DOCSLIB.ORG

Connecticut River Bridge Replacement Project

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Connecticut River Bridge Replacement Project CONNECTICUT RIVER BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT Environmental Assessment & Section 4(f) Evaluation MAY 2014 Table of Contents Executive Summary..................................................................................................................S-1 1: Purpose and Need................................................................................................................. 1-1 A. Introduction..................................................................................................................... 1-1 B. Project Description.......................................................................................................... 1-1 C. Existing Conditions......................................................................................................... 1-1 Regional Passenger Rail System........................................................................................ 1-1 Bridge History.................................................................................................................... 1-2 Current Bridge Operations ................................................................................................. 1-2 Navigation Along the Connecticut River ........................................................................... 1-3 D. Problem Identification and Need..................................................................................... 1-4 Bridge Structure ................................................................................................................. 1-4 Navigation Channel............................................................................................................ 1-4 E. Planning Context............................................................................................................. 1-5 Related Prior Projects......................................................................................................... 1-5 ARRA and PRIIA............................................................................................................... 1-5 State of Good Repair.......................................................................................................... 1-6 Amtrak’s 2012 Update Report ........................................................................................... 1-6 NEC Future Tier I EIS ....................................................................................................... 1-6 F. Project Purpose, Goals, and Objectives .......................................................................... 1-7 G. Environmental Review Process....................................................................................... 1-8 2: Project Alternatives.............................................................................................................. 2-1 A. Introduction..................................................................................................................... 2-1 B. Area of Potential Effect................................................................................................... 2-1 C. Alternatives Development and Screening....................................................................... 2-1 Alternative Groups 1, 2, and 3 ........................................................................................... 2-3 Alternative Groups 4 and 5 ................................................................................................ 2-4 Alternative Groups 6 and 7 ................................................................................................ 2-5 D. No Action Alternative..................................................................................................... 2-5 Replacement of Niantic River Bridge ................................................................................ 2-6 New Shore Line East Stations............................................................................................ 2-6 Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge (Q-Bridge) Construction .................................................. 2-6 ConnDOT New Haven - Hartford – Springfield Rail Program.......................................... 2-6 Amtrak State of Good Repair Program .............................................................................. 2-7 MTA Metro-North Railroad New Haven Line Improvements........................................... 2-7 CTTRANSIT New Britain – Hartford Rapid Transit......................................................... 2-7 E. Preferred Build Alternative ............................................................................................. 2-8 Superstructure and Substructure......................................................................................... 2-8 Communications and Signaling.......................................................................................... 2-9 TOC-1 May 2014 Connecticut River Bridge Replacement Project EA Catenary and Traction Power .............................................................................................2-9 F. Capital Costs....................................................................................................................2-9 G. Potential Permits Required ..............................................................................................2-9 3: Transportation Effects..........................................................................................................3-1 A. Introduction and Methodology ........................................................................................3-1 B. Existing Conditions .........................................................................................................3-1 Intercity Rail.......................................................................................................................3-1 Freight Service....................................................................................................................3-2 Public Transportation..........................................................................................................3-2 Navigable Waters................................................................................................................3-5 Regional Highway System .................................................................................................3-6 C. No Action Alternative .....................................................................................................3-7 Population and Employment Growth .................................................................................3-7 Intercity Rail.......................................................................................................................3-7 Freight Service....................................................................................................................3-8 Public Transportation..........................................................................................................3-8 Navigable Waters................................................................................................................3-9 Regional Highway System .................................................................................................3-9 D. Probable Impacts of the Preferred Alternative ..............................................................3-10 Intercity Rail.....................................................................................................................3-10 Freight Service..................................................................................................................3-10 