DOCSLIB.ORG

Appendix G Historic, Archaeological, and Cultural Resources Part1

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Appendix G Historic, Archaeological, and Cultural Resources Part1 Historic, Archaeological, and Cultural Resources APPENDIX G G.1 Section 106 Effects Assessment and Relevant Correspondence G.2 Phase IA Studies and Relevant Correspondence G.3 Draft Programmatic Agreement G.4 Historic Architectural Resources Background Study (HARBS) and Relevant Correspondence G.5 Project Initiation Letter (PIL) Relevant Correspondence G.6 Miscellaneous Correspondence PENN STATION ACCESS PROJECT: Environmental Assessment and Section 4(f) Evaluation May 2021 Penn Station Access Project: Environmental Assessment and Section 4(f)Evaluation Appendix G. Historic, Archaeological, and Cultural Resources G.1 SECTION 106 EFFECTS ASSESSMENT AND RELEVANT CORRESPONDENCE MTA Metro-North Railroad Penn Station Access Project Preliminary Environmental Assessment Section 106 Effects Assessment Prepared for: Prepared by: Lynn Drobbin & Associates, Historical Perspectives, Inc., and July 2019 Penn Station Access Project: Preliminary Environmental Assessment Section 106 Effects Assessment Contents 1. Introduction ...............................................................................................................................1 2. Project Description ................................................................................................................... 5 2.1 PROJECT NEED ......................................................................................................................................................................... 5 2.2 PROPOSED SERVICE ............................................................................................................................................................... 5 2.3 PROPOSED INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS .................................................................................................... 5 2.3.1 Stations .................................................................................................................................................................................... 5 2.3.2 Other Infrastructure Improvements.................................................................................................................................. 9 3. Legal and Regulatory Requirements ....................................................................................... 11 3.1 INVENTORY OF RESOURCES ........................................................................................................................................... 11 3.2 ASSESSING EFFECTS ............................................................................................................................................................. 11 3.3 ADVERSE EFFECT FINDING ............................................................................................................................................ 12 4. Consulting Parties and Resource Organizations .................................................................... 13 4.1 CONSULTING PARTIES ....................................................................................................................................................... 13 4.2 RESOURCE ORGANIZATIONS ......................................................................................................................................... 15 5. Methodology ............................................................................................................................ 16 5.1 DETERMINATION OF THE AREA OF POTENTIAL EFFECT .............................................................................. 16 5.1.1 Historic Architectural Resources Methodology ............................................................................................................ 16 5.1.2 Archaeological Resources Methodology ......................................................................................................................... 17 5.2 IDENTIFICATION OF RESOURCES ................................................................................................................................ 18 5.2.1 Historic Architectural Resources...................................................................................................................................... 18 5.2.2 Archaeological Resources .................................................................................................................................................. 18 5.3 RESOURCE IDENTIFICATION UPDATE ...................................................................................................................... 