ENVIRONMENTAL 

CONSEQUENCES

Section 5

5. Environmental Consequences
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-1 Tier 2 Draft Document 

 

5.0 Environmental Consequences 

The environmental impacts for each of the reasonable alternatives were assessed as

defined by the FRA’s Procedures for Considering Environmental Impacts, resource

agency input, and public comments.  Field surveys were conducted for resources that

have a potential for impacts.  Surveys were conducted for ambient conditions for noise

and vibration modeling, historic structures and archaeological sites, endangered and

threatened species, and wetlands.  Newsletters, a project website, telephone call‐in

numbers and numerous community presentations were provided for interested

neighborhood groups throughout the project area to solicit comments and feedback

from the public. Refer to Chapter 6.0 for additional information on the public

involvement program.  

Table 5‐1 summarizes the environmental impacts of Alternatives 2A and 2B for further

study.  The methodology used for the resources having potential impacts is discussed in

Section 4.0. Access changes will result in modifications to existing access but there will

be no permanent access loss to these properties.  

Table 5‐1. Environmental Impact Summary of Alternatives 2A and 2B  

Impact Category

Alternative No‐Build

Alternative 2A 2B

Right‐of‐Way Acquisition (Acres) 42.0 42.6 0

Displacements 157 164 0

     Residential 108 108 0

     Commercial 49 56 0

Access Changes 29 41 0

Farmland Conversion (Acres) 0 0 0

Cultural Resources      

     National Register Listed (or Eligible) Sites 0 1(3) 0

     Known Archaeological Sites 0 0 0

Natural Resources      

     Threatened/Endangered Species  (Number of

Species) 0 0 0

     Natural Areas (Number) 0 0 0

     Native Vegetation (Acres) 0 0 0

   
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-2 Tier 2 Draft Document 

 

Impact Category

Alternative No‐Build

Alternative 2A 2B

Affected Lakes and Streams 0 0 0

100‐yr. Floodplains Crossings 0 0 0

Wetlands (Acres) 0 0 0

Parks (Number) 0 0 0

Special Waste Sites (Number within one block)      

    CERCLIS(1) 2 2 0

    LUST(2) 20 20 0

(1)Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Information System.  

(2)Leaking Underground Storage Tank.

(3) Current access to the Great Western Railroad Depot will be relocated to the west along the same block. Therefore,

there will be no permanent impact to this structure.   

Alternatives 2A and 2B are shown in Exhibits 5‐1 and 5‐2. Exhibit 5‐2 only includes the

sheets where Alternatives 2A and 2B differ. The differences for Alternative 2B are noted.  

5.1 Land Use Impacts 

5.1.1 No-Build Alternative 

Rail service for the No‐Build Alternative would continue along the existing three rail

corridors that are present today (i.e., 3rd Street, 10th Street and 19th Street).  Land use

opportunities would remain more limited with three active railroad corridors than with

either of the retained alternatives due to the increase in traffic congestion, delay times,

safety and noise impacts.  In addition, with rail traffic remaining on the 3rd Street

corridor, as in the No‐Build Alternative, expansion of the Medical District would be

hindered with this rail corridor bisecting future plans for their additional facilities.  

Additional right‐of‐way requirements would also affect more businesses with impacts to

potential expansion, parking, access, and relocation.

Access and close proximity to National Register Historic sites such as the Dana‐Thomas

House would also result in a negative impact to tourism because of reduced parking and

safety of crossing the tracks and its associated noise from train horns.  This alternative is

not supported by the Springfield Chamber of Commerce and negatively impacts the

Springfield 2030 Comprehensive Plan, the area’s Long Range Transportation Plan, the

R/UDAT Downtown Redevelopment Plan, as well as the state commissioned Mid‐

Illinois Medical District’s Master Plan.  
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-3 

Exhibit 5‐1. Alternative 2A and 2B – Key Map
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-4 

Exhibit 5‐1A. Alternative 2A
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-5 

Exhibit 5‐1B. Alternative 2A
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-6 

Exhibit 5‐1C. Alternative 2A
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-7 

Exhibit 5‐1D. Alternative 2A
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-8 

Exhibit 5‐1E. Alternative 2A
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-9 

Exhibit 5‐1F. Alternative 2A
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-10 

Exhibit 5‐1G. Alternative 2A
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-11 

Exhibit 5‐1H. Alternative 2A
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-12 

Exhibit 5‐1I. Alternative 2A
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-13 

Exhibit 5‐1J. Alternative 2A
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-14 

Exhibit 5‐1K. Alternative 2A
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-15 

Exhibit 5‐1L. Alternative 2A
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-16 

Exhibit 5‐2A. Alternative 2B
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-17 

Exhibit 5‐2B. Alternative 2B
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-18 

Exhibit 5‐2C. Alternative 2B
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-19 Tier 2 Draft Document 

 

5.1.2 Alternatives 2A/2B 

The relocation of the 3rd Street Corridor to the 10th Street Corridor for Alternative 2A or

2B would allow for the expansion of businesses and the Medical District along 3rd Street.  

Other opportunities would also be possible along the abandoned 3rd Street Corridor,

such as a city‐wide pedestrian/bike path or parkway for additional green space.  This

enhancement to the community could provide the opportunity for businesses to cater to

needs of additional visitors to the Downtown area and the Lincoln sites.  In addition, a

multimodal facility, consisting of a train station and transit hub for buses and taxi

service, has been planned by the City of Springfield for the 10th Street Corridor.  This

facility is intended to provide services and jobs to Springfield’s east side.  This complex

is proposed to be constructed on about four city blocks and may contain restaurants,

shops, office space, a daycare facility, meeting rooms, and parking.  This facility

conforms to the city’s Downtown Redevelopment Plan and Springfield’s 2030

Comprehensive Plan.  

