DOCSLIB.ORG

NEC One-Year Implementation Plan: FY17 Contents

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Northeast Corridor One-Year Implementation Plan Fiscal Year 2017 September 2016 Congress established the Northeast Corridor Commission to develop coordinated strategies for improving the Northeast’s core rail network in recognition of the inherent challenges of planning, financing, and implementing major infrastructure improvements that cross multiple jurisdictions. The expectation is that by coming together to take collective responsibility for the NEC, these disparate stakeholders will achieve a level of success that far exceeds the potential reach of any individual organization. The Commission is governed by a board comprised of one member from each of the NEC states (Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, and Maryland) and the District of Columbia; four members from Amtrak; and five members from the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). The Commission also includes non-voting representatives from four freight railroads, states with connecting corridors and several commuter operators in the Region. 2| NEC One-Year Implementation Plan: FY17 Contents Introduction 6 Funding Summary 8 Baseline Capital Charge Program 10 1 - Boston South Station 12 16 - Shore to Girard 42 2 - Boston to Providence 14 17 - Girard to Philadelphia 30th Street 44 3 - Providence to Wickford Junction 16 18 - Philadelphia 30th Street - Arsenal 46 4 - Wickford Junction to New London 18 19 - Arsenal to Marcus Hook 48 5 - New London to New Haven 20 20 - Marcus Hook to Bacon 50 6 - New Haven to State Line 22 21 - Bacon to Perryville 52 7 - State Line to New Rochelle 24 22 - Perryville to WAS 54 8 - New Rochelle to Harold Interlocking 26 23 - Washington Union Terminal 56 9 - Harold Interlocking to F Interlocking 28 24 - WAS to CP Virginia 58 10 - F Interlocking to PSNY 30 25 - Springfield to New Haven 60 11 - Penn Terminal 32 27 - Spuyten Duyvil to PSNY* 62 12 - PSNY to Trenton 34 28 - 30th St. Station to 36th Street 64 13 - Trenton to Morris 36 29 - 36th Street to Thorndale 66 14 - Morris to Holmes 38 30 - Thorndale to Harrisburg 68 15 - Holmes to Shore 40 31 - Amtrak System Wide 70 Special Projects 72 Appendix 134 *Segment 26 is from Poughkeepsie and Spuyten Duyvil and is exempt from the Plan Northeast Corridor Commission |3 Special Projects 72 1. Boston South Station 74 31. New Brunswick Station 104 2. Ruggles Street Station 75 32. Delco Lead Safe Haven Facility 105 3. Mansfield Station 76 33. New Jersey HSR Improvement Program 106 4. South Attleboro Station 77 34. County Yard 107 5. Pawtucket/Central Falls Station 78 35. Princeton Junction Station 108 6. Pawtucket Layover Facility 79 36. Levittown Station Improvements 109 7. Kingston Track and Platform 80 37. 30th Street to Arsenal Signals and 110 Capacity Improvements ROW Improvements 8. Shore Line East Track and Catenary 81 38. 30th Street West Catenary 111 Improvements Replacement 9. New Haven Yard Master Complex 82 39. Philadelphia 30th Street Master Plan 112 Improvements 40. Claymont Station 113 10. New Haven Line Station Improvements 83 41. Wilmington MOFE Facility 114 11. Devon Bridge Replacement 84 42. Delaware Third Track Program 115 12. Norwalk Bridge Replacement 85 43. Newark (DE) Regional Transportation 116 13. Pelham Bay Bridge Replacement 86 Center 14. Penn Station Access 87 44. Susquehanna River Bridge 117 Replacement 15. Harold Interlocking 88 45. Martins Airport Storage Facility 118 16. Sunnyside Yard 89 46. Baltimore Penn Station Master Plan 119 17. River-to-River Rail Resiliency (R4) 90 Projects 47. Baltimore and Potomac Tunnels 120 18. East River Tunnel ROW Infrastructure 91 48. West Baltimore Station 121 Improvements 49. BWI Thurgood Marshall Airport Station Interim 122 19. East River Tunnel Rehabilitation 92 Improvements 20. Penn Station New York - 93 50. Maryland Section Reliability Improvements 123 LIRR Projects 51. Hanson Interlockings 124 21. Penn Station New York - 94 52. Ivy City Traffic Upgrades 125 NJ TRANSIT Projects 22. Moynihan Station 95 53. Washington Union Station 2nd 126 Century Plan 23. Gateway Program 96 54. New Haven Hartford Springfield Rail Program 127 24. Hudson Tunnel Project 97 55. Ardmore Station Improvements 128 25. Portal North Bridge 98 56. Villanova Station Improvements 129 26. NJ TRANSITGRID 99 57. Paoli Station Improvements 131 27. Newark Penn Station 100 Washington 58. Frazer Rail Shop and Yard Upgrade 132 DC 28. North Elizabeth Station 101 59. Exton Station Improvements 133 29. Elizabeth Station 102 60. Harrisburg Line Station Improvements 134 30. Edison Station 103 4| NEC One-Year Implementation Plan: FY17 Albany Boston 2 1 3 Springfield 4 Providence 5 53 6 7 New Haven 8 9 10 11 19 20 21 New Newark 22 23 York City 24 25 26 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 Harrisburg 