DOCSLIB.ORG

Brownfield Economic Redevelopment: Preparing Modern Intermodal Freight Infrastructure to Support Brownfield Economic Redevelopment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Brownfield Economic Redevelopment: Preparing Modern Intermodal Freight Infrastructure to Support Brownfield Economic Redevelopment FINAL REPORT Brownfield Economic Redevelopment: Preparing Modern Intermodal Freight Infrastructure to Support Brownfield Economic Redevelopment A Joint Project of the North Jersey Transportation Planning Authority, Inc. and the New Jersey Institute of Technology Funded by the Federal Transportation and Community and System Preservation Pilot (TCSP) Program January 2003 Final Report Brownfield Economic Redevelopment Preparing Modern Intermodal Freight Infrastructure to Support Brownfield Economic Redevelopment A Joint Project of the North Jersey Transportation Planning Authority, Inc. and the New Jersey Institute of Technology Funded by the Federal Transportation and Community and System Preservation Pilot (TCSP) Program January 2003 BER FINAL R EPORT This report was financed by the US Department of Transportation,Transportation and Community and System Preservation Pilot program. The NJTPA and NJIT are solely responsible for its contents. Information presented on case study properties in this document is intended to provide only general guidance as to the issues affecting possible development of the sites and cannot substitute for due diligence on the part of those advancing development proposals. NJTPA-NJIT Project Team Consultant Team John Hummer, NJTPA, Principal Investigator Schoor DePalma Lazar Spasovic, NJIT,Principal Investigator Bruce Mackie, Geotrans James Mack, NJIT Dennis Toft,Wolff & Sampson David Dawson, NJTPA Peter Zimmermann Mark Solof, NJTPA Ann Strauss-Wieder Associates, Inc. George Fallat, NJIT John Ricklefs, Moffat-Nichol Engineers, Inc. Former Members BEM, Inc. Gary Thomas,NJIT,co-Principal Investigator, Phase One McLaren/Hart, Inc. Fred Ellerbusch, NJIT Rich Roberts, Muller-Bohlin Associates, Inc. Tom Boland,NJIT Steering Committee Robert Hutchinson, NJTPA NJ Department of Transportation Jerry McKenna, NJIT NJ Department of Environmental Protection Office of State Planning Port Authority of New York & New Jersey NJ Brownfields Redevelopment Task Force US Environmental Protection Agency NJ Department of Labor, State Employment & Training Commission Thanks to the following NJIT interns who worked on the project during Phase I: Kartik Brahmbhatt, Maturza Kathawala, Leena Raut, Jennifer Coffey and Jannina Alvarez.Also thanks to University of Singapore intern Steve Shaffer. Graphic Design: Suzanne Bennett. For further information, see the project website at: www.njtpa.org/planning/brownfields or contact: John Hummer, NJTPA,One Newark Center, 17th floor, Newark, NJ 07102 973-639-8424 Page Table of Contents v Section 1 Introduction . .1 Section 2 Background & Context . .3 2.1 Global Trends Affecting Brownfields Reuse . .3 2.1.1 Importance of Freight . .3 2.1.2 The International Supply Chain . .5 2.1.3 Port Efficiency Challenges . .6 2.1.4 Logistics and Value Added Facilities . .8 2.1.6 Brownfields: the Solution . .10 2.2 Regional Trends Affecting Brownfields Reuse . .11 2.2.1 Market Demand for Warehouse/Distribution Centers (W/DC) . .11 2.2.2 Market Recognition and Activity . .14 Section 3 Study Methodology . .17 3.1 Introduction . .17 3.2 Summary of Phase I . .17 3.3 Case Study Selection . .18 3.4 Summary of Phase II Case Studies Tasks . .19 3.5 Evaluation . .20 Section 4 Case Study Summaries . .21 4.1 Introduction . .21 4.2 Brief Descriptions of the Case Study Sites . .22 4.2.1 Arsynco Site . .22 4.2.1.1 General Site Description . .22 4.2.1.2.Transportation Access . .22 4.2.1.3 Environmental Assessment . .23 4.2.1.4 Market Assessment . .23 4.2.2 Albert Steel Drum Site . .23 4.2.2.1. General Site Description . .23 4.2.2.2.Transportation Access . .24 4.2.2.3 Environmental Assessment . .25 4.2.1.4 Market Assessment . .26 4.2.3 Reichhold Chemical Site . .27 4.2.3.1General Site Description . .27 4.2.3.2 Transportation Assessment . .28 4.2.3.3 Environmental Assessment . .28 4.2.3.4 Market Assessment . .29 4.2.4 Carteret Redevelopment Properties Site . .30 4.2.4.1. General Site Description . .30 4.2.4.2 Transportation Access . .30 4.2.4.3 Environmental Assessment . .30 4.2.4.4 Market Assessment . .32 BER FINAL R EPORT Page 4.2.5 Koppers Coke/Standard Chlorine/Diamond Shamrock Site . .32 vi 4.2.5.1. General Site Description . .32 4.2.5.2. Transportation Access . .33 4.2.5.3 Environmental Assessment . .36 4.2.5.4 Market Assessment . .38 Section 5 - Case Study Findings . .41 5.1 Introduction . .41 5.2 Transportation Access . .41 5.3 Environmental . .43 5.3.1 Site Characterization and the Triad Approach . .44 5.3.2 State Environmental/Brownfields Policies . .45 5.4 Market Evaluation . .46 5.5 Property Value . .47 5.6 Community Considerations . .48 5.7 Financial . .49 Section 6 - Analysis of Findings . .53 6.1 Introduction . .53 6.2 Barriers . .53 6.2.1 Redevelopment Climate . .53 6.2.2 Local Acceptance . .55 6.2.3 Container Storage on Brownfields . .55 6.2.4 Environmental Regulation . .56 6.3 Transportation . .57 6.3.1 Site Access Improvements . .58 6.3.2 Portway/Highway Improvements . .58 6.3.3 Rail . .60 6.3.4 Barge/PIDN . .61 6.3.5 Transportation Financing . .63 6.3.5.1 Port Fees . .63 6.3.5.2 FAST Model . .64 6.4 - Comprehensive Planning . .65 6.4.1 Development Models . .66 6.4.2 Planning Responsibilities . .67 Section 7 - Conclusions & Recommendations . .69 7.1 Conclusions . .69 7.2 Recommendations . .70 7.2.1 Barriers . .70 7.2.1.1 Redevelopment Climate . ..
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 3.5: Freight Movement
    3.5 Freight Movement 3.5 Freight Movement A. INTRODUCTION This section describes the characteristics of the existing rail freight services and railroad operators in the project area. Also addressed is the relationship between those services and Build Alternative long-term operations. The study area contains several rail freight lines and yards that play key roles in the movement of goods to and from the Port of New York and New Jersey, the largest port on the east coast, as well as in the movement of goods vital to businesses and residents in multiple states. However, no long-term freight movement impacts are anticipated with the Build Alternative, and no mitigation measures will be required. B. SERVICE TYPES The following freight rail services are offered in the project area: • Containerized or “inter-modal” consists primarily of containers or Example of Doublestack Train with Maritime truck trailers moved on rail cars. Containers Intermodal rail traffic is considered the fastest growing rail freight market, and is anticipated to grow in the region between 3.9 and 5.6 percent annually through 2030, based on the NJTPA Freight System Performance Study (see Table 3.5-1). • Carload traffic consists of products that are typically moved in boxcars, hopper cars, tank cars, and special lumber cars over a long distance by rail, and then either transported directly by rail or Example of Carload Rail Traffic shifted to truck for delivery to more local customers. The characteristics of these commodities (e.g., bulk, heavy or over- dimensional) make rail the preferred option for long-distance movement.