18 5.4 HISTORIC RESOURCES SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................. 18 5.4.1 Historic Architectural Resources...................................................................................................................................... 18 5.4.2 Archaeological Resources .................................................................................................................................................. 22 5.5 IDENTIFICATION OF EFFECTS ....................................................................................................................................... 26 5.5.1 Summary of Potential Effects on Eligible Historic Architectural Resources .......................................................... 26 5.5.2 Summary of Effects on Potential Archaeological Resources ...................................................................................... 27 6. Effects Assessment ................................................................................................................. 30 6.1 PROPOSED STATIONS ......................................................................................................................................................... 30 6.1.1 Hunts Point Station ............................................................................................................................................................ 30 6.1.2 Parkchester-Van Nest Station ........................................................................................................................................... 34 6.1.3 Morris Park Station ............................................................................................................................................................. 42 6.1.4 Co-op City Station .............................................................................................................................................................. 46 6.2 BRIDGES ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 49 6.2.1 Amtrak Hell Gate (HGL) Line Bascule Bridge over Pelham Bay and the Hutchinson River (AG 15.69-15.85) ................................................................................................................................................................ 49 6.2.2 Cross Bronx Expressway (I-95) Corridor over the Sheridan Expressway (I-895), Bronx River, Bronx River Avenue and Amtrak Hell Gate Line (HGL) (Sheridan Viaduct) (AG 11.99) ............................................... 53 6.2.3 New York Westchester & Boston (NYW&B) Railway Anchor Bridge Starlight Park, North of East 174th Street (AG 11.83) ..................................................................................................................................................... 57 6.2.4 Amtrak Hell Gate (Northeast Corridor) Line Bascule Bridge over the Bronx River (AG 11.40) ........................ 58 6.2.5 IRT No. 6 Subway Truss Bridge over Westchester Avenue, Amtrak Hell Gate Line (HGL) and Bronx River (AG 11.28) .................................................................................................................................................... 63 6.2.6 Lafayette Avenue Bridge over Amtrak Hell Gate Line (HGL) (AG 10.30) ............................................................. 64 i Penn Station Access Project: Preliminary Environmental Assessment Section 106 Effects Assessment 7. Inapplicability of the Criteria of Adverse Effect ..................................................................... 66 7.1 APPLICATION OF THE CRITERIA OF ADVERSE EFFECT ................................................................................... 66 7.1.1 Historic Architectural Resources...................................................................................................................................... 66 7.1.2 Archaeological Resources .................................................................................................................................................. 68 7.2 HISTORIC RESOURCES WITH NO EFFECT AS A RESULT OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT .................... 68 7.3 HISTORIC RESOURCES WITH NO ADVERSE EFFECT AS A RESULT OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 69 8. Conditions to Minimize Harm ............................................................................................... 70 8.1 BRIDGES ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 70 8.2 STATIONS ..................................................................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Top 10 Bridges by State.Xlsx
