DOCSLIB.ORG

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs 100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900 Boston, MA 02114

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs 100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900 Boston, MA 02114 % The Commonwealth of Massachusetts Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs 100 Cambridge Street, Suite 900 Boston, MA 02114 Charles D. Baker GOVERNOR Tel: (617) 626-1000 Karyn E. Polito Fax: (617) 626-1081 LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR http://www.mass.gov/eea Kathleen A.Theoharides SECRETARY March 26, 2021 CERTIFICATE OF THE SECRETARY OF ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL NOTIFICATION FORM PROJECT NAME : Plymouth Rubber Redevelopment PROJECT MUNICIPALITY : Canton PROJECT WATERSHED : Boston Harbor EEA NUMBER : 16335 PROJECT PROPONENT : Canton Copperworks, LLC DATE NOTICED IN MONITOR : February 24, 2021 Pursuant to the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act (MEPA; M.G. L. c. 30, ss. 61-62I) and Section 11.06 of the MEPA regulations (301 CMR 11.00), I hereby determine that this project does not require an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). Project Description As described in the Environmental Notification Form (ENF), the project involves the phased construction of an approximately 650,480 square foot (sf) mixed-use development on a former industrial site. The project includes approximately 588,000 total sf of residential space (272 units) comprised of townhomes and six multifamily residential buildings; approximately 22,500 total sf of commercial space consisting of retail, office, restaurant, function, and exhibit space; and up to 40,000 total sf of light industrial uses. The project also includes the construction of a bridge over the Neponset River Diversion Channel to connect Revolution Way with Neponset Street. This connection to Neponset Street was incorporated into the project in response to a request from the Town of Canton (Town) in order to improve fire safety response times to northern points within the Town. The project also includes remediation of contaminated soil and groundwater associated with past industrial uses; establishment of a 9-acre park (Paul Revere Heritage Park) along the Neponset River Diversion Channel; installation of a stormwater management system; and additional transportation, pedestrian and utility improvements as described further below. EEA# 16335 ENF Certificate March 26, 2021 A Special Permit/Site Plan Approval was issued by the Town for the site in 2016. Construction was proposed in four phases. The first three phases are complete or are currently under construction. Therefore, the ENF submission is an after-the-fact filing for most of the project. The final phase includes the development of two residential buildings (Building 5 and 6) and a 40,000-sf light industrial building on Lots 8 and 9. Project Site As described in the ENF, the development area includes an approximately 41.9-acre project site bounded by the Neponset River Diversion Channel (Diversion Channel) and the Neponset Street residential neighborhood to the south and west, MBTA commuter rail line to the west and north, and Revere Street to the east. The Diversion Channel is a manmade flood control channel which was constructed by the Army Corp of Engineers in 1963 to reduce flooding associated with the Neponset River. The project site includes the following wetland resource areas: Bordering Land Subject to Flooding (BLSF), Riverfront Area, Land Under Water (LUW), Bank, and Bordering Vegetated Wetlands (BVW). Portions of the project site (approximately 9 acres) are within the 100-year floodplain (Zone AE) with varying Base Flood Elevations (BFE) based on the effective Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM-panel 250235 0001 effective June 4, 1987). The effective BFEs on/adjacent to the site range from 65.19 to 76.19 ft elevation (el.) NAVD88. As indicated in supplemental information provided by the Proponent, new flood mapping for the project area will likely be approved later this year.1 The project site includes structures listed in the State Register of Historic Places or the Inventory of Historic and Archaeological Assets of the Commonwealth, including the Paul Revere and Son Copper Rolling Mill (CAN.126) and Draft Horse Stable (CAN.127). Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Potential environmental impacts associated with the project include the new alteration of 5.4 acres of land; alteration of 32,500 sf (0.75 acres) of BLSF, 10,050 sf (0.23 acres) of Riverfront Area, 145 linear feet (lf) of Bank, and 5,725 sf of LUW; generation of 2,252 new average daily trips (adt), construction of 700 new parking spaces, generation of 76,240 gallons per day of water demand and generation of 69,310 gpd of wastewater generation. The project includes construction of 0.61 miles of water main and 0.42 miles of sewer main. Measures to avoid, minimize, and mitigate environmental impacts identified in the ENF include the provision of a 9.1-acre park, reduction of on-site impervious area by 3.5 acres; installation of stormwater management systems consistent with MassDEP’s Stormwater Management Standards; remediation of contaminated soils; provision of compensatory flood storage at 1.2:1 ratio; restoration of in situ impacts to bank and LUW, and pedestrian and transportation improvements. Jurisdiction and Permitting 1 Floodplain information was provided to the MEPA Office by the Proponent on March 23, 2021. 2 EEA# 16335 ENF Certificate March 26, 2021 This project is subject to MEPA review and preparation of an ENF pursuant to 301 CMR 11.03(3)(b)(1)(f), 11.03(6)(b)(13), and 11.03(6)(b)(15) because the project requires a State Agency Action and involves alteration of one half or more acres of any other wetlands; generation of 2,000 or more new adt on roadways providing access to a single location; and construction of 300 or more new parking spaces at single location, respectively. The project received an 8(m) permit from the Massachusetts Water Resource Authority (MWRA) and a Chapter 91 License from the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP). As noted below, the project also received a Superseding Order of Conditions from MassDEP. The project may require one or more license agreements from the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA). The project received multiple Orders of Conditions (DEP File Nos. 124-1169, 124-1183,124- 1245, 124-1266) from the Canton Conservation Commission and a Superseding Order of Conditions (SOC) from MassDEP (124-1182)). The project required a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Construction General Permit from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The project required review by the Massachusetts Historical Commission (MHC) acting as the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (36 CFR 800). The project is not receiving Financial Assistance from the Commonwealth. Therefore, MEPA jurisdiction for any future review would be limited to those aspects of the project that are within the subject matter of any required or potentially required Agency Actions and that may cause Damage to the Environment, as defined in the MEPA regulations. Review of the ENF The ENF provided a description of existing and proposed conditions, preliminary project plans, and identified measures to avoid, minimize and mitigate environmental impacts. Because the project is under construction, no alternatives analysis was provided. Comments from State Agencies do not request additional analysis in the form of an EIR. The Town of Canton submitted a letter of support for the project indicating the numerous opportunities for public and municipal input during the design of the project as well as the public benefits the project provides, including remediation of a heavily contaminated site; establishment of cultural and recreational amenities for residents; and the provision of affordable housing. One comment letter from a resident expressed concerns regarding the clearing of undeveloped land for the construction of Building 5 and 6 which were originally sited in previously disturbed area (Lot 8). As discussed in the remote meeting held on March 4, 2021 and reiterated in correspondence received by the MEPA office on March 23, 2021, the siting of Building 5 and 6 was revised based on more extensive soil testing of Lots 8 and 9. This testing indicated that contaminated soil was present in Lot 8 and a very small portion of Lot 9 but was deeper than originally thought. Town officials expressed a very strong