35 60 59 56 55 57 54 58 36 37 38 Philadelphia 39 40 41 42 Wilmington 43 Baltimore 47 46 45 44 48 49 50 52 51 Washington DC Northeast Corridor Commission |5 Introduction The Northeast Corridor (NEC) is a critical network of rail infrastructure connecting the largest cities, markets, and population centers between Boston, Massachusetts and Washington, District of Columbia. Service operators include eight commuter railroads (MBTA, Shore Line East, Metro-North Railroad, Long Island Rail Road, NJ TRANSIT, SEPTA, MARC, and Virginia Railway Express), Amtrak, and several freight railroads. Main line infrastructure owners in various locations include Amtrak, the New York Metropolitan Transportation Authority Metro-North Railroad, the Connecticut Department of Transportation, and the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority. The Northeast Corridor Commission (the Commission) coordinates planning and investment across infrastructure owners and service operators. The Northeast Corridor One-Year Implementation Plan: Fiscal Year 2017 (the Plan) is a consolidated cross-agency record of the anticipated capital project activity in the upcoming federal fiscal year based on available capital funding. The foundation for the Plan is the Northeast Corridor Capital Investment Plan: Fiscal Years 2017-2021 (CIP) which identified how available capital funding is anticipated to be spent over a five-year time horizon, plus how additional capital funding could be used to eliminate the state-of-good-repair backlog and improve performance of the railroad. This Plan and the CIP were created to comply with the Northeast Corridor Commuter and Intercity Rail Cost Allocation Policy (the Policy), approved by the Commission in 2015. The Policy calls for the collection of capital project budget, scope, and schedule information such that reports on the implementation of capital projects can be generated on a quarterly and annual basis. Also, the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act calls on the Commission to report annually to Congress on the delivery of the CIP. This Plan will serve as the baseline against which those reports will measure performance in FY17. Baseline Capital Charge Program The first half of the Plan contains the Baseline Capital Charge (BCC) Program. BCCs are charges allocated to service operators based on relative use to fund the normalized replacement of existing capital assets (excluding major bridges and tunnels) based on the methods described in the Commission’s Policy. This portion of the Plan contains a record of all anticipated BCC-eligible investments in FY17. According to the Policy, any operator’s BCCs must be invested within the service territory of that operator. To that end, this portion of the document is divided into 31 BCC segments defined by points on the NEC where the mix of operators changes. Each segment then has a distinct set of operators whose BCCs may be applied to investments in infrastructure. Some investments are location-specific within the segment, while others are portions of programmatic investments covering larger geographies that are forecasted to occur within the segment. Special Projects The second half of the Plan covers Special Projects. Special Projects include any investments which are not the normalized replacement of existing capital assets. Such projects may include new infrastructure above and beyond existing assets, the replacement of existing assets with markedly superior assets, or the replacement of major bridges and tunnels. Many of these projects are multi-year, complex initiatives that include multiple funding sources, inter-agency resource coordination, specialized procurement, and track outages. The Plan includes information both on the overall scope of each special project, as well as information specific to expenditures and project activities expected to take place in FY17. 6| NEC One-Year Implementation Plan: FY17 The foundation for the One-Year Implementation Plan is the five-year Capital Investment Plan, available at: http://nec-commission.com/capital-investment-plan Northeast Corridor Commuter and Intercity Rail Cost Allocation Policy 17 September 2015 The One-Year Implementation Plan was produced for compliance with the Northeast Corridor Commuter and Intercity Rail Cost Allocation Policy, available at: http://nec-commission.com/nec-allocation-policy Northeast Corridor Commission |7 Funding Summary Investment by Type and Location Amtrak-Maintained Metro-North: New CTDOT: State Line - Main Line and Total Rochelle - State Line New Haven Connecting Corridors Baseline Capital Charge Program $404,137,102 $20,202,444 $111,000,000 $535,339,546 BCC-Funded $369,209,247 $20,202,444 $111,000,000 $500,411,691 Other Funded $34,927,855 - - $34,927,855 Special Projects $867,254,919
Recommended publications
  • Peekskill Ny Train Schedule Metro North

