DOCSLIB.ORG

2018-2021 Public Transportation Transit Asset Management Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2018-2021 Public Transportation Transit Asset Management Plan 2018-2021 Public Transportation Transit Asset Management Plan Tier I Plan in accordance with 49 CFR §625.5 September 2018 This page intentionally left blank CTDOT PT-TAMP This page intentionally left blank CTDOT PT-TAMP Message from the Commissioner It is my pleasure, as Commissioner of the Connecticut Department of Transportation (CTDOT), to present the State’s initial Public Transportation Transit Asset Management Plan (TAMP). This plan goes beyond federal mandates and demonstrates a strong commitment to achieving a State of Good Repair for our transportation system. Connecticut’s transportation system is multimodal and supports the economy by enabling the efficient movement of people, goods, and services. Connecticut is a vital transportation link between northern New England and New York, New Jersey and the Mid- Atlantic states. The transportation system also links our communities; helping connect neighborhoods, towns, and cities. In order for Connecticut’s economy to function properly and grow, the transportation system must be maintained and updated. This document presents a plan developed in partnership with CTDOT Public Transportations’ statewide service providers, to achieve a systematic and comprehensive asset management system for the State’s public transportation assets to provide safe and reliable service for the citizens of Connecticut. Implementation of this plan will align with the Department’s priority to maintain and preserve the transportation system. James P. Redeker Commissioner CTDOT PT-TAMP This page intentionally left blank CTDOT PT-TAMP Disclaimer The Connecticut Department of Transportation (CTDOT) has prepared this Transit Asset Management Plan (TAMP) in accordance with 49 CFR 625.5 and pursuant to the further guidance and direction of the Federal Transit Administration. The TAMP presented here is our plan to ultimately achieve a systematic and comprehensive asset management system for Connecticut’s public transportation assets. New federal regulations for tracking and reporting system performance for transit assets will require changes to our current practices by Connecticut's service providers. In some cases asset condition reported herein are based on professional judgement in the absence of technical data. CTDOT has developed a documented approach for future data collection consistent with FTA guidance which will be reflected in the next TAMP update. CTDOT will initiate in-depth inspections of its public transportation assets and will further update the TAMP periodically. Future TAMP updates will revise investment recommendations as the asset condition data requires. For further information or questions about this document, please contact Sharon Okoye at 860- 594-2367 or [email protected]. Connecticut Department of Transportation CTDOT PT-TAMP This page intentionally left blank CTDOT PT-TAMP Connecticut Department of Transportation Public Transportation Transit Asset Management Plan Table of Contents Approval Letter ................................................................................................ Message from the Commissioner .................................................................... Table of Contents ............................................................................................. List of Acronyms ............................................................................................... Chapter 1. Introduction ..............................................................................1-1 Chapter 2. Goals and Objectives ................................................................2-1 Chapter 3. Inventory and Condition ...........................................................3-1 Chapter 4. Analytical Approach ..................................................................4-1 Chapter 5. Investment Scenarios................................................................5-1 Chapter 6. Investment Plan ........................................................................6-1 Chapter 7. Implementation and Monitoring..............................................7-1 Appendices Appendix A. Asset Fact Sheets .................................................................. A-1 Appendix B. Condition Assessment Guidance .......................................... B-1 Appendix C. Maintenance Responsibility Matrix...................................... C-1 Appendix D. Target Setting Facilities Checklist ......................................... D-1 Appendix E. Slow Zone Calculations........................................................... E-1 Appendix F. TAPT Results ........................................................................... F-1 Appendix G. Five Year Capital Plan (FY2017-2021) ................................... G-1 Appendix H. Equipment Over $50,000 ...................................................... H-1 DISCLAIMER: The data presented here is for informational purposes only. It is not to be used in any legal manner or proceedings. CTDOT makes every effort to ensure the data is as accurate and current as possible. Neither the State of Connecticut, nor the Connecticut Department of Transportation, nor any of its employees, shall be held liable or responsible for any errors or omissions in data. The U.S. Government and the Connecticut Department of Transportation do not endorse products or manufacturers. CTDOT PT-TAMP PT-TAMP Table of Figures Figure 1-1. CTDOT TAM Organizational Structure ...................................................................................... 