Granite City to St. Louis High- Speed Rail. Public Mee ng February 25, PDF

Please download to get full document.

View again

of 39
All materials on our website are shared by users. If you have any questions about copyright issues, please report us to resolve them. We are always happy to assist you.
Information Report
Category:

Instruction manuals

Published:

Views: 14 | Pages: 39

Extension: PDF | Download: 0

Share
Related documents
Description
Granite City to St. Louis High- Speed Rail Public Mee ng February 25, 2014 Purpose of Mee ng Welcome to Scoping WELCOME Thank you for a ending tonight s Scoping Mee ng for the Granite City to St. Louis
Transcript
Granite City to St. Louis High- Speed Rail Public Mee ng February 25, 2014 Purpose of Mee ng Welcome to Scoping WELCOME Thank you for a ending tonight s Scoping Mee ng for the Granite City to St. Louis High- Speed Rail (HSR) Tier 2 Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) Purpose of Tonight s Scoping Mee ng Granite City to St. Louis HSR Tier 2 project Dra purpose and need under considera on Range of alterna ves and evalua on methods under considera on Par cipate and comment on the scope of the environmental review in open house format What is Scoping? Scoping is a part of the EIS process through which a Federal agency describes a proposed ac on and possible alterna ves and seeks input from the public and other agencies on poten ally affected resources, environmental issues to be considered, and the agency s planned approach to the analysis. Overview of Study Process History Chicago to St. Louis IDOT has ac vely developed the Chicago to St. Louis corridor since the mid 1980 s. FRA selected this corridor for more than $1.2 billion in funding for improvements. History Chicago to St. Louis Corridor Chicago to Joliet Springfield Granite City to St. Louis 2004 Record of Decision 2012 Tier 1 Record of Decision 2013 Tier 2 EIS Initiated Tiered EIS Process A phased environmental review is used in the development of complex projects. A Tier 1 EIS addresses broad, corridor- level issues and alterna ves. A Tier 2 EIS addresses individual component projects of the Selected Alterna ve from the Tier 1 EIS in more detail. Tiered EIS Process Record of Decision (ROD) for the Chicago to St. Louis HSR Tier 1 EIS allows for future double- tracking of the en re corridor. The Granite City to St. Louis HSR Tier 2 EIS will evaluate the Mississippi River Crossing in more detail. Granite City, Illinois to the Gateway Sta on in St. Louis, Missouri Study Area - Granite City to St. Louis Timeline - Granite City to St. Louis Purpose and Need Tier 1 Purpose - Chicago to St. Louis Tier 1 iden fied the purpose of the Chicago to St. Louis HSR Program: Enhance passenger transporta on network in the Chicago- St. Louis corridor Improve high- speed passenger rail service Spur new private investment and tourism in sta on communi es Tier 1 Needs - Chicago to St. Louis Tier 1 iden fied needs for the Chicago to St. Louis HSR Program: Inadequate capacity - single track restricts passenger train traffic Infrequent rail service - single track limits frequency Travel mes too long Poor rail reliability - on- me performance ranged from 38% (2007) to 75% (2010) Aging rail infrastructure - poor condi on limits speeds and travel mes Safety Tier 2 Purpose Granite City to St. Louis DRAFT UNDER CONSIDERATION The purpose of the Granite City to St. Louis HSR project is to implement high- speed passenger rail service, increase rail capacity, and improve reliability for iden fied incremental service addi ons. Tier 2 Needs Granite City to St. Louis DRAFT UNDER CONSIDERATION Reduce Travel Time: Consider the length and travel speeds between Granite City and St. Louis sta on. Improve Service Reliability: Consider opera onal performance, conflicts with freight service, and capacity of Mississippi River crossing(s) for HSR and future freight demands in the year Enhance Safety: Consider rail passenger safety compared to exis ng condi ons. Tier 2 Other Objec ves DRAFT UNDER CONSIDERATION Cost and Constructability Balance benefits of the project with costs, including considera on of constructability, ini al capital costs, and long- term opera onal costs and maintenance costs. Tier 2 Other Objec ves Human, Cultural, and Natural Environment Maximize community benefits and minimize conflicts with exis ng development. Minimize impacts to wetland areas, floodplains, cri cal habitat areas, parks/trails, and historic proper es. DRAFT UNDER CONSIDERATION Exis ng and Future Condi ons Exis ng Passenger Service AMTRAK Trips 4 round trips per