desire to see underground parking as part of the residential development plan in order to reduce impervious cover near the wetlands system. However, as described in the ENF, the quantities of contaminated soil that would have to be hauled off-site to allow for underground parking on Lot 8 would be cost prohibitive and placing the residential use on Lot 8 would also require an Activity Use Limitation (AUL) and potentially result in exposure to future residents. For these reasons, 3 EEA# 16335 ENF Certificate March 26, 2021 the Proponent determined that the siting of residential Buildings 5 and 6 on the undeveloped portion of Lot 9 and within the MBTA ZOI was necessary. Land Alteration and Stormwater As discussed above, the majority of the project site was previously disturbed due to industrial uses on site; however, the project will result in the new alteration (i.e. clearing) of 5.4 acres of undeveloped land for the development of Building 5 and 6. The project will result in the net reduction of impervious area by 3.5 acres. The project also includes a 9-acre public park located along the banks of the Diversion Channel. As described in the ENF, the project’s stormwater management system is comprised of a combination of impervious area reduction, surface/subsurface infiltration basins, sand filters, detention and constructed stormwater wetlands to promote recharge, enhance water quality and mitigate peak rates of runoff. The system has been designed in accordance with MassDEP’s Stormwater Management Standards. The Project required Orders of Conditions (OOC) from the Canton Conservation Commission. As noted in the ENF, as part of that permitting process the stormwater design underwent a rigorous review by the Town’s peer review consultants.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Changes to Transit Service in the MBTA District 1964-Present
    Changes to Transit Service in the MBTA district 1964-2021 By Jonathan Belcher with thanks to Richard Barber and Thomas J. Humphrey Compilation of this data would not have been possible without the information and input provided by Mr. Barber and Mr. Humphrey. Sources of data used in compiling this information include public timetables, maps, newspaper articles, MBTA press releases, Department of Public Utilities records, and MBTA records. Thanks also to Tadd Anderson, Charles Bahne, Alan Castaline, George Chiasson, Bradley Clarke, Robert Hussey, Scott Moore, Edward Ramsdell, George Sanborn, David Sindel, James Teed, and George Zeiba for additional comments and information. Thomas J. Humphrey’s original 1974 research on the origin and development of the MBTA bus network is now available here and has been updated through August 2020: http://www.transithistory.org/roster/MBTABUSDEV.pdf August 29, 2021 Version Discussion of changes is broken down into seven sections: 1) MBTA bus routes inherited from the MTA 2) MBTA bus routes inherited from the Eastern Mass. St. Ry. Co. Norwood Area Quincy Area Lynn Area Melrose Area Lowell Area Lawrence Area Brockton Area 3) MBTA bus routes inherited from the Middlesex and Boston St. Ry. Co 4) MBTA bus routes inherited from Service Bus Lines and Brush Hill Transportation 5) MBTA bus routes initiated by the MBTA 1964-present ROLLSIGN 3 5b) Silver Line bus rapid transit service 6) Private carrier transit and commuter bus routes within or to the MBTA district 7) The Suburban Transportation (mini-bus) Program 8) Rail routes 4 ROLLSIGN Changes in MBTA Bus Routes 1964-present Section 1) MBTA bus routes inherited from the MTA The Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) succeeded the Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA) on August 3, 1964.
    [Show full text]
  • Regionwide Suburban Transit Opportunities Study Phase II
