DOCSLIB.ORG

BNSF Harbor Subdivision

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
BNSF Harbor Subdivision South Bay Cities Railroad Study BNSF Harbor Subdivision Final Report Prepared for: Southern California Association of Governments In Coordination with South Bay Cities Council of Governments The preparation of this report was financed in part through grants from the United States Department of Transportation – Federal Highway Administration and the Federal Transit Administration – under provisions of the Transportation Equity Act of the 21st Century. Additional financial assistance was provided by the California State Department of Transportation. Prepared by: Wilbur Smith Associates Schiermeyer Consulting Services Cheryl Downey February 28, 2002 TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary Project Overview .................................................................................................... ES-1 How the Study was done......................................................................................... ES-1 Recommendations................................................................................................... ES-2 Next Steps ............................................................................................................... ES-2 1 Introduction 1.1 Purpose of the Study........................................................................................ 1-1 1.2 Study Process................................................................................................... 1-2 1.3 Agencies Consulted.......................................................................................... 1-3 1.4 Legal Framework ............................................................................................. 1-4 1.4.1 Shared Use Agreement for the Harbor Subdivision ............................. 1-4 1.4.2 Alameda Corridor Use and Operating Agreement ............................... 1-4 1.4.3 Funding Sources................................................................................... 1-5 1.4.4 Abandoned Crossings........................................................................... 1-8 2 Existing Conditions 2.1 Railroad Corridor Description.......................................................................... 2-1 2.1.1 Train Speeds......................................................................................... 2-1 2.1.2 At-grade Crossings............................................................................... 2-3 2.1.3 Right of Way Widths ........................................................................... 2-4 2.1.4 Utility Easements in Corridor............................................................... 2-7 2.1.5 Track Classification Standards............................................................. 2-7 2.2 Corridor Demographics.................................................................................... 2-8 2.2.1 Land Use .............................................................................................. 2-8 2.2.2 Population ............................................................................................ 2-12 2.2.3 Employment ......................................................................................... 2-13 2.3 Railroad Operations ......................................................................................... 2-14 2.3.1 Shippers................................................................................................ 2-15 2.3.2 Trains and Hours of Operation............................................................. 2-17 2.3.3 Train Length and Speed ....................................................................... 2-17 2.3.4 Line Maintenance ................................................................................ 2-17 2.3.5 Yards, Sidings, Leased Tracks, Storage, and Switching Activity......... 2-18 2.4 Vehicular Traffic Operations............................................................................ 2-19 2.4.1 Vehicular Traffic Volumes................................................................... 2-19 2.4.2 Crossing Delays ................................................................................... 2-20 2.4.3 Nearby Intersection Delays ................................................................. 2-22 2.5 Safety ............................................................................................................... 2-23 364940 SOUTH BAY CITIES RAILROAD STUDY WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES FINAL REPORT Page i FEBRUARY 28, 2002 TABLE OF CONTENTS 2.5.1 Definitions............................................................................................ 2-23 2.5.2 Railroad Protection Devices ................................................................ 2-24 2.5.3 At-grade Crossing Accidents/Incidents................................................ 2-24 2.5.4 Railroad Accidents/Incidents............................................................... 2-28 2.5.5 Nearby Accidents................................................................................. 2-28 3 Future Conditions 3.1 Future Corridor Demographics ........................................................................ 3-1 3.1.1 Land Use .............................................................................................. 3-1 3.1.2 Population ............................................................................................ 3-1 3.1.3 Employment ......................................................................................... 