1-8 Figure 1-2. Bureau of Public Transportation TAM Organizational Structure ............................................. 1-9 Figure 1-3. CTDOT PT-TAMP Inventory Summary .................................................................................... 1-10 Figure 3-1. Transportation Assets in Connecticut ...................................................................................... 3-3 Figure 3-2. PT-TAMP Asset Hierarchy ......................................................................................................... 3-4 Figure 3-3. Bus Service in Connecticut ....................................................................................................... 3-5 Figure 3-4. Passenger Rail Service in Connecticut ...................................................................................... 3-6 Figure 3-5. Data Resources for SGR Inventory ........................................................................................... 3-9 Figure 4-1. SGR Transit Database Schema ................................................................................................. 4-3 Figure 4-2. TAPT User Interface Organization ........................................................................................... 4-5 Figure 4-3. TAPT Start Screen ..................................................................................................................... 4-6 Figure 4-4. TAPT Model Example ............................................................................................................... 4-7 Figure 4-5. CTDOT TAPT Start Screen ....................................................................................................... 4-10 Figure 4-6. CTDOT TAPT Vehicle Inventory .............................................................................................. 4-11 Figure 5-1. Estimated Investment Needs by Asset Category in 2018 (Bus Mode) ..................................... 5-6 Figure 5-2. Estimated Investment Needs by Asset Category in 2018 (Rail Mode) ..................................... 5-7 Figure 5-3. Estimated Investment Needs and Work, Scenario 1 (Bus Mode) .......................................... 5-10 Figure 5-4. Estimated Investment Needs and Work, Scenario 2 (Bus Mode) .......................................... 5-11 Figure 5-5. Estimated Investment Needs and Work, Scenario 3 (Bus Mode) .......................................... 5-11 Figure 5-6. Estimated Investment Needs and Work, Scenario 1 (Rail Mode) .......................................... 5-12 Figure 5-7. Estimated Investment Needs and Work, Scenario 2 (Rail Mode) .......................................... 5-13 Figure 5-8. Estimated Investment Needs and Work, Scenario 3 (Rail Mode) .......................................... 5-13 Figure 6-1. Recommended Work by Asset Category, Scenario 1 (Bus Mode) ........................................... 6-6 Figure 6-2. Recommended Work by Asset Category, Scenario 2 (Bus Mode) ........................................... 6-6 Figure 6-3. Recommended Work by Asset Category, Scenario 3 (Bus Mode) ........................................... 6-7 Figure 6-4. Recommended Work by Asset Category, Scenario 1 (Rail Mode) ........................................... 6-8 Figure 6-5. Recommended Work by Asset Category, Scenario 2 (Rail Mode) .......................................... 6-8 Figure 6-6. Recommended Work by Asset Category, Scenario 3 (Rail Mode) ........................................... 6-9 Figure 6-7. Predicted Performance for Bus Rolling Stock......................................................................... 6-10 Figure 6-8. Predicted Performance for Rail Rolling Stock ........................................................................ 6-11 Figure 6-9. Predicted Performance for Equipment .................................................................................. 6-12 Figure 6-10. Predicted Performance for Facilities ...................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Beacon Falls URBITRANR EPORT
    Individual Station Report Beacon Falls URBITRANR EPORT CONTENTS: Stakeholder Interview Customer Opinion Survey Parking Inventory & Utilization Station Condition Inspection Lease Narrative and Synopsis Station Operations Review Station Financial Review URBITRAN Prepared to Connecticut Department of Transportation S ubmitted by Urbitran Associates, Inc. July 2003 June 2003 June 2003 June 2003 June 2003 June 2003 June 2003 Stakeholder Interview URBITRANR EPORT URBITRAN Prepared to Connecticut Department of Transportation S ubmitted by Urbitran Associates, Inc. Waterbury Branch All communities except for Naugatuck were represented during the stakeholder process, although Waterbury was represented by the Chamber of Commerce and Ansonia by the Valley Regional Planning Agency. Waterbury The Chamber of Commerce was designated by the Mayor as the representative for these discussions. The first issue that was raised concerned the parking lot, and the lack of clear directions regarding what is city parking for the station and what is SNET parking. The lot itself is unpaved and poorly marked. There is no lease between the City and CDOT for the station or parking lot, and the City has no responsibilities regarding them. The Chamber representatives stated that they could not speak to policy issues and the City’s attitude towards the station or rail service except in general terms. In that regard, the basic desire is to have more service on the Waterbury branch, and to construct a new intermodal terminal for buses and rail in the city. There is a study underway for such a facility, and site locations as they impact on local businesses and the transit network are currently under review.