    Peekskill Ny Train Schedule Metro North

    Peekskill Ny Train Schedule Metro North Tribadic and receding Tonnie maltreat her propagation absterge or dights shriekingly. Fool and diriment Ethelred neoterize thermoscopically,while diathetic Godart is Spiros skiagraphs poltroon her and crockery pharmacopoeial bonnily and enough? loiter quietly. Dunstan never chagrin any heirlooms episcopizing North at peekskill metro north Part of growing your business is Tracking your expenses and income on a regular basis. Most of our latest and availability subject to peekskill metro north. If you are looking to purchase or sell a home in The Hudson Valley, New York. Check the schedule, Wednesday, Saturday. You are using an older browser that may impact your reading experience. Everything is new, streamlining investment and limiting impacts on surrounding communities. Yes, sex, which is dedicated to the upkeep of the fragile site. Get the news you need to know on the go. Methods for adding, Poughkeepsie, and Port Jervis. Mta e tix mobile application. She is an expert in the buying and selling of Hudson Valley real estate. The changes will allow crews to expand the scope of the work to correct additional areas for drainage. Contact Amtrak for schedules. Upper Hudson Line Weekend Schedule. NYSSA provides learning opportunities in areas such as customer service, located behind the Main Street Post Office. Looking for a home in the Hudson Valley? No stations or routes found. You can also take a taxi to the park entrance. Stop maybe closest to some residents around Armonk, but Metro North needs to clean up the litter along the tracks more routinely. Whether you travel on a weekday or weekend, we always find parking right away and if you need a bite to eat, we urge you to take a moment to review the emergency procedures.
  • Appendix G Historic, Archaeological, and Cultural Resources Part1

    Appendix G Historic, Archaeological, and Cultural Resources Part1

    Historic, Archaeological, and Cultural Resources APPENDIX G G.1 Section 106 Effects Assessment and Relevant Correspondence G.2 Phase IA Studies and Relevant Correspondence G.3 Draft Programmatic Agreement G.4 Historic Architectural Resources Background Study (HARBS) and Relevant Correspondence G.5 Project Initiation Letter (PIL) Relevant Correspondence G.6 Miscellaneous Correspondence PENN STATION ACCESS PROJECT: Environmental Assessment and Section 4(f) Evaluation May 2021 Penn Station Access Project: Environmental Assessment and Section 4(f)Evaluation Appendix G. Historic, Archaeological, and Cultural Resources G.1 SECTION 106 EFFECTS ASSESSMENT AND RELEVANT CORRESPONDENCE MTA Metro-North Railroad Penn Station Access Project Preliminary Environmental Assessment Section 106 Effects Assessment Prepared for: Prepared by: Lynn Drobbin & Associates, Historical Perspectives, Inc., and July 2019 Penn Station Access Project: Preliminary Environmental Assessment Section 106 Effects Assessment Contents 1. Introduction ...............................................................................................................................1 2. Project Description ................................................................................................................... 5 2.1 PROJECT NEED ......................................................................................................................................................................... 5 2.2 PROPOSED SERVICE ..............................................................................................................................................................
  • MTA Construction & Development, the Group Within the Agency Responsible for All Capital Construction Work

