Agenda Agenda hour open house (5:00 5:30) h h (5 00 5 30) - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Agenda Agenda

½ h h (5 00 5 30)

• ½ hour open house (5:00‐5:30)
• ½ hour presentation (5:30‐6:00)
• ½ hour Q&A (6:00‐6:30)
• ½ hour open house (6:30‐7:00)

½ hour open house (6:30 7:00)

Milwaukee‐Twin Cities High‐Speed Rail Corridor Program

Milwaukee‐Twin Cities High‐Speed Rail Corridor Program High‐Speed Rail Corridor Program

Stakeholders

• Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) is the lead for the

Milwaukee‐Twin Cities High‐Speed Rail Corridor Program in partnership with Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WisDOT)

• Federal Railroad Administration
• Host Railroads:

– Canadian Pacific Railway Canadian Pacific Railway – Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad – Union Pacific Railroad – Others as required by project alternatives q y p j

• Freight/Passenger Rail Operators:

– Canadian Pacific Railway – Burlington Northern Santa Fe Burlington Northern Santa Fe – Canadian National Railway – Union Pacific Railroad – Wisconsin and Southern Railroad – Amtrak

Milwaukee‐Twin Cities High‐Speed Rail Corridor Program

Midwest Regional Rail Initiative

Milwaukee‐Twin Cities High‐Speed Rail Corridor Program

Midwest High‐Speed Rail Midwest High Speed Rail

• Higher maximum speeds than conventional intercity

passenger rail (maximum of 110 mph) passenger rail (maximum of 110 mph)

• Diesel/electric locomotive engines
• Shared track with existing freight lines

Shared track with existing freight lines

• Requires infrastructure improvements

– Improved Railroad signaling – Track materials and geometry standards – Safety equipment at roadway crossings

• Rail stations located at optimal transportation junctions

Rail stations located at optimal transportation junctions

Milwaukee‐Twin Cities High‐Speed Rail Corridor Program

NEPA Process Overview

• Tier 1 EIS for Milwaukee‐Twin Cities Corridor

– Public Involvement Plan P d N d – Purpose and Need – Alternatives Analysis

• Identification of Potential Passenger Rail Alternatives
• Public/Agency Involvement
• Public/Agency Involvement
• Identification of Reasonable and Feasible Passenger Rail Alternatives
• Public Involvement

– Draft Tier I EIS – Public Involvement – Identification of Preferred Passenger Rail Alternative – Final Tier 1 EIS Final Tier 1 EIS – Record of Decision

Milwaukee‐Twin Cities High‐Speed Rail Corridor Program

Public Involvement Plan

• NEPA Public Involvement Process

Notice of Intent to Prepare Tier 1 EIS Scoping Process Prepare Draft Tier 1 EIS Notice of Availability of Draft Tier 1 EIS Public Comments Respond to Public Comments and Notice of Availability of Record of Accepted Prepare Final Tier 1 EIS Availability of Final Tier 1 EIS Decision Milwaukee‐Twin Cities High‐Speed Rail Corridor Program

Project Purpose and Need Project Purpose and Need

• The proposed action is to construct and operate high‐speed

passenger rail service between Milwaukee and Twin Cities passenger rail service between Milwaukee and Twin Cities

• Purpose is to meet future regional travel demand and provide

intermodal connectivity to existing and planned transportation systems in Minnesota and Wisconsin

• Need is driven by the limitations and vulnerabilities of

available travel modes in the corridor to meet future travel available travel modes in the corridor to meet future travel demand

Milwaukee‐Twin Cities High‐Speed Rail Corridor Program

Project Purpose and Need Project Purpose and Need

• The need for the proposed action exists because:

– Travel demand is projected to increase within the corridor placing a Travel demand is projected to increase within the corridor placing a significant burden on existing transportation infrastructure; – Competitive and attractive alternative modes of travel do not exist in the corridor; the corridor; – Transportation systems require improved reliability to meet future demand; Intermodal connectivity between rail and other forms of – Intermodal connectivity between rail and other forms of transportation are limited and require further development to meet future travel demand.