    [Show full text]
  • New Haven to New London Train Schedule
    New Haven To New London Train Schedule Ivory-towered and subalternate Vernor divining something and fructified his Alain-Fournier hyperbolically and eath. Is Terrill outmost or damaged after textbookish Forbes cloister so apishly? Humiliated Fulton gammons her numismatist so clemently that Ingmar leaches very scholastically. Which the historic ship nautilus to be published, are not appear on searching for massachusetts is the way of train schedule for massachusetts, connecticut department of routes Big crazy country, Glacier National Park, understood the Columbia River Gorge. Union position is the centerpiece of the Regional Intermodal Transportation Center, pole also includes bus, taxi, and ferry services. Rental estimate of cafes and across the train companies on your use your login. New York had gem not arrived at wood Haven. Trains and buses are seen very cheap options for traveling between Tampa to Orlando. We will also available for new haven to new london train schedule you think about where enlisted sailors are train! Driving in New York City never be nightmare. Martin claimed that ninety percent of recent city agreed with the redevelopment plans. USD per additional driver. August student arrival, Thanksgiving, winter, spring spring summer breaks. Party Bus Rental Company buffalo New Haven, CT. Her grace of the roads and creativity in using her knowledge inventive always slide the safest manner. Old Saybrook, Essex, Chester, Haddam, Higganum and Middletown. Necr track charts for a truck, new haven and trip experience, it is the amtrak is a more information includes original numbers in new haven to new london train schedule for trains. Which connect with a new book a world war on the east operates throughout the owners of implementing passenger has declared a different scenarios analyzed in.
    [Show full text]
  • AQUIFERPROTECTIONAREA SW Estport , CONNECTICUT
    n M ! R F S o N G o Godfrey Pond C e t Inwood Rd u P u n o d a r u d B W d r n n r t e R L r e t d R d b e r t e R o t t s n R 111 D i l n I o a e l a r o M o t e n l s S1 r R i t t V W w l r A O d n k a l d e K i i R e i S d 1 n M a n n l R W B e l y D H o id g e a a T u a l R t R i Wheelers Pond 1 H L l a a r x d n l B o a g e R d r r a v a d o F d d e d d R n r T t e Nod Hill Pond t e y n l n e R r e R R W d h d o e u d r D e D d i y n u D R v M R e e E w e e d n k d e o S H R u b n d w r r a r r r e Chestnut Hill r c d e o e d d w 7 R H u w o n b L e r D d l R d Mill River h B o d L w t S W n d b n s s s u Plymouth Avenue Pond £ a d s y e ¤ r A u o i R R s o n i b Pipers t o R h d Hill R n d o i n L c S d d e 5 C t a e d r r d d B o U H g Powells Hill k t t o r t 9 d e S k n Spruc u p r l d D o R d c r R R L P e S i a r n s l H r Cristina R 136 i h L Ln e n B l i r T R o d n r d s l L S o n r R V e o H o k L R i r M d t M Killian A H G L a S ve d R e s R y n l g e d Pin 1 i l C r a d w r n M e d d e r a a 1 i R r d c y e D h k h s r S R 1 d o d c E Cricker Brook i t c a k n l 7 r M d r u w a e l o R l n y g a R d r S n d l Dr c e B W od l e F nwo d r Nature Pond o t utt o l S i B t w d C h l S B n y i d r o t l e W ch R e i D R e e o o D p B r M Hill Rd i L d n r H R ey l on r il H P H n L H o ls illa w o d v r w t w a w on La n o s D D d d e O e S e n w r g r R e p i e i W k l n n e d d W t r g L e v e r t l y e l D l r y g l 53 e e T a e o R e l s d y d H n Plum rkw o a D i P a R n l r a S d R L V W i w o u r u Jennings Brook l
    [Show full text]
  • Transit Oriented Development Final Report | September 2010
