DOCSLIB.ORG

Two Community Meetings About the Virginia Avenue Tunnel

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Two Community Meetings About the Virginia Avenue Tunnel ✯ Capitol* Capitol Hill Hi Restorationll Restoration Society Society * ✯ www.chrs.org February 2014 Two Community Meetings About the Virginia Avenue Tunnel By Monte Edwards n January 16, over 400 people the north, near East Coast refineries furious. To their credit, at least three Ofilled a community meeting at and oil transfer hubs such as the Port CSX officials, FHWA and DDOT did the Department of General Services of Albany in New York. show up and answered questions— Building with Mayor Vincent Gray More than once, Mayor Gray although not to the audience’s liking. about the proposed Virginia Avenue used the term “if the tunnel is CSX tried to explain that in 2013 Tunnel expansion. The crowd rebuilt…” A recurring theme in the there were only three tank cars of overflowed into the hall and entry questions and the Mayor’s response Bakken crude shipped through the foyer and others had to be turned was “where is the benefit to DC Virginia Avenue Tunnel. But people away. for the hardships we are asked to began to murmur loudly that they The meeting began with endure?” The Mayor described wanted to hear about alternative prepared statements from concerned the hardships that DC endured routing. As a transportation expert in neighbors addressing access during during the construction of Metro, the District, I was able to summarize construction, safety, public health/ but emphasized the citywide and the need for a second river crossing. pollution, the three- to six-year open regional benefits that resulted. CSX countered that this was very trench construction plan, the dangers Most comments were focused on of a derailment involving hazardous the hardships, risks and concerns Continued on page 6 cargo, environmental justice, and the during the three- to six-year period lack of any benefit to DC. of reconstruction, but there was An interesting fact emerged: some concern expressed about the CSX admitted they are transporting long-term impacts of the project on Also in this issue Bakken crude oil through DC. This restricting the ability to realize the ARTICLES is the highly volatile crude from goals and objectives of passenger and Northeast Library Reopens ............. 4 North Dakota/Montana fracking commuter rail expansion. 2014 House and Garden Tour ........ 5 that was responsible for 47 fatalities On January 25 Delegate Eleanor Capitol Hill Village Seminar ............ 6 Blog on A Street, SE History............ 6 and the destruction of half the town Holmes Norton held a community Hill East History .............................. 7 in Lac-Maginet in a train derailment meeting about the proposed tunnel this past summer in Canada. Some expansion. Again, the initial meeting COLUMNS observers have speculated that the room was unable to hold all of the President’s Column ........................ 2 Zoning Briefs ................................. 4 port in Norfolk, Va., could present a attendees. EPA was to have attended CHRS Supporters ........................... 5 tempting oil-by-rail destination via to explain the long list of deficiencies the Virginia Avenue Tunnel. Such enumerated in their response to LOOKING AHEAD developments would be years away, the Draft Environmental Impact Ward 6 Candidates Forum ............. 5 if they happen at all. For now, CSX’s Statement (DEIS). But EPA did not Mark Your Calendar ....................... 8 crude oil business is concentrated to show up and Delegate Norton was President’s Column: Watershed Moment By Janet Quigley he Anacostia Waterfront Initiative The Good News: Anacostia a community meeting that drew T(AWI) is an interesting and Riverwalk Trail more than 200 residents—the largest ambitious project with intimidating turnout since the Kentucky Courts Recreation outlets are increasingly numbers and lofty goals. In the 14th public housing discussions. CHRS important as open space on the year of a 30-year, $10 billion plan, it supported pedestrian and bicycle Hill decreases while the population is spearheaded by the District and connections from L Street to M Street grows. The Anacostia Riverwalk Trail has 19 regional and federal agency (over/across the former Southeast is a welcome development for the partners working on various stages Freeway) but expressed concerns community. In 2006 I led a muddy of more than 50 projects. AWI is about neighborhood cut-throughs, bike tour of the budding trail from expected to produce a clean and noise and pollution (see CHRS News, the Navy Yard to the Fish Market, active river, new riverfront parks, April 2013). past Buzzard Point and around the revitalized residential neighborhoods, DDOT returned to the Nationals Stadium construction job opportunities and multi-modal community in November 2013 site. It was a diamond in the rough - transportation options, and has with revisions. While they heeded minimal signage, patches of dirt and several accomplishments to date some of CHRS and the neighbors’ gravel, few bike lanes on the streets. including the 11th Street Bridge. concerns (pedestrian but no vehicular Today, DDOT has completed 12 of 20 There are five program areas: connections at 13th, 14th and 15th miles, with pedestrian bridges over Transportation, Environmental, Streets, road not immediately the railroad tracks on the east and Economic, Community Development adjacent to L Street homes, include west sides of the river. Bugs remain to and Recreation, led by four DC lower Kentucky Avenue in the study, be worked out, such as bicycle