Milwaukee‐Twin Cities High‐Speed Rail Corridor Program

Alternatives Analysis Overview

Obj i

• Objectives:

– Identify universe of routes – Identify potential passenger rail alternatives y p p g – Identify reasonable and feasible passenger rail alternatives

• Project Study Area:

P i l id tifi d d th C ti A t N DTFR53 – Previously identified under the Cooperative Agreement No. DTFR53‐ 09‐H‐0009 between the FRA and WisDOT (MWRRI Phase 7)

• Universe of Route Alternatives:

– Logical termini:

• Milwaukee Intermodal Station
• Minneapolis Transportation Interchange via St. Paul Union Depot

– Project Corridor

• 25 Routes between termini

– Baseline Route

• Milwaukee, WI‐Madison, WI‐Tomah, WI‐La Crosse, WI‐

Red Wing, MN‐St. Paul, MN‐Minneapolis, MN

Milwaukee‐Twin Cities High‐Speed Rail Corridor Program

Project Study Area

Milwaukee‐Twin Cities High‐Speed Rail Corridor Program

Identification of the Universe of Routes

Milwaukee‐Twin Cities High‐Speed Rail Corridor Program

Initial Identification of Potential Passenger Rail Alternatives R t Alt ti D l t

• Route Alternatives Development

– Determine Track Segments (34 segments) – Determine Routes from Segment Combinations (25 Routes)

Milwaukee‐Twin Cities High‐Speed Rail Corridor Program

Initial Identification of Potential Passenger Rail Alternatives Passenger Rail Alternatives

Milwaukee‐Twin Cities High‐Speed Rail Corridor Program

Initial Identification of Potential Passenger Rail Alternatives E l ti t id tif t ti l il

• Evaluation to identify potential passenger rail

alternatives

• Evaluation Criteria

– Route Distance – Route Population – Route Defects

• Compare to baseline route

Milwaukee‐Twin Cities High‐Speed Rail Corridor Program

Initial Identification of Potential Passenger Rail Alternatives g

Route Distance Summary Route Population Summary

Milwaukee‐Twin Cities High‐Speed Rail Corridor Program

Initial Identification of Potential P R il Al i

Route Population Sample Map

Passenger Rail Alternatives

Milwaukee‐Twin Cities High‐Speed Rail Corridor Program

Initial Identification of Potential P R il Al i Passenger Rail Alternatives

Untenable Defects Sample: Elroy, WI

Route Numbers Description City Segment 15, 16, 17, 21, and 25 Commercial & residential buildings within the abandoned right-of-way Elroy, WI Reedsburg, WI- Sparta, WI

Milwaukee‐Twin Cities High‐Speed Rail Corridor Program

Initial Identification of Potential Passenger Rail Alternatives

Evaluation Matrix Sample

Milwaukee‐Twin Cities High‐Speed Rail Corridor Program

Initial Identification of Potential Passenger Rail Alternatives Alternatives

Milwaukee‐Twin Cities High‐Speed Rail Corridor Program

Identification of Reasonable and Feasible Passenger Rail Alternatives (Proposed Passenger Rail Alternatives (Proposed Methodology)

• Each potential passenger rail alternative is subject to

p p g j a more robust and quantitative evaluation

• Evaluation criteria:
• 1. Route Characteristics
• Number of Tracks

H i t l/ ti l t

• Horizontal/vertical curvature
• Significant grades
• Miles/percent of single vs. double track
• Miles/percent abandoned and out‐of‐service track
• Miles/percent Class 1 main vs. regional/shortline

Milwaukee‐Twin Cities High‐Speed Rail Corridor Program

Identification of Reasonable and Feasible Passenger Rail Alternatives (Proposed Passenger Rail Alternatives (Proposed Methodology)

• Evaluation criteria:

Evaluation criteria:

• 2. Travel Time
• At 110 mph accounting for recovery, dwell and handoffs
• 3. Market Size
• Population centers served
• 20‐mile bandwidth
• 20‐mile bandwidth
• Intermodal stations outside terminal area
• 4. Capital cost (order of magnitude)
• Cost upgrade to HSR
• Cost of additional right‐of‐way
• Cost to acquire railroad right‐of‐way

