DOCSLIB.ORG

1 Agreement Regarding Construction of Rail

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

AGREEMENT REGARDING CONSTRUCTION OF RAIL PROJECT Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation District West Lake Corridor Town of Munster Area: MP WL61.38 - MP WL64.90 THIS AGREEMENT between the Town of Munster, Indiana, by and through its Town Council (hereinafter “Community”) and the Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation District operating the South Shore Line (hereinafter “the District”) is to be effective as of the day of , 2019. RECITALS WHEREAS, since 1990, the District has operated the South Shore Line passenger rail service from Millennium Station in Chicago, Illinois through Lake, Porter, LaPorte, and St. Joseph Counties in Indiana. WHEREAS, the District has applied for a New Starts Capital Investment Grant from the Federal Transit Administration (“FTA”) for the West Lake Corridor Project (“Rail Project”). WHEREAS, the District and Community support the construction of the Rail Project, which involves: the design and construction of a new approximate 8-mile extension of the South Shore Line from Hammond, Indiana to the border of Munster and Dyer, Indiana, along with new passenger stations, catenary, and structures necessary for passenger rail operations. WHEREAS, the Indiana General Assembly has authorized the District to make and enter into all contracts and agreements necessary or incidental to the performance of its duties and the execution of its powers in financing, leasing, and constructing the Rail Project. I.C. § 5-1.3-3-7. WHEREAS, the District and Community are parties to a Memorandum Agreement dated February 1, 1993, and Easement Agreement dated December 20, 1995 related to the Rail Project. WHEREAS, this Agreement is intended to follow those prior agreements among the Parties, and to establish the respective rights and obligations of each Party that are particular to the design of the current Rail Project. WHEREAS, the parties agree that it is in the best interests of both the District and Community to perform all actions necessary to complete the Rail Projects. 1 NOW, THEREFORE, the parties, intending to be duly bound, set forth their mutual rights and responsibilities to accomplish that purpose in a coordinated and unified approach to the funding, acquisition, and construction of the Rail Project. 1. Definitions – the defined terms set forth in this section shall apply throughout this Agreement. Agreement – This Agreement regarding Construction of Rail Project between the Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation District and the Town of Munster, Indiana. Community – Town of Munster, Indiana, including all Boards, Districts, Commissions, public officials, and any other entity serving the Town of Munster IFA – The Indiana Finance Authority The District – the Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation District Rail Project – the West Lake Corridor Project RDA – the Northwest Indiana Regional Development Authority 2. Findings and Purpose A. The foregoing recitals are incorporated in this Agreement as the findings of the parties. B. The purpose of this Agreement is to establish the mutual rights and responsibilities of the District and Community in order to complete the Rail Project. 3. Duration A. This Agreement shall be for an initial term of ten (10) years. B. This Agreement shall terminate earlier if the Rail Project is completed. 4. Rights and Responsibilities A. The District or its Contractors shall: i. Design and construct the Rail Project through the Design-Build procurement process under Indiana Law. ii. Acquire all real estate necessary for the Rail Project, in accordance with federal and state law, including all necessary appraisals and review appraisals. iii. Maintain insurance coverage for the construction of the Rail Project, and require its contractors to maintain insurance coverage. 2 iv. Develop a Maintenance and Protection of Traffic Plan to address disruptions to travel during the course of the Rail Project (pursuant to the March 2018 Final Environmental Impact Statement, Record of Decision, Attachment A). The plan shall address both street and trail closures. Any lane and trail closures and detour routes shall be approved by the Community. v. Upgrade the traffic signal at the intersection of Sheffield Avenue and Main Street to accommodate a fourth leg of the intersection providing access to the new station parking lot. vi. Provide for noise barriers with a height of four (4) to five (5) feet from top of rail between MP 63.7 and 63.9, on the west side of the tracks (pursuant to the March 2018 Final Environmental Impact Statement, Record of Decision, Attachment A). vii. Provide for noise barriers with a height of four (4) to five (5) feet from top of rail between MP 63.4 and 63.6, on the east side of the tracks (pursuant