About 108 residences and 50 commercial businesses may be relocated as a result of the

construction of Alternative 2A or 2B. These relocations are a result of about 42 acres of

right‐of‐way required for the additional railroad tracks necessary for the project.

Springfield has sufficient comparable housing and commercial space available for these

relocatees. Right‐of‐way purchases would be conducted in compliance with the Uniform

Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (Uniform

Relocation Act) (Title 42 United States Code Sections 4601‐4655), as amended, and the

U.S. Department of Transportation implementing regulations, which apply to all federal

or federally assisted activities that involve the acquisition of real property or the

displacement of residences or businesses.  IDOT would implement the provisions of the

State of Illinois Relocation Assistance Plan in accordance with the Uniform Relocation

Act.     

5.2 Socioeconomics and Environmental Justice 

5.2.1 Displacements 

The No‐Build Alternative would not result in any residential or commercial

displacements.

Table 5‐1 depicts the number of residential and commercial displacement for each of the

build alternatives.  Also shown are the number of properties which would have their

existing street access changed.  Most of these access changes are because of grade

separations and would reduce the number of access points to the property. Table 5‐2

lists all of the proposed residential and commercial displacements of the retained

alternatives. The displacement numbers can be referenced in Exhibit 5‐1 and 5‐2.   

5.2.1.1 Environmental Justice and Title VI

In accordance with the U. S. Dot Order 1510.2, compliance with Executive Order (EO)

12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority and Low‐Income

Populations (EA 1994) directs federal agencies to “promote nondiscrimination in federal
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-20 Tier 2 Draft Document 

 

programs substantially affecting human health and the environment, and provide

minority and low‐income communities access to public information on, and an

opportunity for public participation in matters relating to human health or the

environment.”   The EO directs agencies to use existing laws to ensure that when they

act:

 They do not discriminate on the basis of race, color, or national origin;

 They identify and address disproportionately high and adverse human health or

environmental efforts of their actions on minority and low‐income communities;

and

 They provide opportunities for community input during the National

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process, including input on potential efforts and

mitigation measures.

Road closures along the retained alternatives are primarily in industrial areas where the

business would be displaced and moved to a new location or access would not require

adverse travel.

Of the proposed road closures mentioned in Section 5.1.4, only a few are within

residential neighborhoods that contain a predominance minority and/or low‐income

populations.  Adverse travel is the additional length of roadway a motorist must travel

due to a closed road. Adverse travel for these residents would be limited to no more

than one block at the most, except for the area between Reservoir Street and Enterprise

Street.  This two block area also contains Division Street and all three streets are

proposed to close under Alternative 2B.  Residents within this area may encounter up to

a maximum of eight blocks of adverse travel under Alternative 2B if their destination is

located immediately across the proposed rail corridor.  This adverse travel would only

be borne by residential visits, which is presumed to be negligible.  Adverse travel

resulting from road closures is not a factor for residents going shopping or for

emergency services, or access to public facilities since the primary east‐west arterial is

North Grand Avenue located one block north of Reservoir Street.   

Residential and business relocations will likely affect a small percentage of minority

and/or low‐income individuals, however the cumulative impacts are not anticipated to

be disproportionate for the retained alternatives (2A or 2B) (see Section 4.2.5).  The No‐

Build Alternative will not directly impact minority or low income populations with

displacements, however increasing train frequency and longer duration of train horn

noise will create additional impacts.  
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-21 Tier 2 Draft Document 

 

Table 5‐2.  Residential and Commercial Displacements

Displacement No. (2A & 2B) Street Address

R160 1731 S 9TH STREET  

C87 900 E LAUREL

C88 1716 S 10 1/2 STREET

C89 1013 E LAUREL  

R161 1015 E LAUREL  

R162 1017 E LAUREL

R163 1019 E LAUREL

R164 1021 E LAUREL

R165 1023 E LAUREL  

C90 1011 E LAUREL

Displacement No. (2A & 2B) Street Address

C42 906 E ASH  

R47 2110 S 9TH STREET  

R48 2114 S 9TH STREET  

C43 1008 E ASH

Displacement No. (2A & 2B) Street Address

R14 1020 E NORTH GRAND AVENUE  

C6 1024 E NORTH GRAND AVENUE  

R15 1010 E NORTH GRAND AVENUE  

Displacement No. (2A & 2B) Street Address

R54 1308 E NORTH GRAND AVENUE  

R55 1310 E NORTH GRAND AVENUE  

R56 1320 E NORTH GRAND AVENUE  

R57 1322 E NORTH GRAND AVENUE  

R58 1326 E NORTH GRAND AVENUE  

R59 1328 E NORTH GRAND AVENUE  

R60 1330 E NORTH GRAND AVENUE  

R61 1332 E NORTH GRAND AVENUE  

R62 1334 E NORTH GRAND AVENUE  

R63 1336 E NORTH GRAND AVENUE  

R64 1338 E NORTH GRAND AVENUE  

R65 1340 E NORTH GRAND AVENUE  

R66 1404 E NORTH GRAND AVENUE  

R67 1408 E NORTH GRAND AVENUE  
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-22 Tier 2 Draft Document 

 