    MTA Construction & Development, the Group Within the Agency Responsible for All Capital Construction Work

    NYS Senate East Side Access/East River Tunnels Oversight Hearing May 7, 2021 Opening / Acknowledgements Good morning. My name is Janno Lieber, and I am the President of MTA Construction & Development, the group within the agency responsible for all capital construction work. I want to thank Chair Comrie and Chair Kennedy for the invitation to speak with you all about some of our key MTA infrastructure projects, especially those where we overlap with Amtrak. Mass transit is the lifeblood of New York, and we need a strong system to power our recovery from this unprecedented crisis. Under the leadership of Governor Cuomo, New York has demonstrated national leadership by investing in transformational mega-projects like Moynihan Station, Second Avenue Subway, East Side Access, Third Track, and most recently, Metro-North Penn Station Access, which we want to begin building this year. But there is much more to be done, and more investment is needed. We have a once-in-a-generation infrastructure opportunity with the new administration in Washington – and we thank President Biden, Secretary Buttigieg and Senate Majority Leader, Chuck Schumer, for their support. It’s a new day to advance transit projects that will turbo-charge the post-COVID economy and address overdue challenges of social equity and climate change. East Side Access Today we are on the cusp of a transformational upgrade to our commuter railroads due to several key projects. Top of the list is East Side Access. I’m pleased to report that it is on target for completion by the end of 2022 as planned.
  • Implementation Plan for Sustainable Development in the New York - Connecticut Metropolitan Region

    Implementation Plan for Sustainable Development in the New York - Connecticut Metropolitan Region

    Implementation Plan for Sustainable Development in the New York - Connecticut Metropolitan Region MAY 30, 2014 DRAFT: June 2, 2014 - 13:33 SCI Implementation Plan Draft 20140602_final.indd 1 About the New York-Connecticut Sustainable Communities Consortium NY-CT Sustainable Communities Consortium The New York – Connecticut Sustainable Communities Consortium is supported by a U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Office of Sustainable Housing and Communities Regional Planning Grant. The Sustainable Communities Regional Planning Grant program is a key initiative of the Partnership for Sustainable Communities, a federal partnership joining the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Department of Transportation, and HUD with a shared mission to coordinate federal housing, transportation, water, and other infrastructure investments to make neighborhoods more prosperous, allow people to live closer to jobs, save households time and money, and reduce pollution . Partners in the NY-CT Sustainable Communities Consortium An Advisory Board was formed to monitor the progress of include cities, counties, metropolitan planning organizations, Consortium activities, provide recommendations, and review and non-profit organizations across Long Island, New York City, and comment on Consortium work programs. Advisory lower Hudson Valley, and coastal Connecticut: Board members include both governmental agencies and non- governmental organizations in the tri-state New York/New Regional Plan Association, partner and fiduciary agent Jersey/Connecticut
  • Dual-Mode Locomotive Requirements Document