    Top 10 Most Traveled U.S. Structurally Deficient Bridges by State, 2015 2015 Year Daily State State County Type of Bridge Location Status in 2014 Status in 2013 Built Crossings Rank 1 Alabama Jefferson 1970 136,580 Urban Interstate I65 over U.S.11,RR&City Streets at I65 2nd Ave. to 2nd Ave.No Structurally Deficient Structurally Deficient 2 Alabama Mobile 1964 87,610 Urban Interstate I-10 WB & EB over Halls Mill Creek at 2.2 mi E US 90 Structurally Deficient Structurally Deficient 3 Alabama Jefferson 1972 77,385 Urban Interstate I-59/20 over US 31,RRs&City Streets at Bham Civic Center Structurally Deficient Structurally Deficient 4 Alabama Mobile 1966 73,630 Urban Interstate I-10 WB & EB over Southern Drain Canal at 3.3 mi E Jct SR 163 Structurally Deficient Structurally Deficient 5 Alabama Baldwin 1969 53,560 Rural Interstate I-10 over D Olive Stream at 1.5 mi E Jct US 90 & I-10 Structurally Deficient Structurally Deficient 6 Alabama Baldwin 1969 53,560 Rural Interstate I-10 over Joe S Branch at 0.2 mi E US 90 Not Deficient Not Deficient 7 Alabama Jefferson 1968 41,990 Urban Interstate I 59/20 over Arron Aronov Drive at I 59 & Arron Aronov Dr. Structurally Deficient Structurally Deficient 8 Alabama Mobile 1964 41,490 Rural Interstate I-10 over Warren Creek at 3.2 mi E Miss St Line Structurally Deficient Structurally Deficient 9 Alabama Jefferson 1936 39,620 Urban other principal arterial US 78 over Village Ck & Frisco RR at US 78 & Village Creek Structurally Deficient Structurally Deficient 10 Alabama Mobile 1967 37,980 Urban Interstate
    [Show full text]
  • July 2021 Resources
    Bronx Community Events & Resources Discover public resources for your community including grants, job openings, and internships. Click the title to jump to a section. VOLUNTEER OPPORTUNITIES 1 COMMUNITY EVENTS 2 TRAININGS 3 FARMERS MARKETS 3 FOOD SCRAP DROP-OFFS 4 JOB & INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITIES 6 YEAR-ROUND and ONGOING RESOURCES 6 GRANTS AND AWARDS 7 VOLUNTEER OPPORTUNITIES URBAN CULTIVATED Thursdays, July 1, 15, and 29 • 11 a.m.–2 p.m. Thursdays, July 8 and 22 • 9 a.m.–2 p.m. Saturdays, July 17 and 31 • 9 a.m.–2 p.m. Multiple sites in Northeast Bronx Interested in gardening but don’t have time to maintain your own? Join us one or more days for some communal gardening, urban farm maintenance, and neighborhood beautification in the Northeast Bronx. Training provided. To RSVP or for additional volunteer days and times, email [email protected] AFTER HOLIDAY WEEKEND CLEAN UPS • VAN CORTLANDT PARK ALLIANCE Tuesday, July 6 • 9 a.m.–12 p.m. Van Cortlandt Park Help us clean up the park after July 4th! Join us to give VCP some much needed TLC. For more events in the park, visit https://live-vancortlandt.pantheonsite.io/calendar-of-events/ COMMUNITY VOLUNTEERS TO HELP WITH SYEP • FRIENDS OF MOSHOLU PARKLAND 6 weeks, July 6–August 13 • 8 a.m.–1 p.m. Mosholu Parkland • 3400 Reservoir Oval East Guide students to help clean up Mosholu Parkland, our six playgrounds, and the Keepers House Edible Garden. Tasks include painting pillars and benches, mulching walking paths, tree pit care, weeding, groundskeeping, helping at community gardens, and more.
    [Show full text]
  • A Retrospective of Preservation Practice and the New York City Subway System
    Under the Big Apple: a Retrospective of Preservation Practice and the New York City Subway System by Emma Marie Waterloo This thesis/dissertation document has been electronically approved by the following individuals: Tomlan,Michael Andrew (Chairperson) Chusid,Jeffrey M. (Minor Member) UNDER THE BIG APPLE: A RETROSPECTIVE OF PRESERVATION PRACTICE AND THE NEW YORK CITY SUBWAY SYSTEM A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Cornell University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts by Emma Marie Waterloo August 2010 © 2010 Emma Marie Waterloo ABSTRACT The New York City Subway system is one of the most iconic, most extensive, and most influential train networks in America. In operation for over 100 years, this engineering marvel dictated development patterns in upper Manhattan, Brooklyn, and the Bronx. The interior station designs of the different lines chronicle the changing architectural fashion of the aboveground world from the turn of the century through the 1940s. Many prominent architects have designed the stations over the years, including the earliest stations by Heins and LaFarge. However, the conversation about preservation surrounding the historic resource has only begun in earnest in the past twenty years. It is the system’s very heritage that creates its preservation controversies. After World War II, the rapid transit system suffered from several decades of neglect and deferred maintenance as ridership fell and violent crime rose. At the height of the subway’s degradation in 1979, the decision to celebrate the seventy-fifth anniversary of the opening of the subway with a local landmark designation was unusual.