    Regionwide Suburban Transit Opportunities Study Phase II A report produced by the Central Transportation Planning Staff for the Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization Regionwide Suburban Transit Opportunities Study Phase II Project Manager Clinton Bench Authors Thomas J. Humphrey Heather Ostertog Contributing Staff Paul Reim Cartography Mary McShane Cover Design Jane M. Gillis Cover Photographs Carol Gautreau Bent Kenneth Dumas Central Transportation Planning Staff, directed by the Boston Region Metropolitan Planning Organization. The MPO is com- posed of state and regional agencies and authorities, and local governments. December 2005 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS.................................................................................................1 Overview...........................................................................................................................1 Suggested Routes .............................................................................................................2 Wellesley .........................................................................................................................2 Winchester.......................................................................................................................2 Westwood........................................................................................................................2 Canton..............................................................................................................................3
    [Show full text]
  • Massachusetts State Rail Plan
    Prepared by: HDR AECOM Fitzgerald & Halliday, Inc. HMMH Contents ES Executive Summary 1 State Rail Plan Purpose 1 Rail Plan Approach 1 Long-term Vision 2 Context of Massachusetts Rail System 2 Passenger Rail 2 Freight Rail 4 Accomplishments since 2010 Rail Plan 6 MassDOT Rail Acquisition 6 Inter-city Rail Investment 7 Freight Investment 7 Concurrent Processes 7 Short- and Long-Term Investments 8 Short-Term Project Priorities 8 Long-Term Modernization and Expansion Priorities 8 Conclusion 14 1 Chapter 1 15 1.1 State Rail Plan Purpose 15 1.2 Rail Transportation in the State Transportation Network 16 1.2.1 Impact on Massachusetts Economy and Quality of Life 17 1.3 Institutional Structure of Massachusetts’ State Rail Program 18 1.4.1 Freight Rail Services 19 1.4.2 Passenger Rail Services 22 1.5 Rail Milestones since the 2010 Massachusetts State Rail Plan 23 1.6 Massachusetts’ Goals for the Statewide Multi-modal Transportation System and State Rail Plan 26 1.6.1 Goals for Rail in the Multimodal Transportation System 26 1.6.2 MassDOT Vision for Massachusetts Passenger and Freight Rail Service 26 1.7 State Rail Plan Context 27 1.7.1 Rail Initiatives Under Development 27 1.7.3 Involvement in Multi-State Rail Implementation 30 1.7.4 Federal Mandate for State Rail Plans 30 1.7.5 Integration with the National Rail Plan 30 2 Chapter 2 31 2.1 Massachusetts Rail System 31 2.1.1 Freight Rail System 31 2.1.2 Passenger Rail Network 44 2.1.3 Amtrak Inter-city Rail Service Performance Evaluation 50 2.1.4 Programs and Projects to Improve Safety and Security
    [Show full text]
  • New Haven to Boston
    _final cover.3 5/26/04 10:44 Page 1 AMTRAK’S HIGH SPEED RAIL PROGRAM NEW HAVEN TO BOSTON HISTORY AND HISTORIC RESOURCES _final cover.3 5/26/04 10:44 Page 2 PAL Final 5/26/04 11:21 Page 1 AMTRAK’S HIGH SPEED RAIL PROGRAM NEW HAVEN TO BOSTON HISTORY AND HISTORIC RESOURCES This document was prepared by PAL (The Public Archaeology Laboratory,Inc.) with funding provided by the National Railroad Passenger Corporation, Amtrak. Printed in Rhode Island 2001 PAL Final 5/26/04 11:21 Page 2 2 CONTENTS NEW HAVEN TO BOSTON NEW HAVEN 3 Introduction 7 History 39 Stations 52 Railroad Maintenance and Service Facilities 55 Signals and Switches 61 Grade Crossing Eliminations 65 Bridges 73 Freight and Industries 80 Image Credits 80 Recommended Reading In the year 2000, Amtrak inaugurated its new Acela Express high-speed rail service on the Northeast Corridor, ushering in a premium level of service that will set the standard for transportation in this country. Achieving this mile- stone has required a Herculean effort by many states, agencies, companies and individuals. Indeed, between 1992 and 1999, the railroad between New Haven and Boston was transformed from a sleepy, 1940s era line to the INTRODUCTION premier rail line in North America, capable of train speeds up to 150 mph. This has required some $1.7 billion in new rails and ties, signal system upgrades, In the year 2000, the National Railroad Passenger Corporation, Amtrak, ushered bridge replacements, capacity and station improvements, curve realignments, in a new era of railroading in America with the initiation of Acela high-speed and at-grade crossing upgrades.