bans agencies: the Deputy Mayor for allow pedestrian access through in portions and limited access due to Economic Development, the District the circle), the proposals were 11th Street Bridge construction, but Department of Transportation still unpalatable. Four Boulevard it is encouraging to see how much (DDOT), the District Department of options were presented: two above progress has been made. Extensions the Environment and the Office of grade with underground parking to Kenilworth Aquatic Gardens Planning. Recreation does not have a that would accommodate buses; and the National Arboretum, and dedicated lead agency. two at grade with parking; two improvement of the Buzzard Point DDOT manages eight placing the road closer to the segment are eagerly anticipated. transportation projects as part of river, two farther; all proposing AWI, five of which directly affect Barney Circle and Southeast four lanes. (See drawings at www. Capitol Hill: 11th St Bridge, the Boulevards: $20 Million Roads anacostiawaterfront.org.) Curiously, Anacostia Riverwalk Trail, Barney to Nowhere? the pedestrian walkways to the river Circle-Southeast Boulevard, were wide enough for two lanes of More puzzling is DDOT’s proposed Pennsylvania and Potomac Avenues, cars. And although the potential for revision of Barney Circle and and the South Capitol Street Corridor parkland exists, all four proposals construction of a four-lane, five-block project. With AWI, DDOT presented showed a disappointing ratio of boulevard from 11th Street to the a status report in December that asphalt to grass. Circle. While the Circle might stand a illustrated their considerable In December CHRS reiterated little updating, and pedestrian access progress, but also how important the to DDOT its support of recreational to the riverfront would be welcome, need is for coordination among the access, concerns for neighborhood the $20 million project seems many agencies and projects. CHRS impacts, opposition to bus parking excessive unless the thoroughfare has commented before that the CSX and a park road, and contended that actually extends to or past RFK project and the Long Bridge Study the need has not been shown for Stadium—something the neighbors would benefit from coordination. this $20 million project. ANC 6B has and CHRS have consistently recommended DDOT return to the opposed. drawing board. DDOT unveiled the first plans for this project in February 2013 at Continued on page 6 2 • CHRS News February 2014 Capitol Hill Restoration Northeast Branch Library Reopens Society (CHRS) BOARD OF DIRECTORS By Elizabeth Nelson President. .Janet Quigley First Vice President. .Monte Edwards s of press time, the Northeast The library is located at 330 7th Second Vice President. Lisa Dale Jones Secretary. .Susan Burgerman ABranch Library was scheduled Street, NE, and has been very much Treasurer. Patrick Crowley to reopen to the public on Monday, missed by its neighbors, who’ve At Large . Chuck Burger February 3 with a ribbon cutting had to travel to either the Southeast At Large . .Ben Klay ceremony at 10 am. Since September Branch Library or the Rosedale At Large . .Undine Nash At Large . .Drury Tallant 2012, the library has undergone a Library while it was closed. It’s quite At Large. Maurice Walters $10 million renovation project that wonderful to have it back in service At Large . Lisa Wilson includes: and with improved facilities. The Immediate Past President. .Beth Purcell • restoration of original woodwork larger meeting room is especially welcome as public meeting spaces COMMITTEE CHAIRS • new plumbing, electrical and Beyond the Boundaries. .Beth Purcell HVAC systems are in short supply on the Hill. Budget & Administration. Paul Cromwell CHRS appreciated an invitation City Planning. .Monte Edwards • improved lighting from the DC Public Library (DCPL) Communications. .Susan Burgerman • increased space for library agency to consult with them about Community Development. Chuck Burger Community Relations. Elizabeth Nelson programs the proposed renovations. The CHRS Historic Preservation
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Virginia Railway Express Strategic Plan 2004-2025
    VRE STRATEGIC PLAN Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................................V Current State of the Railroad ..............................................................................................................v The Strategic Planning Process..........................................................................................................vi The VRE Ridership Market................................................................................................................vii Strategic Plan Scenarios and Recommendations .............................................................................viii Core Network Needs...........................................................................................................................ix Potential Network Expansion ..............................................................................................................x Phased Service Improvement and Capital Investment Plan ..............................................................xii Financial, Institutional and Organizational Issues ..........................................................................xiii VRE Moving Forward ......................................................................................................................xiv 1. CURRENT STATE OF THE RAILROAD..........................................................................................1 VRE SYSTEM OVERVIEW .........................................................................................................................1