Cost to acquire railroad right of way

• Cyclical capital costs

Milwaukee‐Twin Cities High‐Speed Rail Corridor Program

Identification of Reasonable and Feasible Passenger Rail Alternatives (Proposed Passenger Rail Alternatives (Proposed Methodology)

E l ti it i

• Evaluation criteria:
• 5. Operating Costs

6 Safety

• 6. Safety
• Number of rail‐rail crossings
• Number of at‐grade crossings
• 7. Reliability
• Freight conflicts (yards, etc.)
• Shared track use

Shared track use

• Track handoffs
• Train control

P bli hi f R

• Public ownership of Route

Milwaukee‐Twin Cities High‐Speed Rail Corridor Program

Identification of Reasonable and Feasible Passenger Rail Alternatives (Proposed Passenger Rail Alternatives (Proposed Methodology)

• Evaluation criteria:
• Evaluation criteria:
• 8. System Connectivity
• Commuter rail use
• Modal connections
• 9. Potential impact to environmental features

Fl d l i

• Floodplains
• Wetlands
• Threatened and Endangered Species
• Cultural resources
• 4(f)/6(f) protected property
• Environmental Justice

Environmental Justice

• Hazardous Materials

Milwaukee‐Twin Cities High‐Speed Rail Corridor Program

Identification of Reasonable and Feasible Passenger Rail Alternatives (Proposed Passenger Rail Alternatives (Proposed Methodology)

• Results

– Evaluation Matrix – Draft Alternatives Selection Report – Public Involvement Meetings – Final Alternatives Selection Report d ifi i f bl d ibl il – Identification of Reasonable and Feasible Passenger Rail Alternatives for further analysis in Tier 1 EIS

Milwaukee‐Twin Cities High‐Speed Rail Corridor Program

Identification of Preferred Passenger Rail Alternative (Proposed Methodology) Alternative (Proposed Methodology)

• Evaluation of reasonable and feasible passenger rail

alternatives and a no build alternative within the Tier 1 alternatives and a no build alternative within the Tier 1 EIS document

• Evaluation based on:
• Evaluation based on:

– Conceptual Engineering – Track Concepts

• Environmental Analysis
• Ridership

Track Concepts – Capital Cost Estimate – Station Location Analysis

• Operating Costs
• Assessment of Benefits
• Preparation of Draft Tier 1 EIS
• Identification of the preferred passenger rail alternative

p p g

Milwaukee‐Twin Cities High‐Speed Rail Corridor Program

Service Development Plan Service Development Plan

• A Service Development Plan is produced for the

f d l i d i l d h f ll i preferred alternative and includes the following information:

Forecasted ridership – Forecasted ridership – Operating plan and costs – Assessment of benefits Assessment of benefits – Financial plan – Station location analysis

Milwaukee‐Twin Cities High‐Speed Rail Corridor Program

Schedule of Activities Project Milestones Project Milestones

• Project Work Plan – January 2011
• Final Purpose and Need – January 2011
• Public Involvement Plan – January 2011
• Alternative Selection Report – February 2011
• Draft Conceptual Engineering Report – June 2011
• Final Conceptual Engineering Report – July 2011
• Draft Tier 1 EIS – August 2011
• Approval of Draft Tier 1 EIS – February 2012
• Identification of Preferred Passenger Rail

Milwaukee‐Twin Cities High‐Speed Rail Corridor Program

g Alternative – February 2012

Schedule of Activities Project Milestones Project Milestones

• Final Service Development Plan – April 2012

p p

• Final Tier 1 EIS – April 2012
• Draft Record of Decision – May 2012

y

• Final Record of Decision – July 2012

Milwaukee‐Twin Cities High‐Speed Rail Corridor Program

Comments Comments

Mn/DOT in partnership with WisDOT and the Federal Mn/DOT in partnership with WisDOT and the Federal Railroad Administration request your comments on the Draft Purpose and Need and the scope of the project for p p p j the Milwaukee‐Twin Cities High‐Speed Rail Corridor Program – Website:

www.dot.state.mn.us/passengerrail/mwrri/phase7.html

Milwaukee‐Twin Cities High‐Speed Rail Corridor Program