R68 1412 E NORTH GRAND AVENUE  

C50 1613 E NORTH GRAND AVENUE  

C51 1615 E NORTH GRAND AVENUE  

R69 1627 E NORTH GRAND AVENUE  

R70 1633 E NORTH GRAND AVENUE  

C52 1635 E NORTH GRAND AVENUE  

R71 1631 E NORTH GRAND AVENUE  

R72 1321 N 15TH STREET  

Displacement No. (2B) Street Address

C84 1028 E MONROE  

C85 1028 E MONROE

C86 1028 E MONROE  

Displacement No. (2A & 2B) Street Address

R94 1917 E ASH

R95 1952 S WIRT

R96 1954 S WIRT

R97 1904 E ASH

R103 2101 S WIRT

R98 2100 S WIRT

R99 2108 S WIRT

R100 2112 S WIRT

R101 2107 E ASH

C53 2103 E ASH

R102 2100 E ASH

Displacement No. (2A & 2B) Street Address

R73 1905 E SOUTH GRAND AVENUE

R74 1913 E SOUTH GRAND AVENUE

R75 1917 E SOUTH GRAND AVENUE

R76 1921 E SOUTH GRAND AVENUE

R77 1929 E SOUTH GRAND AVENUE

R78 1910 E SOUTH GRAND AVENUE

R79 1912 E SOUTH GRAND AVENUE

R80 1918 E SOUTH GRAND AVENUE

R81 1922 E SOUTH GRAND AVENUE

R82 1924 E SOUTH GRAND AVENUE

R83 1926 E SOUTH GRAND AVENUE

R84 1930 E SOUTH GRAND AVENUE
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-23 Tier 2 Draft Document 

 

R85 2005 E SOUTH GRAND AVENUE

R86 2009 E SOUTH GRAND AVENUE

R87 2001 E SOUTH GRAND AVENUE

R88 2008 E SOUTH GRAND AVENUE

R89 2010 E SOUTH GRAND AVENUE

R90 2012 E SOUTH GRAND AVENUE

R91 2016 E SOUTH GRAND AVENUE

R92 2020 E SOUTH GRAND AVENUE

R93 2028 E SOUTH GRAND AVENUE

Displacement No. (2A & 2B) Street Address

C1 1645 N 11TH STREET  

R1 1005 BLACK AVENUE  

R104 1613 N 11TH STREET  

C3 1630 N 11TH STREET  

R2 1622 N 11TH STREET  

R3 1108 RIDGELY

R4 1110 RIDGELY

R5 1118 RIDGELY  

R6 1620 N 11TH STREET  

R7 1618 N 11TH STREET  

R8 1612 N 11TH STREET

R9 1608 N 11TH STREET  

R10 1602 N 11TH STREET  

R11 1600 N 11TH STREET  

C4 1527 N 11TH STREET  

C5 1220 N 09TH STREET  

R12 1006 E NORTH GRAND AVENUE  

R13 1003 RESERVOIR STREET  

R16 1132 N 10TH STREET  

R17 1130 N 10TH STREET  

R18 1128 N 10TH STREET  

R19 1126 N 10TH STREET  

R20 1124 N 10TH STREET  

R21 1122 N 10TH STREET

R22 1110 N 10TH STREET  

R23 1108 N 10TH STREET  

R24 1106 N 10TH STREET  

R25 1017 DIVISION

R26 1023 N 10TH STREET  

R27 1011 N 10TH STREET  
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-24 Tier 2 Draft Document 

 

R28 1005 N 10TH STREET  

R29 1003 N 10TH STREET  

C7 1020 N 10TH STREET  

R30 933 N 10TH STREET  

R31 931 N 10TH STREET  

R32 927 N 10TH STREET  

R33 925 N 10TH STREET  

R34 923 N 10TH STREET  

R35 921 N 10TH STREET  

R36 921 PHILLIPS  

R37 923 PHILLIPS  

R38 929 N 10TH  

C8 920 PHILLIPS

C9 915 E ENOS AVENUE  

C10 918 E ENOS AVENUE  

C11 718 N 09TH STREET  

C12 1004 E ENOS AVE

C13 929 E CARPENTER

C14 1015 E MADISON STREET  

C17 221 N 11TH STREET   

C18 1000 E WASHINGTON  

C19 1001 E MONROE  

C21 1000 E ADAMS  

C22 1000 E MONROE  

C23 1028 E MONROE  

C24 1015 E CAPITOL AVENUE  

C26 1001 E EDWARDS STREET  

C28 1010 E EDWARDS STREET  

C29 709 BARRETT  

C30 1311 S 11TH STREET  

C31 1403 S 10 1/2 STREET  

C32 1425 S 10 1/2 STREET  

R39 1515 S 10 1/2 STREET  

R40 1517 S 10 1/2 STREET  

R41 1601 S 10 1/2 STREET  

R42 1609 S 10 1/2 STREET  

R43 1617 S 10 1\2 STREET  

R44 1619 S 10 1\2 STREET  

C34 1905 S 10 1/2 STREET  

C35 1925 S 10 1/2 STREET  

C37 1935 S 10 1/2 STREET  

C38 1947 S 10 1/2 STREET  
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-25 Tier 2 Draft Document 

 

C39 1000 E LAUREL  

C40 1943 S 10 1/2 STREET  

C41 901 E ASH  

C46 2264 S 06TH STREET  

C44 2121 S 09TH STREET   

C45 2141 S 09TH STREET  

C47 631 PRINCETON  

C48 830 E ASH  

R49 2342 S 05TH STREET  

R50 2405 S 05TH STREET  

R51 2407 S 05TH STREET  

R52 401 E ILES AVENUE  

R53 2500 BURTON DRIVE  

C49 300 E ILES AVENUE  

Included in the commercial designation for both alternatives (2A and 2B) are three

government or non‐profit establishments: the Illinois Environmental Protection (EPA),

the Salvation Army, and Planned Parenthood (see Section 4.1.2). Nearby property

appears to be available for these facilities to relocate. The Salvation Army is moving to a

new location at 100 N. 9th Street independently of this project.

The Uniform Relocation Act applies to all federal or federally assisted activities that

involve the acquisition of real property or the displacement of person or business.  In

compliance with that Act, property owners would receive just compensation for

property acquisitions required for the selected alternative as well as relocation expenses.   

