View
212
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
Salt Lake City Gateway Area
Railroad Consolidation Project
Grant G. Schultz, Ph.D., P.E.,
PTOEAssistant Professor
Brigham Young University
CE En 361
October 1, 2004
2
Topics of Discussion
• Background on the creation and development of the Gateway Railroad Consolidation Project
• The environmental approval process
• Project results• Lessons Learned
3
A Multi-Modal Project...
• Freeways• Surface Streets• Freight Rail• Commuter Rail• Passenger Rail• Light Rail
4
A Multi-Jurisdictional Project...
• Salt Lake City• Utah Department of
Transportation• Utah Transit Authority• Federal Highway Administration• Federal Transit Administration
5
Salt Lake Gateway Project
Area
• Approximately 800 Acres West of the Salt Lake City Central Business District
6
Salt Lake Gateway Project
Area
• An area of declining rail-served industrial uses
7
Salt Lake Gateway Project
Area
• An area of opportunity for expansion of commercial, light industrial and residential land uses
8
Salt Lake Gateway Project
Area
• Challenges– Freeway viaducts inhibited access to the area
9
Salt Lake Gateway Project
Area
• Challenges– Railroad spurs in 400 and 500 West
10
Salt Lake Gateway Project
Area
• Challenges– Rail traffic blocked streets on at-grade crossings
11
Gateway Project Creation
• 1994, Visionary Gateway Plan– Created public and political support for the idea of consolidating rail lines, shortening the 400 South, 500 South
and 600 South viaducts– Developed land use concepts for the area, including the opportunity for an Intermodal Center
12
Gateway Project Creation
• 1995, Rail Consolidation Implementation Study – Created an implementation plan for
shortening the viaducts and consolidating rail lines
– Required the construction of a new station and track to house Amtrak
– Consultant recommendations on cost-sharing for the project
13
Gateway Project
Creation
• June 16, 1995, Salt Lake City awarded 2002 Olympic Winter Games– Increased urgency to complete
projects – Opportunity for funding increased
14
Gateway Project Creation
• 1996, Contracts Awarded for Construction of North/South Light Rail Line– Northern terminus of the line at
the Delta Center, in the Gateway area
15
• March, 1996; Decision to use Design/Build process for reconstruction of I-15 through the Salt Lake Valley
• October, 1996; I-15 Reconstruction Bid Package was released– Included Option B to shorten the
viaducts to downtown Salt Lake City– Option had to be exercised by the Utah
Department of Transportation by November 1, 1997
Gateway Project
Creation
16
• March, 1997; Approval to proceed on preparation of environmental documents for the viaduct shortening and Intermodal Center– Prior to November 1, 1997:
•Completion of the environmental process •Agreement with all parties involved
– UDOT, Salt Lake City, UTA, Union Pacific Railroad, Amtrak, Cereal Food, Holnam Cement, Tenneco Packaging, Mountain Cement, NAC
Gateway Project
Creation
17
• 1997; Gateway Land Use Master Plan– Creation of a land use master
plan for the 800 acre Gateway area
– Accessibility of this area is a major focal point to the master plan
Gateway Project
Creation
18
• 1997, West/East LRT MIS/EIS– Preferred Alternative was a
west/east light rail line running from the airport to the University of Utah
– Preferred alignment passes through the Gateway Area – requires shortening the viaducts
Gateway Project
Creation
19
• 1997, Commuter Rail Study– Commuter Rail is feasible – need
for a station in the Gateway Area
Gateway Project
Creation
20
Environmental Analysis
• Two separate environmental documents – Viaduct Shortening – FHWA
(remember – option must be exercised by November 1, 1997)
– Intermodal Center - FTA
21
Viaduct Environmental
• Key issues– Traffic operations– Business access– Remove rail from 400 W. and 500 W.– Accommodate rail service to shippers
•Holnam Cement•Cereal Food Processors•PCA Tenneco•Amtrak
22
Viaduct Environmental
• Holnam Cement
23
Viaduct Environmental
• Cereal Food Processors
24
Viaduct Environmental
• PCA Tenneco
25
Viaduct Environmental
• Amtrak
26
Viaduct Environmental
• Results– Negotiated with shippers to
resolve rail service issues– Analyzed traffic operations which
indicated traffic can be accommodated
– Received a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) in October 1997•Met November 1 deadline!