Public Transportation........................................................................................................3-10 Navigable Waters..............................................................................................................3-11 Regional Highway System ...............................................................................................3-11 4: Land Use and Socioeconomic Conditions ...........................................................................4-1 A. Introduction .....................................................................................................................4-1 B. Regulatory Context and Methodology ............................................................................4-1 Regulatory Context.............................................................................................................4-1 Methodology.......................................................................................................................4-2 C. Existing Conditions .........................................................................................................4-3 Land Use.............................................................................................................................4-3 Zoning and Public Policy....................................................................................................4-4 Parkland and Open Space ...................................................................................................4-9 Socioeconomic Conditions .................................................................................................4-9 D. No Action Alternative ...................................................................................................4-11 E. Probable Impacts of the Preferred Alternative ..............................................................4-11
Load more

Recommended publications
  • GAO-02-398 Intercity Passenger Rail: Amtrak Needs to Improve Its
    United States General Accounting Office Report to the Honorable Ron Wyden GAO U.S. Senate April 2002 INTERCITY PASSENGER RAIL Amtrak Needs to Improve Its Decisionmaking Process for Its Route and Service Proposals GAO-02-398 Contents Letter 1 Results in Brief 2 Background 3 Status of the Growth Strategy 6 Amtrak Overestimated Expected Mail and Express Revenue 7 Amtrak Encountered Substantial Difficulties in Expanding Service Over Freight Railroad Tracks 9 Conclusions 13 Recommendation for Executive Action 13 Agency Comments and Our Evaluation 13 Scope and Methodology 16 Appendix I Financial Performance of Amtrak’s Routes, Fiscal Year 2001 18 Appendix II Amtrak Route Actions, January 1995 Through December 2001 20 Appendix III Planned Route and Service Actions Included in the Network Growth Strategy 22 Appendix IV Amtrak’s Process for Evaluating Route and Service Proposals 23 Amtrak’s Consideration of Operating Revenue and Direct Costs 23 Consideration of Capital Costs and Other Financial Issues 24 Appendix V Market-Based Network Analysis Models Used to Estimate Ridership, Revenues, and Costs 26 Models Used to Estimate Ridership and Revenue 26 Models Used to Estimate Costs 27 Page i GAO-02-398 Amtrak’s Route and Service Decisionmaking Appendix VI Comments from the National Railroad Passenger Corporation 28 GAO’s Evaluation 37 Tables Table 1: Status of Network Growth Strategy Route and Service Actions, as of December 31, 2001 7 Table 2: Operating Profit (Loss), Operating Ratio, and Profit (Loss) per Passenger of Each Amtrak Route, Fiscal Year 2001, Ranked by Profit (Loss) 18 Table 3: Planned Network Growth Strategy Route and Service Actions 22 Figure Figure 1: Amtrak’s Route System, as of December 2001 4 Page ii GAO-02-398 Amtrak’s Route and Service Decisionmaking United States General Accounting Office Washington, DC 20548 April 12, 2002 The Honorable Ron Wyden United States Senate Dear Senator Wyden: The National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) is the nation’s intercity passenger rail operator.
    [Show full text]
  • Niantic River Bridge Replacement
    NIANTIC RIVER BRIDGE REPLACEMENT A new, moveable, rail PROJECT SUMMARY Timeline The project started in January 2010 and was completed bridge providing greater on schedule in May 2013. reliability, less disruption Funding The total project cost was $154 million, supported by American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funding and to maritime traffic, and Amtrak general capital funds. expanded beach access to Partners U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration, Town of East Lyme, Town of Waterford, the public. U.S. Coast Guard, and East Lyme Public Trust Contractor Cianbro/Middlesex Joint Venture VII PROJECT OVERVIEW Left: Old and new Niantic Bridges in the A new Niantic River Bridge has replaced one of the open position. Below: Looking west, a oldest movable bridges in the country, a two-track, view of the new Niantic Bridge, Overlook Beach and newly constructed board- bascule (rolling lift) bridge that was built in 1907 walk. and operated continuously until it was replaced in 2012. The bridge is one of five movable bridges along the Northeast Corridor rail line between New Haven, Connecticut and Boston, Massachusetts. The completion of the bridge project is an impor- tant milestone in Amtrak’s plans to replace outdat- ed infrastructure, increase capacity for rail opera- tions, and improve reliability and trip times on the Northeast Corridor, by providing sustainable travel options that support a vibrant, growing economy in the Northeast Region. One of Amtrak’s most complex capital projects, the bridge replacement was partially funded by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act and successfully completed in May 2013. Prior to its re- placement, the old Niantic River Bridge served as a key link for passenger and freight rail traffic be- tween New York and Boston.
    [Show full text]
  • Thames River Basin Partnership Partners in Action Quarterly Report
    Thames River Basin Partnership Partners in Action Quarterly Report Summer 2018 Volume 47 The Thames River watershed includes the Five Mile, French, Moosup, Natchaug, Pachaug, Quinebaug, Shetucket, Willimantic, and Yantic Rivers and all their tributaries. We’re not just the "Thames main stem." Greetings from the Thames River Basin Partnership. Once again this quarter our partners have proven their ability to work cooperatively on projects compatible with the TRBP Workplan and in support of our common mission statement to share organizational resources and to develop a regional approach to natural resource protection. I hope you enjoy reading about these activities as much as I enjoy sharing information about them with you. For more information on any of these updates, just click on the blue website hyperlinks in this e-publication, but be sure to come back to finish reading the rest of the report. Jean Pillo, Watershed Conservation Project Manager Eastern Connecticut Conservation District And TRBP Coordinator Special Presentation If you missed the July 2018 meeting of the Thames River Basin Partnership, then you missed a presentation by Chuck Toal, Avalonia Land Conservancy’s development and programs director. Chuck gave a presentation on the 50 years of accomplishments of ALC as a regional land trust. ALC is focused on 22 towns in southeastern Connecticut. ALC, which oversees 4000 acres of preserved land, achieved accreditation in 2017. Their success has resulted from a working board of directors and the establishment of town committees to focus on smaller areas. Their current focus is to be more selective on land acquisition, particularly concentrating on building blocks of open space while also building an endowment fund land stewardship going forward.
