Southeast Commuter Rail Transit District 3250 Bob Malkas Dr., Lansing, IL 60438 708-251-5601

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Southeast Commuter Rail Transit District 3250 Bob Malkas Dr., Lansing, IL 60438 708-251-5601 Request for Expressions of Interest SES LINE SYSTEM PLANNING REFINEMENTS Southeast Commuter Rail Transit District The Southeast Commuter Rail Transit District (SCRTD) will accept expressions of interest from consultant firms who wish to be included in the District’s qualifications-based selection process to conduct System Planning Refinements of existing documents and studies in support of the proposed Southeast Service Line Commuter Rail Project. The SES Line is a multi-jurisdictional planning effort lead by the SCRTD and the corridor communities to evaluate commuter rail transportation alternatives in the southeast suburbs of Cook and Will counties. The proposed northern terminus of the SES Line is the METRA LaSalle Street Station in Chicago. The intent of the SES Line System Planning and Refinements process is to supplement predecessor studies of the proposed service including the Local Alternatives Analysis prepared by METRA. The final scope of work which will be more fully defined through a Request for Qualifications and subsequent Requests for Proposals may solicit all or any combination of the following: . Review, evaluate and update the AA rail freight and passenger operations simulation model and assumptions; . Prepare a capacity plan document to serve as the basis for preliminary engineering; . Development of an investment-grade ridership and ticket revenue forecasting model; . Prepare a system level risk assessment of previous capital and operating cost estimates; and . Prepare a user benefits report of the build alternative using the FTA's SUMMIT analysis program or approved equal. Firms interested in receiving additional information and submittal instructions should forward a letter of interest to: Ms. Bonnie Cuthbert Administrative Assistant Southeast Commuter Rail Transit District 3250 Bob Malkas Drive Lansing, IL 60438 Please specify SES LINE SYSTEM PLANNING REFINEMENTS in your response. Expressions of Interest must be received no later than 5:00 p.m. (CDT), May 9th, 2014. Southeast Commuter-Rail Transit District Communities: Crete, Steger, South Chicago Heights, Chicago Heights, Glenwood, Thornton, South Holland, Dolton, Lynwood, Calumet City, Lansing .

Copy Link

Recommended publications

Southeast Corridor Alternatives Analysis Locally Preferred Alternative Report
SOUTHEAST CORRIDOR ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS DOCUMENT #9 LOCALLY PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE REPORT PREPARED BY AUGUST 2011 METRA – SOUTHEAST CORRIDOR LOCALLY PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE REPORT ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS DOCUMENTS 1. Detailed Work Scope 2. Purpose & Need 3. Initial Alternatives, Part I: Modes & Technologies 4. Evaluation Methodology 5. Initial Alternatives, Part I Screening and Part II: Conceptual Design 6. Screening of Initial Alternatives, Part II 7. Feasible Alternatives 8. Screening of Feasible Alternatives 9. Locally Preferred Alternative Report AECOM AUGUST 2011 I METRA – SOUTHEAST CORRIDOR LOCALLY PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................... 1 A. PURPOSE.................................................................................................................. 1 B. BACKGROUND ......................................................................................................... 1 II. SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS.............................................................. 5 A. INITIAL SCREENING, PART I................................................................................... 5 B. DEFINITION AND SCREENING OF INITIAL ALTERNATIVES, PART II.................. 7 C. DEFINITION OF FEASIBLE ALTERNATIVES ........................................................ 10 D. DETAILED FINAL SCREENING.............................................................................. 11 III. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT SUMMARY.......................................................................
[Show full text]
Go to 2040 Update Appendix
GO TO 2040 UPDATE APPENDIX Major Capital Projects October 2014 Table of Contents Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 1 Major Capital Projects ............................................................................................................................... 2 Expressway Additions: Express Toll Lanes ....................................................................................... 2 I-55 Stevenson Express Toll Lanes ................................................................................................... 2 I-290 Eisenhower Express Toll Lanes .............................................................................................. 3 Expressway Additions: Interchanges and Improvements ............................................................... 4 Circle Interchange .............................................................................................................................. 5 I-294/I-57 Interchange ........................................................................................................................ 5 I-190 Access and Capacity Improvements ...................................................................................... 5 Jane Addams Tollway (I-90) ............................................................................................................. 6 Transit Improvements ..........................................................................................................................