5.2.2 Public Services/Facilities 

As discussed above, public services and facilities that would be displaced by

Alternatives 2A and 2B are the Illinois EPA, the Salvation Army, and Planned

Parenthood. The Illinois EPA headquarters is at 1021 North Grand Avenue East. The

Illinois EPA is an Illinois agency whose mission is to safeguard environmental quality,

consistent with the social and economic needs of the state, so as to protect health,

welfare, property, and the quality of life. The agency’s primary function is to enforce the

environmental laws of the state. The proposed project would dissect the headquarters

building, and displace the north entrance, office space, and parking north and south of

the building, all of which is leased by the Illinois EPA.  Adequate replacement is nearby.  

Office space could be replaced through the addition of floors, or construction of

additional buildings or add‐ons to the north of the existing headquarters. Acquiring

property to the north may also be possible for replacing lost parking space.

The Salvation Army is at 221 N. 11th Street. The Salvation Army is an evangelical

Christian church known for charitable work. This parcel is the site for their Main Thrift

Store and Adult Rehabilitation Center. Construction of the proposed underpasses on
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-26 Tier 2 Draft Document 

 

Madison Street and Jefferson Street would eliminate access to the existing Salvation

Army lot. Currently, the Salvation Army has plans to move to a recently purchased

location at 100 N. 9th Street.

The Planned Parenthood Springfield Health Center at 1000 E. Washington Street is a

provider of sexual and reproductive health care, education, and information. Their

services include family planning, abortion and birth control services, HIV and other STD

testing, and men and women’s health services.  The proposed project would displace the

structure.  There are comparable locations within the same vicinity for relocation of this

facility, resulting in no effect.  It could be relocated on the same block lot, or other vacant

facilities that are available in the area.

Alternatives 2A and 2B are anticipated to have a net positive effect on access and

response times for emergency vehicles serving the Springfield communities once

construction is complete. By reducing the number of rail corridors through Springfield

and by providing grade separations, the existing rail barriers will be eliminated for

improved emergency vehicle access and response times. Response time for emergency

vehicles is expected to improve from decreased train delay times and improved

roadway access as a result of improved roadway system linkage, elimination of the UP

Railroad on the 3rd Street Corridor, construction of eight grade separations, and

consolidation of UP and NS railroad traffic into one corridor. Police, fire, and emergency

response times may be temporarily affected during construction. Coordination with

public response agencies serving the project area would continue during construction to

avoid and minimize disruptions to emergency response.

5.2.3 Community Impacts 

Each of the three existing rail corridors through Springfield would remain in service for

the No‐Build Alternative. These corridors create barriers that divide the city

neighborhoods and isolate portions of the community.  Trains that block crossings also

reduce accessibility to certain neighborhoods.  

Alternatives 2A and 2B consolidate rail traffic to fewer corridors, which eliminates

neighborhood barriers, promotes community cohesion and reduces the length of rail

lines that go through residential areas.  The miles of corridor with rail traffic passing

through residential neighborhoods for each alternative is shown in Table 5‐3.   

Table 5‐3. Miles of Rail Corridor Through Residential Neighborhoods     

Alternative Miles of Corridor in Residential Areas

No‐Build 9.1

2A 5.4

2B 5.4
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-27 Tier 2 Draft Document 

 

Alternatives 2A and 2B pass through or are adjacent to the Springfield neighborhoods of

Pillsbury, Downtown Springfield, Pioneer Park, Mather and Wells, Iles Park, Grand

Improvement, Harvard Park, and Springfield South Corridor.  

Consolidating UP rail traffic onto the 10th Street Corridor is not expected to result in

adverse disruption and further division of these communities.  Rail traffic has long

existed on the 10th Street Corridor, and the proposed action, while accommodating the

predicted increase in rail traffic, would remain on an existing rail alignment. Possible

negative community reactions to the proposed action may result from local road

closures and changes in travel patterns. The recommendations for grade crossing

locations, grade crossing treatments and street closures are therefore a concern to the

Springfield community.  All grade crossing and street closures were evaluated as part of

the EIS process.

Positive impacts to the Springfield communities and neighborhoods would result from

the elimination of 32 at‐grade crossings, improvements to remaining at‐grade crossings,

and the elimination of train horn blowing.  Benefits from these actions center on

increased safety and general noise reduction city‐wide.  New grade separations would

increase safety not only for vehicular traffic but also pedestrians traveling across these

railroad crossing locations. Safety would also increase for vehicular and pedestrian

traffic from proposed improvements to at‐grade crossings remaining along the 10th and

19th Street Corridors.  The proposed at‐grade crossing treatments would support

elimination of blaring noise from train horns traveling through the city’s communities.  

5.2.3.1 Access Changes Associated With Alternative 2A

Each of the proposed street closures associated with Alternative 2A would result in

changes in travel patterns and adverse travel (see Exhibit 5.3).  Adverse travel is the

additional distance individual vehicles would need to travel because the street is closed.  

Abandonment of the 3rd Street Corridor and construction of new grade separations in

10th and 19th Streets would mitigate the delays due to adverse travel by eliminating

delays due to trains blocking crossings.  All locations within the combined 10th Street

Corridor would be within 0.4 miles of a grade separation as opposed to 1.4 miles under

the No‐Build condition.  Even those areas affected by street closures would see

improved emergency vehicle access since the risk of crossings being blocked by trains

would be eliminated on 3rd Street and dramatically reduced on both 10th Street and 19th

Street.

Access would be provided to all businesses and residences that remain.

Specific information regarding adverse travel associated with the proposed street

closures is described below.  

   
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-28 Tier 2 Draft Document 

 

Reservoir Street

Traffic using Reservoir Street would reroute one block north to North Grand Avenue

where a grade separation would be constructed.  The current Average Daily Traffic

(ADT) on Reservoir Street is 900. The maximum adverse travel for any vehicle is 0.4

miles.  There are no important community facilities on Reservoir Street, and closure

would not affect emergency vehicle access.  