to the March 2018 Final Environmental Impact Statement, Record of Decision, Attachment A). viii. Implement ballast mats (or other track support system modifications) between MP 63.7 and 63.9, to extend the length of one full trainset on either side of the affected receptor (pursuant to the March 2018 Final Environmental Impact Statement, Record of Decision, Attachment A). ix. Perform relocation or upgrades (protect in place or replace) of utilities owned by Community in areas of the Rail Project between the southern extent of the Rail Project and the southern boundary of the old Monon Right-of-Way purchased by the District, Community, and the City of Hammond from CSX Transportation, Inc. (located at approximately MP WL63.1), which relocations and/or upgrades are necessary due to the Rail Project, or reimburse Community for its costs of performing said relocations or upgrades. The District shall include Community’s preferred utility contractors in the Design-Builder package for underground facilities. x. Restore any damage to the Pennsy Greenway Bike Trail as a result of the Rail Project to its pre-construction condition. The trail will be rerouted to cross the West Lake Corridor at Fisher Street. xi. Provide a pedestrian underpass at Sunnyside Avenue to accommodate the relocated Monon Bike Trail. xii. Provide a pedestrian tunnel at the new Munster/Dyer Station. xiii. Install a 5-foot wide sidewalk along the west side of Allison Road between Jenna Drive and Megan Way. xiv. Replace any high quality trees which are removed from property owned by the Community as a result of the construction of the Rail Project in locations desired by the Community. High quality trees shall be defined as healthy, native species with a minimum of 6” diameter at breast height. Replacement trees shall be a minimum of 2” diameter at breast height, in the discretion of the District. Provide a planting plan for Community approval that indicates the location and species of replacement trees. xv. Coordinate selection of landscape treatments to be consistent with the requirements of the Community’s landscaping ordinance with respect to any improvements constructed within the Community (pursuant to the March 2018 Final Environmental Impact Statement, Record of Decision, Attachment A). 3 xvi. After completion of the Rail Project, operate trains consistent with federal regulations and safe train operating standards. xvii. Provide a minimum of 60' easement underneath the 45th St. overpass, in the area north of the Grand Trunk Western right-of-way, for an access road to be constructed between the Munster Business Complex and the Lansing Country Club. xviii. Provide space for signs and lighting to be installed on the 45th St. overpass and Broadmoor Ave. viaduct. xix. After close –out of the Rail Project, permit, review plans for, and work with the Community to install a pedestrian underpass at Briar Lane, or if one is not feasible, a state-of-the-art at-grade crossing at Briar Lane. The District’s obligations under this subsection are subject to a demonstrated Transit-Oriented Development need, which must be certified by the RDA. xx. Maintain all parking areas and station areas in compliance with Community’s town codes or reimburse Community for maintenance costs. The District will work with the Community to develop and execute a mutually acceptable Operations and Maintenance Agreement before the commencement of revenue service operations (transporting passengers for a fare) of the Rail Project. The Operations and Maintenance Agreement shall address, at a minimum, the following: (a) lighting, (b) landscaping, (c) mowing, (d) snow/ice removal, and (e) crack sealing/paving. xxi. Develop and present plans for lighting, streetscaping, and landscaping for all parking and station areas that comply with Community’s town codes. xxii. Limit construction activities to established work hours of 7 AM to 7 PM unless specifically authorized by the Community. xxiii. Cooperate with Community and the RDA in planning and development to maximize the benefits and opportunities for transit-oriented development in the vicinity of the passenger stations, subject to the primary purpose of providing safe, reliable, and efficient commuter rail service. Conceptual plans are attached hereto as Exhibit B, for illustrative purposes only. B. Community or its Contractors shall: i. Review project plans once they have reached 60% completion and submit any proposed changes to the District within 30 days of receiving said 60% plans. Any proposed changes submitted by the Community shall be subject to the review and final approval of the District. Proposed changes submitted by the Community, and approved by the District, are subject to the following requirements: a. The District’s Design-Build Contractor shall create a cost estimate to complete
Recommended publications
  • April 2016 All Aboard Indiana