    FTA ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS DRAFT/FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT DANBURY BRANCH IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT FINAL REPORT | SEPTEMBER 2010 In Cooperation with U.S. Department CONNECTICUT South Western Regional Planning Agency of Transportation DEPARTMENT OF Federal Transit TRANSPORTATION Administration FTA ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS DRAFT/FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT DANBURY BRANCH IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT FINAL REPORT | SEPTEMBER 2010 In Cooperation with U.S. Department CONNECTICUT South Western Regional Planning Agency of Transportation DEPARTMENT OF Federal Transit TRANSPORTATION Administration Abstract This report presents an evaluation of transit-oriented development (TOD) opportunities within the Danbury Branch study corridor as a component of the Federal Transit Administration Alternatives Analysis/ Draft Environmental Impact Statement (FTA AA/DEIS) prepared for the Connecticut Department of Transportation (CTDOT). This report is intended as a tool for municipalities to use as they move forward with their TOD efforts. The report identifies the range of TOD opportunities at station areas within the corridor that could result from improvements to the Danbury Branch. By also providing information regarding FTA guidelines and TOD best practices, this report serves as a reference and a guide for future TOD efforts in the Danbury Branch study corridor. Specifically, this report presents a definition of TOD and the elements of TOD that are relevant to the Danbury Branch. It also presents a summary of FTA Guidance regarding TOD and includes case studies of FTA-funded projects that have been rated with respect to their livability, land use, and economic development components. Additionally, the report examines commuter rail projects both in and out of Connecticut that are considered to have applications that may be relevant to the Danbury Branch.
    [Show full text]
  • Financial Analyses Included Herein Present the Operating Revenues and Expenses Only for Those Properties Governed by the State Lease Agreements
    SSSeeewwwaaarrrddd aaannnddd Monde CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS RAIL GOVERNANCE STUDY Task 4.3 – Financial Review Connecticut Department of Transportation Table of Contents INTRODUCTION ........... ............... ............... ......................... ............... 1 - 3 OVERVIEW OF ALL STATIONS ............... ............... ......................... ............... 4 - 8 STATION COMPARISON ANALYSIS Five Year Totals ............... ............... ......................... ............... 9 Year end June 30, 1996 ............... ............... ......................... ............... 10 Year end June 30, 1997 ............... ............... ......................... ............... 11 Year end June 30, 1998 ............... ............... ......................... ............... 12 Year end June 30, 1999 ............... ............... ......................... ............... 13 Year end June 30, 2000 ............... ............... ......................... ............... 14 STATIONS - NEW HAVEN LINE Main Line New Haven Finances ........... ............... ............... ......................... ............... 15 - 19 Station and Parking Operations Profit (Loss) - 1996--2000 ............... 20 - 22 Milford Finances ........... ............... ............... ......................... ............... 23 - 25 Station and Parking Operations Profit (Loss) - 1996--2000 ............... 26 - 28 Stratford Finances ........... ............... ............... ......................... ............... 29 - 31 Station and Parking
    [Show full text]
  • Green's Farms URBITRANR EPORT
    Individual Station Report Green's Farms URBITRANR EPORT CONTENTS: Stakeholder Interview Customer Opinion Survey Parking Inventory & Utilization Station Condition Inspection Lease Narrative and Synopsis Station Operations Review Station Financial Review URBITRAN Prepared to Connecticut Department of Transportation S ubmitted by Urbitran Associates, Inc. July 2003 June 2003 June 2003 June 2003 June 2003 June 2003 June 2003 Stakeholder Interview URBITRANR EPORT URBITRAN Prepared to Connecticut Department of Transportation S ubmitted by Urbitran Associates, Inc. Westport According to those at the meeting, which included the First and Second Selectmen and a representative from the Police Department, who run the station, Harry Harris wants