauty of the countryside and public park and recreation lands, wildlife and waterfowl refuges, and historic sites.” In addition: Section 4(f) prohibits the use of land of significant publicly owned public parks, recreation areas, wildlife and waterfowl refuges, and land of a historic site for transportation projects unless the Administration determines that there is no feasible and prudent avoidance alternative and that all possible planning to minimize harm has occurred. De minimis impacts related to historic sites are defined as the determination of either “no adverse effect” or “no historic properties affected” in compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. For publicly owned parks, recreation areas, and wildlife/waterfowl refuges, de minimis impacts are defined as those that do not “adversely affect the activities, features, and attributes” of the Section 4(f) resource. -
2012-01 (January)
The Trainmaster The Official Publication of the Pacific Northwest Chapter January 2012 National Railway Historical Society Portland, Oregon Pre-Inaugural Trip on the Pioneer By Mike Bergman In the summer of 1977 I was living in Vancouver, B.C. and working as a planner for a small consulting firm that was developing a major transit expansion program for the Greater Vancouver Regional District. In early June we helped launch the “Seabus,” a transit ferry service between downtown Vancouver and North Vancouver. The launch was successful but exhausting, and I was anxious to get away for a few days. My boss had received an invitation to ride on a nounced that we were the first passenger train to head special, pre-inaugural trip of Amtrak’s new Pioneer, up Sullivan’s Gulch since 1971. The new F40’s pulled the first passenger service between Portland the Salt the train effortlessly up the grade and we made good Lake City since the UP’s City of Portland was dis- time heading through the Columbia River Gorge. continued six years earlier. He had a time conflict and Outside temperatures climbed as we approached asked me if I would like to go instead. I jumped at the Hood River, and a big sweltering crowd was wait- chance, and headed south on Amtrak’s Pacific Interna- ing for us at the old UP station anxious to take a look tional to Seattle, where I stayed at the new train. They waited overnight with my parents. The patiently in line to go through next morning I saw my train at the spotless new cars, savoring the King Street Station, a set of every moment they could away brand-new F40’s pulling spot- from the 90-degree heat. -
PROVO RIVER DELTA RESTORATION PROJECT Final Environmental Impact Statement Volume I: Chapters 1–5
PROVO RIVER DELTA RESTORATION PROJECT Final Environmental Impact Statement Volume I: Chapters 1–5 April 2015 UTAH RECLAMATION 230 South 500 East, #230, Salt Lake City, UT 84102 COMMISSIONERS Phone: (801) 524-3146 – Fax: (801) 524-3148 Don A. Christiansen MITIGATION Brad T. Barber AND CONSERVATION Dallin W. Jensen COMMISSION Dear Reader, April 2015 Attached is the Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Provo River Delta Restoration Project (PRDRP). The proposed project would restore a naturally functioning river- lake interface essential for recruitment of June sucker (Chasmistes liorus), an endangered fish species that exists naturally only in Utah Lake and its tributaries. In addition to fulfilling environmental commitments associated with water development projects in Utah and contributing to recovery of an endangered species, the project is intended to help improve water quality on the lower Provo River and to provide enhancements for public recreation in Utah County. Alternative B has been identified as the preferred alternative because it would minimize the amount of private lands that would need to be acquired for the project while still providing adequate space for a naturally functioning river delta and sufficient habitat enhancement for achieving the need for the project. The agencies preparing the Final EIS are the Utah Reclamation Mitigation and Conservation Commission (Mitigation Commission), the Central Utah Water Conservancy District, and the Central Utah Project Completion Act (CUPCA) Office of the U.S. Department of the Interior, collectively referred to as the Joint Lead Agencies. The Final EIS, Executive Summary and Technical Reports can be viewed or downloaded from the project website www.ProvoRiverDelta.us or by requesting a copy on CD. -
Economic Development Commission Launches
OUR TH YEAR www.slenterprise.com July 5, 2021 Volume , Number 50 $1.50 5O Economic development commission launches Weber & Davis commission will be “solutions-oriented.” tablishing subcommittees that serve as con- CountiesReal Estate Brice Wallace “I’m excited to work with state elect- veners to facilitate policy development. The Enterprise ed leaders, cabinet members, local officials “We’re thrilled to announce the cre- PAGE F1 pages 15-1 and others as we collaborate and create new ation of the new Unified Economic Oppor- A new commission charged with de- pathways to economic success,” Cox said. tunity Commission,” said Dan Hemmert, Sponsored by: veloping, directing and coordinating a The commission will convene stake- executive director of the Governor’s Of- statewide economic development strategy holders to develop solutions to the most fice of Economic Opportunity, or GO Utah. has begun its work. critical topics facing Utah’s economy. It That is the new name for the agency former- The Unified Economic Opportunity will also review and create new economic ly known as the Governor’s Office of Eco- Commission, created by HB348, passed strategies and programs to deal with time- nomic Development, or GOED. pages F1-F8 during the 2021 legislative session, has ly topics. Other purposes of the commis- “This commission will help with the been appointed and was scheduled to have sion include aligning economic efforts and state’s growth, education and workforce its first meeting last week, after The Enter- incentive programs, helping support and prise’s press deadlines. align education and industry partnerships Sponsored by: see COMMISSION page 14 Gov. -
PROVO RIVER DELTA RESTORATION PROJECT Bird-Aircraft Strike Risk Technical Memorandum Prepared for the Final Environmental Impact Statement
