NEC Annual Report: FY17 Infrastructure
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
GATEWAY PROGRAM OVERVIEW and UPDATE John D
January 12, 2017 GATEWAY PROGRAM OVERVIEW AND UPDATE John D. Porcari, Interim Executive Director Gateway Program Development Corporation 1 GATEWAY PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION » Incorporated in the state of New Jersey under Title 15A:2-8 New Jersey Domestic Nonprofit Corporation Act. » For coordinating, developing, operating, financing, managing, owning or otherwise engaging in activities to effectuate the transportation project between Penn Station, Newark, New Jersey, and Penn Station, New York, New York currently referred to as the “Gateway Program.” » Four trustees appointed by US DOT, Amtrak, NJ TRANSIT, and NYS DOT, respectively. Gateway Program Development Corporation 2 HOW IT WILL WORK Federal NJ Other/ Amtrak PANYNJ Grants TRANSIT Private Federal Gateway Program Development Loans Corporation Project Delivery NJ Amtrak TRANSIT PANYNJ Consultants/ Contractors Gateway Program Development Corporation 3 WHAT IS THE GATEWAY PROGRAM? » Hudson Tunnel Project » New Hudson River Tunnel » Rehabilitation of Existing North River Tunnel » Replacement of Portal Bridge » Expansion of Penn Station, New York » Capacity and Renewal Projects in New Jersey » Sawtooth Bridges/ Harrison » Portal South Bridge » Secaucus Station and Loops » Operating Rail Yard in NJ » Newark-Secaucus Improvements Gateway Program Development Corporation 4 WHY DO WE NEED GATEWAY? »Existing North River Tunnel, Completed in 1910 Gateway Program Development Corporation 5 SUPERSTORM SANDY CAUSED IRREPARABLE DAMAGE » Superstorm Sandy forced 4-day closure of the NEC in October 2012. » Ongoing damage to internal components requires complete renewal of inundated tunnels. » Tunnel reconstruction requires closure of each tube for outages of ~1.5 years. » Without new tunnel in place, closure would devastate service. » Rebuilding of the existing North River Tunnel will not begin until the new Hudson Tunnel is built and commissioned. -
Portal Bridge Fact Sheet Summer 2015V2.Indd
PORTAL BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT The Portal Bridge Replacement Project will replace an aging obsolete bridge with a new fi xed-span bridge resulti ng in enhanced capacity and reliability along the Northeast Corridor. PROJECT OVERVIEW The Portal Bridge is a two-track, moveable, swing-span bridge PROJECT SUMMARY that crosses over the Hackensack River in Hudson County, New Timeline Esti mated 5-year constructi on period Jersey connecti ng Newark, New Jersey and Penn Stati on, New York. This secti on of the Northeast Corridor is used solely by Am- Cost $940 million (2013 esti mate) trak and New Jersey Transit commuter rail service. Constructed Partners New Jersey Transit, Amtrak and US DOT Federal Rail- over a century ago, the bridge is one of the oldest pieces of infra- road Administrati on structure along the Northeast Corridor. Due to its age and inten- sity of use, the bridge is costly and diffi cult to maintain in work- ing order. The bridge, which hosts about 450 trains per weekday, was esti mated to cost approximately $940 million in 2013 dol- creates a bott leneck along the busy Northeast Corridor that con- lars and will proceed with the cooperati on of New Jersey Tran- fl icts with marine traffi c, limits operati ng speeds and impedes sit and Amtrak, as soon as funding can be secured. The recently effi cient and reliable passenger rail service. The bridge requires completed design process involved a preliminary design phase replacement in order to meet expected future travel demand. for which costs of $31 million were shared between New Jersey Transit and Amtrak, and fi nal design, funded by a Federal Rail- Amtrak and New Jersey Transit have completed several planning road Administrati on grant of $38.5 million. -
Section 4 ELECTRIC ROLLING STOCK EQUIPMENT POWER
