01.08.2014 Views

Norfolk Southern/Conrail Rail Connection–Bucyrus, Ohio - Surface ...

Norfolk Southern/Conrail Rail Connection–Bucyrus, Ohio - Surface ...

Norfolk Southern/Conrail Rail Connection–Bucyrus, Ohio - Surface ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

CHAPTER 2<br />

Alternative Actions Considered<br />

This chapter outlines the alternatives considered for the proposed connection.<br />

2.1 NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE<br />

In its environmental review, SEA considered a “no-action” alternative. Under this alternative, current<br />

operations would continue to move over existing NS and <strong>Conrail</strong> rail lines. However, as outlined<br />

below, access between the two lines would be limited to existing connections, interchanges, or terminals.<br />

If the “no-action” alternative were implemented, the proposed connection would not be constructed and<br />

trains would not be rerouted. None of the potential environmental impacts associated with construction<br />

would occur. However, neither would the benefits of the project be realized. According to NS, in the<br />

absence of the proposed connection, trains traveling from Columbus, <strong>Ohio</strong> to eastern <strong>Ohio</strong> and western<br />

Pennsylvania would have to go through Cleveland and Bellevue, <strong>Ohio</strong> a more circuitous (by<br />

approximately 70 miles), rail-congested, and populated route. This alternative would not provide the<br />

full operational, environmental and economic benefits, including added rail capacity and improved<br />

service to shippers, possible through the proposed connection.<br />

2.2 BUILD ALTERNATIVES<br />

SEA identified no feasible alternatives to new construction for the Bucyrus site. The study team<br />

considered variations of alignments; however, none were reasonable or technically feasible and were<br />

not developed further as alternatives. Two build alternatives were further evaluated based on<br />

consideration of the constraints unique to the proposed project area (Figure 2.1). A description of the<br />

location of each alternative route follows.<br />

Alternative A, the preferred connection, would diverge to the north-northeast from the existing<br />

north/south NS rail line approximately 450 feet north of Woodlawn Avenue. Alternative A would cross<br />

East Warren Street, resulting in an expanded grade crossing. Alternative A would continue to the<br />

northeast and cross Rensselaer Street approximately 230 feet east of the existing NS grade crossing<br />

(resulting in a new at-grade crossing). Alternative A would cross the property where the former T&OC<br />

freight depot stands, curve to the northeast, pass through the Quinn Brothers Construction Company<br />

yard, curve to the east and parallel the existing <strong>Conrail</strong> line for approximately 1,000 feet, and then<br />

connect with the <strong>Conrail</strong> line 200 feet west of Whetstone Street. The former T&OC freight depot and<br />

Quinn Brothers Construction Company one-story office building on the north side of Rensselaer Street<br />

would be demolished. The construction company’s storage yard, where the office building is also<br />

located, would be cleared. Alternative A would not require the removal or relocation of any residences.<br />

An alternative alignment for the connection, Alternative B, is located southeast of the existing <strong>Conrail</strong><br />

and NS crossing and would encompass an area approximately 2,780 feet by 100 feet. It would diverge<br />

from the existing north/south NS track about 400 feet south of Alternative A and about 50 feet north<br />

of Woodlawn Avenue. As this alternative extends northeast, it would cross East Warren Street,<br />

2-1

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!