    April 2016 All Aboard Indiana

    ALL INDIANA ABOARD The Official Newsletter of the Volume 3, Number 4 April 2016 IN THIS ISSUE: Page Two-Three IPRA Calls for Grassroots Effort IPRA Calls for Grassroots Effort, continued To Enhance Hoosier State Service By Phillip Streby Page Four Strengthening Hoosier State Editor’s Note: The following article was originally writ- Service Meeting Topic ten for the spring issue of the Rail Users’ Network (RUN) INDOT, Iowa Pacific Taking quarterly newsletter. It is being republished with their Steps to Boost Ridership permission. Two leading Midwest passenger rail advo- Hoosier State Amenities cates—Ken Prendergast, executive director, All Aboard Featured on Two Videos Ohio, and Steve Coxhead, president, Indiana Passenger Rail Alliance—assisted Mr. Streby in providing material Page Five or editing assistance. February On-Time Performance for Hoosier Members of passenger rail advocacy groups seem to Two girls enjoy a ride on the Hoosier State at 93.9 Percent have to approach their local issues at the basic grass State. What Business Class Is Like roots level on each occasion, reinventing the path to on Amtrak’s Cardinal either improving existing service levels or instituting new services. The Indiana Passen- ger Rail Alliance (IPRA) was formed to bring advocates affiliated with several groups to- Page Six gether in order to create a more effective voice with which to engage with both the Indi- Wait Nearly Over for Lafayette ana General Assembly and Indiana Department of Transportation (INDOT). Page Seven Let us be very clear about why this is necessary. IPRA does not advocate for im- Framework To Improve “On proved passenger rail service either out of a sense of nostalgia for the old days or for Time” Performance Deserves a an antipathy to the automobile.
  • RUN Newsletter Spring 2016V3.Indd

    RUN Newsletter Spring 2016V3.Indd

    NEWSLETTER Spring 2016 Vol. 13, Issue 2 Will Privatization Save The Northeast Corridor? Individual By Richard J. Arena Transportation Bill, known as the NEC infrastructure is Highlights the FAST (“Fixing America’s a millstone. If full annual The Northeast Corridor is an Surface Transportation”) Act, maintenance and state-of-good- expensive piece of real estate, the major changes were to repair costs (estimated to be in snaking along the coast from reauthorize Amtrak and to excess of $2 billion/year) were Boston to Washington, DC. split Amtrak into two separate included in Amtrak’s NEC profit Rail Commuting in While less than 2% of America’s financial accounts—the and loss statement (which they Ventura County p. 2 land mass, it is home to over 50 Northeast Corridor (NEC) and cannot because they are capital), million residents and responsible the National Network (NN). the net result would be an NEC Brooklyn-Queens for 20% of the nation’s GDP. The purpose for this split was loss in the billions. Light Rail? p. 3 Every day over 2,000 trains from to keep the “profits” from NEC Amtrak, commuter rail agencies, operations there, and not use Second concern: FAST does not and freight lines share the tracks, them to subsidize losses on NN differentiate between operating VIA Rail and Canadians’ making it the world’s busiest trains. Simple? Not quite. expenses and infrastructure Mobility Needs p. 4 rail corridor. Plans have been costs. Clearly, a much preferred proposed to upgrade the NEC First concern: Amtrak’s NEC outcome would have been Enhancing Hoosier to true high speed rail, but there does not actually realize a separating Amtrak into three State Service p.
  • Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation District REQUEST for QUALIFICATIONS for DESIGN BUILD SERVICES NICTD WEST LAKE CORRIDOR

    Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation District REQUEST for QUALIFICATIONS for DESIGN BUILD SERVICES NICTD WEST LAKE CORRIDOR

    Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation District REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS FOR DESIGN BUILD SERVICES NICTD WEST LAKE CORRIDOR PROJECT NICTD RFQ NO. 1901 March 22, 2019 I\14127189.4 I\14127189.7 Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation District TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 NICTD Project Website ................................................................................................ 1 1.2 Instructions to Proposers ............................................................................................... 2 1.3 Glossary of Definitions (Exhibit 1)............................................................................... 3 2 GENERAL INFORMATION AND PROJECT DETAILS ................................................ 3 2.1 Project Description and Site Plan ................................................................................. 3 2.2 Improvement Highlights ............................................................................................... 4 2.3 NICTD Project Goals and Objectives ........................................................................... 6 2.4 NICTD Project Team and Role..................................................................................... 7 2.5 Key Project Stakeholders ..……………………………………………………………7 2.6 Project Schedule............................................................................................................ 8 2.7 Project Budget .............................................................
  • West Lake Corridor Final Environmental Impact Statement/ Record of Decision and Section 4(F) Evaluation Appendix H1 Appendix H1

    West Lake Corridor Final Environmental Impact Statement/ Record of Decision and Section 4(F) Evaluation Appendix H1 Appendix H1

    West Lake Corridor Final Environmental Impact Statement/ Record of Decision and Section 4(f) Evaluation Appendix H1 Appendix H1. Guide to the DEIS Response to Comments March 2018 H1-1 West Lake Corridor Final Environmental Impact Statement/ Record of Decision and Section 4(f) Evaluation Appendix H1 This page is intentionally left blank. March 2018 H1-1 West Lake Corridor Final Environmental Impact Statement/ Record of Decision and Section 4(f) Evaluation Appendix H1 1. Guide to the DEIS Response to Comments Appendix H contains the comments received on the West Lake Corridor Project (Project) Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). This DEIS Response to Comments Appendix contains an explanation of the process taken to sort comments received and develop responses. This appendix is organized with the following sections (Appendix H1 through Appendix H13): 1. Guide to the DEIS Response to Comments 2. Index of Agency Comments, Response to Agency Comments 3. Index of Business Comments, Response to Business Comments 4. Index of Civic and Community Organization Comments, Response to Civic and Community Organization Comments 5. Index of General Public Written Comments, Response to General Public Written Comments 6. Index of General Public Verbal Testimony Comments, Response to General Public Verbal Testimony Comments 7. Agency Comments Received on DEIS 8. Business Comments Received on DEIS 9. Civic and Community Organizations Comments Received on DEIS 10. General Written Public Comments Received on DEIS 11. Transcript and alphabetized comment cards – January 17, 2017, Public Hearing – Dyer 12. Transcript and alphabetized comment cards– January 18, 2017, Public Hearing – Hammond 13. Transcript and alphabetized comment cards – January 19, 2017, Public Hearing – Munster Within the comment period, the Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation District (NICTD) and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) received 464 distinct communications from agencies, Project stakeholders, and the general public on the DEIS.
  • Appendix E: Public Scoping Comments

    Appendix E: Public Scoping Comments

    Scoping Summary Report - Draft APPENDIX E Public Scoping Comments March 2015 Scoping Summary Report - Draft Page E-1 March 2015 Scoping Summary Report - Draft Page E-2 March 2015 Scoping Summary Report - Draft Page E-3 March 2015 Scoping Summary Report - Draft Page E-4 March 2015 Scoping Summary Report - Draft Page E-5 March 2015 Scoping Summary Report - Draft Page E-6 March 2015 Scoping Summary Report - Draft Page E-7 March 2015 Scoping Summary Report - Draft Page E-8 March 2015 Scoping Summary Report - Draft Page E-9 March 2015 Scoping Summary Report - Draft Page E-10 March 2015 Scoping Summary Report - Draft Public Online Comments Received 1. Online Comment Form Submission Date Received: Mon 10/15/2014 2:01 PM questions_comments: The proposed Dyer stop is a must! I live in St. John, and the 30-35 min route up 41, to East Chicago, just isn't efficient. St. John/Schererville/Dyer need a closer stop. Thank you Homeowner: yes length_of_time: 5 Months realname: Jim address1: Rapp address2: city: Saint John state: State zip_code: 46373 phone: email: [email protected] 2. Online Comment Form Submission Date Received: Mon 10/15/2014 4:17 PM questions_comments: Will the Monon Corridor portion be a quiet zone? Homeowner: yes Resident_Project_Corridor: yes Email_Notifications: yes length_of_time: 7 months realname: David Terdich address1: 524 173RD STREET address2: city: Hammond state: IN zip_code: 46324 phone: email: [email protected] 3. Online Comment Form Submission Date Received: Mon 10/16/2014 8:05 PM questions_comments: I currently board at Hegewisch but our plans are to move into NWI in the next few years.
  • West Lake Corridor DEIS Ch 3 Transportation