Division Street

Traffic using Division Street would reroute two blocks to the north to North Grand

Avenue where a grade separation would be constructed.  The current ADT is 800. The

maximum adverse travel for any vehicle is 0.6 miles.  There are no important

community facilities on Division Street, and closure would not affect emergency vehicle

access.  

Enterprise Street

Traffic using Enterprise Street would reroute three blocks to the north and use the

proposed grade separation at North Grand Avenue or two blocks to the south to the at‐

grade crossing at Enos Street.  Since Enos Street is closed in Alternative 2B, Enterprise

Street traffic would be diverted to North Grand Avenue to the north or Carpenter Street  
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-29 

Exhibit 5‐3A. Adverse Travel Alternative 2A
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-30 

Exhibit 5‐3B. Adverse Travel Alternative 2A
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-31 

Exhibit 5‐3C. Adverse Travel Alternative 2A
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-32 Tier 2 Draft Document 

 

to the south.  The current ADT is 1,150.  The maximum adverse travel is shown in Table

5‐4.

Table 5‐4.  Maximum Adverse Travel for Enterprise Street     

Alternative Adverse Travel (miles)

No‐Build 0.0

2A 0.7

2B 0.9

There are no important community facilities on Enterprise Street in this area, and closure

would not affect emergency vehicle access.  

Miller and Reynolds Streets

Traffic using both of these streets would be diverted one block to the proposed grade

separation at Carpenter Street.  The current ADT is 500 for Miller Street and 700 for

Reynolds Street.  The maximum adverse travel for any vehicle is 0.4 miles.  There are no

critical community facilities on Miller or Reynolds Streets in this area, and closure would

not affect emergency vehicle access.

Adams Street

Traffic using Adams Street would be rerouted to the at‐grade crossing of Washington

Street one block to the north or Monroe Street one block to the south.  The current ADT

is 2,250.  The maximum adverse travel for any vehicle is 0.4 miles.  The Sangamon

County Complex, including County offices, courtrooms and jail is on the south side of

Adams Street between 9th Street and the rail corridor.  Visitor parking is west of 9th

Street.  Employee parking is on the east side of the rail corridor.  Some employees would

have a longer (up to 600 feet) walk from their parking to the County building.  There are

no other critical community facilities on Adams Street, and closure would not affect

emergency vehicle access.

Jackson Street

Traffic using Jackson Street would be rerouted one block to the north of the Capitol

Avenue at‐grade crossing or two blocks to the south to the Cook Street grade separation.  

The current ADT is 350.  The maximum adverse travel for any vehicle is 0.4 miles.  There

are no critical community facilities on Jackson Street in this area, and closure would not

affect emergency vehicle access.

5.2.3.2 Access Issues Associated with Alternative 2B  

Alternative 2B was developed in response to a request from the UP to consider a fully

grade separated corridor where UP tracks would be immediately adjacent to NS tracks.  

This was accomplished by modifying Alternative 2A as follows:  
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-33 Tier 2 Draft Document 

 

 Close Enos Street

 Grade Separate Washington Street

 Grade Separate Monroe Street

 Close Capitol Avenue

These modifications would close or grade separate all of the crossings in the project area

south of North Grand Avenue (see Exhibit 5‐4 for adverse travel associated with

Alternative 2B).

Each of these additional street closures and grade separations for Alternative 2B create

specific access issues for individual properties as described below. Under the

descriptions for each location the access issues associated with construction of these

grade separations or street closures would not result in a disproportionately high impact

to low‐income or minority populations. A benefit/cost ratio was calculated for the grade

separations using the assumptions described in Section 3.4.4. Benefits were primarily

reductions in delays, accidents, emissions and fuel.  

Capitol Avenue (Average Daily Traffic – ADT = 1,600) – The Federal, State and City

governments have made a major investment to create a monumental corridor along

Capitol Avenue between Martin Luther King Drive and the Capitol Building with 10th

Street tracks right in the middle. This monumental corridor would serve as a stage for

community events such as parades, festivals and civic ceremonies. Closing Capitol

Avenue would eliminate much of the intended benefit of this completed construction.  

Constructing a grade separation at this location would block the views along Capitol

Avenue and cut off access to the State Journal‐Register newspaper.    

 Monroe Street – A grade separation would cut off current delivery access to the

County Building and jail as well as the historic Great Western Depot.  Access to the

Great Western Depot would be provided by constructing a new entrance from 9th

Street through what is currently a private parking lot. This would result in

additional land acquisition, but not an adverse effect to the historic resource. ADT =

2,450.  The benefit/cost ratio for this grade separations = 0.49.

 Washington Street – A grade separation of Washington Street would make access to

the future Amtrak station and bus transfer facility difficult and inefficient.  ADT =

1,700. The benefit/cost ratio for this grade separation = 0.75.  

 Enos Street – Closure would seriously hamper emergency access and neighborhood

connectivity for residents along Enos Street east of 10th Street as the nearest

crossings would be North Grand Avenue to the north and Carpenter Street to the

south.  The affected area is blocked to the east by the I&M rail yard with no other

access to school or emergency services.  The anticipated ADT on Enos Street is

1,800. Grade separation of Enos street would not be cost effective.   
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-34 

Exhibit 5‐4A. Adverse Travel Alternative 2B
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-35 

Exhibit 5‐4B. Adverse Travel Alternative 2B
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-36 

Exhibit 5‐4C. Adverse Travel Alternative 2B
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-37 Tier 2 Draft Document 

 

5.2.3.3 Grade Separations

Under Alternatives 2A and 2B grade separations would be constructed or upgraded at

the locations shown in Table 5‐5.

Table 5‐5.  Grade Separations

2A 2B Overpass/

Underpass

Benefit/Cost

Ratio

New Grade Separations

10th St. 

