DOCSLIB.ORG

TH 10 Elk River

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
TH 10 Elk River FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS Trunk Highway 10 in Elk River State Project: 7102-123 City of Elk River Sherburne County, Minnesota Minnesota Department of Transportation TABLE OF CONTENTS I. ADMINISTRATIVE BACKGROUND/STATEMENT OF ISSUE ......................................1 II. FINDINGS OF FACT.............................................................................................................2 III. DECISION REGARDING NEED FOR ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT ....4 A. Type, Extent, and Reversibility of Impacts .............................................................4 B. Cumulative Potential Effects of Related or Anticipated Future Projects ..............10 C. Extent to Which the Environmental Effects are Subject to Mitigation by Ongoing Public Regulatory Authority ................................................................11 D. Extent to Which Environmental Effects can be Anticipated and Controlled as a Result of Other Environmental Studies .......................................................12 IV. CONCLUSIONS...................................................................................................................12 APPENDIX A: Figures APPENDIX B: Comments Received APPENDIX C: Responses to Comments APPENDIX D: Final Section 4(f) Evaluation APPENDIX E: Public Hearing Documentation - i - I. ADMINISTRATIVE BACKGROUND/STATEMENT OF ISSUE The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) has identified long-term improvements to Highway 10 in Elk River, including reconstruction of Highway 10 from an urban arterial roadway to a freeway design within Elk River between Upland Avenue/County Road 44 and the Highway 101/169 interchange (refer to Figures 1 and 2 in Appendix A). MnDOT is the proposer and Responsible Governmental Unit for this project. An Environmental Assessment/Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EA/EAW) has been prepared for this project in accordance with Minnesota Rules Chapter 4410 and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) [42 USC 4321 et. seq.]. The EA/EAW was developed to assess the impacts of the project and other circumstances in order to determine if an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is indicated. The EA/EAW was filed with the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (EQB) and circulated for review and comments to the required EA/EAW distribution list. A “Notice of Availability” was published in the EQB Monitor on November 1, 2010, and a legal advertisement was published in the Star News on October 30, 2010. A press release was also provided to media outlets in the surrounding area. The EA/EAW was made available for public review at the Elk River Public Library, Great River Regional Library, Elk River City Hall, Sherburne County Public Works Office, and MnDOT District 3 Offices. An open house/public hearing for the proposed project was held on Thursday, December 2, 2010, at the Elk River City Hall. The hearing presented the project design and identified potential environmental impacts of the project. At the hearing, members of the public were given the opportunity to provide formal written comments or oral testimony on the proposed project. Two written comments and no oral statements were received at the December 2 public hearing. Additional comments were received through December 20, 2010. Four additional written comments were received during the EA/EAW comment period, for a total of six comments. All comments received during the EA/EAW comment period, including those received from the open house/public hearing, were considered in determining the potential for significant environmental impacts. Comments received during the comment period are provided in Appendix B, and responses to the comments are provided in Appendix C. Based upon the information in the record, which is composed of the EA/EAW for the proposed project, the issues raised during the public comment period, the responses to the comments, and other supporting documents, MnDOT makes the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions: Trunk Highway 10 in Elk River Page 1 S.P. 7102-123 Findings of Fact and Conclusions II. FINDINGS OF FACT Project Description The Highway 10 improvements studied in this EA/EAW include reconstruction of Highway 10 from an urban arterial roadway to a freeway design within Elk River between Upland Avenue/County Road 44 and the Highway 101/169 interchange. The project includes the construction of a grade-separated interchange at Upland/Proctor Avenues and a half interchange at Main Street (interchange ramps to and from the east). A one-way pair of frontage roads would connect interchange ramps at Upland/Proctor Avenues. At-grade intersections would be removed, and frontage roads along Highway 10 would be constructed to provide local access. The Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway would be realigned to the north, and grade- separated crossings will be constructed at Proctor Avenue, Jackson Avenue, and Main Street. The proposed action would improve bicycle and pedestrian safety by providing grade-separated crossings of Highway 10 and the BNSF