    West Lake Corridor DEIS Ch 3 Transportation

    Draft Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation Chapter 3 Transportation December 2016 Draft Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation This page intentionally left blank. December 2016 Draft Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation 3 TRANSPORTATION 3.1 Introduction Chapter 3 characterizes the existing conditions of the multi-modal transportation system, potential impacts of the West Lake Corridor Project (Project) on the transportation network, and proposed mitigation of potential impacts. Areas of analysis for this chapter include public transportation, freight rail, bicycle and pedestrian, traffic, and parking. The analysis is organized by resource area (i.e., mode of transportation). The information is presented for the No Build Alternative as a point of comparison with the impacts of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Preferred Alternative (Hammond Alternative Option 2) and the other Build Alternatives. For reference, conceptual engineering plans for the Build Alternatives are included in Appendix G. 3.2 Public Transportation This section describes the potential impacts the Build Alternatives would have on public transportation (transit) services within the Study Area, which is defined as ½-mile on either side of the proposed alignments. 3.2.1 Regulatory Setting No federal laws, regulations, or executive orders specifically regulate how impacts to public transportation resulting from transit projects should be evaluated. However, NEPA provides the general legal framework for considering potential impacts. In addition, the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations include requirements for describing the affected environment and environmental consequences for general resources, including public transportation facilities. See 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) § 1502.15.
  • Evaluation; Appendix H5 and H6 Index

    Evaluation; Appendix H5 and H6 Index

    West Lake Corridor Final Environmental Impact Statement/ Record of Decision and Section 4(f) Evaluation Appendix H5 Appendix H5. Index of General Public Written Comments, Response to General Public Comments March 2018 H5-1 West Lake Corridor Final Environmental Impact Statement/ Record of Decision and Section 4(f) Evaluation Appendix H5 This page is intentionally left blank. March 2018 H5-2 West Lake Corridor Final Environmental Impact Statement/ Record of Decision and Section 4(f) Evaluation Appendix H5 Table H5-1: General Public Written Comments and Responses Index Last Name First Name Comment ID(s) Albrecht Ronald 40 Albright Brandon 41 Albright Nicole 42 Alderden Aaron 43 Alesi Amanda 44 Alexander Deb 45 Allegrezza William 46 Alrick Ron 47 Amezcua Manuel 48 Amezcua Samantha 49 Andrzejewski Edward 50 Anitec Barbara 51 Applesies Edith 52 Armstrong LJ 53 Ashrita 54 Astor Debbie 55 Astor Debbie 56 Babcock Don 57 Babusiak Kate 58 Babusiak Kevin 59 Bachmann Debbie 60 Baker Dean 61 Bakker Gene 62 Bakker Patricia 63 Barrett Gabrielle 64 Barrett Laura 65A – 65G Barrett Michael 66 Barrientez Monica 67 Baum Kathryn 68 Benchik Jon 69 March 2018 H5-3 West Lake Corridor Final Environmental Impact Statement/ Record of Decision and Section 4(f) Evaluation Appendix H5 Last Name First Name Comment ID(s) Bernardi Connie 70 Bonchnowski Ann 71 Boer Debi 72 Bolling April 73 Bowers Judy 74 Brandenburg Carly 75 Brandenburg Carly and Steve 76 Bravo Heriberto 77 Brennan Jennifer 78 Brewe Ian 79 Brohart Rodney 80 Buchnat Ursula 81 Budeselich Michelle 82 Burbach Brian 83 - 85 Burbridge Wende 86 Burgos Mercedes 87 Burian Amy 88 Byrne Mary and Rich 89 Byrne Mary 90 Cable Chris 91 Cannon Margaret 92 Carlson Rich 93 Casas M.
  • INTERCITY PASSENGER RAIL CONCEPTUAL INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN Hoosier State Passenger Rail