PROVO RIVER DELTA RESTORATION PROJECT Bird-Aircraft Strike Risk Technical Memorandum Prepared for the Final Environmental Impact Statement April 2015 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND RELEVANT BACKGROUND .................................................. 1 Description of Project Alternatives ............................................................................................. 6 2.0 METHODS .......................................................................................................................... 7 Describing Existing Bird Communities ...................................................................................... 7 Study Area Bird Surveys ........................................................................................................ 7 Internet and Other Data Sources ............................................................................................. 9 Assessment of Bird-Aircraft Strike Risk .................................................................................. 11 Quantitative Approach .......................................................................................................... 11 Habitat-Based Quasi-Quantitative Approach ....................................................................... 12 3.0 RESULTS .......................................................................................................................... 17 Existing Bird Communities based on Project Area Surveys, Provo’s Wildlife Hazard Assessment, and Bird Strike Reports ....................................................................................... -
The Films in This Cinematic Innovation, New Frontier Is Also a Venue Showcasing Section Will Shape a “Greater” Next Wave in American Cinema
T U , E C N A D N U S , T R O S E R N I A T N U O M E C N A D N U S F O Y S E T R U O C SUNDANCE INSTITUTE PRESENTS THE SUNDANCE FILM FESTIVAL ABOUT SUNDANCE INSTITUTE ABOUT SUNDANCE FILM FESTIVAL Sundance Institute is a nonprofit cultural organization Each January, the Sundance Film Festival attracts the most founded by Robert Redford to advance the work of risk-taking innovative storytellers and adventurous audiences to a 10-day storytellers worldwide. With a range of programs for artists celebration of the best independent filmmaking today. In a and audiences, the Institute provides year-round creative and small mountain town, a diverse range of ideas, stories, artists, financial support for the development and presentation of and film lovers converge to launch the year in culture. original stories for the screen and stage. W ELCOME ST RA NGER N Sundance Institute Presents E E R G R E 2014 Sundance Film Festival EV Here is an overview of the program at this year’s Sundance Film Festival. HA LF NE LSON U .S. DRAMATIC COMPETITION D OCUMENTARY PREMIERES FROM THE COLLECTION SUNDANCE KIDS Presenting the world premieres of 16 narrative feature films, Renowned filmmakers and films about far-reaching subjects Rediscover classic works of independent cinema as the This new section of the Festival is designed for independent the Dramatic Competition offers Festivalgoers a first look at comprise this section highlighting our ongoing commitment to Sundance Film Festival presents films from the vaults of the film’s youngest fans. -
Survey of Streetcar Cities] Summaries of the Various Streetcar Projects from Around the United States
2012 [SURVEY OF STREETCAR CITIES] SUMMARIES OF THE VARIOUS STREETCAR PROJECTS FROM AROUND THE UNITED STATES Introduction Streetcars are enjoying a national revival in these early years of the 21st century. As communities across the nation rediscover the charm and efficiency of this short distance transit option, they are investing in new streetcar lines or extensions of existing operations. This survey in support of The Community Streetcar Coalition (CSC) was commissioned to track important streetcar development projects, planned or underway, in major U.S. cities. Portland Streetcar Inc. funded this work with the partial proceeds of its 2005 Rudy Bruner Gold Medal Award for Urban Excellence. This survey report is a living, working document. It will be updated regularly, and shared with policymakers, opinion leaders, interested municipalities, and those involved in streetcar issues and technologies. Cities wishing to be included in subsequent iterations of this document should contact Julie Gustafson, [email protected]. The Community Streetcar Coalition The Community Streetcar Coalition was established in 2004. It is comprised of cities, transit authorities and private sector that are focused on supporting the Small Starts program and establishment of a program that supports streetcars in the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) and advocating with Federal Transit Administration (FTA) to implement the Small Starts program. The CSC conducts monthly phone calls for members and twice -
Agenda Items Proposed for Action and Consideration (Pdf)
Utah Reclamation Mitigation & Conservation Commission COMMISSIONERS 230 South 500 East Suite 230 Salt Lake City, UT 84102-2045 Brad T. Barber, Chair Phone: (801) 524-3146 – Fax: (801) 524-3148 Robert L. Morgan Gene Shawcroft MEETING AGENDA Monday, September 13, 2021 TIME: 9:30 a.m. LOCATION: Utah Reclamation Mitigation and Conservation Commission, 230 S. 500 East Suite 230, Salt Lake City, UT, 84102 Also available online through Microsoft Teams Click here to join the meeting or type the following into your internet browser: https://teams.microsoft.com/l/meetup- join/19%3ameeting_MzAwN2ZmNzEtYzFmMS00Y2EwLTg5ODEtNjk5NTgzNjk1ZDI1%40th read.v2/0?context=%7b%22Tid%22%3a%220693b5ba-4b18-4d7b-9341- f32f400a5494%22%2c%22Oid%22%3a%2209fd8a27-76fc-460d-af33-294b0a20928f%22%7d ITEMS ON THE AGENDA FOR ‘ACTION’ AND FOR ‘CONSIDERATION’ MAY BE ACCESSED ON THE COMMISSION’S WEBSITE by navigating through mitigationcommission.gov/news Or at https://mitigationcommission.gov/news/pdf/AgreementsProposedForAction- Consideration.pdf 1. WELCOME AND OPENING REMARKS 2. APPROVAL OF PREVIOUS MINUTES 3. ITEMS FOR COMMISSION RATIFICATION A. A Resolution concurring in the issuance of the Final Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact for ‘Block Notice 7A-2 Temporary Use in North Utah County’ 4. ITEMS FOR COMMISSION ACTION A. Proposed Modification of Agreement with Provo City for Cooperative Planning, Design, Construction and Funding of the Provo Lakeview Parkway and Trail PRDRP B. Proposed Agreement with USDA-Wildlife Services for Funding Wildlife Hazard Mitigation at Provo Airport and Provo River Delta Restoration Project 5. ITEMS FOR COMMISSION CONSIDERATION None 6. PRESENTATIONS BY STAFF A. Diamond Fork System Update Draft Environmental Assessment B.