    [Show full text]
  • Dear Chair White and Director Higgins: Thank You for the Opportunity To
    May 05, 2015 Mary Jo White Chair, Securities and Exchange Commission Keith Higgins Director, Corporate Finance Division, Securities and Exchange Commission Securities and Exchange Commission 100 F Street, NE Washington, DC 20549 Re: Disclosure Effectiveness Review Dear Chair White and Director Higgins: Thank you for the opportunity to provide input on improving disclosures by U.S. public companies. I am writing to you on behalf the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS). UCS is a leading science based non-profit working to integrate science into public decision making. In particular, I write to urge the Securities and Exchange Commission to proceed with rulemaking on two issues, as a means of improving disclosure for investors and the public: 1) require companies to report annually whether climate change impacts pose risks to their business and to clearly specify any such risks, and 2) require publicly traded companies to disclose both their direct and indirect political activities. These actions would provide important information to investors and the public about the risks companies face and how companies are influencing important policy discussions. Disclosing Risks Posed by Climate Change The SEC recognized the financial impacts of climate change when it issued Interpretive Guidance on climate disclosure in February 2010, responding to more than 100 institutional investors representing $7 trillion who are seeking regular reporting from companies on these risks1. The Guidance outlines expectations for companies reporting on material regulatory, physical, and indirect risks, as well as opportunities related to climate change including: “Significant physical effects of climate change, such as effects on the severity of weather (for example, floods or hurricanes), sea levels, the arability of farmland, and water availability and quality, have the potential to affect a registrant’s operations and results.
    [Show full text]
  • New Jersey Statewide FREIGHT PLAN %FDFNCFS
    New Jersey Statewide FREIGHT PLAN %FDFNCFS Table of CONTENTS Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the Author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the view of the Federal Highway Administration. New Jersey Statewide FREIGHT PLAN Page left blank intentionally. Table of CONTENTS Acknowledgements The New Jersey Department of Transportation’s Division of Multimodal Services thanks the many organizations and individuals for their time and contribution in making this document possible. New Jersey Department of Transportation Nicole Minutoli Paul Truban Genevieve Clifton Himanshu Patel Andrew Ludasi New Jersey Freight Advisory Committee Calvin Edghill, FHWA Keith Skilton, FHWA Anne Strauss-Wieder, NJTPA Jakub Rowinski, NJTPA Ted Dahlburg, DVRPC Mike Ruane, DVRPC Bill Schiavi, SJTPO David Heller, SJTPO Steve Brown, PANYNJ Victoria Farr, PANYNJ Stephanie Molden, PANYNJ Alan Kearns, NJ TRANSIT Steve Mazur, SJTA Rodney Oglesby, CSX Rick Crawford, Norfolk Southern Michael Fesen, Norfolk Southern Jocelyn Hill, Conrail Adam Baginski, Conrail Kelvin MacKavanagh, New Jersey Short Line Railroad Association Brian Hare, Pennsylvania Department of Transportation David Rosenberg, New York State Department of Transportation Consultant Team Jennifer Grenier, WSP Stephen Chiaramonte, WSP Alan Meyers, WSP Carlos Bastida, WSP Joseph Bryan, WSP Sebastian Guerrero, WSP Debbie Hartman, WSP Ruchi Shrivastava, WSP Reed Sibley, WSP Scudder Smith, WSP Scott Parker, Jacobs Engineering Jayne Yost, Jacobs Engineering
    [Show full text]
  • Attachment a Project Description & Screening
    ATTACHMENT A PROJECT DESCRIPTION & SCREENING ANALYSES New York Container Terminal Expansion EAS Attachment A: Project Description and Screening Analyses I. INTRODUCTION This attachment provides a detailed description of the Proposed Action, including project description, the Proposed Action’s purpose and need, and the governmental approvals required for implementation. In addition, this attachment examines the potential for the Proposed Action to result in significant adverse impacts in any CEQR technical area. The attachment has been prepared in accordance with the procedures set forth in the CEQR Technical Manual. Using the guidelines and methodologies in the CEQR Technical Manual, supplemental (“screening”) analyses were conducted for the Proposed Action in each of the Manual’s impact categories. For each of the impact categories, the screening analysis is intended to determine whether a further, more detailed impact assessment in the draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is appropriate for this Proposed Action, and whether the potential for adverse impacts can be ruled out. This application is for a set of actions (referred to collectively as the “Proposed Action”) relating to the proposed expansion of New York Container Terminal, Inc. (NYCT) operations in Staten Island Community District 1. The Proposed Action would facilitate the construction and installation of a new 50-foot deep container ship berth (“Berth 4”) and associated marine container terminal on a portion of the former Port Ivory site, a previously utilized marine-related site and partial brownfield located adjacent to the existing NYCT facility. The proposed berth and associated marine container terminal would be located on an approximately 39-acre site (referred to as the “Berth 4 site”), which encompasses part of Block 1306, Lot 14; and Block 1309, Lots 1, 2, 10 and part of Lot 5.