    [Show full text]
  • Long Bridge Project Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) Alternatives Development Report
    Long Bridge Project Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) Alternatives Development Report June 19, 2018 Long Bridge Project EIS Draft Alternatives Development Report Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 1 1.1. NEPA Requirements for Alternatives Development ..................................................................... 1 1.2. Purpose of this Report .................................................................................................................. 1 1.3. Project Background ...................................................................................................................... 3 1.4. Concept Screening Process ........................................................................................................... 4 1.5. Organization of this Report .......................................................................................................... 4 2.0 Purpose and Need ......................................................................................................... 6 2.1. Why is the Project needed? .......................................................................................................... 6 2.2. Will the Long Bridge consider bicycle and pedestrian access? .................................................... 8 3.0 Alternatives Development Process ................................................................................ 9 3.1. Pre-NEPA Alternatives Development
    [Show full text]
  • CSX Baltimore Division Timetable
    NORTHERN REGION BALTIMORE DIVISION TIMETABLE NO. 4 EFFECTIVE SATURDAY, JANUARY 1, 2005 AT 0001 HOURS CSX STANDARD TIME C. M. Sanborn Division Manager BALTIMORE DIVISION TABLE OF CONTENTS GENERAL INFORMATION SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS DESCRIPTION PAGE INST DESCRIPTION PAGE 1 Instructions Relating to CSX Operating Table of Contents Rules Timetable Legend 2 Instructions Relating to Safety Rules Legend – Sample Subdivision 3 Instructions Relating to Company Policies Region and Division Officers And Procedures Emergency Telephone Numbers 4 Instructions Relating to Equipment Train Dispatchers Handling Rules 5 Instructions Relating to Air Brake and Train SUBDIVISIONS Handling Rules 6 Instructions Relating to Equipment NAME CODE DISP PAGE Restrictions Baltimore Terminal BZ AV 7 Miscellaneous Bergen BG NJ Capital WS AU Cumberland CU CM Cumberland Terminal C3 CM Hanover HV AV Harrisburg HR NI Herbert HB NI Keystone MH CM Landover L0 NI Lurgan LR AV Metropolitan ME AU Mon M4 AS Old Main Line OM AU P&W PW AS Philadelphia PA AV Pittsburgh PI AS.AT Popes Creek P0 NI RF&P RR CQ S&C SC CN Shenandoah SJ CN Trenton TN NI W&P WP AT CSX Transportation Effective January 1, 2005 Albany Division Timetable No. 5 © Copyright 2005 TIMETABLE LEGEND GENERAL F. AUTH FOR MOVE (AUTHORITY FOR MOVEMENT) Unless otherwise indicated on subdivision pages, the The authority for movement rules applicable to the track segment Train Dispatcher controls all Main Tracks, Sidings, of the subdivision. Interlockings, Controlled Points and Yard Limits. G. NOTES STATION LISTING AND DIAGRAM PAGES Where station page information may need to be further defined, a note will refer to “STATION PAGE NOTES” 1– HEADING listed at the end of the diagram.
    [Show full text]
  • Washington, DC to Richmond Third Track Feasibility Study HOUSE
    REPORT OF THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF RAIL AND PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION Washington, DC to Richmond Third Track Feasibility Study TO THE GOVERNOR AND THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF VIRGINIA HOUSE DOCUMENT NO. 78 COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA RICHMOND 2006 Third Track Feasibility Study December 2006 WASHINGTON, D.C. TO RICHMOND THIRD TRACK FEASIBILITY STUDY PREFACE This study was requested by the 2006 General Assembly session in HB 5012. In addition to an analysis of the feasibility of constructing a third track, this study responds to the General Assembly’s direction to expand the scope to: (i) Identify needed right-of-way parallel to existing tracks, including right-of-way owned by CSX or by other parties; (ii) Identify major environmental issues; (iii) Develop an implementation plan based on the most optimal options, including the schedules for each phase of the project as well as financing for the project; (iv) Review legal and regulatory issues; and (v) Estimate the cost of powering passenger trains by electricity for a Third Track from Washington, D.C. to Richmond. The Department of Rail and Public Transportation (DRPT) is charged with ensuring that the Commonwealth of Virginia achieves the highest public benefit for the dollars invested in our rail programs. There is no doubt that this is a high priority freight and passenger rail corridor that will require significant investment in order to maintain and improve mobility for people and goods. DRPT is taking a strategic approach in studying this high priority corridor. Our new approach is based on establishing public benefits, identifying public/private partnership opportunities, and providing realistic cost estimates based on a comprehensive plan that identifies all of the improvements and issues that need to be addressed in the provision of reliable, sustainable, expandable, and efficient freight and passenger rail operations.
