Multimodal Impact Network (min) Statement TransAmerica us 460 Corridor I. Introduction
Download 295.18 Kb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- B. Lead agency, participating agencies, and non-public participation
- C. Points of contact, address, e-mail
- D. Date prepared and dates that comments are due [if applicable] Draft version April 8, 2003 E. List of preparers
- II. Need and purpose of the multimodal system A. Provide summary of the need and purpose, including assessment of intermodal connectivity
- B. Identify relevant goals, objectives, performance measures, stakeholders
- C. Identify strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats (including socio-demographic trends)
- A. Provide summary rationale for the selected alternative, e.g., benefit-cost evaluation tbd B. Identify alternatives, including the no-action alternative
- C. Identify alternatives not explored below and explain why tbd D. Contrast alternatives with respect to goals, objectives, selected measures
- B. Identify constituent projects of the multimodal system
- District Route Description
- C. Describe government, private, stakeholder coordination and source(s) of funding and resources
- E. Describe interim assessment and evaluation plans
| Multimodal Impact Network (MIN) Statement
TransAmerica US 460 Corridor I. Introduction A. Overview of the multimodal system The proposed system will provide multimodal services on a corridor spanning the cities of Hampton Roads, Petersburg, Lynchburg, Roanoke, and Beckley, W.Va. System implementation will involve construction, upgrade, and operation of road, aviation, high-speed passenger rail, freight rail, transit, and port facilities. System alternatives focus on the order of construction of the many constituent projects. Locations: US 460 from Hampton Roads (Virginia Beach, Norfolk, Suffolk) to Petersburg to Lynchburg to Roanoke US 220 from Roanoke to Clifton Forge I-64 from Clifton Forge to Beckley, WV 
B. Lead agency, participating agencies, and non-public participation VDOT, VDRPT, DOAV, VPA, CSXT, NS, Maersk, ... As part of the I-66 Study, a broad array of opportunities will be provided to distribute information about the process and findings, as well as to solicit input, to relevant federal, state, and local agencies; other interested parties, and the public. Some of these opportunities include: Public Meetings/Hearings Local Advisory Committee Technical Committee Community /Stakeholder Briefings Newsletters Study Information Centers (Kiosks) Web Site Toll-Free Information Line Study Office The members of the local advisory committee are: Chair:
Members: Hon. Sean Connaughton Prince William County Hon. Gerald Connolly Fairfax County Hon. Michael R. Frey Fairfax County Hon. Katherine K. Hanley Fairfax County Hon. Robert F. Lederer City of Fairfax Hon. Edgar S. Wilbourn, III Prince William County Ex Officio: Karen J. Rae Director, DRPT James H. Offutt Citizen Representative Thomas F. Farley District Administrator, VDOT Northern Virginia District Richard A. White General Manager, Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) Source(s): I-66 Multimodal Transportation and Environmental Study, Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation C. Points of contact, address, e-mail VTrans 2025, statewideplan@virginiadot.org, (866) 835-6070 Study Office: 8403 Arlington Boulevard, First Floor, Suite 200, Fairfax, VA 22031 comments@infoi66.com
1-866-infoi66 or 1-866-463-6466 D. Date prepared and dates that comments are due [if applicable] Draft version April 8, 2003 E. List of preparers James Lambert F. Distribution list of agencies, organizations, others from whom comment is solicited tbd G. References, web sites, etc. Richmond to South Hampton Roads High-Sped Rail Feasibility Study, Prepared by Parsons Transportation Group for the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation, April 2002, www.drpt.state.va.us/resource/downloads.asp Transamerica Corridor Feasibility Study, Prepared by the Virginia Department of Transportation, May 1999, www.virginiadot.org/projects/pr-studiescorridor.asp City of Suffolk. (2003). Legislative Policies. Retrieved April 3, 2003, http://www.suffolk.va.us/citygovt/03legis_pkg.pdfTRB Committee A1E13. (2001, December). Research and Development in Intercity Rail Passenger Systems. Retrieved April 1, 2003, from http://gulliver.trb.org/publications/irps/irps_dec_2001.pdfU.S. Route 460 Communications Committee. (August 2001). Hampton Roads. Retrieved April 2, 2003, from http://dls.state.va.us/pubs/legisrec/2001/hjr684a.htm Routing of the Trans America Corridor (ISTEA/NHS/TEA-21). http://www.aaroads.com/high-priority/corr03.html. Accessed June, 2003 Federal Highway Administration. NHS High Priority Corridor Description. http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/hep10/nhs/hipricorridors/hpcor.html. Accessed June, 2003. Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transit. I-66 Multimodal Transportation and Environmental Study.http://www.infoi66.com/ . Accessed June, 2003. II. Need and purpose of the multimodal system A. Provide summary of the need and purpose, including assessment of intermodal connectivity Corridor 3 is also known as the Trans America Corridor. Starting in San Diego, California, and terminating in the Hampton Roads/Norfolk, Virginia Area, the Trans America Corridor is: From San Diego, Interstate 15 northeast to Barstow, California/Interstate 40 Interstate 40 east to Santa Rosa, New Mexico/U.S. 54 U.S. 54 northeast to Mullinville, Kansas/U.S. 400 U.S. 400 east to Joplin, Missouri/Interstate 44 Interstate 44 east to Springfield, Missouri/U.S. 60 U.S. 60 east to near Charleston, Missouri Missouri 80 east to the Mississippi River and Kentucky State Line Roughly Kentucky 80 across the southern tier of Kentucky (see below for more detail) U.S. 460 through Virginia to Norfolk/Hampton Roads Per its title, the Trans America Corridor route would connect the west coast to the east coast. In the ISTEA, NHS, and TEA-21 legislation, only the eastern two-thirds of the route is described in any detail. The legislation does not designate a western terminus for this route; however, recent maps show the corridor overlapping Corridor 16 (Interstates 15/40) through California and Arizona. The following map shows the approximate routing of the Trans America Corridor: The legislation language for Trans America Corridor 3 has been modified and refined significantly since it was first written in the ISTEA legislation in 1991. Originally, Corridor 3 was to be part of a new cross-country Interstate highway between Fresno, California, and Hampton Roads, Virginia, dubbed by some as Interstate 66. However, as the western states (such as California, Nevada, and Arizona) only provided lukewarm support during the 1990s, the eastern states clarified their preferred routing for Corridor 3. In addition, a million-dollar feasibility study indicated that some parts of the originally planned route were not necessary. The legal routing of Corridor 3 from TEA-21 (1998, amended in 2001) is as follows: Corridor 3 is the East-West Trans America Corridor commencing on the Atlantic Coast in the Hampton Roads area going westward across Virginia to the vicinity of Lynchburg, Virginia, continuing west to serve Roanoke and then to a West Virginia corridor centered around Beckley to Welch as part of the Coalfields Expressway described in section 1069(v), then to Williamson sharing a common corridor with the Interstate 73/74 Corridor (referred to in item 12 of the table contained in subsection (f)), then to a Kentucky Corridor centered on the cities of Pikeville, Jenkins, Hazard, London, and Somerset; then, generally following the Louie B. Nunn Parkway corridor from Somerset to Columbia, to Glasgow, to I-65; then to Bowling Green, Hopkinsville, Benton, and Paducah, into Illinois, and into Missouri and exiting western Missouri and moving westward across southern Kansas. Virginia The Trans America Corridor enters Virginia, specifically serving Covington, the Allegheny Highlands, Roanoke, Lynchburg, and the Hampton Roads. At Roanoke, the corridor will meet Interstate 73 (Corridor 5) again. The corridor description in TEA-21 does not mention Front Royal, Strasburg, or Washington, D.C., which shows that this corridor is not the same as the original Interstate 66 proposal. VDOT indicates that Corridor 3 in Virginia consists of Interstate 64 from Beckley, W. Va. to Clifton Forge, Va.; U.S. 220 from Clifton Forge to Roanoke, Va.; and U.S. 460 from Roanoke to Hampton Roads. One of the appropriations listed in TEA-21 is $500,000 to "conduct feasibility study for the construction of Interstate 66 from Lynchburg to the West Virginia border." Note that the language here refers to Interstate 66 and not Corridor 3. The trouble is, Interstate 66 already ends in Strasburg, not Lynchburg, and it is located several miles to the north. Perhaps the plan is to redesignate Interstate 66 along the specific definition of Corridor 3 (which comes no where near Washington, D.C.). Scott Dennis writes, "the Virginia Highway Department's web page does mention funding for studying Interstate 66 from 'Lynchburg' to West Virginia. That seems to be the intent of Congress critters who are, to be charitable, fairly ignorant about highway numbers." More information is available at the TransAmerica Corridor in Virginia (U.S. 460) web page available from VDOT. The page indicates that the $500,000 study has been completed. The National Highway System map of 1995 lists U.S. 460 across central Virginia as a high priority corridor. Bruce Harper points out, U.S. 460 works in the context of "Interstate" highway, in that it is a four-lane highway, some