Section 4 ELECTRIC ROLLING STOCK EQUIPMENT POWER 4.1 EQUIPMENT DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS The rolling stock equipment to be selected must be designed and built in full accordance with the rules and regulations issued by the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) and the Recommendations issued by the American Public Transportation Association (APTA). On May 12, 1999, FRA issued comprehensive rules addressing rail vehicle design and construction in accordance with operating speeds. Tier I of the rules apply to "...railroad passengerequipment operating at speedsnot exceeding 125 mph..." "Unless otherwise specified, these requirements only apply to passenger equipment ordered on or after September 8, 2000 or placed in service for the first time on or after September 9, 2002. The rule also states that "The structural standards of this subpart. do not apply to passengerequipment if used exclusively on a rail line: (i) With no public highway-rail grade crossings; (ii) On which no freight operations occur at any time; (iii) On which only passengerequipment of compatible design is utilized; (iv) On which trains operate at speedsnot exceeding 79 mph. The rule provides for alternative compliance by demonstrating "...at least an equivalent of safety in such environment with respect to the protection of its occupants from serious injury in the case of a derailment or collision." Given the fact that JPB's equipment: a) operates, or may operate in the future, on the same lines as other freight and passengertrains; and b) that it will likely operate at speeds higher than 79 mph in the future, it is assumed that the electrically powered rolling stock will be required to meet the rules and regulations as written, with no waivers or alternative solutions. -
Implementation Plan for Sustainable Development in the New York - Connecticut Metropolitan Region
Implementation Plan for Sustainable Development in the New York - Connecticut Metropolitan Region MAY 30, 2014 DRAFT: June 2, 2014 - 13:33 SCI Implementation Plan Draft 20140602_final.indd 1 About the New York-Connecticut Sustainable Communities Consortium NY-CT Sustainable Communities Consortium The New York – Connecticut Sustainable Communities Consortium is supported by a U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Office of Sustainable Housing and Communities Regional Planning Grant. The Sustainable Communities Regional Planning Grant program is a key initiative of the Partnership for Sustainable Communities, a federal partnership joining the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Department of Transportation, and HUD with a shared mission to coordinate federal housing, transportation, water, and other infrastructure investments to make neighborhoods more prosperous, allow people to live closer to jobs, save households time and money, and reduce pollution . Partners in the NY-CT Sustainable Communities Consortium An Advisory Board was formed to monitor the progress of include cities, counties, metropolitan planning organizations, Consortium activities, provide recommendations, and review and non-profit organizations across Long Island, New York City, and comment on Consortium work programs. Advisory lower Hudson Valley, and coastal Connecticut: Board members include both governmental agencies and non- governmental organizations in the tri-state New York/New Regional Plan Association, partner and fiduciary agent Jersey/Connecticut -
No Action Alternative Report
No Action Alternative Report April 2015 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................................. 1 2. NEC FUTURE Background ............................................................................................................................ 2 3. Approach to No Action Alternative.............................................................................................................. 4 3.1 METHODOLOGY FOR SELECTING NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE PROJECTS .................................................................................... 4 3.2 DISINVESTMENT SCENARIO ...................................................................................................................................................... 5 4. No Action Alternative ................................................................................................................................... 6 4.1 TRAIN SERVICE ........................................................................................................................................................................ 6 4.2 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE RAIL PROJECTS ............................................................................................................................... 9 4.2.1 Funded Projects or Projects with Approved Funding Plans (Category 1) ............................................................. 9 4.2.2 Funded or Unfunded Mandates (Category 2) ....................................................................................................... -
Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project FEIS