    [Show full text]
  • Control Point Virginia Tower
    GOVERNMENT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE HISTORIC PRESERVATION REVIEW BOARD APPLICATION FOR HISTORIC LANDMARK OR HISTORIC DISTRICT DESIGNATION New Designation __X___ Amendment of a previous designation _____ Please summarize any amendment(s) _______________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ Property name _Control Point (CP) Virginia Tower_______________________________________ If any part of the interior is being nominated, it must be specifically identified and described in the narrative statements. Address __Southeast Corner of 2nd Street SW and Virginia Avenue SW, Washington, DC_________ Square and lot number(s) __0582 0856_________________________________________________ Affected Advisory Neighborhood Commission ______ANC 6D_____________________________ Date of construction __1904-1906____ Date of major alteration(s) __1930s___________________ Architect(s) __Unknown______________ Architectural style(s) ____________________________ Original use _Railroad Interlocking Control Tower_ Present use ___Railroad Infrastructure Property owner _CSX Transportation, Inc._____________________________________________ Legal address of property owner _500 Water Street, Jacksonville, Florida 32202 ________________ NAME OF APPLICANT(S) _CSX Transportation, Inc.____________________________________ If the applicant is an organization, it must submit evidence that among its purposes is the promotion of historic preservation in the District of Columbia.
    [Show full text]
  • Committee of 100 Comments on DEIS 09-28-2020
    September 28, 2020 Mr. David Valenstein Office of Railroad Policy and Development USDOT Federal Railroad Administration (MS-20 RPD-10) 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20590 Founded 1923 Dear Mr. Valenstein, Chair Kirby Vining We are pleased to provide the following comments on the Washington Vice-Chair Union Station DEIS. Alma Gates We thank you for the opportunity to comment and look forward to Secretary working with you throughout this process. Please contact Monte Edwards at Erik Hein [email protected] or Erik Hein at [email protected] if you Treasurer have specific questions or other concerns. George R. Clark Sincerely, Trustees Charlie Bien Larry Hargrove Naima Jefferson Aidan Jones Nancy MacWood Kirby Vining, Chair Meg Maguire Committee of 100 on the Federal City David Marlin Sheldon Repp Cc: Phil Mendelson Andrea Rosen Mary Cheh Marilyn Simon Charles Allen Jim Smailes Marcel Acosta Pat Tiller Andrew Trueblood James Wilcox Jeff Marootian Evelyn Wrin Anna Chamberlin Stephen Hansen, Emeritus David Maloney Andrew Lewis Rebecca Miller 945 G Street, N.W. Betsy Merritt Washington, D.C. 20001 Drury Tallent 202.681.0225 www.committeeof100.net [email protected] A beautiful and livable Washington, DC for all. Comments Concerning the Union Station Draft Environmental Impact Statement (Released June 12, 2020) September 28, 2020 The Union Station Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) proposes an expansion plan that will cost between 5.8 and 7.5 billion dollars1 and require 11 to 14 years to build2. The plan focuses on bus and automobile parking, station concourses, platforms and retail. But the plan does not adequately address Union Station’s role as a train station.