    [Show full text]
  • Northeast Corridor Chase, Maryland January 4, 1987
    PB88-916301 NATIONAL TRANSPORT SAFETY BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C. 20594 RAILROAD ACCIDENT REPORT REAR-END COLLISION OF AMTRAK PASSENGER TRAIN 94, THE COLONIAL AND CONSOLIDATED RAIL CORPORATION FREIGHT TRAIN ENS-121, ON THE NORTHEAST CORRIDOR CHASE, MARYLAND JANUARY 4, 1987 NTSB/RAR-88/01 UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT TECHNICAL REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE 1. Report No. 2.Government Accession No. 3.Recipient's Catalog No. NTSB/RAR-88/01 . PB88-916301 Title and Subtitle Railroad Accident Report^ 5-Report Date Rear-end Collision of'*Amtrak Passenger Train 949 the January 25, 1988 Colonial and Consolidated Rail Corporation Freight -Performing Organization Train ENS-121, on the Northeast Corridor, Code Chase, Maryland, January 4, 1987 -Performing Organization 7. "Author(s) ~~ Report No. Performing Organization Name and Address 10.Work Unit No. National Transportation Safety Board Bureau of Accident Investigation .Contract or Grant No. Washington, D.C. 20594 k3-Type of Report and Period Covered 12.Sponsoring Agency Name and Address Iroad Accident Report lanuary 4, 1987 NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD Washington, D. C. 20594 1*+.Sponsoring Agency Code 15-Supplementary Notes 16 Abstract About 1:16 p.m., eastern standard time, on January 4, 1987, northbound Conrail train ENS -121 departed Bay View yard at Baltimore, Mary1 and, on track 1. The train consisted of three diesel-electric freight locomotive units, all under power and manned by an engineer and a brakeman. Almost simultaneously, northbound Amtrak train 94 departed Pennsylvania Station in Baltimore. Train 94 consisted of two electric locomotive units, nine coaches, and three food service cars. In addition to an engineer, conductor, and three assistant conductors, there were seven Amtrak service employees and about 660 passengers on the train.
    [Show full text]
  • Connecticut Town Guides: Compiled from Collections at the CT State Library
    Connecticut Town Guides: Compiled from Collections at the CT State Library Compiled by Jeannie Sherman, Reference Librarian, History & Genealogy Unit, Connecticut State Library, 2016 Introduction Many people visit the Connecticut State Library to research their family history. We hold one of the best genealogy collections in Connecticut including our indexes to pre-1850 vital records, cemetery inscriptions, church & family bible records, marriage & death notices, and probate estate papers. Though these indexes are state-wide by surname, we also hold records for each town. As any person who attempts to do genealogy research in Connecticut discovers, knowing what town a family lived in is very important. Connecticut currently has one hundred and sixty-nine towns each with their own vital, land, and probate district chronology. As towns in Connecticut were created, most were set off from a parent town. County boundaries also changed throughout Connecticut's history, so knowing a parent town or knowing in which county a town was located over time can help researchers search for court and other records. The purpose of these Town Guides is to have in one place basic information about each town. This includes the year it was established, the parent town, historical county information, vital and church record information, a probate district chronology, and a list of cemeteries that were inventoried in the Hale Collection. For town vital records and church records, both the Connecticut State Library (CSL) microfilm number and the Latter-Day Saint (LDS) microfilm number are given where applicable. Researchers are encouraged to search by film number within the LDS catalog as many vital records can be found online.
