DOCSLIB.ORG

Supplemental Environmental Assessment for Construction of a Concrete Casing Extension in the Hudson Yards, New York, New York

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Supplemental Environmental Assessment for Construction of a Concrete Casing Extension in the Hudson Yards, New York, New York SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A CONCRETE CASING EXTENSION IN THE HUDSON YARDS, NEW YORK, NEW YORK Prepared Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. § 4332), and FRA’s Procedures for Considering Environmental Impacts (64 FR 28545 and 78 FR 2713) by the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) and Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) August 2014 This page intentionally left blank. This page intentionally left blank. TABLE OF CONTENTS Acronyms and Abbreviations .................................................................................................................... iii Chapter One Introduction, Background, Purpose, and Need............................................................... 1 1.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................1 1.2 Background and Scope ................................................................................2 1.3 Purpose and Need ........................................................................................2 Chapter Two Description of Proposed Action and No Action .............................................................. 4 2.1 Proposed Action ...........................................................................................4 2.1.1 Timing ............................................................................................. 4 2.1.2 Construct a Concrete Casing Extension .......................................... 4 2.2 No Action .....................................................................................................9 Chapter Three Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences .......................................... 10 3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................10 3.2 Geology ......................................................................................................10 3.2.1 Affected Environment ................................................................... 10 3.2.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................... 10 3.3 Soils............................................................................................................11 3.3.1 Affected Environment ................................................................... 11 3.3.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................... 12 3.4 Groundwater ..............................................................................................12 3.4.1 Affected Environment ................................................................... 12 3.4.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................... 12 3.5 Air Quality .................................................................................................13 3.5.1 Affected Environment ................................................................... 13 3.5.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................... 15 3.6 Cultural Resources .....................................................................................17 3.6.1 Affected Environment ................................................................... 17 3.6.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................... 18 3.7 Visual Resources ........................................................................................19 3.7.1 Affected Environment ................................................................... 19 3.7.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................... 19 3.8 Hazardous Materials and Health and Safety ..............................................20 3.8.1 Affected Environment ................................................................... 20 3.8.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................... 21 3.9 Noise and Vibration ...................................................................................22 3.9.1 Affected Environment ................................................................... 22 3.9.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................... 23 3.10 Access and Traffic .....................................................................................24 3.10.1 Affected Environment ................................................................... 24 3.10.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................... 24 3.11 Utilities and LIRR Operations ...................................................................26 3.11.1 Affected Environment ................................................................... 26 3.11.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................... 27 3.12 Section 4(f) Evaluation of Impacts to the High Line .................................29 3.12.1 Affected Environment ................................................................... 29 3.12.2 Environmental Consequences ....................................................... 29 i TABLE OF CONTENTS 3.13 Cumulative Effects.....................................................................................30 3.13.1 Reasonably Foreseeable Future Actions ....................................... 30 3.13.2 Potential Cumulative Impacts ....................................................... 31 Chapter Four Distribution ...................................................................................................................... 34 Chapter Five List of Preparers .............................................................................................................. 