3-2 3.2 Future Freight Rail Operations......................................................................... 3-3 3.2.1 Shippers................................................................................................ 3-3 3.2.2 Trains and Hours of Operations ........................................................... 3-4 3.2.3 Train Lengths and Speed...................................................................... 3-4 3.2.4 Line Maintenance ................................................................................ 3-4 3.2.5 Yards, Sidings, Leased Tracks, Storage, and Switching Activity......... 3-5 3.2.6 Alameda Corridor Capacity ................................................................. 3-5 3.2.7 Air Quality and Noise........................................................................... 3-5 3.3 Future Vehicular Traffic Operations................................................................ 3-7 3.3.1 Planned Railroad Grade Separation Projects....................................... 3-7 3.3.2 VehicleTraffic Volumes ....................................................................... 3-7 3.3.3 Crossing Delays.................................................................................... 3-7 3.3.4 Nearby Intersection Delays.................................................................. 3-10 3.4 Safety ............................................................................................................... 3-10 3.4.1 Changes to At-grade Crossing Warning Devices................................. 3-10 3.4.2 Crossing and Railroad Accidents ......................................................... 3-12 3.5 Other Railroad and Transit Alternatives .......................................................... 3-12 3.5.1 Green Line Extension to Los Angeles International Airport ............... 3-13 3.5.2 High Speed Rail to LAX ...................................................................... 3-14 3.5.3 Conventional Rail Passenger Service to LAX ..................................... 3-14 3.5.4 New Light Rail or Bus Rapid Transit to LAX...................................... 3-16 3.5.5 Rail Shuttle Service from South Bay Points......................................... 3-17 3.5.6 Extension of Metro Green Line to Torrance........................................ 3-19 3.5.7 Service to Long Beach......................................................................... 3-20 3.5.8 Summary of Alternative Rail Uses of the Right of Way...................... 3-20 3.6 Other Alternative Uses of the Right of Way.................................................... 3-21 3.6.1 Widen Adjacent Streets........................................................................ 3-21 3.6.2 Linear Parkway or Trail....................................................................... 3-22 3.6.3 Expand Adjoining Uses........................................................................ 3-23 3.6.4 Utility Corridors ................................................................................... 3-23 364940 SOUTH BAY CITIES RAILROAD STUDY WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES FINAL REPORT Page ii FEBRUARY 28, 2002 TABLE OF CONTENTS 4 Findings and Recommendations 4.1 Findings............................................................................................................ 4-1 4.1.1 Corridor Demographics........................................................................ 4-1 4.1.2 Future Rail Operations......................................................................... 4-1 4.1.3 Vehicular Operations............................................................................ 4-2 4.1.4 Safety ................................................................................................... 4-2 4.1.5 Alternative Uses................................................................................... 4-2 4.2 Recommendations............................................................................................ 4-3 4.2.1 Maintain Existing Protection at Crossings ........................................... 4-3 4.2.2 Traffic Improvements
Load more

Recommended publications
  • El Monte Station Connections Foothilltransit.Org
    metro.net El Monte Station Connections foothilltransit.org BUSWAY 10 Greyhound Foothill Transit El Monte Station Upper Level FT Silver Streak Discharge Only FT486 FT488 FT492 Eastbound Metro ExpressLanes Walk-in Center Discharge 24 25 26 27 28 Only Bus stop for: 23 EMT Red, EMT Green EMS Civic Ctr Main Entrance Upper Level Bus Bays for All Service B 29 22 21 20 19 18 Greyhound FT481 FT Silver Streak Metro Silver Line Metro Bike Hub FT494 Westbound RAMONA BL RAMONA BL A Bus stop for: EMS Flair Park (am/pm) Metro Parking Structure Division 9 Building SANTA ANITA AV El Monte Station Lower Level 1 Bus Bay A Bus Stop (on street) 267 268 487 190 194 FT178 FT269 FT282 2 Metro Rapid 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Bus Bay 577X Metro Silver Line 8 18 Bus Bay Lower Level Bus Bays Elevator 76 Escalator 17 Bike Rail 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 EMS Bike Parking 270 176 Discharge Only Commuter 770 70 Connection Parking Building 13-0879 ©2012 LACMTA DEC 2012 Subject to Change Destinations Lines Bus Bay or Destinations Lines Bus Bay or Destinations Lines Bus Bay or Street Stop Street Stop Street Stop 7th St/Metro Center Rail Station Metro Silver Line 18 19 Hacienda Heights FT282 16 Pershing Square Metro Rail Station Metro Silver Line , 70, 76, 770, 1 2 17 18 37th St/USC Transitway Station Metro Silver Line 18 19 FT Silver Streak 19 20 21 Harbor Fwy Metro Rail Station Metro Silver Line 18 19 Pomona TransCenter ÅÍ FT Silver Streak 28 Alhambra 76, 176 6 17 Highland Park 176 6 Altadena 267, 268 9 10 Puente Hills Mall FT178, FT282 14 16 Industry Å 194, FT282 13 16 Arcadia 268,