North Grand Avenue (NS) X X O 1.04

North Grand Avenue (UP) X X U 1.41

Carpenter Street X X U 1.09

Jefferson Street X X U 4.24

Madison Street X X U 1.60

Washington Street    X U .75

Monroe Street    X U .49

Laurel Street X X U 1.0

New Grade

Separations

10th

St. 

Ash Street X X U .96

19th St. 

South Grand Avenue X X U 1.76

Ash Street X X U 1.20

           Upgrade Existing Grade Separations

Cook Street X X U

South Grand Avenue X X U

5th Street X X U

6th Street X X U

All of the grade separations would be underpasses (road under railroad) except for

North Grand Avenue at the NS which would be an overpass due to the length required

for crossing both the NS and I&M tracks.  Exhibits 5‐5 and 5‐6 show the anticipated

appearance of the 10th Street 19th Street grade separations.

These grade separations would reduce the barrier effect of the railroad tracks by

eliminating trains blocking streets, allowing vehicles and pedestrians to cross the tracks

safely and without delays.  These bridges would tie together neighborhoods and

communities now divided by the rail lines. The cost of these grade separations are
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-38 Tier 2 Draft Document 

 

shown in Table 3‐8 and their Benefit/Cost ratios are in Table 5‐5. The impacts are

included in the impacts for the alternatives.  

5.2.4 Economic Impacts 

The expenditure of funds for transportation infrastructure has both direct and indirect

economic impacts to the City of Springfield.  The direct impacts can be measured by the

number of jobs created both in production of materials and equipment used in the

project and in actual on‐site construction activities.  Construction of the project would

involve demolition of existing structures, widening and preparing the road bed,

placement of new track, installation of signal and safety devices, and construction of

grade separations.  Firms that produce the signal and safety devices, steel rails, and

rolling stock for Alternatives 2A and 2B would create additional jobs.  Wages

individuals receive are then recycled throughout the economy as new workers buy/rent

houses, furniture, groceries and other merchandise.  These expenditures, in turn, create

new jobs, producing a multiplier effect on the economy.  While most of the impact

would be within the City of Springfield the total geographic distribution impact would

depend upon the location of firms supplying the labor and materials needed on the

project.

The economic impacts of Alternatives 2A and 2B would be dispersed through the City of

Springfield and Sangamon County.  The construction process would create construction

jobs.   The predicted increase in train traffic by 2020 from about 35 trains per day to 72

trains per day through the City of Springfield would create some new railroad jobs. The

precise location of economic impacts would depend on which companies receive

contracts to conduct the construction activity.  Firms specializing in engineering,

construction and manufacturing throughout the State of Illinois would likely feel

economic changes.   

The impacts of expenditures from rail operation would probably concentrate within the

City of Springfield from jobs created to serve the new system.  Rail repair and routine

rail maintenance would create jobs.

Alternatives 2A and 2B would require the purchase of about 41 acres of additional right‐

of way.  The increased benefits of increased passenger rail traffic through the city and

the redevelopment potential of the abandoned 3rd Street Railroad corridor is expected to

negate the loss of property tax revenue as a result of the conversion of property to

transportation use.
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-39 

Exhibit 5‐5. Underpass – 10th St.
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-40 

Exhibit 5‐6. Underpass Separation – 19th St.
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-41 Tier 2 Draft Document 

 

5.3 Energy 

Construction of Alternative 2A or 2B would require indirect consumption of energy for

processing materials, construction activities, and maintenance for grade separation

bridges and miles of rail added within the project area.

Construction of Alternative 2A or 2B would reduce traffic congestion and wait times at

crossings along the alignment and thereby reduce vehicle stopping and slowing

conditions.  As discussed in Section 3.4.1, vehicle delay minutes per day in year 2020 in

the Springfield rail corridors are projected to decrease almost in half for the retained

alternatives compared to the existing year 2010 delay times, and be nearly reduced by a

third compared to the projected No‐Build Alternative 2020 delays.  Also, a reduction in

lifecycle and annual costs from the No‐Build condition reflects a measurable benefit of

implementing the retained alternatives, primarily as a reduction of delays and accidents.

This would result in less direct and indirect vehicle operational energy consumption for

the retained alternatives than the No‐Build Alternative.  Additional energy savings may

be possible from the indirect benefits of the redevelopment of the abandoned 3rd Street

rail corridor, such as a pedestrian and bicycle accommodations which would increase

non‐motorized transportation usage.  Thus, in the long term, post construction

operational requirements should offset construction and maintenance energy

requirements and result in new savings in energy usage.

5.4 Cultural Resources 

Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA) requires Federal

agencies to take into account the effects of their undertakings on historic properties, and

afford the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) of reasonable opportunity

to comment. The historic preservation review process mandated by Section 106 is

outlined in regulations issued by ACHP. Revised regulations, “protection of Historic

Properties” (36 CFR Part 800), became effective January 11, 2011.  

The value of the architectural and archaeological resources within the project area is

determined by their eligibility for listing on the National Register of Historic Places.  

Eligibility to the National Register is based on four broad criteria that are defined by the

National Park Service and used to guide the evaluation process.  These criteria state that:

The quality of significance in American history, architecture, archaeology, and culture is

present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that possess integrity of

location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association, and

A. that are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the

broad patterns of our history; or

B. that are associated with the lives of persons significant to our past; or
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-42 Tier 2 Draft Document 

 

C. that embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of

construction or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic

values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose

components may lack individual distinction; or

D. that have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory

or history (36CFR60.4 Criteria for Evaluation).