36 Chapter Six References ....................................................................................................................... 38 List of Appendices Appendix A Environmental Assessment for Construction of a Concrete Casing in the Hudson Yards, New York, New York, March 2013 and Finding of No Significant Impact: Construction of a Concrete Casing in the Hudson Yards, New York, New York, May 2013 Appendix B Air Quality Emissions Calculations Appendix C National Historic Preservation Act Section 106 Consultation with New York State Historic Preservation Office Figures Figure 1 Project Location Map………………….………….…………………………………...3 Figure 2 Proposed Action Components………………………………………………………....6 Tables Table 1 Applicable General Conformity De Minimis Levels ....................................................... 14 Table 2 Annual Estimated Emissions for the Proposed Action Compared with Conformity Thresholds ................................................................................................ 16 Table 3 Comparison of GHG Emissions between the Proposed Action and New York City ............................................................................................................................... 17 ii Acronyms and Abbreviations AC Alternating Current NEPA National Environmental Policy Act ACM Asbestos-Containing Materials NHPA National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 AMTRAK National Railroad Passenger Corporation NJT New Jersey Transit APE NOx Nitrogen oxide Area of Potential Effect NRHP National Register of Historic Places NYC New York City bgs below ground surface NYCTA MTA New York City Transit Authority CAA Clean Air Act NYSDEC State Department of Environmental CEQ Council on Environmental Quality Conservation CFR Code of Federal Regulations CO Carbon monoxide OPRHP New York State Office of Park, CO2e Carbon dioxide equivalent Recreation and Historic Preservation OTR Ozone transport region DC Direct Current DEP New York City Department of PM10 Particulate matter less than or equal to Environmental Protection 10 microns PM2.5 Particulate matter less than or equal to 2.5 microns EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act FR Federal Register ROW Right-of-way FRA Federal Railroad Administration RSCO Recommended Soil Cleanup FTA Federal Transit Administration Objective GHG Greenhouse Gas SHPO State Historic Preservation Office SIP State Implementation Plan LIRR Long Island Rail Road SEA Supplemental Environmental Assessment MOE Maintenance of Equipment SVOC Semivolatile Organic Compound MTA Metropolitan Transportation Authority μg/m3 micrograms per cubic meter U.S.C. U.S. Code NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality VOC Volatile Organic Compound Standards NEC Future Northeast Corridor Future Program Studies iii Acronyms and Abbreviations This page intentionally left blank. iv Introduction, Background, Purpose, and Need CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION, BACKGROUND, PURPOSE, AND NEED 1.1 INTRODUCTION This document is a Supplemental Environmental Assessment (SEA) to a March 2013 Environmental Assessment (EA) prepared by the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) and the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA). The March 2013 EA examined the potential environmental impacts of constructing an underground concrete casing through the Eastern Rail Yard of the John D. Caemmerer West Side Yard (also referred to as Hudson Yards) in New York, NY. Hudson Yards is owned by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) and used by the Long Island Rail Road (LIRR). The underground concrete casing through the Eastern Rail Yard would preserve a right-of-way (ROW) for the possibility of future expansion of rail service between New Jersey and New York and would support Amtrak’s efforts to improve resiliency
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Long Island Committee Meeting
    Long Island Committee Meeting July 2016 Long Island Rail Road Committee Meeting 2 Broadway, 20th Floor New York, NY Monday, 7/25/2016 9:30 - 10:30 AM ET 1. PUBLIC COMMENTS PERIOD 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - June 20, 2016 Minutes from June 20, 2016 - Page 4 3. 2016 WORK PLAN 2016 LIRR WORK PLAN - Page 13 4. AGENCY PRESIDENTS’/CHIEF’S REPORTS a. LIRR President’s Report (no material) b. MTA Capital Construction Report MTA Capital Construction Report - Page 20 c. MTA Police Report MTA Police Report - Page 26 5. INFORMATION ITEMS INFORMATION ITEMS - Page 31 a. Penn Station Retail Development Penn Station Retail Development - Page 32 b. Environmental Audit Environmental Audit - Page 39 c. Fall Construction Schedule Fall Construction Schedule - Page 40 d. Commuter Railroad/Amtrak Agreement Modifications Commuter Railroad/Amtrak Agreement Modifications - Page 44 6. PROCUREMENTS a. LIRR Procurements LIRR Procurements - Page 47 i. Non-Competitive LIRR Non-Competitive Procurement - Page 51 ii. Competitive LIRR Competitive Procurements - Page 54 iii. Ratifications (No Items) b. MTA CC Procurements MTA CC Procurements - Page 60 i. Non-Competitive (no items) ii. Competitive MTA CC Competitive Procurements - Page 63 iii. Ratifications MTA CC Ratifications - Page 65 7. PERFORMANCE SUMMARIES a. Operations - Transportation Operations - Transportation - Page 68 b. Operations - Mechanical Operations - Mechanical - Page 73 c. Operations - Safety Operations - Safety - Page 77 d. Financial Financial Report - Page 79 e. Ridership Ridership Report - Page 100 f. Capital Program Capital Program Report - Page 107 Next Meeting: Monday, September 26, 2016 at 9:30 AM Minutes of the Regular Meeting Long Island Rail Road Committee Monday, June 20, 2016 Meeting held at 2 Broadway – 20th Floor New York, New York 10004 8:30 a.m.