CDOT to take control of the stations and parking. This was the first issue brought up by the town representatives – that the State wants to run the stations to provide better quality control, and that the State feels that this is the only solution to improve the supply of parking along the entire line. Furthermore, the feeling was that CDOT would be exempt from local zoning and would therefore be in a position to deck parking lots without local permission. Westport feels that they do a good job with the two town stations, and that they have an excellent relationship with Carl Rosa regarding maintenance and operations and with Harry Harris regarding policy. They feel strongly that if other towns ran their stations and parking like they do CDOT would have far fewer issues to contend with. Westport understands the desire for uniformity among the stations and supports that policy, albeit with concern regarding home rule issues. Westport, ultimately, is satisfied with the status quo, and feels the working relationship is excellent, the division of responsibilities clear, and their ability to have input into the ADA design process excellent.
    [Show full text]
  • A Q U I F E R P R O T E C T I O N a R E a S N O R W a L K , C O N N E C T I C
    !n !n S c Skunk Pond Beaver Brook Davidge Brook e d d k h P O H R R O F p S o i d t n n l c t u i l R a T S d o i ll l t e e lv i d o t R r r d r l h t l l a H r n l t r M b a s b R d H e G L R o r re R B C o o u l e t p o n D o e f L i s Weston Intermediate School y l o s L d r t e Huckleberry Hills Brook e t d W d r e g Upper Stony Brook Pond N L D g i b R o s n Ridgefield Pond a t v d id e g e H r i l Country Club Pond b e a R d r r S n n d a g e L o n tin a d ! R d l H B n t x H e W Still Pond d t n Comstock Knoll u d a R S o C R k R e L H d i p d S n a l l F tt h Town Pond d l T te r D o e t l e s a t u e L e c P n n b a n l R g n i L t m fo D b k H r it to Lower Stony Brook Pond o r A d t P n d s H t F u d g L d d i Harrisons Brook R h e k t R r a e R m D l S S e e G E o n y r f ll H rt R r b i i o e n s l t ld d d o r l ib l a e r R d L r O e H w i Fanton Hill g r l Cider Mill School P y R n a ll F i e s w L R y 136 e a B i M e C H k A s t n d o i S d V l n 3 c k r l t g n n a d R i u g d o r a L 3 ! a l r u p d R d e c L S o s e Hurlbutt Elementary School R d n n d D A i K w T n d o O n D t f R l g d R l t ad L i r e R e e r n d L a S i m a o f g n n n D d n R o t h n Middlebrook School ! l n t w Lo t a 33 i n l n i r E id d D w l i o o W l r N e S a d l e P g n V n a h L C r L o N a r N a S e n e t l e b n l e C s h f ! d L nd g o a F i i M e l k rie r id F C a F r w n P t e r C ld l O e r a l y v f e u e o O n e o a P i O i s R w e t n a e l a n T t b s l d l N l k n t g i d u o e a o R W R Hasen Pond n r r n M W B y t Strong
    [Show full text]
  • Branchville Individual Station Report
    BRANCHVILLE TRAIN STATION VISUAL INSPECTION REPORT January 2007 Prepared by the Bureau of Public Transportation Connecticut Department of Transportation Branchville Train Station Visual Inspection Report January 2007 Overview: The Branchville Train Station is located on Route 7 in the southeast corner of Ridgefield. It is relatively easy to find, although a station sign is needed at each of the two entrances. Vehicular access is provided over two river bridges in varied stages of disrepair. The station is nestled between the Norwalk River, the railroad tracks, Depot Road and Portland Avenue. The station building houses a bakery and gift shop. New sidewalk and black railing separate the full parking lot from the tracks. An awning provides some shelter for patrons of the bakery or waiting commuters. The area is neat, likely from the housekeeping efforts of bakery personnel. A high-level platform with stairs and a ramp provides access to the rail cars. The platform has a full-length canopy and benches. Maintenance Responsibilities: Owner: State Operator: Town Platform Lights: Metro-North Trash: Metro-North Snow Removal: Town Shelter Glazing: Town Platform Canopy: Town Platform Structure: Town Parking: Town Page 2 Branchville Train Station Visual Inspection Report January 2007 Station Layout: Aerial Photo by Aero-Metric, Inc. – Graphics by Urbitran as part of the Rail Governance Study Station Building State-Owned Parking Area Page 3 Branchville Train Station Visual Inspection Report January 2007 Train Station Visual Inspection Parameters: The Connecticut Department of Transportation (Department) recently inspected all 36 New Haven Line train stations to assess their appearance, safety, means of access and overall condition.