Three sites within the Area of Potential Effect are currently listed on the National

Register individually (Table 5‐6).  One of these—the Abraham Lincoln Home—is also

National Historic Landmark.  The other two sites include the Lincoln Colored Home and

the Mine Rescue Station. The Illinois State Fairgrounds is adjacent to the project area at

the northern terminus and is located north of Sangamon Avenue. FRA believes the

retained alternatives would have No Effect on these properties due to their distance from

the proposed action since they are all over 600 feet from the railroad tracks, except for

the Mine Rescue Station.   

The Mine Rescue Station at 609 East Princeton Avenue is listed on the National Register

of Historic Places and is about 75 feet from the existing railroad R.O.W., but this

presents no change from its historic setting. This property also has no vibration impacts

to the structural integrity of the building, therefore the effects assessment on this

property is “No Effect.”

Numerous properties inventoried as Lincoln‐era structures (pre‐1861) are potentially

eligible for the National Register are located within the project area (Table 5‐6).  Many of

these houses, although they retain fairly poor architectural integrity, are potentially

eligible for listing on the National Register because of their archaeological significance

(and thus would be eligible due to Criteria A, C, and/or D).  The retained alternatives

would have No Effect on these properties due to their distance (over 400 feet) from the

proposed action, except for the four properties mentioned below.  

These properties are adjacent to existing tracks including the Springfield Furniture

Factory, the Great Western Railroad Depot and the Mine Rescue Station.  

The former Springfield Furniture Factory at 819 North Eleventh Street at the northwest

corner of Eleventh Street and Enos Avenue consists of a complex of attached two‐story,

brick buildings arranged in a C‐shaped plan. The facility was constructed in the late

nineteenth century as a furniture factory and later occupied by the Desnoyer Shoe

Company (1903‐1910) and International Shoe Company (1910‐1964). The present

occupant is Goodwill Industries. The Springfield furniture Factory retains good integrity

and is considered eligible to the National Register under Criteria A (industry) and C.

The property abuts the existing proposed railroad R.O.W., but this represents no change

from its historic setting. Moreover, vibration studies have assessed no structural impact

to the property for the retained alternatives. Therefore, the effects assessment on this

property is “No Effect.”
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-43 Tier 2 Draft Document 

 

The Great Western Railroad Depot at Monroe and 10th Street is a two‐story, brick,

Italianate‐style structure. It was constructed in the 1850s with only one story and later

raised to two. It was from this site that Abraham Lincoln departed his hometown for

Washington, D.C. on February 11, 1861. It also represents the oldest surviving rail depot

in Springfield. The Great Western Railroad Depot is considered eligible for the National

Register under Criteria A (commerce), B (in relation to Lincoln), and C. The property

abuts the existing railroad R.O.W., but this presents no change from its historic setting.

Vibration studies have assessed no structural impact to the property for the retained

alternatives. However, Alternative 2B would provide an underpass along Monroe Street

which would relocate the existing access to the Depot further to the west within the

same block. Therefore, the effects assessment on this property is “No Effect.”  

Alternatives 2A and 2B would displace the former Fireproof Storage House No. 3 at 1000

East Monroe Street (see photo below)(No. 21), directly across from the Great Western

Depot (No. 20) on the opposite side of the existing NS tracks and the Peabody Coal

Company Office building at 2135 South 9th Street (see photo below) (No. 54). These

properties were identified during the Illinois Historic Structures Survey prepared by

Fever River Research as potentially eligible for the National Register. Both were

considered potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places

under Criterion A (Social History) and/or C (Architecture).  However, through

coordination with the Illinois Historic Preservation Agency, IDOT and FRA have

determined that these structures are not eligible for the National Register of Historic

Places (see Appendix A).
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-44 

Table 5‐6. Properties of Architectural Significance within the Area of Potential Effect‐ 10th Street C

Exhibit

ID Property Name Address NR

Pot.

NR

National Register

Eligibility

Criterion(4)

1 Illinois State Fairgrounds(5) Sangamon & Peoria Rd. X 2 Ridgely Interlocking Tower(2) 1501 Percy Avenue X A and C 3 (5) 1120 East Ridgely X4 Lanphier HS Gymnasium 1121 East North Grand X A and C 5 [Brick Italianate Commercial] 1001 North 9th X A and C 6 Springfield Furniture Factory(2) 819 North 11th X C 7 Concordia Seminary North 12th & Enos X A and C 8 [Queen Anne Cottage] 1021 East Phillips X C 9 [Frame Queen Anne Cottage] 919 North 9th X C 

10 [Frame House] 901 North 9th X C 11 [Frame House] 809 North 9th X C 12 1105 East Miller X A, C and/or D 13 1106 East Miller X A, C and/or D 14 1122 East Miller X A, C and/or D 15 Municipal Substation 1013 East Reynolds X Not Eligible 16 1121 East Reynolds X A, C and/or D 17 801 East Miller X A, C and/or D 18 St. Johnʹs Hospital 800 East Carpenter X A and C 19 GIPS Co. General Warehouse 217 North 9th X C 20 Great Western RR Depot(2) East Monroe & 10th X A, B and C 21 Fireproof Storage House No. 3(3) 1000 East Monroe Not Eligible(6) 22 Lincoln School 1115 East Capitol X A and C 23 Lincoln Colored Home 427 South 12th X 24 1201 East Edwards X A, C and/or D 25 Sacred Heart Rectory 722 South 12th X A and C 26 Sacred Heart RC Church South 12th & Lawrence X A and C 27 Morse, James, House 818 East Capitol X 28 Abraham Lincoln Home South 8th & Jackson X A, B, C and D 29 Charles Arnold House(5) 810 East Jackson X 30 Cook House 508 South 8th X 31 Henson Robinson House(5) 520 South 8th X 32 Solomon Allen Barn 530 South 8th X 33 [Frame Queen Anne House] 814 East Edwards X C 34 810 East Edwards X A, C and/or D 
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-45 

Exhibit

ID Property Name Address NR

Pot.