Chapter 4: Transportation Effects A. INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY This chapter assesses the potential impacts of the project alternatives on transportation conditions in the New York-New Jersey metropolitan area and the entire Northeast Corridor. Since the Portal Bridge is a vital link on the Northeast Corridor, the project alternatives could result in effects over a larger area than many of the other environmental resources examined in this FEIS. The effects of the project alternatives on the capacity and reliability of Amtrak and NJ TRANSIT’s crossing of the Hackensack River could have a positive effect on regional and commuter rail travel along the Northeast Corridor. This could lead to changes in travel patterns and modes that are discussed below. Therefore, the transportation impact assessment includes a discussion of regional issues, with a focus on the critical trans-Hudson corridor. The analysis presented in this chapter includes an evaluation of current and future transportation infrastructure within the project study area, including intercity rail, public transportation (including public and private bus service, commuter and light rail, and ferry services), navigable waters, and the roadway system. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS The importance of public transportation (including bus, rail, and ferry) in northern and central New Jersey is reflected in the mode shares for the different types of trips made in the region. As shown in Table 4-1, while intra-New Jersey trips were predominately auto-based, trans-Hudson trips are evenly split between automobiles and public transportation. This illustrates the importance of public transportation in providing access to New York City for employment, entertainment, shopping, education, and other trips. -
Nj Transit Fy2019 Obligation (Year-End) Report
NJ TRANSIT FY2019 OBLIGATION (YEAR-END) REPORT T143 ADA--Platforms/Stations COUNTY: Various MUNICIPALITY: Various Funding is provided for the design and construction of necessary repairs to make NJ TRANSIT's rail stations, and subway stations more accessible for the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) including related track and infrastructure work. Funding is requested for repairs, upgrades, equipment purchase, platform extensions, and transit enhancements throughout the system and other accessibility repairs/improvements at stations. MPO FUND Phase Year STIP Amount Grant Number Obligation Obligated Unobligated Date Amount Amount COMMENTS DVRPC STATE ERC 2019 $0.230 $0.230 $0.000 19-480-078-6310-D44 7/11/2018 $0.230 NJTPA STATE ERC 2019 $0.700 $0.700 $0.000 19-480-078-6310-D44 7/11/2018 $0.700 SJTPO STATE ERC 2019 $0.070 $0.070 $0.000 19-480-078-6310-D44 7/11/2018 $0.070 TOTALS $1.000 $1.000 $0.000 T05 Bridge and Tunnel Rehabilitation COUNTY: Various MUNICIPALITY: Various This program provides funds for the design, repair, rehabilitation, replacement, painting, inspection of tunnels/bridges, and other work such as movable bridge program, drawbridge power program, and culvert/bridge/tunnel right of way improvements necessary to maintain a state of good repair. MPO FUND Phase Year STIP Amount Grant Number Obligation Obligated Unobligated Date Amount Amount COMMENTS DVRPC STATE ERC 2019 $0.975 $0.975 $0.000 19-480-078-6310-D45 7/11/2018 $0.975 NJTPA STATE ERC 2019 $38.429 $38.429 $0.000 19-480-078-6310-D45 7/11/2018 $38.429 SJTPO STATE ERC 2019 $0.206 $0.206 $0.000 19-480-078-6310-D45 7/11/2018 $0.206 TOTALS $39.609 $39.609 $0.000 SUMMARY REPORT Section III - Page 1 11/21/2019 10:20:11 AM NJ TRANSIT FY2019 OBLIGATION (YEAR-END) REPORT T111 Bus Acquisition Program COUNTY: Various MUNICIPALITY: Various This program provides funds for replacement of transit, commuter, access link, and suburban buses for NJ TRANSIT as they reach the end of their useful life as well as the purchase of additional buses to meet service demands. -
FY 2015-2016 NJTPA SUBREGIONAL STUDIES PROGRAM CR 529 Corridor Study Improve Transit Services & Bicycle and Pedestrian Access