    [Show full text]
  • Transit Service Plan
    Attachment A 1 Core Network Key spines in the network Highest investment in customer and operations infrastructure 53% of today’s bus riders use one of these top 25 corridors 2 81% of Metro’s bus riders use a Tier 1 or 2 Convenience corridor Network Completes the spontaneous-use network Focuses on network continuity High investment in customer and operations infrastructure 28% of today’s bus riders use one of the 19 Tier 2 corridors 3 Connectivity Network Completes the frequent network Moderate investment in customer and operations infrastructure 4 Community Network Focuses on community travel in areas with lower demand; also includes Expresses Minimal investment in customer and operations infrastructure 5 Full Network The full network complements Muni lines, Metro Rail, & Metrolink services 6 Attachment A NextGen Transit First Service Change Proposals by Line Existing Weekday Frequency Proposed Weekday Frequency Existing Saturday Frequency Proposed Saturday Frequency Existing Sunday Frequency Proposed Sunday Frequency Service Change ProposalLine AM PM Late AM PM Late AM PM Late AM PM Late AM PM Late AM PM Late Peak Midday Peak Evening Night Owl Peak Midday Peak Evening Night Owl Peak Midday Peak Evening Night Owl Peak Midday Peak Evening Night Owl Peak Midday Peak Evening Night Owl Peak Midday Peak Evening Night Owl R2New Line 2: Merge Lines 2 and 302 on Sunset Bl with Line 200 (Alvarado/Hoover): 15 15 15 20 30 60 7.5 12 7.5 15 30 60 12 15 15 20 30 60 12 12 12 15 30 60 20 20 20 30 30 60 12 12 12 15 30 60 •E Ğǁ >ŝŶĞϮǁ ŽƵůĚĨŽůůŽǁ ĞdžŝƐƟŶŐ>ŝŶĞƐϮΘϯϬϮƌŽƵƚĞƐŽŶ^ƵŶƐĞƚůďĞƚǁ
    [Show full text]
  • 2006 C.3 Harbor Subdivision Transit Analysis
    1JiIi~ ENGINEERS ?LAo~NERS •••••• ECONOMISTS ........~ro'" WilburSmith ASSOC, ... TlS Metro ---34937 TF OCT 02 2007 870 .H377 2006 c.3 Harbor Subdivision Transit Analysis Final Report Submitted to: The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Trausportation Authority Prepared by: Wilhur Smith Associates UltraSystems Environmental RAW International December 22, 2006 • Executive Summary HARBOR SUBDIVISION TRANSIT ANALYSIS ANALYSIS BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE In 1992, the former Los Angeles County Transportation Commission (LAcrq purchased the majority of the Harbor Subdivision, the mainline of the former Atchison Topc:ka & Santa Fe Railw:ay (ATSF or Santa Fe) ~tween downtown Los Angeles and the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. As part of that agreement, ATSF retained the right to provide freight rail servia on the portion of the line owned by the LAcre, and LAcre retained the right to operate passenger service on the line. Today, the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway (BNSF), the succ('ssor railroad to the ATSF, still operates freight trains on the line, although the total is a small fraction ofwhat it was at Ute time of the purchase. Neither LACfC nor its successor agency, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro), ran any passenger service on the line. The line studied appears as Figure £5.1 on the following page. With this analysis, Metro has attempted to investigate the feasibility of the potential deployment of various transit modes on its portion of the Harbor Subdivision. The attempt has been to make use of as much of the 26.36-mile right-of-way as may be practical, realizing that some sections of the line run through primarily industrial land uses.
    [Show full text]
  • LA County Goods Movement Strategic Plan    
    Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority LA County Goods Movement Strategic Plan 2020 In Memory In Tribute LA Metro honors the memory and legacy of Connie Rivera, the LA County owes a deep debt of gratitude to the truck drivers, Public Affairs Director for the Alameda Corridor Transportation warehouse workers and all essential members of the logistics Authority, who for many years provided tremendous insight, sector for keeping our homes, businesses and hospitals wisdom, leadership and her trademark great sense of humor supplied with food, medicine and other necessities during in many LA County goods movement forums and discussions. the COVID-19 crisis. Your dedication and bravery ensured our families would be fed and have access to necessary goods at a A product of Southern California, Connie resided in Long critical time in our history. Thank you. Beach, attended local schools and earned her bachelor’s degree from Cal State University, Long Beach. She was passionate about her family and serving her community through the YMCA and Rotary Club. She will be remembered fondly by her many colleagues, especially the Ladies of Logistics, an informal group of women in non-traditional jobs serving the Logistics Industry in Southern California. Connie led with humility and graced Metro as a member of the Freight Working Group – her vision and voice are embedded within the vision, principles and priorities of the LA County Goods Movement Strategic Plan. Metro dedicates this Plan to Connie’s memory and her unwavering belief that through hard work, collaboration and kindness people can come together to lift up and improve the quality of life for all LA County residents, families and communities.