    [Show full text]
  • DC State Rail Plan Website
    STATE RAIL PLAN: FINAL REPORT 2017 State Rail Plan Table of Contents Contents Chapter 1 The Role of Rail in District Transportation ............................................................................ 1-1 1.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 1-1 1.2 Federal Authority For States ...................................................................................................... 1-2 1.3 Institutional Governance Structure of The District’s Rail Programs .......................................... 1-2 1.4 Multimodal Transportation System Goals .................................................................................. 1-3 1.5 Rail Transportation’s Role within The District’s Transportation System ................................... 1-5 1.5.1 Role of Freight Rail ................................................................................................................ 1-5 1.5.2 Role of Commuter Rail .......................................................................................................... 1-6 1.5.3 Role of Intercity Rail ............................................................................................................... 1-6 Chapter 2 Approach to Public and Agency Participation ...................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Stakeholder Roundtables ...........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Howard Street Tunnel Finding of No Significant Impact
    Federal Railroad Administration Howard Street Tunnel Project FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT June 2021 Prepared Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 4332 (2)(c) By the U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration and Maryland Department of Transportation Maryland Port Administration Table of Contents 1. Introduction ...............................................................................................................................1 2. Study Area .................................................................................................................................2 2.1. Maryland ....................................................................................................................................... 4 2.2. Delaware ....................................................................................................................................... 4 2.3. Pennsylvania ................................................................................................................................. 4 3. Purpose and Need Statement .....................................................................................................5 3.1. Purpose of the Project .................................................................................................................. 6 3.2. Need for the Project...................................................................................................................... 6 4. Alternatives ...............................................................................................................................7
    [Show full text]
  • Potential Improvements to the Washington-Richmond Railroad
    Report to Congress VOLUME I Potential Improvements to the Washington⎯Richmond Railroad Corridor National Railroad Passenger Corporation May 1999 TABLE OF CONTENTS VOLUME I TABLE OF CONTENTS . TC-1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . ES-1 . CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION . 1 CHAPTER 2: THE CORRIDOR TODAY . 5 CHAPTER 3: SERVICE GOALS . 24 CHAPTER 4: METHODOLOGIES . 29 CHAPTER 5: INVESTMENT REQUIREMENTS . 37 . CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSION . 56 List of Tables TABLE 1: Existing Railroad Services on the Washington-Richmond Corridor . ES-5 TABLE 2: Railroad Services Envisioned for 2015 on the Washington-Richmond ES-10 Corridor . TABLE 3: Description of Project Groups . ES-14 TABLE 4: Preliminary Listing of Projects for the Washington-Richmond Corridor . ES-15 TABLE 5: Potential Improvements by Category . ES-16 TABLE 2-1: Track Ownership and Operating Control . 7 TABLE 2-2: Station Ownership and Use . 11 TABLE 2-3: Existing Railroad Services on the Washington-Richmond Corridor . 13 TABLE 2-4: Amtrak Train Service in the Washington-Richmond Corridor . 14 TABLE 3-1: Railroad Services Envisioned for 2015 on the Washington-Richmond 24 Corridor . TABLE 3-2: Projected Train Movements by Direction Between Washington and 25 Alexandria Between 3:30PM and 7:30PM, Year 2015 . .. TABLE 5-1: Preliminary Listing of Projects for the Washington-Richmond Corridor . 54 TABLE 5-2: Description of Project Groups . 55 TABLE 5-3: Potential Improvements by Category . 56 List of Figures FIGURE 1: Washington-Richmond Corridor . ES-3 FIGURE 2: Southeast Corridor . ES-3 FIGURE 3: Demand for Intercity Corridor Train Services, Washington-Richmond ES-11 FIGURE 4: Selected Rail Lines in Washington, D.
    [Show full text]
  • The Shipping Container and the Globalization of American Infrastructure by Matthew W. Heins
    The Shipping Container and the Globalization of American Infrastructure by Matthew W. Heins A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Architecture) in the University of Michigan 2013 Doctoral Committee: Professor Robert L. Fishman, Chair Associate Professor Scott D. Campbell Professor Paul N. Edwards Associate Professor Claire A. Zimmerman © Matthew W. Heins 2013 Acknowledgments I wish to express my sincere and heartfelt thanks to my advisor, professor Robert Fishman, who has provided such valuable guidance and advice to me over the years. Ever since I arrived at the University of Michigan, Robert has been of tremendous assistance, and he has played a vital role in my evolution as a student and scholar. My deepest gratitude also goes out to the other members of my dissertation committee, professors Claire Zimmerman, Scott Campbell and Paul Edwards, who have all given invaluable help to me in countless ways. In addition I would like to thank professor Martin Murray, who has been very supportive and whose comments and ideas have been enriching. Other faculty members here at the University of Michigan who have helped or befriended me in one way or another, and to whom I owe thanks, include Kit McCullough, Matthew Lassiter, Carol Jacobsen, Melissa Harris, María Arquero de Alarcón, June Manning Thomas, Malcolm McCullough, Jean Wineman, Geoffrey Thün, Roy Strickland, Amy Kulper, Lucas Kirkpatrick and Gavin Shatkin. My fellow doctoral students in architecture and urban planning at Taubman College have helped me immensely over the years, as I have benefited greatly from their companionship and intellectual presence.