    [Show full text]
  • The Long Island Rail Road
    Long Island Rail Road Jamaica, NY September 10, 2018 General Notice No.4-23 Effective 12:01 AM Monday, September 10, 2018 (A) Entire Railroad Timetable Special Instruction 1901-B General Notice replacement pages for Special Instruction 1901-B On Pages I-92 and I-96, Special Instruction 1901-B has been revised as follows: On Pages, I-92 and I-96 under MAIN LINE Kew gardens and Forest Hills, in Sta. Cap. column, “4” has been changed to “6”, in the “6” car column, “H-4” has been changed to “*” and in the 8, 10, 12 car column, “H-4” has been changed to “H-6”. Employees must discard Special Instruction Pages I-91, I-92, I- 95, and I-96 and replace with Replacement Pages “I-91, I-92, I- 95, and I-96” attached to and part of this General Notice. (B) Entire Railroad Timetable Authority – General Notices General Notice 4-21 Paragraph (A1) is annulled General Notice 4-21 Paragraph (A2), 12 switch cross over paragraph – delete “(blocked and spiked normal)” and delete the last two paragraphs in their entirety. General Notice 4-21 Paragraphs (A3), (A4) and (A5) delete “see map on page 12” General Notice 4-21 Paragraph (A6) delete “see map on page 11-13” General Notice 4-21 Paragraphs (A9) and (A10) delete “see map on page 13” General Notice 4-21 Paragraph (C4) delete “6th row containing information related to Giaquinto has been removed.” (C) Entire Railroad Timetable Station Pages Employees must make the following changes in ink: On Page III, Main line Branch, change “FARM 1 R-From Divide” to read “FARM R-From Divide” and change “FARM 2 R-From Divide” to read “PW R-From Divide”.
    [Show full text]
  • HY STAFF SUMMARY May 16 08 Draft (JH0850.DOC;1)
    WSY Staff Summary page 2 BACKGROUND: At its regular meetings on May 22, 2008, the MTA Board adopted resolutions which, among other things, authorized (1) the MTA Chief Executive Officer to execute Conditional Designation Letters (“CDLs”) naming a joint venture of The Related Companies, L.P. and Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (“Related/Goldman”) as the conditionally designated developer for the proposed disposition of certain developable property rights in the WRY (conditioned on SEQRA review and approval) and the ERY; (2) the MTA to serve as co-lead agency with the New York City Planning Commission (“CPC”) for the environmental review of the proposed mixed-use development over the WRY and associated actions pursuant to applicable State and local environmental laws and regulations; and (3) the MTA Chief Executive Officer to enter into contracts and other project documents with Related/Goldman negotiated pursuant to the CDLs. A copy of the May 22, 2008 Staff Summary associated with those actions (the “May 22, 2008 Staff Summary”) is attached hereto as Attachment A. In connection with the execution of the CDLs, Related/Goldman paid MTA non-refundable participation fees of $6 million and made an additional deposit of $5 million into an expenses fund to cover pre- development expenses associated with the projects. As the Board has previously been apprised (see Memorandum dated February 3, 2009 attached as Attachment G), the severe downturn in both the commercial and residential real estate markets since May, 2008 resulted in January 31, 2009 CDL modifications that extended the conditional designation periods under the CDLs for ERY and WRY through January 31, 2010, in connection with which Related/Goldman paid MTA additional amounts totaling $8,600,000 ($4,300,000 for each of the WRY and ERY), half of which constituted non- refundable fees and half of which was paid into the aforementioned expenses fund.
    [Show full text]
  • The Bulletin MTA NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT OPENS SECONDARY Published by the TH Electric Railroaders’ ENTRANCE at 34 STREET-HUDSON YARDS Association, Inc
    ERA BULLETIN — NOVEMBER, 2018 The Bulletin Electric Railroaders’ Association, Incorporated Vol. 61, No. 11 November, 2018 The Bulletin MTA NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT OPENS SECONDARY Published by the TH Electric Railroaders’ ENTRANCE AT 34 STREET-HUDSON YARDS Association, Inc. P. O. Box 3323 STATION ON THE 7 Grand Central Station New York, NY 10163 by Subutay Musluoglu For general inquiries, (Continued from October, 2018 issue) or Bulletin submissions, contact us at (Photographs by the author) bulletin@erausa. org or on our website at erausa. org/contact As first reported in the October Bulletin, neighborhood was comprised of an assort- New York City Transit opened the secondary ment of tenement apartment houses, indus- Editorial Staff: th entrance to the 34 Street-Hudson Yards trial loft buildings, warehouses, and parking Jeffrey Erlitz Station on the 7 on September 1. This lots and garages used mostly for off-hour taxi Editor-in-Chief month we will examine the long process by and bus storage. Ronald Yee which rail transit came to the growing Hud- While the area had always been seen as Tri-State News and son Yards neighborhood, with a closer look the logical extension of the Midtown office Commuter Rail Editor at the three-year-old subway station that district, the right economic conditions never Alexander Ivanoff serves it. seemed to line up for redevelopment. It had North American and The opening of the entrance is the latest been hoped that the opening of the Javits World News Editor step in the development of Hudson Yards, Center would be followed by hotels and new where over 25 million square feet of commer- commercial office buildings; however, its lo- David Ross th Production Manager cial and residential space will ultimately be cation on 11 Avenue, a 10-15-minute walk built.