[Show full text]
West Lake Corridor DEIS Appendix B: References
Draft Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation APPENDIX B References December 2016 Draft Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation This page intentionally left blank. December 2016 Draft Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation References AASHTO. Census Transportation Planning Products for ACS 5-year Data. http://ctpp.transportation.org. Abell, G. 2010. Indi-Illi Park Historic District. National Register of Historic Places Nomination Form. Dyer, IN: Lake County Interim Report,1996. AECOM. 2014. West Lake Corridor Project Existing Conditions Technical Memorandum. AECOM. 2015. Noise and Vibration Technical Report. AECOM. 2015. Traffic Technical Report. Amtrak. 2014. Amtrak. accessed September 24, 2014. http://www.amtrak.com. Andreas, A.T. 1884. History of Cook County, Illinois: from the earliest period to the present time. Reprinted by Unigraphic, 1976. ANSI. 1992. Quantities and Procedures for Description and Measurement of Environmental Sound. American National Standard S12.9-1992. Part 2: Measurement of Long-term, Wide-Area Sound. Standards Secretariat, Acoustical Society of America, New York, NY. ANSI. 1993. Quantities and Procedures for Description and Measurement of Environmental Sound. American National Standard S12.9-1993. Part 3: Short-Term Measurements with an Observer Present. Standards Secretariat, Acoustical Society of America, New York, NY. Architectural Record Company. 1913. Sweet’s Catalogue of Building Construction, Architects and Builders Edition for 1913. Federal Cement Tile Company. 1913 Edition. New York, New York. pp. 556-557. Barnhart, J.D. and D.L. Riker. 1971. Indiana to 1816 - The Colonial Period. Indiana Historical Bureau and Indiana Historical Society, Indianapolis. Baughn, J. 2016. Hohman Avenue Railroad Bridge, Lake County, Indiana.
[Show full text]
Comprehensive Regional Plan
Comprehensive Regional Plan CHICAGO METROPOLITAN AGENCY FOR PLANNING While overall quality of life is high, our region has grown in unsustainable ways that create congestion and make it hard for people to live near their jobs. We need to invest in our existing communities while making wise development choices that make our communities great places to live. 6 While the region’s residents are its greatest renewable resource, our systems of education and workforce development are not keeping up with other major centers of commerce. We must develop skilled workers to help local businesses innovate to compete in the global marketplace. 8 Government agencies must work more closely together to coordinate investments and improve access to information, becoming more accountable to residents. While our region’s units of government are numerous, many residents believe they should be more responsive. 10 We need strategic investments that modernize and maintain these road and transit systems to meet the needs of our growing population. While our region’s transportation infrastructure has been key to a century of progress, it is aging rapidly. 12 While our economy has long been the envy of other metropolitan regions, we cannot take it for granted. To achieve sustainable prosperity, our seven- county region needs to implement an aggressive but nuanced comprehensive plan that strategically aligns public policies and investments. 14 GO TO 2040 A PIVOTAL MOMENT Metropolitan Chicago is one of the world’s great economic A Pivotal Moment centers. We have abundant natural resources — including a magnificent system of parks, open spaces, trails, and waterways — with access to Lake Michigan for drinking for Metropolitan Chicago water and recreation.
[Show full text]
Chicago Southland's Green TIME Zone
Chicago Southland’s Green TIME Zone Green Transit, Intermodal, Manufacturing, Environment Zone A Core Element of the Southland Vision 2020 for Sustainable Development © Center for Neighborhood Technology 2010 Table of Contents America’s First Green TIME Zone 1 The Southland Green TIME Zone Strategy 2 Transit-Oriented Development 3 Intermodal: Cargo-Oriented Development 6 Manufacturing for a Green Economy 8 Environment: A Binding Thread 12 A Greener Return on Investment 14 Making It Happen 15 A Model for Livable and Workable Communities 18 The Southland Green TIME Zone Framework 18 America’s First Green TIME Zone The southern suburbs of Chicago (the Southland) The Green TIME Zone of Chicago’s Southland grew up in the nineteenth century with a dual capitalizes on these emerging trends with a strategy identity: as residential communities from which through which older communities can translate people rode the train to downtown jobs and as the value of their established rail infrastructure industrial centers that rose around the nexus of and manufacturing capacity into desirable the nation’s freight rail network. Over the last two neighborhoods, good jobs, and environmental generations, many of these communities endured improvement. The strategy is built on three linked economic hardship as residents and businesses mechanisms for sustainable redevelopment: transit- left for sprawling new suburbs and international oriented development (TOD) to establish livable pressures eroded the industrial base. The communities, cargo-oriented development (COD) environment of the Southland and the entire Chicago region suffered as farmland was paved over at ever freight movements, and green manufacturing to accelerating rates, vehicle miles traveled climbed buildto capture a healthy the economic economy benefitswith a bright of intermodal future.