    [Show full text]
  • LEGEND Location of Facilities on NOAA/NYSDOT Mapping
    (! Case 10-T-0139 Hearing Exhibit 2 Page 45 of 50 St. Paul's Episcopal Church and Rectory Downtown Ossining Historic District Highland Cottage (Squire House) Rockland Lake (!304 Old Croton Aqueduct Stevens, H.R., House inholding All Saints Episcopal Church Complex (Church) Jug Tavern All Saints Episcopal Church (Rectory/Old Parish Hall) (!305 Hook Mountain Rockland Lake Scarborough Historic District (!306 LEGEND Nyack Beach Underwater Route Rockefeller Park Preserve Rockefeller Park Preserve Rockefeller Park Preserve CP Railroad ROW Rockefeller Park Preserve Rockefeller Park Preserve CSX Railroad ROW Rockefeller Park Preserve (!307 Rockefeller Park Preserve Rockefeller Park Preserve NYS Canal System, Underground (! Rockefeller Park Preserve Milepost Rockefeller Park Preserve Rockefeller Park Preserve Rockefeller Park Preserve )" Sherman Creek Substation Rockefeller Park Preserve Rockefeller Park Preserve Methodist Episcopal Church at Nyack *# Yonkers Converter Station Rockefeller Park Preserve Upper Nyack Firehouse ^ Mine Rockefeller Park Preserve Van Houten's Landing Historic District (!308 Park Rockefeller Park Preserve Union Church of Pocantico Hills State Park Hopper, Edward, Birthplace and Boyhood Home Philipse Manor Railroad Station Untouched Wilderness Dutch Reformed Church Rockefeller, John D., Estate Historic Site Tappan Zee Playhouse Philipsburg Manor St. Paul's United Methodist Church US Post Office--Nyack Scenic Area Ross-Hand Mansion McCullers, Carson, House Tarrytown Lighthouse (!309 Harden, Edward, Mansion Patriot's Park Foster Memorial A.M.E. Zion Church Irving, Washington, High School Music Hall North Grove Street Historic District DATA SOURCES: NYS DOT, ESRI, NOAA, TDI, TRC, NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF Christ Episcopal Church Blauvelt Wayside Chapel (Former) First Baptist Church and Rectory ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION (NYDEC), NEW YORK STATE OFFICE OF PARKS RECREATION AND HISTORICAL PRESERVATION (OPRHP) Old Croton Aqueduct Old Croton Aqueduct NOTES: (!310 1.
    [Show full text]
  • The Bulletin BROOKLYN PCC CARS’ 80 ANNIVERSARY
    ERA BULLETIN — DECEMBER, 2016 The Bulletin Electric Railroaders’ Association, Incorporated Vol. 59, No. 12 December, 2016 TH The Bulletin BROOKLYN PCC CARS’ 80 ANNIVERSARY Published by the Electric by Bernard Linder Railroaders’ Association, Incorporated, PO Box (Continued from November, 2016 issue) 3323, New York, New York 10163-3323. As soon as the cars were in service, news- dynamic brake came into service first and papers reported that the passengers liked was increased as the brake foot pedal was For general inquiries, or the quiet, fast, comfortable cars. St. Louis depressed. At 3-inch pedal movement, the Bulletin submissions, Car Company’s booklet explains how the track brake cut in. The air brake completed contact us at bulletin@ company accomplished this feat. the braking cycle and held the car after it erausa.org. ERA’s The designers proceeded to develop a radi- stopped. Your Editor-in-Chief’s supervisor website is cally new control and braking apparatus for recalled that the Brooklyn cars’ magnetic www.erausa.org. smooth and rapid starts and stops. To deter- brakes were disconnected after they wore Editorial Staff: mine the maximum comfortable acceleration, out the track rails at the trolley stops. The Editor-in-Chief: your Editor-in-Chief’s supervisor sat in a car PCC’s brakes gave rates of retardation that Bernard Linder loaded with sandbags. Tests were conducted were not previously achieved. Tri-State News and in the Ninth Avenue Depot at different rates The PCCs were much quieter than the old- Commuter Rail Editor: Ronald Yee of acceleration and deceleration. These ex- er cars.