Railway at Bridge Street, Proctor Avenue, Jackson Avenue, and Main Street. Refer to Figure 4 in Appendix A for a depiction of the improvements studied in the EA/EAW. The purpose of the project is to address regional mobility, traffic operations, and local connectivity/accessibility while serving as a guide for comprehensive planning in the City of Elk River. Currently, there is no funding in place for construction of the proposed project. This EA/EAW process is intended to support the anticipated future use of federal funding and to allow for land use and local transportation improvements consistent with the proposed project to be implemented over time as funding becomes available. Corrections to the EA/EAW or Changes in the Project Since the EA/EAW was Published The ERDB file number referenced in the May 24, 2008 letter from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MnDNR) in Appendix B of the EA/EAW is incorrect. The correct ERDB file number for this project is 20080649. In addition to the land use requirements highlighted in Section VII.A.14 of the EA/EAW, Minn R.7050.0180 classifies the segment of the Mississippi River adjacent to the project area as an Outstanding Resource Value Waters (ORVW). This classification calls for additional control on new or expanded discharges from either point or non-point sources to OWVRs. Since completion of the EA/EAW, a more recent Phase I Environmental Site Assessment was completed in February 2009. This Phase I ESA found 36 sites of documented or potential contamination within the study area. Nine (9) sites were identified as having high risk potential for contamination, and 19 were identified as medium risk potential sites. Table 12 from the EA/EAW has been revised to show the current properties with high or medium potential for contamination (see Table 1 below), and their locations are shown in revised Figure 7 in Appendix A. Five (5) high potential sites would be affected by right of way acquisition (3 total, 2 partial); 8 medium potential sites would be affected by right of way acquisition (7 total, 1 partial). Medium and high potential properties that are identified as total acquisitions are identified in Table 1 below (revised from Table 12 of the EA/EAW). Trunk Highway 10 in Elk River Page 2 S.P. 7102-123 Findings of Fact and Conclusions TABLE 1 (Revised from Table 12 of the EA/EAW) KNOWN OR POTENTIALLY CONTAMINATED SITES NEAR HIGHWAY 10 CORRIDOR Risk Reason for Concern Site ID Site Name Site Address Potential (Contaminant)(1) 1 Great River Energy 17845 Hwy 10 High RCRA-CESQG, ERNS, FTTS, HIST FTTS, MLTS, FINDS, MN LS, UST, LAST, AST, Spills (multiple), TIER 2, SWF/LF (orphan) 2 Old Town Tavern 506 Main St. Medium Spill 3 USTs Hwy 10 and Main St. High USTs 4 Boelters Union 76 600 Hwy 10 Medium LUST (Closed), UST 5 USTs West of 600 Hwy 10 High USTs 6 Sipe Auto Service 611 Hwy 10 Medium LUST (Closed, Orphan), UST 7 Nadeau’s Cleaners Inc., Bluff Block Site, USTs 621 Main St. High RCRA-NonGen, FINDS, VIC, MN List of Sites, SRS 8 USTs 630 Main St. High LUST (closed), UST, Spill, AST Amoco SS #5053, Hetricks 308 Jackson Place 9 Elk River Flower 612 Railroad Dr. Medium Spill 10 Elk River Section/Burlington Northern US Hwy 10 Medium UST 11 Jackson Express 356 Jackson Medium UST 12 US West 440 Jackson St. NW Medium LUST (closed) 13 USTs 369 Jackson High USTs 14 Grand Rental Station 728 Railroad Dr. Medium RCRA-CESQG, FINDS, AST 15 Napa Auto Parts 800/824 Railroad Dr. High LUST, UST 16 Elk River Machine Co. 828 4th St. Medium RCRA-SQG, ENF, TIER 2, FINDS, Spills (2), AIRS 17 Cinema Professional Building 657 Main St. Medium LUST (closed), UST 18 Elk River Hardware 665 (556) Main St. Medium RCRA-NonGen, FINDS, Spill 19 USTs Hwy 10 and King Ave. High USTs 20 First National Bank 729 Main St. Medium Spill 21 City of Elk River 307 King Ave. Medium Spill 22 Charlie Browns Inc./Beaudry Oil 335 (actually 334) Lowell Medium LUST (Closed), UST, AST 23 Beaudry Express/Beaudry Oil Company 610, 630 Proctor Ave. High LUST, UST, RCRA-NonGen, FINDS, Spill 24 Houle Oil 793 Proctor Rd. Medium LAST (closed) 25 Lefebvre & Sons Inc. 615 Quinn Ave. Medium RCRA-NonGen, FINDS, LUST (closed), UST, ENF 26 Cretex Concrete Products North 1340 6th St. Medium RCRA-CESQG, FINDS, LUST (closed, 2), UST, AST, Spill, TIER 2 27 Beaudry Oil Bulk Facility 720 Quinn Ave. Medium LAST 28 Elk River Oil, Elk River Bulk Plant (Orphan) 533 6th St. Medium AST, LAST Bolded sites identified for total acquisition based on preliminary design of the proposed project. (1) Acronyms: Above Ground Storage Tank (AST); Underground Storage Tank (UST); Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST); Leaking Above Ground Storage Tank (LAST); Voluntary Investigation and Cleanup (VIC); Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA); Small Quantity Generators (SQG); Conditionally-Exempt Small Quantity Generators (CESQG); U.S. EPA Facility Index System (FINDS); MPCA Hazardous Waste Enforcement Summary (ENF), Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS); Emergency Response Notification System (ERNS); Material Licensing Tracking System (MLTS); Minnesota List of Sites (MN LS) Shaded areas represent sites with high risk.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Learning from Fukushima: Nuclear Power in East Asia