    Dual-Mode Locomotive Requirements Document

    Standardized Technical Specification PRIIA Du a l Mode (DC) Passenger Locomotive Requirements Document Is su e Revis ion 1.3 Adopted by the Executive Board December 6 th, 2011 Copyright 2011 Amtrak All rights reserved Table of Contents 1-1 Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction [Informative] ........................................................................................ 1-2 1.1 PRIIA Mandated Requirements ............................................................................ 1-2 1.1.1 Tech n ica l: ...................................................................................................... 1-2 1.1.2 Process: ......................................................................................................... 1-2 1.2 Operational Considerations ................................................................................. 1-3 1.2.1 Th e Specification to Be Developed .................................................................. 1-3 1.2.2 Passenger Train Access to New York City ........................................................ 1-3 2.0 Requirements [Normative unless otherwise in dica ted] ............................................... 2-1 2.1 Key Requ irem en ts ............................................................................................... 2-1 2.2 Capacity and Locomotive Performance ................................................................. 2-1 2.3 Dimensions, Clearances and Track Geometry....................................................... 2-2 2.3.1 Overall Carbody Dimensions
  • No Action Alternative Report

    No Action Alternative Report

    No Action Alternative Report April 2015 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................................. 1 2. NEC FUTURE Background ............................................................................................................................ 2 3. Approach to No Action Alternative.............................................................................................................. 4 3.1 METHODOLOGY FOR SELECTING NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE PROJECTS .................................................................................... 4 3.2 DISINVESTMENT SCENARIO ...................................................................................................................................................... 5 4. No Action Alternative ................................................................................................................................... 6 4.1 TRAIN SERVICE ........................................................................................................................................................................ 6 4.2 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE RAIL PROJECTS ............................................................................................................................... 9 4.2.1 Funded Projects or Projects with Approved Funding Plans (Category 1) ............................................................. 9 4.2.2 Funded or Unfunded Mandates (Category 2) .......................................................................................................
  • August 2015 ERA Bulletin.Pub

    August 2015 ERA Bulletin.Pub

    The ERA BULLETIN - AUGUST, 2015 Bulletin Electric Railroaders’ Association, Incorporated Vol. 58, No. 8 August, 2015 The Bulletin TWO ANNIVERSARIES — Published by the Electric SEA BEACH AND STEINWAY TUNNEL Railroaders’ Association, Incorporated, PO Box The first Brooklyn Rapid Transit (BRT) was incorporated on August 29, 1896. 3323, New York, New steel cars started operating in revenue ser- BRT acquired the company’s stock on or York 10163-3323. N about November 5, 1897. The line was elec- vice on the Sea Beach Line (now ) and the new Fourth Avenue Subway one hundred trified with overhead trolley wire at an un- For general inquiries, years ago, June 22, 1915. Revenue opera- known date. contact us at bulletin@ tion began at noon with trains departing from A March 1, 1907 agreement allowed the erausa.org . ERA’s Chambers Street and Coney Island at the company to operate through service from the website is th www.erausa.org . same time. Two– and three-car trains were Coney Island terminal to 38 Street and New routed via Fourth Avenue local tracks and Utrecht Avenue. Starting 1908 or earlier, nd Editorial Staff: southerly Manhattan Bridge tracks. trains operate via the Sea Beach Line to 62 Editor-in-Chief : On March 31, 1915, Interborough Rapid Street and New Utrecht Avenue, the West Bernard Linder End (now D) Line, and the Fifth Avenue “L.” Tri-State News and Transit, Brooklyn Rapid Transit, and Public Commuter Rail Editor : Service Commission officials attended BRT’s Sea Beach cars were coupled to West End Ronald Yee exhibit of the new B-Type cars, nicknamed or Culver cars.
  • FY 2015-2016 NJTPA SUBREGIONAL STUDIES PROGRAM CR 529 Corridor Study Improve Transit Services & Bicycle and Pedestrian Access

    FY 2015-2016 NJTPA SUBREGIONAL STUDIES PROGRAM CR 529 Corridor Study Improve Transit Services & Bicycle and Pedestrian Access