    [Show full text]
  • 964-968 East 167Th Street, Bronx, Ny 10459 3 Vacant Mixed-Use Buildings with Air Rights
    964-968 EAST 167TH STREET, BRONX, NY 10459 3 VACANT MIXED-USE BUILDINGS WITH AIR RIGHTS Block: 274 4 Lots: 23, 24, & 25 Neighborhood: Foxhurst Stories: 3 Lot Dimensions: 58' x 90' | ± 5,250 SF Building Size: 50.01’ x 50’ | ± 7,501 SF Residential Units: 6 Commercial Units: 2 Zoning: C2-4/R7-1 ZFA: ± 21,000 SF Combined R.E. Taxes (19/20): $7,849 ZFA with Facility Bonus: ± 25,200 SF PROFORMA Residential Units SF BRs $/SF Rent Annual 964 East 167th Street 833 2 $28.22 $1,959 $23,508 964 East 167th Street 833 2 $28.22 $1,959 $23,508 966 East 167th Street 1,250 3 $23.88 $2,487 $29,844 966 East 167th Street 1,250 3 $23.88 $2,487 $29,844 968 East 167th Street 833 2 $28.22 $1,959 $23,508 968 East 167th Street 833 2 $28.22 $1,959 $23,508 Projected Residential Totals: 5,832 $26.36 $12,810 $153,720 ***Residential rents based on 2019 Section 8 Payment Standards Commercial Units SF $/SF Monthly Rent Annual Rent 964 East 167th Street 833 $35 $2,430 $29,155 NEW PRICE: $1,750,000 968 East 167th Street 833 $35 $2,430 $29,155 Projected Retail Totals: 1,666 $35 $4,859 $58,310 MASS TRANSIT OPTIONS DESIGNATED PRICE/SF PRICE/ZFA Estimated Expenses Totals: $/SF $/Unit 2, 5, & 6 TRAIN OPPORTUNITY ZONE $233 $83 Real Estate Taxes (18/19) Actual $7,849 $1.05 $785 Development Site Advisors has been retained on an exclusive basis to arrange for the sale of 964, 966, and Insurance Projected @ $1.00 / SF $7,501 $1.00 $750 968 East 167th Street in the Bronx.
    [Show full text]
  • NYC Park Crime Stats
    1st QTRPARK CRIME REPORT SEVEN MAJOR COMPLAINTS Report covering the period Between Jan 1, 2018 and Mar 31, 2018 GRAND LARCENY OF PARK BOROUGH SIZE (ACRES) CATEGORY Murder RAPE ROBBERY FELONY ASSAULT BURGLARY GRAND LARCENY TOTAL MOTOR VEHICLE PELHAM BAY PARK BRONX 2771.75 ONE ACRE OR LARGER 0 00000 00 VAN CORTLANDT PARK BRONX 1146.43 ONE ACRE OR LARGER 0 01000 01 ROCKAWAY BEACH AND BOARDWALK QUEENS 1072.56 ONE ACRE OR LARGER 0 00001 01 FRESHKILLS PARK STATEN ISLAND 913.32 ONE ACRE OR LARGER 0 00000 00 FLUSHING MEADOWS CORONA PARK QUEENS 897.69 ONE ACRE OR LARGER 0 01002 03 LATOURETTE PARK & GOLF COURSE STATEN ISLAND 843.97 ONE ACRE OR LARGER 0 00000 00 MARINE PARK BROOKLYN 798.00 ONE ACRE OR LARGER 0 00000 00 BELT PARKWAY/SHORE PARKWAY BROOKLYN/QUEENS 760.43 ONE ACRE OR LARGER 0 00000 00 BRONX PARK BRONX 718.37 ONE ACRE OR LARGER 0 01000 01 FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT BOARDWALK AND BEACH STATEN ISLAND 644.35 ONE ACRE OR LARGER 0 00001 01 ALLEY POND PARK QUEENS 635.51 ONE ACRE OR LARGER 0 00000 00 PROSPECT PARK BROOKLYN 526.25 ONE ACRE OR LARGER 0 04000 04 FOREST PARK QUEENS 506.86 ONE ACRE OR LARGER 0 00000 00 GRAND CENTRAL PARKWAY QUEENS 460.16 ONE ACRE OR LARGER 0 00000 00 FERRY POINT PARK BRONX 413.80 ONE ACRE OR LARGER 0 00000 00 CONEY ISLAND BEACH & BOARDWALK BROOKLYN 399.20 ONE ACRE OR LARGER 0 00001 01 CUNNINGHAM PARK QUEENS 358.00 ONE ACRE OR LARGER 0 00001 01 RICHMOND PARKWAY STATEN ISLAND 350.98 ONE ACRE OR LARGER 0 00000 00 CROSS ISLAND PARKWAY QUEENS 326.90 ONE ACRE OR LARGER 0 00000 00 GREAT KILLS PARK STATEN ISLAND 315.09 ONE ACRE
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Starlight Park Phase 2 Project Receives “Envision Gold Award” for Sustainable Infrastructure