    LEARNING FROM FUKUSHIMA NUCLEAR POWER IN EAST ASIA LEARNING FROM FUKUSHIMA NUCLEAR POWER IN EAST ASIA EDITED BY PETER VAN NESS AND MEL GURTOV WITH CONTRIBUTIONS FROM ANDREW BLAKERS, MELY CABALLERO-ANTHONY, GLORIA KUANG-JUNG HSU, AMY KING, DOUG KOPLOW, ANDERS P. MØLLER, TIMOTHY A. MOUSSEAU, M. V. RAMANA, LAUREN RICHARDSON, KALMAN A. ROBERTSON, TILMAN A. RUFF, CHRISTINA STUART, TATSUJIRO SUZUKI, AND JULIUS CESAR I. TRAJANO Published by ANU Press The Australian National University Acton ACT 2601, Australia Email: [email protected] This title is also available online at press.anu.edu.au National Library of Australia Cataloguing-in-Publication entry Title: Learning from Fukushima : nuclear power in East Asia / Peter Van Ness, Mel Gurtov, editors. ISBN: 9781760461393 (paperback) 9781760461409 (ebook) Subjects: Nuclear power plants--East Asia. Nuclear power plants--Risk assessment--East Asia. Nuclear power plants--Health aspects--East Asia. Nuclear power plants--East Asia--Evaluation. Other Creators/Contributors: Van Ness, Peter, editor. Gurtov, Melvin, editor. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying or otherwise, without the prior permission of the publisher. Cover design and layout by ANU Press. Cover image: ‘Fukushima apple tree’ by Kristian Laemmle-Ruff. Near Fukushima City, 60 km from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant, February 2014. The number in the artwork is the radioactivity level measured in the orchard—2.166 microsieverts per hour, around 20 times normal background radiation. This edition © 2017 ANU Press Contents Figures . vii Tables . ix Acronyms and abbreviations .
    [Show full text]
  • GNC SWOT Analysis Final Report
    Final Report | Great Northern Corridor SWOT Analysis TECHNICAL REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE 1. Report No. 6 (Final Report) 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. 5. Report Date December 31, 2014 4. Title and Subtitle 6. Performing Organization Code Great Northern Corridor Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats Analysis Final Report 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. 6 (Final Report) Olsson Associates Parsons Brinckerhoff The Beckett Group 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. Olsson Associates 11. Contract or Grant No. 2111 S. 67th Street, Suite 200 Omaha, NE 68106 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Research Programs Type: Project Final Report Montana Department of Transportation Period Covered: January-November 2014 2701 Prospect Avenue P.O. Box 201001 14. Sponsoring Agency Code 5401 Helena MT 59620-1001 15. Supplementary Notes Research performed in cooperation with the Montana Department of Transportation and the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration. 16. Abstract The GNC Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats Analysis Final Report is the culmination of a ten-month study of the Great Northern Corridor as requested by the GNC Coalition. The Final Report combines the key messages of the previous five Technical Memoranda, which addressed the Corridor’s Infrastructure and Operations, Freight & Commodity Flows, SWOT Analysis & Scenario Planning Workshop, Economic & Environmental Impacts Analysis, and Project Prioritization. This Final Report intends to tell the compelling story of the Corridor today and how it can strategically position itself for continued and improved performance, access, safety, and reliability in the future.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Section 4(F) Evaluation February 23, 2006
    NORTHSTAR CORRIDOR RAIL PROJECT Findings of Fact and Conclusions/ Final Section 4(f) Evaluation February 23, 2006 Minnesota Department of Transportation in cooperation with the Northstar Corridor Development Authority the Metropolitan Council and the Federal Transit Administration Northstar Project Office 155 Fifth Avenue South, Suite 755 Minneapolis, MN 55401 (612) 215-8200 TABLE OF CONTENTS STATEMENT OF ISSUE...........................................................................................................................1 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS .........................................................................................1 1.0 ADMINISTRATIVE BACKGROUND........................................................................................1 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ..........................................................................................................3 3.0 CHANGES IN THE PROJECT SINCE THE EA/DRAFT 4(F) WAS RELEASED ...............4 4.0 ADDITIONS/CORRECTIONS TO THE EA/DRAFT 4(f) EVALUATION............................5 4.1 Alternative Definition…………………………………………………………………………...5 4.2 Farmlands Section........................................................................................................................5 4.3 Wetland Mitigation Plan..............................................................................................................5 5.0 SUMMARY OF COMMENTS RECEIVED ..............................................................................7 5.1 Agency Comments.......................................................................................................................7