    [Show full text]
  • Long Bridge Project Summary
    I-95 Corridor Improvement Plan Long Bridge Project Summary Long Bridge Long BridgeNew Virginia-owned Long Bridge across the Potomac River will Long Long Bridgehave dedicated passenger rail tracks To Virginia Avenue Tunnel Bridge To Union PreliminaryTransforming Rail Estimate: in Virginia Program $1.6 willB illion*facilitate an increase of Station To Virginia Avenue Tunnel Corridor To Union ThePreliminarythe new current Long bridge Bridge Estimate:from will twoincrease tracks capacity:$1.6 to four Billion* Station Washington, DC The• Over new 18,000 Long Bridgenew freight will increase and passenger capacity: train TWO TRACKS ON crossings NEW POTOMAC LongWashington, Bridge DC • Over 18,000 new freight and passenger train RIVERTWO TRACKS BRIDGE ON Potomac River • 1 million trucks taken off the roads NEW POTOMAC Long Bridge crossings RIVER BRIDGE Potomac River • 5• million1 million cars trucks taken taken off theoff roadsthe roads Virginia 6 MILES OF NEW FOURTH • Safety• 5 million improved cars taken by reducing off the crashesroads Virginia MAIN6 TRACKMILES OF NEW FOURTH • Safety improved by reducing crashes MAIN TRACK AF Train Current # of 2040 # of Percent Alexandria Operator Trains per Day Trains per Day Increase AF Train Current # of 2040 # of Percent Alexandria VREOperator Trains34 per Day Trains92 per Day 171%Increase Franconia MARCVRE 0 34 8 92 --171% To Manassas AMTRAKMARC 24 0 44 8 83%-- LortonFranconia To Manassas 8 MILES OF NEW CSXTAMTRAK 18 24 42 44 133%83% Lorton Auto THIRD MAIN TRACK Train 8 MILES OF NEW Norfolk SouthernCSXT 0 18 6 42 --133% Occoquan Auto THIRD MAIN TRACK Occoquan River Train Norfolk SouthernTotal 76 0 192 6 -- Occoquan Occoquan River Source: DDOT, LongTotal Bridge Draft EIS 76 192 Long Bridge Today Source: DDOT, Long Bridge Draft EIS �Long Two Bridgetracks operateToday at 98% capacity.
    [Show full text]
  • Long Bridge Study
    District Department of Transportation LONG BRIDGE STUDY January 2015 Cover photo credits: Zefiro 280 High Speed Rail Train courtesy of Bombadier. LONG BRIDGE STUDY FINAL REPORT Table of Contents ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS & ACRONYMS I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 Introduction 1 History 3 Bridge Structure 3 Purpose and Need 4 Bridge Condition and Current Operations 5 Alternatives 6 Railroad Alternatives 10 Alternative 1: No Build 10 Alternative 2: Two-Track Bridge 10 Alternative 3: Four-Track Bridge 11 Alternative 4: Four-Track Tunnel 11 Railroad and Other Modal Alternatives 11 Alternative 5: Four-Track Bridge and Pedestrian/Bicycle 11 Alternative 6: Four-Track Bridge with Pedestrian/Bicycle and Streetcar 12 Alternative 7: Four-Track Bridge with Pedestrian/Bicycle and Shared Streetcar/ General-Purpose Lanes 12 Alternative 8: Four-Track Bridge with Pedestrian/Bicycle, Shared Streetcar/General- Purpose Lanes and Additional General-Purpose Lanes 13 Transportation Analysis 14 Freight and Passenger Rail 14 Freight and Passenger Outlook 16 Analysis of Pedestrians and Bicycles 16 Analysis of Transit and Vehicular Modes 17 Engineering, Constructability and Costing 18 4-Track Concepts - Alternatives 2-4 20 Environmental Review and Resource Identification 21 4-Track Concepts - Alternatives 5-8 21 Findings 22 Project Coordination 24 Acknowledgements 25 CHAPTER 1: OVERVIEW 1 Background 1 The Long Bridge 1 Study Area 2 Freight, Passenger, and Commuter Rail 4 Long Bridge History 5 Relationship to Other Studies 7 Southeast High-Speed Rail Market and Demand Study, August
    [Show full text]