    DDC: Ian Michaels, 646-939-6514, [email protected] NYC Parks: Dan Kastanis, 212-360-1311, [email protected] ISI: Dyan Lee, [email protected] Starlight Park Phase 2 Project Receives “Envision Gold Award” for Sustainable Infrastructure (Bronx, NY – February 4, 2021) The NYC Department of Design and Construction (DDC) and NYC Parks announced today that Phase 2 of the project to construct a continuous greenway through Starlight Park in the Bronx has been selected to receive an Envision Gold Award from the Institute for Sustainable Infrastructure (ISI). The project is being managed by DDC for NYC Parks. A restored section of the Bronx River Greenway in Starlight Park The $41 million, multi-staged project is closing a critical gap in the Bronx River Greenway and linking communities that had been isolated by highways and train lines. The first phase of the project was completed in summer 2020, while the second phase is expected to be completed in summer 2022. Phase 1 of the work, which was managed by the NYS Department of Transportation and opened in 2013, constructed the existing portion of Starlight Park, with a restored shoreline, boat dock, soccer fields, a playground and a 0.6-mile-long portion of the Bronx River Greenway. Phase 2 is constructing a critical greenway link between Starlight Park and Concrete Plant Park. Two pedestrian/bicycle bridges are being built – one crossing Amtrak lines at E. 172 Street and another crossing the Bronx River just north of Westchester Avenue. “DDC is very proud to be part of an effort to not only complete a crucial portion of the Bronx River Greenway, but to also link the Bronx neighborhoods surrounding Starlight Park,” said DDC Commissioner Lorraine Grillo.
    [Show full text]
  • Acceso a La Estación Penn Station
    Acceso a la estación Penn Station Cuatro nuevas estaciones en East Bronx con servicio directo de Metro- North hacia la estación Penn Station, Westchester y Connecticut. Viajes más rápidos. Servicio expandido. El proyecto utilizará la actual línea Hell Gate de Amtrak para acceder a la estación Penn Station, lo que incrementará el Conexiones regionales. potencial de la infraestructura existente y a la vez minimizará el efecto en la comunidad circundante. También El servicio de Metro-North desde el Bronx, Westchester y dejará la línea Hell Gate en un buen estado de reparación Connecticut a la estación Penn Station y el lado oeste de y mejorará tanto la fiabilidad como la puntualidad para los Manhattan está a un paso de materializarse. El acceso a la pasajeros interurbanos. estación Penn Station respaldará la equidad, la conectividad regional y la fiabilidad al ofrecer una nueva opción de transporte público. Además de las nuevas estaciones, el proyecto convertirá el ferrocarril de 2 vías actual en un ferrocarril mayor de 4 vías con más de 19 millas de vías nuevas y rehabilitadas. El Con cuatro estaciones de ferrocarril nuevas en el East Bronx proyecto también incluye el reacondicionamiento de 4 accesibles para pasajeros según las disposiciones de la Ley puentes, la reconfiguración de la playa de New Rochelle de para Estadounidenses con Discapacidades y mejoras Metro-North, 4 enclavamientos nuevos y 1 enclavamiento significativas en la infraestructura ferroviaria, el acceso de reconfigurado, 5 subestaciones nuevas y 2 mejoradas, y Penn Station respaldará la economía local y atraerá el talento modernizaciones de la infraestructura de señalización, regional al aumentar la accesibilidad a barrios de pocos energía y comunicación.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 NYC Bridge and Screenline Traffic Volumes Dashboard Metadata