[Show full text]
South Suburban Commuter Rail Feasibility Study
South Suburban Commuter Rail Feasibility Study FINAL REPORT and April 1999 South Suburban Commuter Rail Feasibility Study TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE FOREWORD ........................................................ iii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................ ES-1 1.0 INTRODUCTION .......................................... 1 1.1 Study Area .................................................... 1 1.2 Historical Background ............................................ 3 1.3 Candidate Alignments ............................................ 4 2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS .................................. 7 2.1 Alignment Options .............................................. 7 2.2 Descriptions of Alignment Segments ................................. 10 2.3 Freight Railroad Operating Characteristics ............................ 12 2.4 Existing Transportation Services .................................... 15 2.5 Potential Station Locations ........................................ 17 3.0 FUTURE PLANS ........................................... 27 3.1 Study-Area Demographics ......................................... 27 3.2 Rail Corridor Community Analysis .................................. 30 3.3 Railroads and Other Agencies ...................................... 36 4.0 POTENTIAL OPERATIONS ............................... 39 4.1 Service Concept ................................................ 40 4.2 Utilization of Existing Facilities ..................................... 40 4.3 Potential Transfers with Existing Lines ..............................
[Show full text]
Draft Existing Conditions and Planning Framework Report
DRAFT October 06, 2009 EXISTING CONDITIONS AND PLANNING FRAMEWORK REPORT Prepared for: REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY Prepared by: In association with: Valerie S. Kretchmer Associates, inc Draft 10/06/09 Table of Contents Project Background .............................................................................................................................. 1 Community Background ........................................................................................................................... 1 Historical Context ...................................................................................................................................... 3 Station Area Planning Study...................................................................................................................... 3 Study Area Boundary ................................................................................................................................ 4 Transit‐Supportive Development .............................................................................................................. 4 Proposed Transit Service ........................................................................................................................... 6 New Starts Criteria ................................................................................................................................ 7 Planning Context ................................................................................................................................
[Show full text]
New Master File 5 PM
Regional Transportation Authority 2005 Annual Budget and Five-Year Program Regional Transportation Authority Table of Contents Budget and Program Ordinance 3 Agency Operating Plan 6 Pace Operating Plan RTA Board of Directors ........................................... 1 Overview .............................................................. 37 Overview .............................................................. 71 Overview ................................................................ 1 Operating Budget and Financial Plan ..................... 37 Service ................................................................ 71 Six-County Area ...................................................... 1 Operations by Expense Category .......................... 38 Budget and Financial Plan .................................... 75 Ordinance No. 2005–06 ......................................... 2 Operations by Organization Group ......................... 39 System–Generated Revenues ............................... 75 Agency Statutory Cap ........................................... 42 Operating Expenses ............................................. 75 1 Budget in Brief 2004 Budget Versus 2004 Estimate ..................... 42 Expense Elements ............................................... 77 Overview .............................................................. 13 Regional Technical Assistance and Coordination ... 42 Deficit ................................................................. 78 Strategic Focus ...................................................
[Show full text]
Systemwide Cost Benefit Analysis of Major Capital Improvements
Systemwide Cost Benefit Analysis of Major Capital Improvements Final Report January 16, 2019 Metra Systemwide Cost Benefit Analysis of Major Capital Improvements Prepared for: Metra Prepared by: AECOM 303 East Wacker Drive Chicago, IL 60601 aecom.com In association with: Cambridge Systematics Connetics Transportation Group EJM Engineers Wight & Company This report was prepared in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Federal Transit Administration, and the Illinois Department of Transportation. The contents reflect the views of the author who is responsible for the facts and accuracy presented. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of IDOT or U.S. DOT. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. AECOM i Metra Systemwide Cost Benefit Analysis of Major Capital Improvements Table of Contents ..........................................................................................................................1 1. Introduction ....................................................................4 2. Data Inputs, Assumptions and Methodology Project Definition 4 2.1 Operating Plans 5 2.2 Capital Improvement Plans 6 2.3 O&M Costs 6 2.4 Capital Costs 7 2.5 Ridership 7 2.6 State of Good Repair Impacts 7 2.7 Reliability Impacts 8 2.8 Project Timeframe 8 2.9 Potential Funding Sources 8 2.10 Connecting Services 9 2.11 Tier 1 and 2 Synergies 9 2.12 ..............................................................................................................10
[Show full text]
The Need for Capital Alarm for Several Years About the Massive Shortfall in Our Capital Budget
3 3 ON THE BI-CLommuter NeEwsletter, FeVbruary 2009 EL MetraThas bheen souneding the need for capital alarm for several years about the massive shortfall in our capital budget. We tell everyone who'll listen, “We're at a crossroads.” What do we mean? Put sim - ply, unless unless the state cre - ates a funding program to address our needs, the system will fall into a state of disrepair, eroding the region's hard work and investment of the last 25 years. The longer we wait, the harder it will be to recover. Here are some questions and answers about the issue: Q: Didn't Metra raise fares last year? Didn't the Legislature also raise the sales tax to raise money for transit? A: Yes, and yes. But that The replacement of Highliner cars on the Metra Electric District is a top priority. money was needed to plug a expect to get about $1.3 billion capital budget into operations. passing the buck - we will say huge hole in our budget for oper - from Illinois if state lawmakers Q: So what will happen if the that the funding crisis hasn't ations. Metra still has a crisis in pass a capital bill. Even with that state doesn't come through? helped. its capital budget. amount, Metra will still be about A: We'll have to continue to Q: Why can't you just raise Q: What's the difference? $350 million short of its need. put things off. As just one exam - fares? A: The operating budget pays And to carry out four expansion ple, rail cars should be rehabbed A: As regular riders know, for fuel, electricity, salaries and projects on the drawing board - every 15 years, which means we Metra has raised fares, incre - all the other day-to-day costs of the suburban STAR line, the need to do 50 a year.