    [Show full text]
  • Department of Environmental Protection Inland Waters And
    Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies TITLE 26. Fisheries & Game Agency Department of Environmental Protection Subject Inland Waters and Marine District Defined Section § 26-108-1 CONTENTS Sec. 26-108-1. Inland waters and marine district defined Revised: 2015-3-6 R.C.S.A. § 26-108-1 - I- Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies TITLE 26. Fisheries & Game Department of Environmental Protection §26-108-1 Inland Waters and Marine District Defined Sec. 26-108-1. Inland waters and marine district defined The following lines across streams flowing into Long Island Sound, Fisher’s Island Sound, Little Narragansett Bay and tributaries thereof shall be known as the inland-marine demarcation lines above which lines such water shall be known as the “inland district” and below which lines such water shall be known as the “marine district”: FAIRFIELD COUNTY Byram River, Greenwich marine district—up to and including the railroad crossing inland district—all waters above Horse Neck Brook, Greenwich marine district—none inland district—above junction with mouth of harbor Indian Harbor, Greenwich marine district—up to and including the first railroad crossing inland district—all waters above Mianus River, Greenwich marine district—below dam just above Boston Post Road inland district—all waters above Rippowam River, Stamford marine district—up to and including the first railroad crossing inland district—all waters above Noroton River, Stamford-Darien marine district—up to and including Boston Post Road inland district—all waters above Goodwives River,
    [Show full text]
  • Regional Rail Service the Vermont Way
    DRAFT Regional Rail Service The Vermont Way Authored by Christopher Parker and Carl Fowler November 30, 2017 Contents Contents 2 Executive Summary 4 The Budd Car RDC Advantage 5 Project System Description 6 Routes 6 Schedule 7 Major Employers and Markets 8 Commuter vs. Intercity Designation 10 Project Developer 10 Stakeholders 10 Transportation organizations 10 Town and City Governments 11 Colleges and Universities 11 Resorts 11 Host Railroads 11 Vermont Rail Systems 11 New England Central Railroad 12 Amtrak 12 Possible contract operators 12 Dispatching 13 Liability Insurance 13 Tracks and Right-of-Way 15 Upgraded Track 15 Safety: Grade Crossing Upgrades 15 Proposed Standard 16 Upgrades by segment 16 Cost of Upgrades 17 Safety 19 Platforms and Stations 20 Proposed Stations 20 Existing Stations 22 Construction Methods of New Stations 22 Current and Historical Precedents 25 Rail in Vermont 25 Regional Rail Service in the United States 27 New Mexico 27 Maine 27 Oregon 28 Arizona and Rural New York 28 Rural Massachusetts 28 Executive Summary For more than twenty years various studies have responded to a yearning in Vermont for a regional passenger rail service which would connect Vermont towns and cities. This White Paper, commissioned by Champ P3, LLC reviews the opportunities for and obstacles to delivering rail service at a rural scale appropriate for a rural state. Champ P3 is a mission driven public-private partnership modeled on the Eagle P3 which built Denver’s new commuter rail network. Vermont’s two railroads, Vermont Rail System and Genesee & Wyoming, have experience hosting and operating commuter rail service utilizing Budd cars.
    [Show full text]
  • Regional Transportation Improvement Program 2019-2028
    Regional Transportation Improvement Plan Fiscal Year 2019-2028 UPDATED: July 2017 Table of Contents Introduction .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Ten Year Plan Update Process ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 4 Figure 2: Transportation Planners Collaborative Threshold Criteria ............................................................................................................ 4 Scoring Criteria, Weighting, and Supporting Data .................................................................................................................................................. 5 NCC TYP Scoring Strategy ................................................................................................................................................................................................. 5 New TYP Projects Description, Scope and Budget .................................................................................................................................................. 7 List of Tables for All Projects ..........................................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Water-Supply Paper 374 Hartford, Stamford, Salisbury, Willimantic and Saybrooi Areas, Connecticut
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR FRANKLIN K. LANE, Secretary UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY GEORGE OTIS SMITH, Director WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 374 GROUND WATER IN THE HARTFORD, STAMFORD, SALISBURY, WILLIMANTIC AND SAYBROOI AREAS, CONNECTICUT BY HERBERT E. GREGORY AND ARTHUR J. ELUS Prepared IB cooperation with the CoBBectleat State Geological and Natural Hbtorjr Surer WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1016 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR FRANKLIN K. LANE, Secretary UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY GEORGE OTIS SMITH, Director Water-Supply Paper 374 GROUND WATER IN THE HARTFORD, STAMFORD, SALISBURY, WILLIMANTIC AND SAYBROOK AREAS, COHECTICUT HERBERT E. GREGORY AND Prepared in cooperation with the Connecticut State Geological and Natural History Surrey WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT FEINTING OFFICE 1916 CONTENTS. Page. Introduction.. ........................................................... 9 The problem. ........................................................ 9 History of the investigation. ........................................... 10 Acknowledgments. ................................................... 11 Areas selected for study. .................................................. 11 Reliability of data. ....................................................... la Occurrence of ground water. .............................................. 14 Origin.. .............................................................. 14 Water in the glacial drift. ............................................. 15 Circulation.... ...................................................