    [Show full text]
  • How NYC's Newest Neighborhood Will Float Above an Active Train Yard Kelsey Campbell-Dollaghan
    How NYC's Newest Neighborhood Will Float Above an Active Train Yard Kelsey Campbell-Dollaghan In Manhattan this spring, crews are ramping up work on Hudson Yards, the largest private development in US history. But what's fascinating about this new mega-development aren't just its buildings. It's the fact that they will float above an existing train depot on a massive artificial foundation. We got an early look at how it's being built. First, a little back story. West Side Yard, a sunken rail yard wedged above the High Line and two blocks away from Penn Station, is a critical nerve center in NYC's transit system: A 26-acre depot that serves overflow Long Island Railroad trains during rush hour, with 30 tracks and space for storage and maintenance, too. It's so important that it's been spared from the rush to redevelop the West Side in the wake of the High Line—though that's not to say its creators didn't foresee it. When the rail yard opened in the 1980s, its engineers were already imagining the day when a hungry developer would pave over it. So they left a small gap that runs around the edges of the yard—just enough space for structural members to be laid down without interrupting traffic. Think of it as an insurance plan for future city-builders. Now, those builders have arrived—and they're building something far bigger than the planners of the 1980s probably ever imagined: Hudson Yards, a tightly-packed puzzle of four skyscrapers and a cadre of other towers that represent the largest private development project in the entire history of the US, and the largest development in NYC since Rockefeller Center.
    [Show full text]
  • Preliminary Analysis of Benefits and Costs of Constructing and Maintaining Midday Car Storage Facilities for the LIRR
    INSTITUTE FOR RATIONAL URBAN MOBILITY, INC. George Haikalis One Washington Square Village, Suite 5D President New York, NY 10012 212-475-3394 [email protected] www.irum.org Memo: To: Meta Brunzema and Dan Gutman From: George Haikalis, President, Institute for Rational Urban Mobility, Inc. Date: May 21, 2007 Re: Preliminary Analysis of Benefits and Costs of Constructing and Maintaining Midday Car Storage Facilities for the LIRR Thanks for the opportunity to share some thoughts on the future of the LIRR West Side Yard and Sunnyside Yard A. These very preliminary findings are presented in the hope that a more detailed analysis of these concepts will be undertaken by MTA, which has the information and resources to explore them more fully. I. Key Findings: (1) MTA could maximize its gain from the sale of the LIRR West Side Yard if this property were cleared and sold as raw real estate for development. This gain would be further increased if two tracks were retained in the yard, and a new platform constructed, permitting a rail link between the yard site and Penn Station. In total, MTA’s gain – ranging from $1.0 billion to $2.0 billion – far exceeds the “present worth” of the annual incremental operating cost of sending cars now stored in this yard to existing yards further east in Queens and Long Island. This increased operating cost is estimated at $8.2 million per year. (2) MTA could reduce the cost of its LIRR East Side Access Project by dropping its plan to construct a new midday railcar storage yard at Yard A, just north of Amtrak’s Sunnyside Yard in Queens.
    [Show full text]
  • And Description of the Preferred Alternative
    Project Alternatives Chapter 2: and Description of the Preferred Alternative 2.1 INTRODUCTION The proposed Hudson Tunnel Project (the Project or the Proposed Action) would consist of a new rail tunnel under the Hudson River (referred to as the Hudson River Tunnel), new surface tracks in New Jersey and railroad infrastructure connecting the new rail tunnel to the existing Northeast Corridor (NEC) in Secaucus, New Jersey and at Penn Station New York (PSNY), together with rehabilitation of the existing NEC tunnel beneath the Hudson River, known as the North River Tunnel. The primary purpose of the Project is to enable rehabilitation of the North River Tunnel without major disruptions to passenger rail service into and out of PSNY. In addition, when completed, the Project would result in a total of four tracks on the NEC from Secaucus, New Jersey, to PSNY with both the old and new tunnels in service. This would provide redundant capability and increased operational flexibility for the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) and the New Jersey Transit Corporation (NJ TRANSIT), which both operate passenger trains on the NEC between New Jersey and New York. Since publication of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS), the Preferred Alternative has been refined from what was presented in the DEIS as a result of design advancement and changes made in response to comments received on the DEIS. Amtrak has continued to advance the design of the Preferred Alternative, including incorporating design refinements based on further engineering analysis and information, resulting in some modifications to the design presented in the DEIS.