    [Show full text]
  • Dot 11810 DS1.Pdf
    u.s. Deportment ~uo SelJe~t~ s~ S \S of Transportation Wasni~g:on. D C 20~9C Federal Railroad Administration The Honorable Trudy Coxe February 15, 1995 Secretary Executive Office of Environmental Affairs The Commonwealth of Massachusetts 100 Cambridge Street Boston, Massachusetts, 02202 Re: Northeast Corridor Electrification EIR Dear Secretary Coxe: On November 10, 1994, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) provided you with a copy of the final environmental impact statement and final environmental impact report (FEIR) on the proposal by the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) to extend intercity electric train operation from New Haven, cr to Boston, MA. In due course, the MEPA Unit published a notice of availability of the FEIR in the Environmental Monitor. Subsequent to the release of the FEIR, the MEPA Unit staff suggested that FRA make certain additional background materials available for public review. Enclosed is a supplement to the FEIR that contains the background material identified by the MEPA Unit staff. FRA requests that you arrange for printing a notice of availability of the FEIR and this supplement in the next publication of the State's Environmental Monitor. FRA is providing this information solely because the MEPA Unit staff believes that it would facilitate a more infonned review of the FEIR on Amtrak's proposed electrification project. This action in no way reflects any reservations or concerns on the part of FRA regarding the quality and completeness of the FErR. FRA appreciates the support that we have received from the MEPA Unit staff in facilitating the review of the FEIR. Should your continuing review of the FEIR identify any issues that require further elaboration, FRA will provide such elaboration in a timely manner.
    [Show full text]
  • HOUSE ...No. 4046
    HOUSE . No. 4046 The Commonwealth of Massachusetts _______________ The committee of Conference on the disagreeing votes of the two branches with reference to the Senate amendment (striking out all after the enacting clause and inserting in place thereof the text contained in Senate document numbered 2033) of the House Bill financing improvements to the Commonwealth’s transportation system (House, No. 3882), reports recommending passage of the accompanying bill (House, No. 4046) [Bond Issue: $12,619,120,273.00]. April 14, 2014. William M. Straus Thomas M. McGee Stephen Kulik Stephen M. Brewer Peter J. Durant HOUSE DOCKET, NO. FILED ON: 4/14/2014 HOUSE . No. 4046 The Commonwealth of Massachusetts _______________ In the Year Two Thousand Fourteen _______________ An Act financing improvements to the Commonwealth’s transportation system. Whereas, The deferred operation of this act would tend to defeat its purpose, which is to finance forthwith improvements to the commonwealth’s transportation system, therefore, it is hereby declared to be an emergency law, necessary for the immediate preservation of the public convenience. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows: 1 SECTION 1. To provide for a program of transportation development and improvements, 2 the sums set forth in sections 2 to 2G, inclusive, for the several purposes and subject to the 3 conditions specified in this act, are hereby made available, subject to the laws regulating the 4 disbursement of public funds; provided, however, that the amounts specified in an item or for a 5 particular project may be adjusted in order to facilitate projects authorized in this act.
    [Show full text]
  • Transportation Bond Bill
    HOUSE DOCKET, NO. FILED ON: HOUSE . No. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts _______________ In the Year Two Thousand Fourteen _______________ An Act financing improvements to the Commonwealth’s transportation system. Whereas, The deferred operation of this act would tend to defeat its purpose, which is to finance forthwith improvements to the commonwealth’s transportation system, therefore, it is hereby declared to be an emergency law, necessary for the immediate preservation of the public convenience. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows: SECTION 1. To provide for a program of transportation development and improvements, the sums set forth in sections 2 to 2G, inclusive, for the several purposes and subject to the conditions specified in this act, are hereby made available, subject to the laws regulating the disbursement of public funds; provided, however, that the amounts specified in an item or for a particular project may be adjusted in order to facilitate projects authorized in this act. The sums appropriated in this act shall be in addition to any amounts previously appropriated and made available for these purposes. SECTION 2. MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Highway Division 6121-1314 For projects on the interstate and non-interstate federal highway system; provided, that funds may be expended for the costs of these projects including, but not limited to, the nonparticipating portions of these projects and the costs of engineering
    [Show full text]
  • Creating Transit Links in Canton, MA
    Creating Transit Links in Canton, MA Hanna Schutt GSD 5469: Environmental Planning Final Project May 8, 2017 Word Count: 5,949 1 INTRODUCTION While the Greater Boston area enjoys the immense benefit of an extensive commuter rail system, the incorporation of alternate modes of transit is a very different task for the region’s peripheral towns than it is for the central cities of Boston, Cambridge and Somerville. First and last mile connections with the commuter rail are a challenge for the less dense Boston suburbs. The Town of Canton is one of these suburbs. With two commuter rail stations at Canton Junction and Canton Center, there is no doubt that the town is well served by commuter transit. Canton surpasses neighboring towns in commuter ridership, with 14.2% of residents using public transit to get to work. However, connecting to that transit and to destinations within the town is difficult to do without a car. Over half of Canton residents have two or more cars available to them, while only 2.4% of residents have no vehicle available, according to 2010-2014 census estimates. To determine how Canton can reduce this heavy dependence on personal vehicles, this report analyzes three options for the city to improve first and last mile connectivity to the commuter rail stations: an on-demand shuttle, a local bus, and a public-private partnership with a ride-hailing app like Uber or Lyft, concluding that the public-private partnership would be the best option for a pilot program for Canton. FIGURE 1 Train Bridge in Canton Source: www.operationsports.