    NYC Bridge and Screenline Traffic Volumes Dashboard Metadata Data Methodology Vehicular traffic volumes are collected annually for a two week period either during the fall months of September, October, and November or during the spring months of March, April, May, and June. Most of these traffic volumes are collected using Automated Traffic Recorders (ATRs), which record each vehicle as it passes over a pneumatic tube. A small percentage are collected using cameras. Average hourly volumes and an average daily volume are calculated from valid midweek days (Tuesday through Thursday). Dashboard Visuals The line graph on the “Average Daily Traffic Volumes per Facility per Year” page (page 1 of 2) represents a bidirectional (where applicable) average daily volume per location dating back to 1981 for most locations. The line graph on the “Average Hourly Traffic Volumes per Facility” page (page 2 of 2) represents the average bidirectional (where applicable) hourly volumes per location. This graph displays the end of the hour for each traffic volume on the x axis. For example, in the year of 2019 for Brooklyn Bridge, the traffic volume of 7,931 occurs during the 11:00 PM to 12:00 AM time period. Similarly, the traffic volume of 5,333 occurs during the 12:00 AM to 1:00 PM time period, and so on. The "Group" and the "Facility" filters will apply to both graphs. The "Year" filter will only alter the "Average Hourly Traffic Volumes per Facility" line graph. Each graph can display a maximum of only 60 facilities (lines) due to a limitation with Power BI.
    [Show full text]
  • I-295 Corridor Study Scarborough-Brunswick Prepared by Maine Department of Transportation (Mainedot) Bureau of Transportation Systems Planning
    I-295I-295 CorridorCorridor StudyStudy Scarborough-BrunswickScarborough-Brunswick Prepared by Maine Department of Transportation (MaineDOT) Bureau of Transportation Systems Planning May 2010 I-295 Corridor Study Scarborough-Brunswick Prepared by Maine Department of Transportation (MaineDOT) Bureau of Transportation Systems Planning May 2010 Acknowledgements MaineDOT Edward Hanscom, Study Manager Dennis Emidy, Transportation Engineer PACTS John Duncan, Director Eric Ortman, Transportation Planner Paul Niehoff, Transportation Planner Kevin Hooper, Travel Demand Modeler Other Staff Participants Ernest Martin, MaineDOT Project Development Dan Stewart, MaineDOT Bicycle and Pedestrian Program Sue Moreau, MaineDOT Multimodal Planning & Operations Unit Russ Charette, MaineDOT Mobility Management Division Tracy Perez, formerly MaineDOT Office of Passenger Transportation Gerald Varney, FHWA John Perry, FHWA David Willauer, formerly GPCOG Maddy Adams, GPCOG Corridor Advisory Committee Brunswick: Don Gerrish, Town Manager Theo Holtwijk, Town Planner Cumberland: Bill Shane, Town Manager Carla Nixon, Town Planner Falmouth: George Thebarge, Town Planner Tony Hayes, Public Works Director Freeport: Donna Larson, Town Planner Albert Presgraves, Town Engineer Maine Turnpike Authority: Conrad Welzel, Manager of Government Relations Portland: James Cloutier, City Councilor Larry Mead, Assistant City Manager Mike Bobinsky, Public Works Director State Police I-295 Troop: Lieutenant Ron Harmon Scarborough: Ron Owens, Town Manager Joe Ziepniewski, Town Planner South Portland: Tex Haeuser, Planning Director Steve Johnson, Public Works Director Transit Providers Working Group: Peter Hefler, METRO General Manager Westbrook: Paul Boudreau, Public Works Director Eric Dudley, Chief City Engineer Yarmouth: Nat Tupper, Town Manager Dan Jellis, Town Engineer Cover: I-295 northbound, Exit 3 to Exit 4 (PACTS photo) Table of Contents Executive Summary ES-1 I. Introduction 1-1 A.
    [Show full text]