of it limited access, with bypasses around most major cities and towns, with the exception of Roanoke. Source(s): Routing of the Trans America Corridor US460 is a non-limited-access two and four-lane highway. Limited passenger rail service exists between western Richmond, Petersburg, and Hampton Roads. General aviation airports and smaller commercial airports lie along the route. Freight rail serves the port of Norfolk. US 460 can be upgraded to near-interstate standards. High-speed rail service can be provided between the Main Street Station in Richmond, Petersburg, and South Hampton Roads. A major eastern airport can be constructed in South Hampton Roads (Isle of Wight, Eastern Virginia International Airport). Increased rail capacity and new alignments can accommodate both expanding freight and passenger rail service. SEC. 1105. HIGH PRIORITY CORRIDORS ON NATIONAL HIGHWAY SYSTEM. (c) Identification of High Priority Corridors on National Highway System. The following are high priority corridors on the National Highway System: …
In the Commonwealth of Virginia, the Corridor shall generally follow-- United States Route 220 from the Virginia-North Carolina border to I-581 south of Roanoke; I-581 to I-81 in the vicinity of Roanoke; I-81 to the proposed highway to demonstrate intelligent transportation systems authorized by item 29 of the table in section 1107(b) in the vicinity of Christiansburg to United States Route 460 in the vicinity of Blacksburg; and United States Route 460 to the West Virginia State line. … Source(s): NHS High Priority Corridor Description, Federal Highway Administration The existing corridor is heavily congested and projected to get worse in the future. A first step in seeking relief is to identify, evaluate, and design transportation improvements that satisfy these future travel demands. The funding and construction of these improvements follow this step. In this Study, potential improvements will be identified, evaluated, and designed to a level of detail to assist with decision-making. Source(s): I-66 Multimodal Transportation and Environmental Study, Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation B. Identify relevant goals, objectives, performance measures, stakeholders Provide capacity for increased intermodal container traffic west of Hampton Roads and west of Petersburg (over 100 million tons of maritime freight using port, about 25% is diverted on the roadways) Reduce congestion for passengers and freight in south Hampton Roads (divert 12000-15000 vehicles per day from I-64 and the Hampton Roads crossings, trucks are 16 to 25% of US 460 vehicles) Provide alternative modes of transportation for passengers and freight Integrate Hampton Roads with the US northeast corridor transportation network Minimize end-to-end rail travel time Maximize rail capacity Provide fast, frequent, reliable, and comfortable passenger service Maintain and enhance the ability of the host railroads to move freight in the same corridor Minimize adverse environmental impacts along corridor Address worsening public safety concern along US460 (fatality rate of 4.9 per 100,000 compares poorly to state average of 1.7 per 100,000) Enhance economic prosperity south of the James River Enhance capabilities for hurricane evacuation from the Hampton Roads region VDOT studies show limited-access and local improvements with a benefit to cost ratio of 4.0 along US 460 corridor C. Identify strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats (including socio-demographic trends) tbd Socio-demographic trends have been identified as the growth of port-rail container traffic D. Identify precedents and lessons learned tbd III. Rationale for the selected alternative A. Provide summary rationale for the selected alternative, e.g., benefit-cost evaluation tbd B. Identify alternatives, including the no-action alternative Alternatives are being developed from the earlier MIS and I-66 scoping process and include: A No-Build Alternative (which includes area wide transit and highway improvements in the current Washington region Financially Constrained Long-Range Plan [CLRP]) A Transportation System Management (TSM) Alternative Transit (metrorail extension, VRE, bus) improvements High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lane improvements General purpose (normal travel) lane improvements The TSM alternative is a relatively low-cost alternative that attempts to address travel demand by improving the existing system through minor roadway, intersection and safety improvements, enhanced bus service, car or vanpooling strategies, and the use of ITS technology to better manage existing facilities. Alternatives that carry through the process may be a combination of those listed above, given multimodal nature of the preferred strategy from the MIS and the comments received during Scoping.