    INTERCITY PASSENGER RAIL CONCEPTUAL INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN Hoosier State Passenger Rail

    INTERCITY PASSENGER RAIL CONCEPTUAL INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN Hoosier State Passenger Rail November, 2019 Prepared for: Indiana Department of Transportation Prepared By: Patrick Engineering Inc. Table of Contents Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................... 3 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................................ 4 2. Other Studies in the Area ................................................................................................................... 5 3. Assumptions ....................................................................................................................................... 5 4. Proposed Hoosier State Operating Scenario ..................................................................................... 6 5. Proposed Hoosier State Schedule ...................................................................................................... 6 6. Proposed Infrastructure Improvements ............................................................................................ 8 1. Local Speed Improvements..................................................................................................... 8 1.1 Monon Realignment .................................................................................................. 8 1.2 Local Speed Restrictions ...........................................................................................
  • West Lake Corridor Final Environmental Impact Statement/Record of Decision and Section 4(F) Evaluation; Chapter 3; Transportatio

    West Lake Corridor Final Environmental Impact Statement/Record of Decision and Section 4(F) Evaluation; Chapter 3; Transportatio

    West Lake Corridor Final Environmental Impact Statement/ Record of Decision and Section 4(f) Evaluation Chapter 3 Transportation Chapter 3 Transportation March 2018 West Lake Corridor Final Environmental Impact Statement/ Record of Decision and Section 4(f) Evaluation Chapter 3 Transportation This page intentionally left blank. March 2018 West Lake Corridor Final Environmental Impact Statement/ Record of Decision and Section 4(f) Evaluation Chapter 3 Transportation 3 Transportation 3.1 Introduction Chapter 3 describes current conditions and effects on the multimodal transportation system from the FEIS Preferred Alternative and identifies the effects of the alternatives considered in the DEIS, including the DEIS NEPA Preferred Alternative. This chapter describes the effect of the Project on the transportation network and the proposed mitigation of significant impacts. Areas of analysis for this chapter include public transportation, freight rail, bicycle and pedestrian, traffic, and parking. The analysis is organized by resource area (i.e., mode of transportation). Changes to This Chapter since Publication of the DEIS Since publication of the DEIS, the data on existing conditions have been updated and design refinements have been made to the DEIS NEPA Preferred Alternative. The Project Area for each of the alternatives remains the same; therefore, some resource areas have few to no changes from the DEIS to the FEIS. The majority of the Project Area is in Indiana, with a small portion extending into Illinois. Construction activities in Illinois would be limited to the existing railroad ROW. Section 3.2 describes the transportation system in the Project Area and travel demand modeling. The transportation system remains unchanged since publication of the DEIS.
  • Chicago Railroad Economic Opportunity Plan Final Report

    Chicago Railroad Economic Opportunity Plan Final Report

    CHICAGO RAILROAD ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY PLAN FINAL REPORT CITY OF CHICAGO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Submitted by: IHS GLOBAL INSIGHT (USA) INC. Contact: Joseph Waldo Director – State and Local Sector Consulting Tel: 610-490-2636 Fax: 610-490-2770 E: [email protected] Chicago Railroad Economic Opportunity Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction and Executive Summary .............................................................................................1 Task 1. Analysis of Carload Rail-Based Industries and Their Long-Term Trends ......................10 Introduction............................................................................................................................... 10 Warehousing Activity ............................................................................................................... 11 Manufacturing Industry ............................................................................................................ 14 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................ 37 Task 2. Examine Chicago’s Industrial Corridors for Suitability of Rail-Served Industries .........41 Introduction............................................................................................................................... 41 CREATE Effects....................................................................................................................... 41 Overview of Industrial Areas...................................................................................................
  • Evaluation; Appendix H2 Index Of