FY 2015-2016 NJTPA SUBREGIONAL STUDIES PROGRAM CR 529 Corridor Study Improve Transit Services & Bicycle and Pedestrian Access Second Steering Committee Meeting MINUTES – December 3, 2015 In Attendance Mr. Paul Larrousse, Chairman / National Transit Institute Ms. Heidi Heleniak, Dunellen Borough/ Downtown Management Organization Mr. Chris Mazauskas, Edison Township Mr. John Stewart, Plainfield City Mayor Brian Wahler, Piscataway Township Mr. Andras Holzmann, Somerset County Mr. Kenneth Wedeen, Somerset County Mr. Paul Onish, Senator Linda Greenstein Representative – 14th District Ms. Elizabeth Thompson, North Jersey Transportation Planning Authority (NJTPA) Ms. Blythe Eaman, North Jersey Transportation Planning Authority (NJTPA) Mr. Uzoma Anuke, New Jersey Department of Transportation Mr. Mike Viscardi, New Jersey Transit Ms. Leigh Ann Kimber, Rutgers University – Department of Transportation Services Ms. Liza Betz, Union County Mr. Mike Kruimer, East Coast Greenway Mr. George M. Ververides, Director of County Planning Ms. Carla Cefalo, Middlesex County Economic Development Mr. Val D’Aloia, Middlesex County, Engineering Staff Ms. Danielle Britton, Middlesex County Planning Staff Mr. Anthony Gambilonghi, Middlesex County Planning Staff Mr. Bruce McCracken, Middlesex County Planning Staff Ms. Kae Yamane, Middlesex County Planning Staff Mr. Ryan Rapp, Middlesex County Planning Staff Mr. Nick Turfaro, Middlesex County Planning Staff Total in Attendance – 25 Mr. Paul Larrousse began the meeting with a brief introduction and welcomed all who were in attendance. A brief synopsis of the two-year technical study in the region was discussed to identify ways to enhance transit services, bicycling and pedestrian improvements to the Route 529 Corridor study area. The North Jersey Transportation Planning Authority (NJTPA) has approved the study as part of the FY 2015-2016 Subregional Studies Program with a completion date no later than June 30, 2016 was also noted. -
NEC One-Year Implementation Plan: FY17 Contents
Northeast Corridor One-Year Implementation Plan Fiscal Year 2017 September 2016 Congress established the Northeast Corridor Commission to develop coordinated strategies for improving the Northeast’s core rail network in recognition of the inherent challenges of planning, financing, and implementing major infrastructure improvements that cross multiple jurisdictions. The expectation is that by coming together to take collective responsibility for the NEC, these disparate stakeholders will achieve a level of success that far exceeds the potential reach of any individual organization. The Commission is governed by a board comprised of one member from each of the NEC states (Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, and Maryland) and the District of Columbia; four members from Amtrak; and five members from the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). The Commission also includes non-voting representatives from four freight railroads, states with connecting corridors and several commuter operators in the Region. 2| NEC One-Year Implementation Plan: FY17 Contents Introduction 6 Funding Summary 8 Baseline Capital Charge Program 10 1 - Boston South Station 12 16 - Shore to Girard 42 2 - Boston to Providence 14 17 - Girard to Philadelphia 30th Street 44 3 - Providence to Wickford Junction 16 18 - Philadelphia 30th Street - Arsenal 46 4 - Wickford Junction to New London 18 19 - Arsenal to Marcus Hook 48 5 - New London to New Haven 20 20 - Marcus Hook to Bacon 50 6 - New Haven to State Line 22 21 - Bacon to Perryville 52 7 - State Line to New Rochelle 24 22 - Perryville to WAS 54 8 - New Rochelle to Harold Interlocking 26 23 - Washington Union Terminal 56 9 - Harold Interlocking to F Interlocking 28 24 - WAS to CP Virginia 58 10 - F Interlocking to PSNY 30 25 - Springfield to New Haven 60 11 - Penn Terminal 32 27 - Spuyten Duyvil to PSNY* 62 12 - PSNY to Trenton 34 28 - 30th St. -
Northeast Corridor Capital Investment Plan Fiscal Years 2017-2021
Northeast Corridor Capital Investment Plan Fiscal Years 2017-2021 April 2016 Congress established the Northeast Corridor Commission (the Commission) to develop coordinated strategies for improving the Northeast’s core rail network in recognition of the inherent challenges of planning, financing, and implementing major infrastructure improvements that cross multiple jurisdictions. The expectation is that by coming together to take collective responsibility for the NEC, these disparate stakeholders will achieve a level of success that far exceeds the potential reach of any individual organization. The Commission is governed by a board comprised of one member from each of the NEC states (Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, and Maryland) and the District of Columbia; four members from Amtrak; and five members from the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). The Commission also includes non-voting representatives from four freight railroads, states with connecting corridors and several commuter operators in