    [Show full text]
  • CPY Document
    July 26, 2006 Honorable Members of the Antonio R. Villaraigosa, Mayor City of Los Angeles City Council of the City of Los Angeles CD No. 15 Board of Harbor Commissioners SUBJECT: EAST 74TH STREET BRIDGE OVER THE ALAMEDA CORRIDOR - EASEMENT DEED AND AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PORTS OF LOS S. David Freeman President ANGELES AND LONG BEACH, THE ALAMEDA CORRIDOR TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, AND THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES Jerilyn Lopez Mendoza Vice President Pursuant to Section 385 of the City Charter and related implementing Kaylynn L. Kim provisions of the Los Angeles Administrative Code, enclosed for passage by your Honorable Body is an Ordinance, approved as to form by the City Douglas P. Krause Attorney, approving Order No. 6873, which was adopted by the Board of Harbor Commissioners at its meeting held Wednesday, May 17, 2006. Joseph R. Radisich RECOMMENDATION: Geraldine Knatz, Ph.D. The City Council adopt the Ordinance approving Order No. 6873 which Executive Director approves and authorizes the execution of proposed Easement Deed and Agreement (East 74th Street Bridge) (assigned Harbor Agreement No. 2481), by and among the City of Los Angeles acting by and through its Board of Harbor Commissioners, the City of Long Beach acting by and through its Board of Harbor Commissioners, the Alameda Corridor Transportation Authority (ACTA), and the County of Los Angeles (County) therein granting necessary easement rights to the County for public road and highway purposes to construct a new bridge and a new traffic signal over and across the Alameda Corridor at East 74th Street and Alameda 425 S. Palos Verdes Street Street to provide access to the Florence and Alameda Commercial Center.
    [Show full text]
  • West Santa Ana Branch Transit Corridor Project
    Draft EIS/EIR Appendix F Final Safety and Security Impact Analysis Report WEST SANTA ANA BRANCH TRANSIT CORRIDOR PROJECT Draft EIS/EIR Appendix F Final Safety and Security Impact Analysis Report Prepared for: Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority Prepared by: WSP 444 South Flower Street Suite 800 Los Angeles, California 90071 July 2021 Authors AUTHORS Charlie Hetland, Jacobs John Simon, Jacobs Ryo Nagai, Jacobs Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................. 1-1 1.1 Study Background ................................................................................................ 1-1 1.2 Alternatives Evaluation, Screening and Selection Process .................................... 1-1 1.3 Report Purpose and Structure .............................................................................. 1-2 1.4 General Background ............................................................................................. 1-3 1.4.1 Safety .................................................................................................... 1-3 1.4.2 Security ................................................................................................. 1-4 1.4.3 Impact Criteria and Thresholds ............................................................ 1-5 1.5 Methodology ........................................................................................................ 1-6 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • CPY Document
    December 7, 2005 Antonio R. Villaraigosa, Mayor City of Los Angeles Honorable Members of the Board of Harbor Commissioners City Council of the City of Los Angeles CD No. 15 S. David Freeman President SUBJECT: SECOND AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT NO. 1989 BElWEEN Jerilyn Lopez Mendoza V1ce President THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES AND PACIFIC HARBOR LINES Kaylynn L. Kim Transmitted herewith, pursuant to Section 606 of the City Charter, is a Douglas P. Krause copy of Order No. 6830, which was adopted by the Board of Harbor Commissioners at its meeting held Wednesday, August 31, 2005. Joseph R. Radisich RECOMMENDATION: Bruce E. Seaton The City Council approve Board of Harbor Commissioners Order No. 6830, Interim Executive Director approving and authorizing the Second Amendment to Agreement No. 1989 (assigned Harbor Department Agreement No. 1989-B), between the City of Los Angeles and Pacific Harbor Lines, and return to the Board of Harbor Commissioners for further processing. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The Director of Environmental Management has determined that the proposed action is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in accordance with Article II, Section 425 S. Palos Verdes Street 2(f) of the Los Angeles City CEQA Guidelines. Financial Impact: Posl Office Box 151 A transfer from the Unappropriated Balance to Account 59965, Center San Pedro, CA 90733-0151 0330, Program 636 (Air Quality), Work Order 79236 for Fiscal Year Budget 2005/2006 will be required in the amount of $4,961,875 to cover the TelffDD 310 SEA-PORT 2005/2006 expenses for the Locomotive Fleet Modernization Program.