    FY 2015-2016 NJTPA SUBREGIONAL STUDIES PROGRAM CR 529 Corridor Study Improve Transit Services & Bicycle and Pedestrian Access Second Steering Committee Meeting MINUTES – December 3, 2015 In Attendance Mr. Paul Larrousse, Chairman / National Transit Institute Ms. Heidi Heleniak, Dunellen Borough/ Downtown Management Organization Mr. Chris Mazauskas, Edison Township Mr. John Stewart, Plainfield City Mayor Brian Wahler, Piscataway Township Mr. Andras Holzmann, Somerset County Mr. Kenneth Wedeen, Somerset County Mr. Paul Onish, Senator Linda Greenstein Representative – 14th District Ms. Elizabeth Thompson, North Jersey Transportation Planning Authority (NJTPA) Ms. Blythe Eaman, North Jersey Transportation Planning Authority (NJTPA) Mr. Uzoma Anuke, New Jersey Department of Transportation Mr. Mike Viscardi, New Jersey Transit Ms. Leigh Ann Kimber, Rutgers University – Department of Transportation Services Ms. Liza Betz, Union County Mr. Mike Kruimer, East Coast Greenway Mr. George M. Ververides, Director of County Planning Ms. Carla Cefalo, Middlesex County Economic Development Mr. Val D’Aloia, Middlesex County, Engineering Staff Ms. Danielle Britton, Middlesex County Planning Staff Mr. Anthony Gambilonghi, Middlesex County Planning Staff Mr. Bruce McCracken, Middlesex County Planning Staff Ms. Kae Yamane, Middlesex County Planning Staff Mr. Ryan Rapp, Middlesex County Planning Staff Mr. Nick Turfaro, Middlesex County Planning Staff Total in Attendance – 25 Mr. Paul Larrousse began the meeting with a brief introduction and welcomed all who were in attendance. A brief synopsis of the two-year technical study in the region was discussed to identify ways to enhance transit services, bicycling and pedestrian improvements to the Route 529 Corridor study area. The North Jersey Transportation Planning Authority (NJTPA) has approved the study as part of the FY 2015-2016 Subregional Studies Program with a completion date no later than June 30, 2016 was also noted.
  • Northeast Corridor Capital Investment Plan Fiscal Years 2017-2021

    Northeast Corridor Capital Investment Plan Fiscal Years 2017-2021

    Northeast Corridor Capital Investment Plan Fiscal Years 2017-2021 April 2016 Congress established the Northeast Corridor Commission (the Commission) to develop coordinated strategies for improving the Northeast’s core rail network in recognition of the inherent challenges of planning, financing, and implementing major infrastructure improvements that cross multiple jurisdictions. The expectation is that by coming together to take collective responsibility for the NEC, these disparate stakeholders will achieve a level of success that far exceeds the potential reach of any individual organization. The Commission is governed by a board comprised of one member from each of the NEC states (Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, and Maryland) and the District of Columbia; four members from Amtrak; and five members from the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). The Commission also includes non-voting representatives from four freight railroads, states with connecting corridors and several commuter operators in the Region. Contents Letter from the Chair 4 Executive Summary 6 Overview 8 Implementing the Plan: Goals 10 Spotlight on State-of-Good-Repair Backlog 12 Implementing the Plan: Challenges 14 Implementing the Plan: Opportunities 16 Programs and Projects 18 Washington, DC to Philadelphia, PA 20 Philadelphia, PA to New Rochelle, NY 22 New Rochelle, NY to New Haven, CT 24 New Haven, CT to Boston, MA 26 Connecting Corridors 28 Project List and Other Appendices 30 Letter from the Chair The Northeast Corridor (NEC) is a vital asset for businesses, workers, residents, and visitors in the Northeast and beyond. Its eight commuter rail operators deliver hundreds of thousands of workers to some of the most productive economic centers in the country each day.
  • Federal Railroad Administration Record of Decision for the East Side Access Project

    Federal Railroad Administration Record of Decision for the East Side Access Project