    [Show full text]
  • Northstar Corridor Rail Project Work Group Report
    This document is made available electronically by the Minnesota Legislative Reference Library as part of an ongoing digital archiving project. http://www.leg.state.mn.us/lrl/lrl.asp 04 - 0027 Northstar Corridor Rail Project Work Group Report Required by 2003 Minnesota Legislature Minnesota Session Laws of 2003 l't Special Session Chapter 19 - Section 75 Report Date: January 15,2004 r Northstar Work Group Report Draft January 15, 2004 Introduction The Northstar Corridor Rail Project is a proposed commuter rail project running northwest from downtown Minneapolis near the trunk highway 10 corridor. Potential stations, in addition to downtown, are Northeast Minneapolis, Fridley, Coon Rapids-Foley, Coon Rapids­ Riverdale, Anoka, Elk River, Big Lake, Becker, St. Cloud East, and Rice. The state share of funding for the project has been debated by the Minnesota Legislature since the 2000 session, but has not been authorized. Minnesota Session Laws of 2003, 1st Special Session, Chapter 19, Section 75 (see appendix A) required the commissioner of transportation, in conjunction with the Northstar Corridor Development Authority (NCDA), to convene a work group to perform two specific tasks: 1) Update ridership forecasts for Northstar commuter rail based on 2000 census data and 2) Seek updated information from the Burlington Northem Santa Fe railroad (BNSF) regarding capacity improvements, railroad usage rights, construction, risk and liability allocation, and other related issues. The commissioner must report this to chairs and ranking members of legislative committees having jurisdiction over transportation and capital investment by January 15, 2004. A work group was formed comprised of 22 people from the Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT), NCDA, Northstar Corridor counties, and the Metropolitan Council with expertise in planning, transportation investment, project management, railroading, and the Northstar corridor.
    [Show full text]
  • Happy Holidays
    Volume 45 #10 December 2014 HAPPY HOLIDAYS TC&W St Paul Turn at Dayton Bluff (Hoffman Ave) Photo by Bob Ball Contents Meeting Notice Meeting Notice P1 The Next meeting of the Northstar Chapter of the NRHS will Officer Contact Directory P2 be the Holiday Banquet at Guldens Restaurant December 7, Editors Column P2 2014 at 4pm. Directions to Meeting Site P2 Minutes of Oct 2014 Meeting P2,3 Next business meeting will be held January 17, 2015 Obituaries P3,4 6:30 pm, at Roseville Lutheran Church at 1215 Roselawn NRHS Report P4 Avenue, midway between Lexington and Hamline Avenues in Minnesota Zephyr move P4 Roseville. See map on page 2 Northstar Commuter Service Delays P5 Amtrak Parlor cars P5 Program after the meeting – BNSF ND Work completed P5 To Be Determined. Northern Lights Open House P6 There will be a pre-meeting get-together Jan 17, 2014 at the California Trip (continued) P5,6,7 Keys Cafe and Bakery at the northeast corner of Lexington and MN Governors Rail/pipeline forum P7 Larpenteur starting about 4:45 pm. PLEASE CALL Bob Restoration of D&NM 2-8-2 P8 Clarkson at 651-636-2323 and leave a message with your name Extra news and Misc photos P8-P13 and the number of persons coming with you. Railfan Events P13-P14 Reminder: Dues for 2015 are Due! Page 1 Northstar News December 2014 Northstar Chapter Officers President H Martin Swan [email protected] 612-961-1684 Vice President Richard Tubbesing [email protected] 763-757-1304 Past President Dawn Holmberg [email protected] 763-784-8835 National Director John Goodman [email protected]
    [Show full text]
  • Nuclear Power in East Asia, Edited by Peter Van Ness and Mel Gurtov, Published 2017 by ANU Press, the Australian National University, Canberra, Australia
    10 Decommissioning nuclear power reactors Kalman A . Robertson Abstract Global demand for decommissioning services is poised to rise rapidly over the next 20 years, creating major technical and administrative challenges for a large number of states and operators that have only limited experience in this field. This chapter explains the radiological risks associated with each step from shutting down a reactor to releasing the former reactor site for a new use . The selection of a strategy for decommissioning a reactor involves competing policy imperatives that may be assessed in light of two key principles related to funding decommissioning and assuring safety, inter-generational equity and the polluter/user pays principle . Based on an assessment of current trends in decommissioning, there are opportunities to improve cost estimates for decommissioning and strengthen international cooperation to meet rising demand . Risk communication and public participation also warrant special attention due to the highly technical nature of the risks associated with decommissioning and remediation of reactor sites . Introduction As commercial nuclear power generation enters its seventh decade, the world is set to undergo an unprecedented increase in the number of reactors requiring decommissioning. The combination of ageing reactor 287 LEARNING FROM FUKUSHIMA fleets and early shutdowns will see a doubling in the number of reactors undergoing decommissioning within the next 20 years, and it is projected to create a global market for decommissioning and waste storage worth over US$100 billion by 2030 (Nucleonics Week 2016). In principle, many of the risks to nuclear safety associated with a reactor site progressively decrease as it is shut down and decommissioned.