    [Show full text]
  • The Need for Freight Rail Electrification in Southern California
    The Need for Freight Rail Electrification in Southern California Brian Yanity Californians for Electric Rail [email protected] May 13, 2018 Executive Summary Full electrification of freight trains is the only proven zero-emissions freight railroad technology. Electric rail propulsion can take several different forms, including locomotives powered by overhead catenary wire, on-board batteries, or more advanced concepts such as battery tender cars and linear synchronous motors. This white paper is largely a literature review of previous studies on electric freight rail in the Southern California region, with information compiled about existing electric freight rail locomotives and systems from around the world. The two main benefits of freight rail electrification in the region would be reduced air pollution, and reduced consumption of diesel fuel for transportation. Electrification of freight rail in Southern California would reduce the public health impacts to local communities affected by diesel-powered freight transportation, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions of freight movement. The main challenge for electric freight rail is the high capital costs of electric rail infrastructure, especially the overhead catenary wire over tracks. A variety of options for public and/or private financing of freight rail electrification need to be explored. Electrification of the proposed short-haul rail service between the ports and the Inland Empire, currently under study, is an opportunity for using electric locomotives though the Alameda
    [Show full text]
  • Agenda Register Here
    TRANSPORTATION BUSINESS ADVISORY COUNCIL (TBAC) WEB BASED / ONLINE GENERAL MEETING Thursday, June 3, 2021 Meeting Time: 9:30 a.m. - 11:30 a.m. AGENDA REGISTER HERE: https://tbacgeneralmeeting6-2021.eventbrite.com During this current period of minimizing health risks and promoting personal and regional safety, we are providing web based online meetings per Mayor Garcetti’s “Safer at Home” order. The purpose of this meeting is to share information that may be helpful in supporting small and diverse businesses as TBAC serves in an advisory role to Metro. Please click on the link above to join the discussion at the listed time. This is a free online meeting and it is always open to the public. Please note that the link above is the official link to register for the meeting. Do not register through any other links. # Topic and Presenter(s) Purpose and Process I Call to Order, Chair S. Rourk II Safety & Security Briefing, Metro Introductions may be modified during online meetings. Welcome and Introductions, Chair S. Rourk Metro Quorum Confirmation, Secretary TBD Voting Members: Organization Info & Introduction Packet Review & Code of Conduct, Exec Committee Nonvoting Members: Introduction & Process and Procedures, Exec Committee Organization Represented Executive Committee: Introductions Welcome to New General Public Attendees III Metro Chair Representative California Public Utilities Code (PUC) Division 12 Chapter 2 130051.19.(c) IV Chair Comments, Chair S. Rourk V Meeting Minutes Review and Approve Review & approve May 2021 Online Meeting Minutes VI Metro Contracting Opportunities All may inquire Procurement/Contract Look-Ahead Questions must adhere to upcoming contract All Areas: Construction/Professional opportunities.