the Region. Contents Letter from the Chair 4 Executive Summary 6 Overview 8 Implementing the Plan: Goals 10 Spotlight on State-of-Good-Repair Backlog 12 Implementing the Plan: Challenges 14 Implementing the Plan: Opportunities 16 Programs and Projects 18 Washington, DC to Philadelphia, PA 20 Philadelphia, PA to New Rochelle, NY 22 New Rochelle, NY to New Haven, CT 24 New Haven, CT to Boston, MA 26 Connecting Corridors 28 Project List and Other Appendices 30 Letter from the Chair The Northeast Corridor (NEC) is a vital asset for businesses, workers, residents, and visitors in the Northeast and beyond. Its eight commuter rail operators deliver hundreds of thousands of workers to some of the most productive economic centers in the country each day. -
Joint Metro-North and Long Island Committees Meeting February 2019
Joint Metro-North and Long Island Committees Meeting February 2019 Members M. Pally, Chair, LIRR Committee S. Metzger, Chair MNR Committee N. Brown R. Glucksman C. Moerdler S. Rechler A. Saul V. Tessitore V. Vanterpool N. Zuckerman Joint Metro-North and Long Island Committees Meeting 2 Broadway 20th Floor Board Room New York, NY Monday, 2/25/2019 8:30 - 10:00 AM ET 1. PUBLIC COMMENTS PERIOD 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - January 22, 2019 LIRR Minutes LIRR Minutes - Page 5 MNR Minutes MNR Minutes - Page 20 3. 2019 WORK PLANS LIRR 2019 Work Plan LIRR 2019 Work Plan - Page 29 MNR 2019 Work Plan MNR 2019 Work Plan - Page 36 4. AGENCY PRESIDENTS’/CHIEF’S REPORTS LIRR Report (no material) LIRR Safety Report LIRR Safety Report - Page 44 MNR Report (no material) MNR Safety Report MNR Safety Report - Page 48 MTA Capital Construction Report MTA Capital Construction Report - Page 51 MTA Police Report MTA Police Report - Page 55 5. AGENCY INFORMATION ITEMS Joint Information Item Project Update on PTC Project Update on PTC - Page 64 LIRR Information Items LIRR Adopted Budget/Financial Plan 2019 LIRR Adopted Budget/Financial Plan 2019 - Page 81 LIRR 2018 Annual Operating Results LIRR 2018 Annual Operating Results - Page 104 LIRR 2018 Annual Fleet Maintenance Report LIRR 2018 Annual Fleet Maintenance Report - Page 112 LIRR Diversity-EEO Report – 4th Quarter 2018 LIRR Diversity-EEO Report - 4th Quarter 2018 - Page 128 March Timetable Change & Trackwork Programs March Timetable Change & Trackwork Programs - Page 145 MNR Information Items MNR Information Items - Page 148 MNR Adopted Budget/Financial Plan 2019 MNR Adopted Budget-Financial Plan 2019 - Page 149 MNR 2018 Annual Operating Results MNR 2018 Annual Operating Results - Page 171 MNR 2018 Annual Fleet Maintenance Report MNR 2018 Annual Fleet Maintenance Report - Page 183 MNR Diversity-EEO Report - 4th Quarter 2018 MNR Diversity-EEO Report - 4th Quarter 2018 - Page 197 April 14th Schedule Change April 14th Schedule Change - Page 214 6. -
Commuter Rail System On-Time Performance Report
COMMUTER RAIL SYSTEM ON-TIME PERFORMANCE REPORT October 2015 Division of Strategic Capital Planning December 2015 COMMUTER RAIL ON-TIME PERFORMANCE October 2015 This report presents an analysis of the October 2015 train delays as reported for Metra's eleven commuter rail lines. On-time is defined, for this analysis, as those regularly scheduled trains arriving at their last station stop less than six minutes behind schedule. Trains that are six minutes or more behind schedule, including annulled trains (trains that do not complete their scheduled runs), are regarded as late. “Extra” trains (trains added to handle special events but not shown in the regularly published timetables) are excluded from on-time performance calculations unless shown in special-event schedules that include all intermediate station stop times and are distributed publicly via Metra's website or on paper flyers. Cancelled (not annulled) trains and non-revenue trains are also excluded from on-time performance calculations. On-Time Performance Tables Table 1 presents the number of train delays by rail line and service period. During October 2015, Metra operated 17,717 scheduled trains, including scheduled “extras”, if any. 528 of these trains were delayed (late or annulled), representing an on-time performance rate of 97.0%. Table 2 lists on-time percentages by line for each month and year since 2010. Table 3 lists each train that was on time for less than 85% of its weekday runs in October 2015, in order of line, train, and dates delayed. The codes in the 'Delay Code' column of Table 3 are defined in Table 4 and shown sorted by delay-cause category and carrier designation in Table 5.