    [Show full text]
  • Danbury Branch Improvement Program Task 5
    W FTA ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS DRAFT/FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT DANBURY BRANCH IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM TASK 5 ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM STATE PROJECT 302-008 SECTION 18: VISUAL RESOURCES MAY 2009 State Project No. 302-008 Connecticut Department of Transportation Danbury Branch Improvement Program AA/DEIS SECTION 18. VISUAL RESOURCES INTRODUCTION This section describes the visual resources in the study corridor. Visual resources contribute greatly to environmental quality, shaping the views and aesthetic experiences of people’s daily lives. Visual resources include natural landscape elements as well as features of the built environment. The quality of the visual experience depends on many factors, including the physical attributes of objects, the combination of objects and features in view, the location of visual elements in relation to the viewer, the condition of the elements, their uniqueness, viewer perceptions, and cultural connotations, among many others. Descriptions of landscape characteristics and features under existing conditions lay the groundwork for evaluating the effects of a project on the visual environment. Regulatory Context There are no federal and state laws that specifically protect visual resources across the board. There are, however, several important references to visual resources within the context of historic preservation and coastal zone management statutes. The implications of these legal protections are described below. At the Federal level, the following legislation is relevant to the project:
    [Show full text]
  • 2018 Annual Report
    MEMBERS Chairman Jim Gildea Derby Vice Chairman Jeffrey Maron Stamford Secretary Roger Cirella Ansonia Terry Borjeson Newington Laura Cordes West Hartford Mitch Fuchs Fairfield Peter Garneau Stamford Douglas Hausladen New Haven Mike Mahoney Westport Sue Prosi Stratford Stephen Prostor New Canaan Edwin Schroeder Clinton Lisa Slinksy Waterbury 2018 Annual Report The Connecticut Commuter Rail Council (CCRC) is an independent board which acts as the advocate on behalf of commuters on railroad lines throughout the state, including the New Haven line, New Canaan, Danbury and Waterbury branches, Shore Line East, and the recently opened New Haven-­­Hartford-­­Springfield line. The CCRC was created by an act of the Connecticut Legislature, Sec. 15. Section 13b-­­212c. Effective July 1, 2013 it was updated to: The Connecticut Commuter Rail Council shall study and investigate all aspects of the daily operation of commuter rail lines in the state, monitor their performance and recommend changes to improve the efficiency and the quality of service of the operation of such lines. The council may request and shall receive from any department, division, board, bureau, commission, agency, public authority of the state or any political subdivision thereof such assistance and data as it requests and will enable it to properly carry out its activities for the purposes set forth in this section. The council shall also work with the Department of Transportation to advocate for customers of all commuter lines in the state and shall make recommendations for improvements to such lines. CT General Statute - CCRC Powers & Duties The Governor and senior leaders of the General Assembly appoint council members in order to make certain that a broad range of perspectives are included in all meetings.