[Show full text]
Toolkit for Impact
Toolkit for Impact ULI Chicago Description: ULI Chicago’s Infrastructure Game Changers is a model for identifying significant infrastructure projects based on their feasibility and influence on land use and economic development. An infrastructure game changer is a project related to transportation, water and other basic utilities, and parks and open space that has benefits far beyond its immediate impact. Why must The infrastructure game changers process is a flexible analysis tool: infrastructure . Scalable: the process can be adapted to any city or region, big or small decision-making be . Comprehensive: the process works across the entire range of infrastructure “siloed”? Is there a categories . way to take a broad Affordable: no new time-intensive and expensive studies are required . Tailored: evaluation criteria are flexible and can be aligned with chosen priorities and integrated look . Partnership Oriented: the process encourages partnerships among the public, at different types of private, and non-profit sectors infrastructure? . Implementation Focused: the process looks at how to advance or maximize the YES! benefits of already planned infrastructure projects. Is there a way to Studies: ULI Chicago developed and tested the infrastructure game changers process on examine two study areas within the Greater Chicago region. infrastructure, land Regional Infrastructure in Northeastern Illinois: Infrastructure’s Role in Maintaining use, and economic Greater Chicago’s Competitive Edge identifies nine regionally significant infrastructure competitiveness all projects in the seven counties of Northeastern Illinois and explains how they could at the same time? influence land use and encourage economic development. YES! The Lakeshore Industrial Heritage Corridor: Infrastructure’s Role in Revitalizing Lake What about Michigan’s South Shore Communities looks at infrastructure projects in the border including non- region of Chicago and Northwest Indiana.
[Show full text]
Southeast Commuter Rail Transit District 3250 Bob Malkas Dr., Lansing, IL 60438 708-251-5601
Southeast Commuter Rail Transit District 3250 Bob Malkas Dr., Lansing, IL 60438 708-251-5601 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Contact: Bonnie Cuthbert 708.418.5888 SOUTHEAST RAIL LINE ON TRACK TO NEXT LEVEL Lansing– March 19, 2014 – The Southeast Commuter Rail Transit District board voted Wednesday to approve a $650,000 budget for 2014 that will prepare the proposed rail line project for the engineering phase of the nearly $800 million project. The planned Southeast Service Line will link the 33 miles between Crete’s Balmoral Park and downtown Chicago’s LaSalle Street Station, with additional stops in Crete, Steger, South Chicago Heights, Chicago Heights, Glenwood, Thornton, South Holland, Dolton, as well as the 115th Street, Gresham and 35th Street/US Cellular Field stations on Chicago’s South Side. The project was authorized in the 2005 federal transportation bill and METRA, Northeastern Illinois’ commuter rail agency completed the first phase Alternatives Analysis in 2010 that projected an average of 18,700 riders per weekday with annual operating costs estimated at $28.8 million. Since then, the Southeast Commuter Rail Transit District has focused on eliminating any remaining technical capacity issues since the same railroad right-of-way has also been proposed for High Speed rail service from Chicago to St. Louis. J. Wynsma, Chairman of the Transit District stated that adherence to the federal funding process was critical and that the District needs to take care “not to put the cart before the horse”. The Federal Transit Administration has a 3 step planning and approval process that includes an Alternatives Analysis, Preliminary Engineering and Final Design.
[Show full text]