    [Show full text]
  • State Rail Plan
    State Rail Plan DRAFT MARCH 2015 CONTACT LIST MnDOT Dave Christianson, Project Manager Office of Freight and Commercial Vehicle Operations [email protected] 651-366-3710 Dan Krom, Director Passenger Rail Office [email protected] 651-366-3193 Consultant Team Andreas Aeppli, Project Manager Cambridge Systematics, Inc. [email protected] 617-234-0433 Brian Smalkoski Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. [email protected] 651-643-0472 MINNESOTA GO STATEWIDE RAIL PLAN Draft Plan PAGE i TABLE OF CONTENTS CONTACT LIST ............................................................................................................................................. I TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................................................ II EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................. VII Overview of the Study .................................................................................................................................... vii Context of the 2015 Rail Plan Update ........................................................................................................... viii The Vision for Minnesota’s Multimodal Transportation System ...................................................................... ix Minnesota’s Existing and Future Rail System .................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Minnesota Comprehensive Statewide Freight and Passenger Rail Plan
    This document is made available electronically by the Minnesota Legislative Reference Library as part of an ongoing digital archiving project. http://www.leg.state.mn.us/lrl/lrl.asp Minnesota Comprehensive Statewide Freight and Passenger Rail Plan Draft Final Report December 2009 Minnesota Comprehensive Statewide Freight and Passenger Rail Plan draft final report Minnesota Comprehensive Statewide Freight and Passenger Rail Plan prepared for Minnesota Department of Transportation prepared by Cambridge Systematics, Inc. with Kimley Horn and Associates, Inc. TKDA, Inc. December 2009 Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Minnesota Comprehensive Statewide Freight and Passenger Rail Plan Table of Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................... ES-1 Vision for Rail...................................................................................................................... ES-2 System Costs ..................................................................................................................... ES-5 Passenger Rail Performance and Benefits ......................................................................... ES-5 Rail System Development and Funding Responsibilities .................................................... ES-6 1 Overview and Vision ........................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Background and Purpose of Study .........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • MN Minneapolis METRO Blue Line Extension Engineering Profile
    METRO Blue Line Extension (Bottineau LRT) Minneapolis, Minnesota New Starts Engineering (Rating Assigned November 2016) Summary Description Proposed Project: Light Rail Transit 13.5 Miles, 11 Stations Total Capital Cost ($YOE): $1,536.18 Million (includes $30.0 million in finance charges) Section 5309 New Starts Share ($YOE): $752.73 Million (49.0%) Annual Operating Cost (opening year 2021): $26.66 Million 16,600 Daily Linked Trips Current Year Ridership Forecast (2014): 5,486,300 Annual Linked Trips 25,500 Daily Linked Trips Horizon Year Ridership Forecast (2035): 8,439,500 Annual Linked Trips Overall Project Rating: Medium-High Project Justification Rating: Medium Local Financial Commitment Rating: High Project Description: The Metropolitan Council (MC) is planning a light rail transit (LRT) extension of the METRO Blue Line from the existing Target Field LRT station in downtown Minneapolis to Brooklyn Park in suburban Hennepin County serving the suburban municipalities of Golden Valley, Robbinsdale and Crystal. The proposed alignment is mostly at grade and generally parallels freight rail and roadway rights of-way. The Project also includes 28 light rail vehicles, a new operations and maintenance facility in Brooklyn Park, four new park-and-ride facilities with approximately 1,700 total spaces, seven LRT bridges, and pedestrian and bicycle access to stations. Service is planned to operate every ten minutes during the day and every ten to 30 minutes during the evening on weekdays, and every ten to 15 minutes on weekends. Project Purpose: The Project is intended to improve access to employment and activity centers. Outside of downtown Minneapolis, which has nearly 140,000 jobs and a growing population, key destinations in the Project corridor include North Hennepin Community College and a large, growing Target corporate campus near the northern end of the line in Brooklyn Park.