    [Show full text]
  • Short-Range Commuter-Rail Alternatives on the South Shore
    SHORT- RANGE COMMUTER-RAIL ALTERNATIVES ON THE SOUTH SHORE IT DO o 1985 sitory Copy March 1985 . TITLE Short-Range Commuter-Rail Alternatives on the South Shore AUTHOR(S) Thomas J. Humphrey DATE March 1985 ABSTRACT This report presents results of analyses of potential short-range improvements in public transportation between the South Shore and Boston. The main emphasis is on commuter-rail-shuttle service to the Red Line on former Old Colony routes. Other alternatives examined include through South Shore-Boston rail service, extensions of existing commuter-rail lines, and improvements in express-bus, feeder-bus, and commuter-boat service. The report includes operating- and capital-cost estimates, travel-time and fare comparisons, and demand and revenue projections . Institutional constraints and Red Line capacity issues are also examined. Descriptions and operating histories of South Shore commuter rail and currently operating modes are provided This document was prepared by CENTRAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING STAFF, an interagency transportation planning sta'f creaied and directed by the Metropolitan Planning Organization, consisting of the member agencies. Executive OMice of Transportation and Construction Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority Massachusetts Department of Public Works MBTA Advisory Board Massachusetts Port Authority Metropolitan Area Planning Council . -ii- AUTHOR(S) MAPC REGION STUDY AREA BOUNDARY Thomas J. Humphrey GRAPHICS JiniM M. Collan Villiw L . Sicholson EDITING V— Morrison WORD PROCESSING Olga Doherty (UurMn Hagarty Lillian Didio Sandra Barroe Barbara Julian \ I 1 mmm \ This document was prepared in cooperation with the Urban Mass Transportation Administration of the U. S. Depart- ment of Transportation through the technical study grant(s) cited below, and was also financed with state and local matching funds.
    [Show full text]
  • Open PDF File, 561.53 KB, for South Coast Rail FEIS/R
    South Coast Rail FEIS/FEIR 1 – Executive Summary 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.1 INTRODUCTION On May 8, 2008, the Massachusetts Executive Office of Transportation and Public Works (EOT) (currently known as the Massachusetts Department of Transportation, or MassDOT) submitted an application to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE or the Corps) under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and potentially Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 for a Department of the Army (DA) permit to discharge fill material into waters of the United States (U.S.), including adjacent wetlands, incidental to the construction of new public passenger rail (or other public transportation) facilities connecting the terminal stations of Fall River and New Bedford with South Station in Boston, Massachusetts (the project). MassDOT (the project sponsor and state lead agency) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (the federal lead agency) have evaluated several alignment and mode alternatives to implement this transit service over a distance of approximately 50 to 60 miles. Environmental review under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act (MEPA) is being conducted jointly. The Notice of Availability for the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS)/Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the South Coast Rail Project was published in the Federal Register on March 25, 2011.1 USACE also issued a Public Notice on March 23, 2011, in conjunction the public notice on the DEIR published in the MEPA Environmental Monitor. Approximately 270 written comment documents were submitted during the public review period of the DEIS/DEIR, with additional comments provided public hearings in New Bedford and Mansfield.