    [Show full text]
  • 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS 2.1 History of Circulation in Jersey City 2.2
    Jersey City Master Plan / Circulation Element 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS As part of the background work in developing this Circulation Element, a detailed assessment of the history of circulation in Jersey City and an inventory of the baseline conditions of the City’s transportation system were prepared. 2.1 History of Circulation in Jersey City Photo Source: Jersey City Division of City Planning Strategically located on the Hudson River and with easy access to Upper New York Bay, the City of Jersey City was an important center for shipping and maritime activity during the peak of the industrial revolution of the early nineteenth century. This status was reinforced when the Morris Canal was completed at Jersey City in 1836, giving the City shared direct linkage with the Delaware River at Phillipsburg and with important inland points, such as Newark and Paterson. Jersey City continued to serve as a transit point between Upper New York Bay and inland points to the west, but as the industrial revolution progressed, new technologies enabled the development of newer, more efficient forms of transport than canals. Consequently, railroads followed and terminals were constructed along the Hudson River waterfront and other points in the City. One example is the historic Central Railroad of New Jersey Terminal, which originally opened in 1864 and is located in what is now Liberty State Park. With terminals located on the Hudson River, it was not long before ideas about a rail linkage to New York City began to evolve. This led to the construction of what is now known as the Port Authority Trans-Hudson (PATH) train, which commenced operations in 1907 after many arduous years of tunneling under the Hudson River.
    [Show full text]
  • Port of New York & New Jersey Intermodal Rail
    PORT OF NEW YORK & NEW JERSEY RAIL FACILITY EXPANSION PROGRAM Transportation Research Forum March 8, 2005 Port of New York & New Jersey Intermodal Rail Linkages y n a b CSX Primary l A o NS Primary t X NS Secondary S Little Ferry C NS & CSX Shared River Line X S New Jersey Newark C S ExpressRail Port Newark N ExpressRail Elizabeth Lehigh Line ExpressRail Staten Island Chemical Coast Line Port Reading rg arrisbu NS to H Secondary Line Port of New York & New Jersey On-Dock Rail Volume is Growing 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 275000 1998 250000 225000 1999 200000 175000 2000 150000 2001 125000 100000 2002 75000 50000 2003 25000 2004 0 Port of New York & New Jersey Projected Rail Growth 1,800,000 1,600,000 1,400,000 1,200,000 1,000,000 800,000 600,000 400,000 200,000 0 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 Rail Volume (LIFTS) Port of New York & New Jersey Reasons for Projected Rail Growth Port Throughput is Growing • Global economy • Increased demand for imports and exports • Rail participates in port growth • Increasing demand for rail transport • Higher trucking costs • More short-haul rail Port of New York & New Jersey Advantages of Rail Transportation •More port volume lowers cost per unit •More port-related jobs •Enhanced port competitive position •Improved fuel efficiency vs. trucking (2 to 4 times more efficient) •Environmental benefits (about 1/3 NOx of trucks) •Alleviates traffic congestion (one train = 500 trucks) •Safety, including hazardous materials transport Port of New York & New Jersey Intermodal Rail Program Dedicated Rail Terminals including:
    [Show full text]
  • CONNECTIONS Norfolk Southern Report Builder 042718 NS RB13 Reportbuilder V5 09/24/13 Page 2
    Norfolk Southern Report Builder 042718 NS_RB13_ReportBuilder_v5 09/24/13 page 1 NORFOLK SOUTHERN 2013 SUSTAINABILITY REPORT CONNECTIONS Norfolk Southern Report Builder 042718 NS_RB13_ReportBuilder_v5 09/24/13 page 2 NORFOLK SOUTHERN 2013 SUSTAINABILITY REPORT 2 INTRODUCTION This report describes our ongoing activity guided by proven and successful business principles Wick Moorman, CEO Our Connections At Norfolk Southern, everything we do is connected. The tracks we lay down are connected to the towns that surround them. Our business is connected to jobs, economies, environmental benefits, and efficient delivery of goods. These connections create lasting, mutually beneficial relationships with our communities, our employees, our customers, our environment, and our economy. We at Norfolk Southern are looking to strengthen existing connections with our communities and forge new ones. In acknowledgment of this shared future, we will do all we can to ensure that the legacy we leave – social, economic, and environmental – is positive for generations to come. IN THIS SECTION CEO LETTER CSO LETTER ABOUT OUR REPORT THE BIG PICTURE SUSTAINABILITY HIGHLIGHTS AWARDS & RECOGNITION INTRODUCTION Norfolk Southern Report Builder 042718 NS_RB13_ReportBuilder_v5 09/24/13 page 3 NORFOLK SOUTHERN 2013 SUSTAINABILITY REPORT 3 CEO Letter As a leading freight carrier, our railroad must invest in the communities we serve, and we must be a responsible steward of our environment. Adherence to those two principles has enhanced and affirmed our understanding of the connections between our long-term business success and the health of our communities, our environment, and our employees. This sixth annual sustainability report highlights those connections and our commitment to best practices of corporate environmental, economic, and social responsibility.