27
Intermodal Center Environmental
• Key Issues:– Modes to be included at the site– Location– Hazardous Waste– Historical Properties
28
Intermodal Center Environmental
• Initially a mono-modal site for relocating Amtrak as part of the viaduct shortening and track consolidation
• Developed into a true Intermodal Center
• Commuter rail study had identified the need for a Gateway station
• Greyhound was losing their lease in their downtown location
29
Intermodal Center Environmental
• Four sites evaluated for location of Intermodal Center– Union Pacific Depot– Rio Grande Depot– 600 West/South Temple– 200 South/600 West
30
Intermodal Center Environmental
• Union Pacific Depot
31
Intermodal Center Environmental
• Rio Grande Depot
32
Intermodal Center Environmental
• 200 South/600 West
33
Intermodal Center Environmental
Location Alternative/Criteria 1a. 1b. 2. 3. 4a. 4b.
Remove heavy rail lines and at-grade rail crossings east of UP mainline.
- - N Y Y Y
Relocate Amtrak within construction timeframe. Y Y - Y Y Y
Federal funding available. N N N N Y Y
Within 1,200 feet of LRT Connection or final destination. N N N - - Y
North Temple underpass or overpass must be reconstructed with 400 West intersection remaining.
N X Y N Y Y
Must provide 800 feet of platform length for RCR. X Y X Y Y Y
Must provide 1,500 feet of platform length for Amtrak. X X X X Y Y
Must use technology compatible for use on existing freight rail lines.
Y Y Y Y Y Y
Land must be available within construction timeframe. X X Y N Y Y
XPotential Fatal Flaw - Disadvantage N Neutral Y Advantage
1a. Union Pacific Depot Head-In Station 1b. Union Pacific Depot Parallel Platform 2. Rio Grande Depot Head-In Station 3. 600 West South Temple Commuter Rail 200 South 600 West Amtrak 4a. 200 South 600 West Intermodal Center without LRT Connection 4b. 200 South 600 West Intermodal Center with LRT Connection
34
• Results– Staff recommended site at
200 South/600 West– City Council voted in favor of site– EA document completed to
include all modes– Finding of No Significant Impact
(FONSI) received October 21, 1998
Intermodal Center Environmental
35
Gateway Area Map
36
Project Results
• Viaduct shortening– Signed agreements with all
shippers to sever or relocate rail service January 1, 1999
– Constructed the Cereal Foods rail spur
– Viaducts designed and constructed for the shortened lengths
37
Project Results
• Viaduct shortening
38
Project Results
• Intermodal Center– Environmental document
approved October 21, 1998– Temporary Amtrak Station
currently being used– Final design approved and under
construction
39
Project Results
• Intermodal Center
40
Project Results
• Intermodal Center
41
Project Results
• Intermodal Center
42
Project Results
• Intermodal Center
43
Project Results
• Intermodal Center
44
Project Results
• Intermodal Center Before
Today
45
Project Results
• Gateway Land Use– ‘Bridges’ five acre development
proposed west of Intermodal site– ‘Gateway’ 40 acre development
west of and incorporating the historic Union Pacific depot
– Reuse of existing warehouses to retail and housing uses
46
Project Results
47
Project Results
• Gateway Land Use
48
Project Results
• Gateway Land Use
49
Project Results
• Gateway Land Use
50
• Gateway Land Use
Project Results
51
• Gateway Land Use
Project Results
52
The Gateway
53
The Gateway
54
Project Results
• Commuter Rail– Weber County to Salt Lake Draft
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) completed
– Review currently underway– Trains could start rolling into the
station as soon as 2007
55
Project Results
56
Project Results
57
Project Results
• Commuter Rail– Included as an alternative for the
I-15 Corridor Utah County – Salt Lake County EIS
– Studying corridor from Salt Lake City to Santaquin
• Light Rail– Several projects currently being
evaluated
58
Project Results
• I-15 Corridor Utah County – Salt Lake County Study Area
59
Lessons Learned
• Make no small plans.…• One project begets another...• Develop public support for
your project• Have the Olympics come to
your community!
60
Transportation Planningat BYU
• Urban Transportation Planning (CEEn 565) Fall semester– Keep your text!
• Site Transportation Planning (CEEn 594R/564) Winter semester– Prerequisite CEEn 562
• Traffic Engineering (CEEn 562) Fall semester