    [Show full text]
  • Long Island Committee Meeting
    Long Island Committee Meeting May 2017 Members M. Pally, Chair I. Greenberg S. Metzger C. Moerdler J. Molloy V. Tessitore V. Vanterpool J. Vitiello C. Wortendyke N. Zuckerman Long Island Rail Road Committee Meeting 2 Broadway 20th Floor Board Room New York, NY Monday, 5/22/2017 9:30 - 10:30 AM ET 1. PUBLIC COMMENTS PERIOD 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - April 24, 2017 Approval of Minutes - April 24, 2017 - Page 4 3. 2017 WORK PLAN LIRR 2017 Work Plan - Page 17 4. AGENCY PRESIDENTS’/CHIEF’S REPORTS a. LIRR President’s Report (no material) b. MTA Capital Construction Report MTA Capital Construction Report - Page 24 c. MTA Police Report MTA Police Report - Page 28 5. INFORMATION ITEMS a. Diversity/EEO Report - 1st Quarter 2017 Diversity/EEO Report - 1st Quarter 2017 - Page 33 b. Summer Service & TrackWork Programs Summer Service & TrackWork Programs - Page 42 6. PROCUREMENTS a. LIRR Procurements LIRR Procurements - Page 44 i. Non-Competitive LIRR Non-Competitive - Page 48 ii. Competitive LIRR Competitive - Page 50 iii. Ratifications LIRR Ratification - Page 56 b. MTA CC Procurements MTA CC Procurements - Page 59 i. Non-Competitive (No Items) ii. Competitive MTA CC Competitive - Page 62 iii. Ratifications MTA CC Ratifications - Page 65 7. PERFORMANCE SUMMARIES a. Operations - Transportation Operations - Transportation Report - Page 68 b. Operations - Mechanical Operations - Mechanical Report - Page 73 c. Operations - Safety Operations - Safety - Page 78 d. Financial Financial Report - Page 81 e. Ridership Ridership Report - Page 101 f. Capital Program Capital Program Report - Page 108 Next meeting: Joint with MNR, Monday, June 19, 2017 at 8:30 am Minutes of the Regular Meeting Long Island Rail Road Committee Monday, April 24, 2017 Meeting held at 2 Broadway – 20th Floor New York, New York 10004 8:30 a.m.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessment of the Condition of the Mta Long Island Rail Road
    ASSESSMENT OF THE CONDITION OF THE MTA LONG ISLAND RAIL ROAD Submitted by: Donald N. Nelson September 21, 2007 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Executive Summary ......................................................................... 1 II. Infrastructure – Engineering...........................................................2 1. Track Structure .....................................................................................................2 2. Buildings and Bridges (B & B) .............................................................................6 3. Line Assessments................................................................................................. 8 4. Communications and Signals (C & S) ...............................................................12 5. Power (ET)..........................................................................................................15 III. Maintenance of Equipment............................................................16 1. General.................................................................................................................16 2. Facilities and Shops............................................................................................19 3. Electric MU Fleet ................................................................................................21 4. Diesel (DE) and Dual Mode (DM) Locomotives ............................................. 22 5. Material – Stores Department.......................................................................... 22 6.
    [Show full text]
  • Western Rail Yard EIS Draft Scope of Work
    Western Rail Yard Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) Draft Scope of Work INTRODUCTION The Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) and the New York City Planning Commission (CPC) are serving as co-lead agencies for the environmental review of a proposed mixed-use development over the western section (“Western Rail Yard”) of the MTA-Long Island Rail Road (LIRR) John D. Caemmerer West Side Yard in Manhattan. The mixed-use development is expected to include commercial (retail, office, and/or hotel) space, residential units (both market rate and affordable), a public school, other community facilities, open space, and parking (“Proposed Project”). The principal actions to be analyzed (collectively, the “Proposed Actions”) include: (1) the lease of, with option to purchase, the air space over the Western Rail Yard by MTA to a development entity selected by MTA to carry out such mixed- use development; (2) zoning map and text amendments and accessory parking special permits by the City of New York pursuant to the Uniform Land Use Review Procedure (ULURP); (3) the establishment of new legal grades in West 33rd Street between Eleventh and Twelfth Avenues; (4) the site selection for a PS/IS school on the Western Rail Yard; (5) the partial release of MTA’s interest in certain property located at the intersection of Ninth Avenue and West 54th Street in Manhattan to the City; and (6) disposition and other land use approvals for this MTA parcel and another parcel located near the intersection of Tenth Avenue and West 48th Street in order to facilitate the development of affordable housing at these two sites.