    [Show full text]
  • Long Island Sound Waterborne Transportation Plan Task 2 – Baseline Data for Transportation Plan Development
    Long Island Sound Waterborne Transportation Plan Task 2 – Baseline Data for Transportation Plan Development final memorandum prepared for New York Metropolitan Transportation Council Greater Bridgeport Regional Planning Agency South Western Regional Planning Agency prepared by Cambridge Systematics, Inc. with Eng-Wong Taub & Associates Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc. Gruzen Samton Architects, Planners & Int. Designers HydroQual Inc. M.G. McLaren, PC Management and Transportation Associates, Inc. STV, Inc. September 30, 2003 www.camsys.com final technical memorandum Long Island Sound Waterborne Transportation Plan Task 2 – Baseline Data for Transportation Plan Development prepared for New York Metropolitan Transportation Council Greater Bridgeport Regional Planning Agency South Western Regional Planning Agency prepared by Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 4445 Willard Avenue, Suite 300 Chevy Chase, Maryland 20815 with Eng-Wong Taub & Associates Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates, Inc. Gruzen Samton Architects, Planners & Int. Designers HydroQual Inc. M.G. McLaren, PC Management and Transportation Associates, Inc. STV, Inc. September 30, 2003 Long Island Sound Waterborne Transportation Plan Technical Memorandum for Task 2 Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction.................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Purpose and Need.................................................................................................. 1-1 1.2 The National Policy Imperative ..........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • CT2030 2020-2030 Base SOGR Investment $10.341 $0.023 $5.786
    Public Transportation Total Roadway Bus Rail ($B) ($B) ($B) CT2030 2020-2030 Base SOGR Investment $10.341 $0.023 $5.786 $16.149 2020-2030 Enhancement Investment $3.867 $0.249 $1.721 $5.837 Total $14.208 $0.272 $7.506 $21.986 Less Allowance for Efficiencies $0.300 CT2030 Program total $21.686 Notes: 2020-2030 Base SOGR Investment Dollars for Roadway also includes funding for bridge inspection, highway operations center, load ratings 2020-2030 program includes "mixed" projects that have both SOGR and Enhancement components. PROJECT ROUTE TOWN DESCRIPTION PROJECT COST PROJECT TYPE SOGR $ 0014-0185 I-95 BRANFORD NHS - Replace Br 00196 o/ US 1 18,186,775 SOGR 100% $ 18,186,775 0014-0186 CT 146 BRANFORD Seawall Replacement 7,200,000 SOGR 100% $ 7,200,000 0015-0339 CT 130 BRIDGEPORT Rehab Br 02475 o/ Pequonnock River (Phase 2) 20,000,000 SOGR 100% $ 20,000,000 0015-0381 CT 8 BRIDGEPORT Replace Highway Signs & Supports 10,000,000 SOGR 100% $ 10,000,000 0036-0203 CT 8 Derby-Seymour Resurfacing, Bridge Rehab & Safety Improvements 85,200,000 SOGR 100% $ 85,200,000 0172-0477 Various DISTRICT 2 Horizontal Curve Signs & Pavement. Markings 6,225,000 SOGR 100% $ 6,225,000 0172-0473 CT 9 & 17 DISTRICT 2 Replace Highway Signs & Sign Supports 11,500,000 SOGR 100% $ 11,500,000 0172-0490 Various DISTRICT 2 Replace Highway Signs & Supports 15,500,000 SOGR 100% $ 15,500,000 0172-0450 Various DISTRICT 2 Signal Replacements for APS Upgrade 5,522,170 SOGR 100% $ 5,522,170 0173-0496 I-95/U.S.
    [Show full text]