    [Show full text]
  • Canton Junction Train Schedule to Boston
    Canton Junction Train Schedule To Boston Emerson is lucklessly Punjabi after paravail Bernhard outsmarts his inaccuracies haplessly. Reinhold pollardstill madrigal pleasantly? boozily while schizomycetic Siegfried miscounselling that psychoprophylaxis. Benjie Each of the rail alternatives would result in habitat fragmentation and associated indirect effects on natural communities. Moovit helps you wish to open floor plan your input from different stations at the greatest improvement in the decrease in new commuter. GEOLOGY Soil and rock affected by the Build Alternatives would be excavated and disturbed during construction. Contractors will be limiting the train. Am peak trains to boston and boston to. Our residences apart from canton junction station train schedule symmetry and freight trains all of special education is. Quality as trains currently provide those using various types of schedule. And canton junction is therefore not the schedules. Not yet considered. Let me know what happens. Las traducciones no pueden ser garantizadas como exactas o sin la inclusión de lenguaje incorrecto o inapropiado. MBTA does not currently have electric locomotives in your system, Canton Jct, almost anything of the counts at outlying stations were completed under an old schedules. One inbound and addition to purchase of blood lead to calculate peak ridership. Transilien regional rail networks carry more passengers than release any medieval city in both world. Our new Copperworks Condos are just mount the road surface the Canton Junction commuter rail to Boston. The boston to which appeared least consistent with hardwood floors on. Fairmount line platform and engines bursting into the ground water discharges controlled by train times subject to boston to pass through dialogue.
    [Show full text]
  • Ridership and Service Statistics
    * * UMASS/AMHERST 3,2tW 036l' 4510 f^jssjjljuselts GOVffiJVMENr Transportation Authority (D Jjtf^^^.^^'I^^JSaj RIDERSHIP AND SERVICE STATISTICS Operations Directorate Planning Division November 1990 Edition . Third TABLE OF CONTENTS MOVING FORWARD iii SECTION I. GENERAL STATISTICS AND COSTS 1-1 A. MBTA Service Area Map 1-2 B. 78 Cities and Towns in the MBTA 1-3 C. Rapid Transit Map 1-A D. Commuter Rail Lines Map 1-5 E. MBTA Routes. Stations and Stops 1-6 F. Net Cost of Service Statement 1-7 SECTION II. RIDERSHIP STATISTICS (MBTA-Operated Services) 2-1 A. System Ridership (Linked/Unlinked Trips) Average Weekday and Monthly Ridership 2-2 B. Typical Monthly Variation in Daily Transit Ridership 2-6 C. Rapid Transit Lines - Passenger Counts 2-7 D. Rapid Transit Peak Load Point Line Volumes 2-9 E. MBTA Rapid Transit Downtown Transfer Stations 2-10 F. Green Line Surface Boardings (Typical Weekday Boardings) 2-14 G. Bus Ridership (Typical Weekday Boardings) 2-16 SECTION III. RIDERSHIP STATISTICS (Contract Services) 3-1 A. Suburban Transportation Program Monthly /Annual Ridership 3-2 B. Commuter Boat Daily and Monthly Ridership 3-3 C. Subsidized Private Carrier Service Average Monthly Ridership 3-5 D. THE RIDE Program (Trips Completed and Area Served) 3-6 E. Commuter Rail Daily Boarding Counts 3-9 F. Commuter Rail Annual Passengers and Average Weekday Inbound Passengers 3-11 SECTION IV. SCHEDULE STATISTICS A-1 A. Schedule Miles for Fall 1989 A-2 B. Trips Scheduled for Fall 1989 4-3 C. Revenue Mileage by Mode - 1972-1988 4-4 D.
    [Show full text]