    Evaluation; Appendix H2 Index Of

    West Lake Corridor Final Environmental Impact Statement/ Record of Decision and Section 4(f) Evaluation Appendix H2 Appendix H2. Index of DEIS Agency Comments, Response to DEIS Agency Comments March 2018 H2-1 West Lake Corridor Final Environmental Impact Statement/ Record of Decision and Section 4(f) Evaluation Appendix H2 This page is intentionally left blank. March 2018 H2-2 West Lake Corridor Final Environmental Impact Statement/ Record of Decision and Section 4(f) Evaluation Appendix H2 Table H2-1: Index of DEIS Agency Comments Agency Last Name First Name Comment ID(s) Amtrak Rogers Richard 1 Amtrak Terdich David 2 Chicago South Shore and South Bjornstad Todd 3A – 3C Bend Railroad City of Hammond Button Dean 4A – 4CR CN Railroad Kuxmann Scott 5 CN Railroad Matteucci Michael 6A – 6F Consolidated Rail Corporation Hill Jocelyn 7A – 7G Dyer Fire Department Bonnin Bob 8 Dyer Town Council DeGiulio Tom 9A – 9F Forest County Potawatomi LaRonge Michael 10 Community INDNR – Division of Historic Carr John 11A – 11B Preservation and Archaeology Metra Kralik David 12 Miami Tribe of Oklahoma Hunter Diane 13 NiSource Sullivan Dan 14A – 14B Norfolk Southern Corporation Cochran J. 15A Norfolk Southern Corporation Edwards John 15B Town of Munster Anderson Dustin 16A – 16AL U.S. Coast Guard, Ninth Coast Striffler Commander Scott 17 Guard District U.S. Dept. of the Interior (OEPC) Darby Valincia 18 USEPA Westlake Kenneth 19A – 19U March 2018 H2-3 West Lake Corridor Final Environmental Impact Statement/ Record of Decision and Section 4(f) Evaluation Appendix
  • Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation

    Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation

    Purdue Road School West Lake Corridor Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation District Agenda • About NICTD • Project History • Sponsor, Agency, & Coordination Involvement • About the Project & Amenities • Structural Elements & Stations • Real Estate • Contracting Opportunities • Project Partners • Additional Resources South Shore Line Passenger Rail History • Michigan City to South Bend – 1908 • Bankruptcy in 1925, bought by CSS&SB • Declined to join Amtrak in 1971 • NICTD formed in 1977 to subsidize service • Bankrupt in late ‘80s • Freight service bought by new CSS&SB (A&P) • Passenger service assumed by NICTD West Lake Corridor History 1967: Regularly scheduled passenger train service is discontinued on the Monon Railroad 1989: NIRPC releases study identifying extending the South Shore as the best means of expanding mass transit in the region 1993: NICTD acquire the Monon Rail Line right-of-way with the intent of connecting communities in Lake County and economic centers in Illinois through rail service 1996 - 1998: Study of the Lowell to Chicago South Shore service, now called the West Lake Corridor, begins and includes a public hearing on the West Lake Corridor project 2004: Lake and Porter County communities agree to help fund study to extend South Shore to Lowell 2011: NICTD officials propose building a first stage extension from Hammond to Munster/Dyer 2014: West Lake Corridor Draft Environmental Impact Study (DEIS) begins 2017: DEIS completed, Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) begins 2018: FEIS and Record of Decision Published in March Who is Completing this Project? • NICTD – Project Sponsor • • Federal Transit Administration (FTA) – Lead Federal Agency • Funding Partners: • NWIRDA • Indiana Finance Authority •Coordinating with: • City of Hammond • Town of Munster • Town of Dyer • Northwest Indiana Regional Planning Commission (NIRPC) - MPO Funding • $6M/year for 30 years in State Appropriations beginning in fiscal year 2016.