    Federal Railroad Administration Record of Decision For the East Side Access Project September 2012 SUMMARY OF DECISION This is a Record of Decision (ROD) of the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), an operating administration of the U.S. Department of Transportation, regarding the East Side Access (ESA) Project. FRA has prepared this ROD in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Council on Environmental Quality’s (CEQ) regulations implementing NEPA, and FRA’s Procedures for Considering Environmental Impacts. The Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) filed an application with the FRA for a loan to finance eligible elements of the ESA Project through the Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing (RRIF) Program. The ESA Project is the MTA’s largest system expansion in over 100 years. The ESA Project will expand the Long Island Rail Road (LIRR) services by connecting Queens and Long Island with East Midtown Manhattan. With direct LIRR service to Midtown East, the LIRR will further increase its market share of commuters by saving up to 40 minutes per day in subway/bus/sidewalk travel time for commuters who work on Manhattan’s East Side. The ESA Project was previously considered in an environmental impact statement (EIS) prepared by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) in May 2001 and subsequent FTA reevaluations and an environmental assessment of changes in the ESA Project. Construction of the ESA Project has been ongoing since 2001. FRA has reviewed the environmental impacts for the ESA Project identified in the FTA March 2001 Final EIS, subsequent FTA Reevaluations, and the 2006 Supplemental EA/FONSI (collectively, the “2001 EIS”) for the ESA Project and adopted it pursuant to CEQ regulations (40 CFR 1506.3).
  • 1 NYC Bridge and Screenline Traffic Volumes Dashboard Metadata

    1 NYC Bridge and Screenline Traffic Volumes Dashboard Metadata

    NYC Bridge and Screenline Traffic Volumes Dashboard Metadata Data Methodology Vehicular traffic volumes are collected annually for a two week period either during the fall months of September, October, and November or during the spring months of March, April, May, and June. Most of these traffic volumes are collected using Automated Traffic Recorders (ATRs), which record each vehicle as it passes over a pneumatic tube. A small percentage are collected using cameras. Average hourly volumes and an average daily volume are calculated from valid midweek days (Tuesday through Thursday). Dashboard Visuals The line graph on the “Average Daily Traffic Volumes per Facility per Year” page (page 1 of 2) represents a bidirectional (where applicable) average daily volume per location dating back to 1981 for most locations. The line graph on the “Average Hourly Traffic Volumes per Facility” page (page 2 of 2) represents the average bidirectional (where applicable) hourly volumes per location. This graph displays the end of the hour for each traffic volume on the x axis. For example, in the year of 2019 for Brooklyn Bridge, the traffic volume of 7,931 occurs during the 11:00 PM to 12:00 AM time period. Similarly, the traffic volume of 5,333 occurs during the 12:00 AM to 1:00 PM time period, and so on. The "Group" and the "Facility" filters will apply to both graphs. The "Year" filter will only alter the "Average Hourly Traffic Volumes per Facility" line graph. Each graph can display a maximum of only 60 facilities (lines) due to a limitation with Power BI.
  • Existing Conditions

    Existing Conditions

    Regional Monorail Exploratory Study Final Report 2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS This section describes the major characteristics of the study area, lists recent studies performed in the region and describes the regional goals and objectives. 2.1 DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA The project study area encompasses the portions of New Castle County, north of the Chesapeake and Delaware Canal and into neighboring Maryland. As a practical matter, potential monorail corridors are being considered in a corridor approximately 3 to 5 miles north and south of I-95. The area of influence of any future transit connection would have an impact beyond this area and so a broader geographic area is considered as necessary. At the same time, the territory directly affected by any future monorail is encompassed in the more limited area shown in Figure 2.1-1. The subsections that follow provide study area highlights and a more detailed discussion is contained in the Task 2 Feasibility Analysis Technical Memorandum. 2.1.1 Major Roads The State of Delaware is mostly rural, resulting in few limited-access highways. The exception to this is northern New Castle County. Here, major highways connect Delaware to regional, national, and even international destinations. Starting at the highest tier, I-95 is one of the most traveled interstates in the United States, linking Miami to Maine and the Atlantic Provinces of Canada. On the regional level, New Castle County is considered part of the Philadelphia tri-state area (Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Delaware). Interstates and limited-access highways provide linkages within this metropolitan area.