    [Show full text]
  • CT DEEP 2018 FISHING REPORT NUMBER 1 Channel Catfish (Ictalurus Punctatus) 4/26/2018 Brown Trout (Salmo Trutta)
    CT DEEP 2018 FISHING REPORT NUMBER 1 Channel catfish (Ictalurus punctatus) 4/26/2018 Brown Trout (Salmo trutta) YOU CAN FIND US DIRECTLY ON FACEBOOK. This page features a variety of information on fishing, hunting, and wildlife watching in Connecticut. The address is www.facebook.com/CTFishandWildlife. INLAND REPORT OPENING DAY – We had a short blast of warm air temperatures that gave anglers a comfortable Opening Day, however, water temperatures were very cold, possibly contributing to difficult catching for many. Fisheries staff were out at eight of the twelve Trout Parks were stocked on Opening Day and the many kids Connecticut’s Trout & Salmon Stamp: Connecticut present enjoyed helping us stock. Catch percentage has implemented a Trout and Salmon Stamp. 100% was from 60 to 80% at a number of the Trout Parks of the revenue from your investment comes to the including Stratton Brook, Black Rock, Kent Falls, DEEP Bureau of Natural Resources for Fisheries Chatfield Hollow, Valley Falls Park, Southford Falls, and programs. Great Hollow. Many other locations, both river and The Trout and Salmon Stamp is $5 for anyone age 18 stream as well as lake and pond did not give up their or older, including those 65 or older, and $3 for CT recently stocked trout so easily. residents age 16-17. The Stamp is required for the harvest (keeping) of Over 300,000 trout were stocked before Opening Day trout or salmon. into nearly 100 lakes and ponds and over 120 rivers The Stamp is required to FISH in one of these places: and streams located throughout Connecticut.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Government Printing Office Style Manual, 2008
    U.S. Government Printing Offi ce Style Manual An official guide to the form and style of Federal Government printing 2008 PPreliminary-CD.inddreliminary-CD.indd i 33/4/09/4/09 110:18:040:18:04 AAMM Production and Distribution Notes Th is publication was typeset electronically using Helvetica and Minion Pro typefaces. It was printed using vegetable oil-based ink on recycled paper containing 30% post consumer waste. Th e GPO Style Manual will be distributed to libraries in the Federal Depository Library Program. To fi nd a depository library near you, please go to the Federal depository library directory at http://catalog.gpo.gov/fdlpdir/public.jsp. Th e electronic text of this publication is available for public use free of charge at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/stylemanual/index.html. Use of ISBN Prefi x Th is is the offi cial U.S. Government edition of this publication and is herein identifi ed to certify its authenticity. ISBN 978–0–16–081813–4 is for U.S. Government Printing Offi ce offi cial editions only. Th e Superintendent of Documents of the U.S. Government Printing Offi ce requests that any re- printed edition be labeled clearly as a copy of the authentic work, and that a new ISBN be assigned. For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402-0001 ISBN 978-0-16-081813-4 (CD) II PPreliminary-CD.inddreliminary-CD.indd iiii 33/4/09/4/09 110:18:050:18:05 AAMM THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE STYLE MANUAL IS PUBLISHED UNDER THE DIRECTION AND AUTHORITY OF THE PUBLIC PRINTER OF THE UNITED STATES Robert C.
    [Show full text]
  • CHAPTER 6: SERVICES and INFRASTRUCTURE Introduction
    Chester 2009 Plan of Conservation and Development Page 6‐1 CHAPTER 6: SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE Introduction Town services and infrastructure are the framework on which the community network operates, progresses, and interacts. Town services include governing boards and commissions, social services, recreational programs, education, public safety, and public works. Infrastructure incorporates tangible facilities that can be moved, expanded, modified, or removed. The library, town hall, community center, transportation, communications, parks, trails, water, sewer, fire stations, and schools are some of the significant facilities that enhance community character and quality of life. This Plan of Conservation and Development explores Chester’s services and infrastructure to provide recommendations to address future needs. To coordinate efficient and effective town planning, multiple services need to be supported by mutually shared infrastructure. A caveat in final recommendations within this section of the plan is the ability of the town to legally act within the context of enabling statutes outlined by the State of Connecticut. There are also policies and standards outlined by the state and federal government which the town follows in the context of receiving state funding or use of state property. Chester has significant acreage dedicated to state or regional ownership; parks, forest, regional watershed, and transportation. The town’s ability to coordinate future planning goals with infrastructure improvements in parks, roads, and utilities
    [Show full text]