    [Show full text]
  • APPENDIX D SCIG Cultural and Paleontological Reports
    APPENDIX D SCIG Cultural and Paleontological Reports Southern California International Gateway Draft EIR September 2011 Historical, Paleontological, and Archaeological Assessment of the Southern California International Gateway Project Area Phase II – Northern Section of Southern California International Gateway Project Area ADP #041027-199 Prepared for: Los Angeles Harbor Department 425 South Palos Verdes Street San Pedro, CA 90733-0151 Contact: Dennis Hagner 310/732-3949 Prepared by: 811 West 7th Street, Suite 800 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Contact: David Greenwood 213/627-5376 September 2008 Table of Contents Project Overview ................................................................................................................1 Previous Surveys ..........................................................................................................1 Summary of Findings – Phase I ...................................................................................5 Phase II Technical Report .................................................................................................8 Addendum: Northern Portion of California Cartage Warehouse .................................8 Project Description ............................................................................................................8 Historic Setting - Review .............................................................................................9 Site Context ................................................................................................................10
    [Show full text]
  • Prn 199311.Pdf
    1994 CALENDARS Richard Steinheimer's Ma5Jnificent Tralns® New for 19941 Master railroad pho­ Those Magnificent Trains® tographer Richard The ultimate train calendar! Featuring Steinheimer captures 12 stunning images of American rai/­ railroading's glory roading, steam and diesel, both old days in 12 fabulous and new. black & white 12" x 12", full-color images. A must for railfans of all ages. 12" x 12" ColoradoNarrow Gauge Classic railroading in the cen­ tral Rockies from the Colorado Railroad Museum. 12" x 12", full-color Those �nificent Trains Dafebook.® Howard Fogg's Trains A datebaok of Featuring 12 gorgeous new American railroading paintings of railroading's containing 36 full­ glory days by the master rail­ color jJhotos. road pOlnte'i Howard Fogg. 5" x 7", spiral-bound 12" x 12", rull-color PRICES 7 Calendar $12 2 Calendars $20 3 Calendars+ $9/each Order 5 and get one FREE Shipping $1 p!3r calendar for US and Canada American Streetcars Red Cars/Yellow Cars Foreign. orders add $4 per calendar Classic photos of trolleys from Early views of Los Angeles No COD's across America appear in this Transit Line yellow cars and timeless calendar. Pacific Electric red cars. 12" x 12", full-color 12" x 12", full-color US Funds Only CAresidents add 7.25% sales tax Visa and Mastercard welcomed AvailableQt befferhobbv , & book· ,shops c stores or c61/:l " 1a1.FREE 1- 800 227 6162 The Lakers Cruise across the Great Lakes in our 1994 calendar of these classic steamships. 12" x 12", full-color PACIFIC RAILNEWS Santa Fe's Harbor Sub 16 Memories of growing up along an unusual branch line Bob Finan and Joe Blackwell 24 UP's Nebraska Expressway The busy Council Bluffs Sub between Gibbon and North Platte Jim Gilley 32 Focus Colorado: D&RGW Tunnel 29 A Moffat Route monument to the conquest of the Front Range R.
    [Show full text]
  • THE PORT of LOS ANGELES DATE: JULY 22, 2021 Executive Director's Report to the FROM: CARGO & INDUSTRIAL REAL ESTATE Board of Harbor Commissioners
    I,\ THE PORT OF LOS ANGELES DATE: JULY 22, 2021 Executive Director's Report to the FROM: CARGO & INDUSTRIAL REAL ESTATE Board of Harbor Commissioners SUBJECT: RESOLUTION NO. _____- APPROVE MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT AMONG CITY OF LOS ANGELES HARBOR DEPARTMENT, PORT OF LONG BEACH, ALAMEDA CORRIDOR TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY AND BNSF RAILWAY COMPANY FOR THE DOLORES YARD CROSSOVER PROJECT SUMMARY: Staff requests approval of a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) among the City of Los Angeles Harbor Department (Harbor Department), Port of Long Beach (collectively "Ports"), Union Pacific Railroad Company (UP), BNSF Railway Company (collectively "Railroads") and Alameda Corridor Transportation Authority (ACTA) for the Dolores Yard Crossover Project (Project) located in the City of Carson. The Project consists of a new crossover rail connection to/from the Alameda Corridor at the south end of the UP owned Dolores (rail) Yard . Rail crossovers are additional rail that allow trains to move from one railroad track to another. The Project will improve rail cargo movement operations to/from the Ports and on the Alameda Corridor. The parties above entered into an Amended and Restated Alameda Corridor Use and Operating Agreement (UOA), dated December 15, 2016, that governs the use and operations of the Alameda Corridor. The proposed MOA is required to address the specific details on this Project, including but not limited to the design and construction,operations, maintenance and repair, and UP's sole responsibility to bear all costs associated with the Project. This MOA requires approval from the Board of Harbor Commissioners of both Ports. The Port of Long Beach Board of Harbor Commissioners approved th is MOA at its meeting on June 28 , 2021 .
    [Show full text]