Norfolk Southern/Conrail Rail ConnectionâBucyrus, Ohio - Surface ...
Norfolk Southern/Conrail Rail ConnectionâBucyrus, Ohio - Surface ...
Norfolk Southern/Conrail Rail ConnectionâBucyrus, Ohio - Surface ...
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