    [Show full text]
  • Proposed Amtrak Northeast Route & Service Structure
    PROPOSED AMTRAK NORTHEAST ROUTE & SERVICE STRUCTURE ILLUSTRATION LEDGER Revised July 14, 2020 The contents of this document are the intellectual property of AmeriStarRail, LLC. PROPOSED AMTRAK NORTHEAST ROUTE & SERVICE STRUCTURE ILLUSTRATION LEDGER Table of Contents Revised: June 1, 2020 1. Proposed Amtrak Northeast Route Structure 2. Proposed Amtrak Northeast Service Structure (highlighting stations with airport connections) 3. Proposed Amtrak Northeast Service Structure (highlighting stations gaining direct NEC service) 4. Proposed Washington Area Amtrak Operations 5. Washington Union Station Amtrak Operations: Proposed Platform Use 6. Proposed Philadelphia Area Amtrak Operations 7. Proposed New York City Area Amtrak Operations 8. New York City Area Amtrak Station Connections 9. New York Penn Station Amtrak Operations: Physical Configuration (Page 1 of 4) 10. New York Penn Station Amtrak Operations: Current Platform Use (Page 2 of 4) 11. New York Penn Station Amtrak Operations: Proposed Platform Use (Page 3 of 4) 12. New York Penn Station Amtrak Operations: Proposed Platform Use Cross-Section (Page 4 of 4) 13. Proposed Boston Area Amtrak Operations The contents of this document are the intellectual property of AmeriStarRail, LLC. Brunswick AmeriStarRail Portland Dover Worcester Transportation Innovation Springfield North Station INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OF Albany AmeriStarRail, LLC BOSTON South Station Hartford Providence New London New Haven Harrisburg Ronkonkoma NEWJenkintown YORK CITY Newark Hoboken Trenton PHILADELPHIA Wilmington Baltimore
    [Show full text]
  • ARC FEIS Appendix 2 Project Alternatives
    ARC FEIS Appendix 2 Project Alternatives TABLE OF CONTENTS ¾ SCREENING RESULTS – NEW YORK STATION ALTERNATIVE ¾ ALTERNATIVES DEVELOPMENT PROCESS ¾ FEIS BUILD ALTERNATIVE ALIGNMENT ROUTING AND STATION AND ANCILLARY FACILITY LOCATION SELECTION ¾ INVESTIGATION OF ALTERNATIVE NEC ALIGNMENT ¾ NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION, AUGUST 25, 2008 CORRESPONDENCE – REQUEST FOR TAIL TRACKS REMOVAL ACCESS TO THE REGION’S CORE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Screening Results-New York Station Alternative Task 3.2 Screening of Long Term Alternatives NJT Contract #03-118 November 2004 Submitted by: Transit Link Consultants a Joint Venture of Parsons Brinckerhoff and SYSTRA Consulting In Association with: A.D. Marble & Company Anne Strauss-Wieder, Inc In Group, Inc. Lawler, Matuskey & Skelly Louis Berger & Associates K.S. Engineers K.M. Chng Matrix Environmental Services Robinson Aerial Surveys, Inc. Organizational Learning Associates Zetlin Strategic Communications Version Final ARC DEIS Screening Results – New York Station Alternative REPORT QUALITY CONTROL/QUALITY ASSURANCE Prepared by: ___Nicole Bucich________________________ Date: 5/27/04 [Rev 10/26/04] Reviewed by: ___Ruby Siegel_________________________ Date: 5/28/04 [Rev 11/1/04] Approved by: ___John Wilkins________________________ Date: _11/16/04__ ____ 083_3.2_PL_R_Screening Results - New York Station Transit Link Consultants NB /RAS 10-26-04 ARC DEIS Screening Results – New York Station Alternative TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]