    [Show full text]
  • Amtrak's Twilight Shoreliner Service Debuts ·
    SPECIAL REPORT: AMTRAK'S TWILIGHT SHORELINER SERVICE DEBUTS · -, The RAILROAD PRESS Magazine proudly presents two fully-illustrated stories of our American railroad heritage... The 1947 Freedom Train, and the Chicago, North Shore & Milwaukee Ry. Subscribe to The Railroad Press for $16 for one year (4 issues) starting with Issue #34 featuring the 50th Anniversary of the 1947 Freedom Train, and receive Issue #32 featur­ ing North Shore Memories absolutely free!! Name Send check, money order Please begin YES!!! or credit card info to: my one year (4 issues) Address subscription to TRP for The Railroad Press City only $16.00. Please start 1150 Carlisle St. #444K with Issue #34 featuring Hanover, PA 17331 State Zip the 50th Anniversary of the Freedom Train, and send Foreign customers Phone Required for credit card orders me Issue #32 featuring write for rates Card # Exp. Chicago, North Shore and Milwaukee memories free! Dealer Inquiries Welcome! Signature Not good in conjunction with any other offer. Offerexpires 12/31/98 e October 1997al Issue 407 FE ATURES Some30 Decade Wisconsin Central's first 10 years have been eventful. Andrew S. Nelson I(nox Station32 Bed & Rails A new bed-and-breakfast in central Illinois is recommended for raiIfans. George S. Pitarys Steve Smedley DE PARTMENTS 34 4 Editorial Appalachian' Interludes 5 Letters A western railroader finds thrills in them eastern hills. 8 Expediter Patrick D. Flynn 12 Expediter Special Report 14 From the Cab 18 Burlington Northern &. Santa Fe 22 VIA Rail Canada 48 24 Conrail UP Locomotive Renumberings 2G Amtrak The post-merger motive power fleet receives new numbers.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix F – Technical Memorandum on Rail Operations Modeling
    North star Commuter Rail Exten sion Fea sibility A ssess ment Appendix F – Techni cal Memorandum on Rail Operati ons Modelin g August 4, 2020 Photo Cred t: Dave Gonzalez Prepared for By Northstar Commuter Rail Extension Feasibility Assessment Appendix F – Technical Memorandum on Rail Operations Modeling Table of Contents 1. Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 1 2. Development of Base Case RTC Model ................................................................................................. 1 2.1. Base Case Network ....................................................................................................................... 1 2.1.1. Turnout and Crossover Speeds ............................................................................................. 2 2.1.2. Signals ................................................................................................................................... 2 2.2. Base Case Traffic ........................................................................................................................... 5 2.2.1. Weekly 2020 Train Counts .................................................................................................... 5 2.2.2. Origin‐Destination ................................................................................................................. 7 2.3. Base Case Train Operations .........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix a – Technical Memorandum on Existing Constraints (PDF)
    Northstar Commuter Rail Extension Feasibility Assessment Appendix A – Technical Memorandum on Existing Constraints July 31, 2020 Photo Credit: Dave Gonzalez Prepared for by Northstar Commuter Rail Extension Feasibility Assessment Appendix A – Technical Memorandum on Existing Constraints Table of Contents 1. Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 1 2. Corridor Capacity Constraints ............................................................................................................... 1 2.1. Accommodating High‐Priority Freight Trains ................................................................................ 1 2.2. Capacity Needs .............................................................................................................................. 2 2.3. Congestion near Northtown Yard ................................................................................................. 2 3. FRA Regulations .................................................................................................................................... 3 3.1. Hours of Service Limitations ......................................................................................................... 3 3.1.1. FRA Regulations .................................................................................................................... 3 3.1.2. Constraints on Proposed Northstar Service .........................................................................
    [Show full text]