day Chicago- St. Louis Texas Eagle also operates Chicago- St. Louis- San Antonio Travel Time within Study Limits (no delay) MacArthur Bridge route 20 to 21 minutes (11.5 miles) Merchants Bridge route 26 to 27 minutes (10.8 miles) Route Determined by host freight railroad Terminal Railroad Associa on (TRRA) Exis ng Freight Service MacArthur Bridge Average of 50 trains per weekday Double track Merchants Bridge Average of 32 trains per weekday Double track Depending on type of train, some limita ons on two trains passing on bridge because of structural issues Exis ng Passenger Service Reliability Chicago - St. Louis 2013 On- Time Performance (Excludes Texas Eagle) 100.0% 90.0% 80.0% Average (84%) 70.0% 60.0% 50.0% 40.0% 30.0% 20.0% 10.0% 0.0% Exis ng Passenger Service Reliability Study area (11.5 miles) accounts for 4.1% of the overall 284- mile Chicago to St. Louis HSR corridor Based on December 2013 data, the study area accounted for: 7.0% of freight train- related delays to passenger service 1.9% of track and signal condi on- related delays to passenger service Baseline Year 2017 Exis ng passenger service with all commi ed improvements along the corridor: 4 High Speed Rail Round Trips (Chicago to St. Louis) 1 Amtrak Texas Eagle Round Trip Exis ng freight service Future No Build Year 2040 Proposed passenger service (per 2012 Tier 1 ROD) with all commi ed improvements along the corridor: 8 High Speed Rail Round Trips (Chicago to St. Louis) 2 Amtrak Texas Eagle Round Trips Expanded freight traffic Projected ~40% freight growth Alterna ves Range of Alterna ves To Consider Evaluate efficient and reliable routes across Mississippi River (new and exis ng) Upgrade and expand exis ng mainline tracks Opera onal improvements to interlockings within the St. Louis Terminal network Evaluate poten al grade separa ons and other crossing safety measures Improvements to exis ng bridges and other infrastructure Evaluate the feasibility of a new sta on between Alton and St. Louis Merchants Route Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) to south of WR Tower Improved connec on to the TRRA Merchants Bridge Rehabilita on of Merchants Bridge TRRA West Bank to St. Louis Gateway Sta on MacArthur Route UPRR to Q Tower TRRA from Q Tower to St. Louis Gateway Sta on New Mississippi River Bridge Tier 1 Op on 1A (2 track) Tier 1 Op on 1B (4 track) Safety Considera ons Roadway Grade Separa on Studies Niedringhaus Avenue Bissell Avenue Other Roadway Grade Crossing Safety Improvements Merchants Route (15 crossings) MacArthur Route (3 crossings) Proposed Screening Criteria DRAFT UNDER CONSIDERATION Overall Travel Length Reduce Travel Time Granite City to St. Louis Travel Time Geometric Design Speed Purpose and Need Improve Service Reliability Passenger Train Reliability Performance Freight Train Reliability Performance Highway - Rail Grade Crossings Enhance Safety Rail - Rail Grade Crossings Passenger Safety Pedestrian Safety Proposed Screening Criteria DRAFT UNDER CONSIDERATION Other Objec ves Cost Constructability Human Environment Cultural Environment Natural Environment Capital Cost Opera ng Costs Maintenance Costs Opera onal Impacts During Construc on Construc on Footprint Community Benefits Right- of- Way Impacts Residen al Areas Along Alignment Environmental Jus ce Considera ons Historic Proper es Parks and Trails Streams and Wetland Areas Floodplains Cri cal Habitat Areas Agency and Public Involvement Coordina on Coopera ng Agencies (Federal/State Regulatory Agencies) Local Governments Railroads and Other Property Owners Sec on 106 Consul ng Par es Other Interested Groups and Individuals Sec on 106 Na onal Historic Preserva on Act (1966) takes into account the effects of the undertaking on eligible or listed Na onal Register proper es. Affords the Advisory Council an opportunity to comment (www.achp.gov). Four Step Process: 1) Ini ate the process 2) Iden fy historic proper es 3) Assess effects of undertaking on historic proper es 4) Resolve any adverse effects We Need Your Input Please complete a comment form at the mee ng today. Visit the program website ü Leave a comment or ask a ques on ü Learn more about the project ü Sign up for the mailing list ü Learn about business opportuni es Thank you for par cipa ng This presenta on will begin again in a few minutes.
We Need Your Support
Thank you for visiting our website and your interest in our free products and services. We are nonprofit website to share and download documents. To the running of this website, we need your help to support us.

Thanks to everyone for your continued support.

No, Thanks