    [Show full text]
  • Intermodal Network and Infrastructure
    TECHNICAL MEMO NYMTC Regional Freight Plan Update 2015-2040 Interim Plan Task 2.1.5 Intermodal Network and Infrastructure REVISED, JANUARY 2014 technical memorandum Task 2.1.5 Technical Memorandum Intermodal Network and Infrastructure Revised, January 30, 2014 Task 2.1.5 Technical Memorandum Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction ......................................................................................................... 1-1 2.0 NYMTC Intermodal Network .......................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Intermodal Services Description .............................................................. 2-1 Rail/Highway – Intermodal Containers and Trailers ........................... 2-1 Rail/Highway – Transload of Bulk Goods ............................................. 2-2 Highway/Rail and Barge – MSW Transload .......................................... 2-2 Water/Highway – Long Island Sound Ferries ....................................... 2-2 Water/Rail ................................................................................................... 2-3 Air/Highway .............................................................................................. 2-3 2.2 Nature of Providers .................................................................................... 2-3 Rail Carriers ................................................................................................. 2-3 Drayage ........................................................................................................ 2-5
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Section 4.3.17 – Transportation Failure
    Section 4.3.17: Risk Assessment – Transportation Failure 4.3.17 Transportation Failure The following section provides the hazard profile (hazard description, location, extent, previous occurrences and losses, probability of future occurrences, and impact of climate change) and vulnerability assessment for the transportation hazards in Essex County. 2020 HMP Update Changes All subsections have been updated using best available data. Previous events between 2014 and 2019 were researched, with a comprehensive list of previous events in Appendix X. 4.3.17.1 Profile Hazard Description Essex County is vulnerable to vehicular accidents, aviation accidents, railway accidents, bridge failures, and roadway failures and flood vulnerable roadways. Essex County is located adjacent to New York City and along the major transportation routes connecting the New York and Philadelphia metropolitan areas. Port Newark is also located in the County. Traffic flow through the County is critical to economic prosperity in the entire region (Essex County HMP 2007). The County possesses an extensive transportation network, including many rail and fixed route bus services, as well as demand responsive, ridesharing, and shuttle services (Essex County Transportation Plan 2013). The majority of fixed route service in Essex County is provided by New Jersey Transit (NJ Transit) or private carriers. There are 60 bus routes and 5 light rail routes and commuter rail lines. Private carriers mostly serve trips to New York City, although there are at least three privately operate local bus routes. NJ Transit operates commuter rail, light rail, and bus service in Essex County. Commuter rail service is provided on the Morris and Essex Rail Line and on the Boonton Line.