Corridor 3 is the East-West Trans America Corridor commencing on the Atlantic Coast in the Hampton Roads area going westward across Virginia to the vicinity of Lynchburg, Virginia, continuing west to serve Roanoke and then to a West Virginia corridor centered around Beckley to Welch as part of the Coalfields Expressway described in section 1069(v), then to Williamson sharing a common corridor with the Interstate 73/74 Corridor (referred to in item 12 of the table contained in subsection (f)), then to a Kentucky Corridor centered on the cities of Pikeville, Jenkins, Hazard, London, and Somerset; then, generally following the Louie B. Nunn Parkway corridor from Somerset to Columbia, to Glasgow, to I-65; then to Bowling Green, Hopkinsville, Benton, and Paducah, into Illinois, and into Missouri and exiting western Missouri and moving westward across southern Kansas. Source(s): Routing of the Trans America Corridor B. Identify constituent projects of the multimodal system Multiple roadway upgrades to bring US460 to near interstate standards Construct new 6000 ft runway at Hampton Roads airport Provide dedicated access/interchanges for the following general aviation and small commercial facilities: Blackstone Municipal Airport, Petersburg Airport, Wakefield Airport (runway protection zone necessitates realignment), Crewe Airport, Farmville Airport, Lynchburg-Falwell Airport, Lynchburg Regional Airport, Roanoke Airport Multiple rail upgrade (double stack, sidings, speeds) and realignment of Norfolk Southern and CSXT lines Passenger rail terminals APM Terminals (Maersk subsidiary) intermodal container port in Portsmouth (largest such private facility in the US) Intermodal container rail to port facility in Suffolk (Virginia Port Authority) Intermodal container rail to port facility in Petersburg (Richmond Ports Commission) Multiple rail-industrial development sites west of Petersburg
Source(s): VDOT Dashboard C. Describe government, private, stakeholder coordination and source(s) of funding and resources Norfolk Southern, CSXT, Richmond Ports Commission, Maersk, airport authorities, VDOT, FHWA D. Describe milestones, schedule, expenditures/resources, and project interdependencies The I-66 Study will lead to a Commonwealth Transportation Board decision on a preferred alternative in approximately three years. The Study consists of the following primary tasks. Study Scoping Transportation Analysis Alternatives Development/Refinement Conceptual Multimodal Engineering Environmental Impact Analysis Draft EIS Final EIS The time line remains unknown for finalizing the assessment of the preferred alternative in the Final EIS and obtaining a federal Record of Decision (ROD) on the study findings. A federal ROD is needed to dedicate funding and to continue into final engineering design and construction. 
Source(s): I-66 Multimodal Transportation and Environmental Study, Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation E. Describe interim assessment and evaluation plans tbd Directory: crmes -> multimodal -> downloads downloads -> Virginia Department of Aviation System Inventory downloads -> Virginia Department of Transportation System Inventory downloads -> VTrans2025 Multimodal Investment Network (min) Statement Route 64 Corridor I. Introduction multimodal -> Future Scenarios for Multimodal Transportation Planning Prepared for crmes -> Final contract report benefits estimates of highway capital improvements with uncertain parameters Download 295.18 Kb. Share with your friends:
|