    [Show full text]
  • Importance of State and Local Authorities in Ensuring Chemical Plant Security
    S. HRG. 110–1046 IMPORTANCE OF STATE AND LOCAL AUTHORITIES IN ENSURING CHEMICAL PLANT SECURITY HEARING BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION SAFETY, INFRUSTRUCTURE SECURITY, AND WATER QUALITY OF THE COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION MARCH 19, 2007—NEWARK, NJ Printed for the use of the Committee on Environment and Public Works ( Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress.senate U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 55–922 PDF WASHINGTON : 2010 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001 COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION BARBARA BOXER, California, Chairman MAX BAUCUS, Montana JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut JOHN W. WARNER, Virginia THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON, New York JOHNNY ISAKSON, Georgia FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey DAVID VITTER, Louisiana BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland CRAIG L. THOMAS, Wyoming BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont LARRY E. CRAIG, Idaho AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, Missouri BETTINA POIRIER, Majority Staff Director and Chief Counsel ANDREW WHEELER, Minority Staff Director SUBCOMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION SAFETY, INFRUSTRUCTURE SECURITY, AND WATER QUALITY FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey, Chairman BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland DAVID VITTER, Louisiana Ranking Member AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, Missouri SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Vermont GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio CONTENTS Page MARCH 19, 2007 OPENING STATEMENTS Lautenberg, Hon.
    [Show full text]
  • Freight Rail Grade Crossing Assessment Study—Phase
    North Jersey Transportation Planning Authority FREIGHT RAIL GRADE CROSSING ASSESSMENT STUDY Prepared by: Jacobs Engineering 299 Madison Avenue Morristown, NJ 07962 In association with: A. Strauss-Wieder, Inc. Atlantic Rail Services, Inc. May 27, 2008 NORTH JERSEY TRANSPORTATION PLANNING AUTHORITY FREIGHT RAIL GRADE CROSSING ASSESSMENT STUDY NORTH JERSEY TRANSPORTATION PLANNING AUTHORITY FREIGHT RAIL GRADE CROSSING ASSESSMENT STUDY TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION 1 I.1 Study Purpose and Need 1 II. INDUSTRY LITERATURE SEARCH 3 III. STUDY AREA AND SUBJECT RAIL CORRIDORS 6 IV. DATA COLLECTION PROGRAM 16 IV.1 FRA Crash History 16 IV.2 Field Reconnaissance / Inventory of 17 Equipment & Features IV.3 Rail Activity / Operations at Crossings 17 IV.4 Roadway Activity at Crossings 19 V. GIS DATABASE DEVELOPMENT 20 VI. STAKEHOLDER AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT 24 VI.1 Overview 24 VI.2 Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) 24 VI.3 “One-on-one” meetings with the municipalities 25 and sub regions VI.4 Stakeholder Meeting 25 VI.5 Public Information Center 25 VII. GRADE CROSSING EVALUATION CRITERIA 26 VII.1 Evaluation Criteria – Description, Context and Importance 26 Jacobs Engineering i NORTH JERSEY TRANSPORTATION PLANNING AUTHORITY FREIGHT RAIL GRADE CROSSING ASSESSMENT STUDY VII.2 Development of Criteria Weighting Factors 31 VIII. ANALYSIS / SCORING OF GRADE CROSSINGS 33 VIII.1 Impact Scoring Methodology 33 VIII.2 Impact Scoring Measures by Criterion 34 IX. RANKING AND PRIORITIZATION OF CROSSINGS 39 X. ISSUES / SOLUTIONS MATRIX 41 X-1 Development of the Issues
    [Show full text]
  • Freight.IITC Final Report
    FINAL REPORT IITC TASKS 15 & 16 An Assessment of Rail Freight Service Within The International Intermodal Transportation Corridor Prepared for: New Jersey Department of Transportation Prepared by: Alan M. Voorhees Transportation Center Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Policy Development Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey and A. Strauss-Wieder, Inc. And New Jersey Institute of Technology International Intermodal Transportation Center May 2004 DISCLAIMER STATEMENT The contents of this report reflect the views of the author(s) who is (are) responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the New Jersey Department of Transportation or the Federal Highway Administration. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. REPORT STANDARD TITLE PAGE 1. Report No. 2.Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No. 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date An Assessment of Rail Services Within The May 2004 International Intermodal Transportation Corridor 6. Performing Organization Code VTC, Rutgers 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Alan M. Voorhees Transportation Center and A. Strauss-Wieder, Inc 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. New Jersey Department of Transportation CN 600 11. Contract or Grant No. Trenton NJ 06825 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Federal Highway Administration Final Report U.S. Department of Transportation 14. Sponsoring Agency Code Washington D.C. 15. Supplementary Notes 16. Abstract Northern New Jersey is experiencing rapid growth in the movement of freight traffic through its major terminals and on its infrastructure.
    [Show full text]