NR

National Register

Eligibility

Criterion(4)

35 [Frame Queen Anne House] 802 East Edwards X C 37 [Italianate Frame House] 718 South 8th X C 38 612 South 8th X A, C and/or D 39 805 South 12th X A, C and/or D 40 809 South 12th X A, C and/or D 41 902 South 12th X A, C and/or D 42 920 South 11th X A, C and/or D 43 1019 South 11th X A, C and/or D 44 1104 South 11th X A, C and/or D 45 1122 South 11th X A, C and/or D 46 1124 South 11th X A, C and/or D 47 1209 South 12th X A, C and/or D 48 1219 South 12th X A, C and/or D 49 Old Southtown Theater Marquee(5) 1110 East South Grand X A and C 50 [Victorian Frame House] 1314 South 8th X C 51 Claus Grocery Store(5) 1700 South 11th X A and C 52 First Brethren Church 2117 South Yale X A and C 53 Iles Park Shelter East Ash & 6th X A and C 54 Peabody Coal Company Office(3) 2135 South 9th Not Eligible(6) 55 Weaver Building 2150 South 9th X A and C 56 Mine Rescue Station(2) 609 Princeton Avenue X A and C 

NR=National Register (individually listed); Pot. NR=Potentially National Register eligible;

1) The corridor represents two blocks on either side of the tracks.

2) Denotes properties adjacent to existing NS right‐of‐way. No new ROW acquisition is anticipated. See Cultural Reso

Report.3) Properties in bold would be displaced by the Retained Alternatives.

4) See Section 4.4.1 for National Register criteria.

5) Adjacent to project area or No Effect.

6) Finding confirmed by the IHPA, see coordination in Appendix A. Not eligible only after SHPO coordinates – 

information.
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-46 Tier 2 Draft Document 

   

Former Fireproof Storage House No. 3 (No. 21) at left, 1000 E. Monroe Street

Peabody Coal Company Office (No. 54), 2135 South 9th Street  

   

Numerous other structures were identified within the APE (Table 5‐6).  The majority of

these structures, most of which would be eligible for listing on the National Register

under Criterion A and C, would not be affected by either of the retained alternatives (No

Effect).  However, the Great Western Railroad Depot would have its existing access

shifted to the western end of the block it is contained in due to the proposed underpass

on Monroe Street for Alternative 2B. Therefore, this property was listed as a potential

impact since an Adverse Effect determination from the SHPO is likely through the

Section 106 consultation process for Alternative 2B in Table 5‐1.
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-47 Tier 2 Draft Document 

5.4.1 Archaeological Resources 

Alternatives 2A and 2B would avoid the Lincoln Home National Historic District;

therefore, the project would not impact any known archaeological sites. No

archaeological surveys or testing were conducted during the Phase I cultural resources

evaluation because of the previous disturbance of the railroad corridors. New right‐of‐

way would be subjected to a Phase I archaeological survey to identify potentially

significant archaeological resources.  Several of these potentially significant

archaeological resources including the former coal‐mining communities of Starne and

Iles Junction, the rail yard and shops of the Great Western/Wabash Railroad, as well as

pre‐Civil War domestic neighborhoods of downtown Springfield would be investigated

prior to construction. The evaluation of potential impacts to unknown archaeological

resources within the project area would require continued coordination with the IHPA

through the Section 106 process which will occur with their review of the Tier 2 Draft

Document.  This evaluation would occur after an alternative is selected by the FRA and

will be provided in the Final EIS.  

5.5 Agriculture 

Alternative 2A and 2B would require no farmland acquisition. All improvements would

be constructed either within existing railroad right‐of‐way or adjacent to existing

railroad right‐of‐way along the 10th Street corridor, except for the proposed grade

separations on existing urban streets along the 10th Street and 19th Street corridors. The

land required for these improvements is entirely urban. Therefore, Alternatives 2A and

2B would not impact prime, unique, or important farmland.  

5.6 Air Quality 

5.6.1 Conformity 

All areas of Sangamon County affected by the project are classified as attainment areas

for the six criteria air pollutants which include carbon monoxide (CO), lead (Pb),

nitrogen dioxide (NO2), particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5), ozone (O3), and sulfur

dioxide (SO2). Accordingly, a conformity determination of the projectʹs capacity to cause

or exacerbate exceedances of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) is

not required.

5.6.2 Local Air Quality 

Alternatives 2A and 2B would combine existing 3rd Street corridor rail traffic with 10th

Street corridor rail traffic; thereby, increasing the potential for local emission

concentrations of air pollutants. Because the proposed project would better

accommodate existing and projected rail traffic through Springfield and not result in

new sources of rail traffic, substantial increases in the amount of emissions‐producing

traffic are not expected. Alternatives 2A and 2B are not anticipated to have a substantial

impact on current or future air quality standards or lead to the establishment of a non‐

attainment area.
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-48 Tier 2 Draft Document 

Recent Microscale CO analyses were performed for the 2003 Final Environmental Impact

Statement, Chicago to St. Louis, High‐Speed Rail Project. Microscale analyses were

performed at a worst‐case highway‐railroad grade crossing in Springfield (Carpenter

Street) and at the Amtrak station.  The estimated CO concentrations were well below the

NAAQS one‐hour and eight‐hour standards. Maximum one‐hour concentrations were

estimated to be no greater than 7.4 ppm, and estimated eight‐hour concentrations were

no greater than 4.6 ppm. Recent study shows concentrations well below threshold levels

and existing conditions have not changed enough to warrant additional analysis.

For 4,000‐horsepower locomotives emitting CO at the maximum rate permitted under

federal regulation, total CO emissions per mile per day along this portion of the corridor

would be equivalent to approximately 46 to 100 daily motor vehicles, well below the

16,000 ADT trigger for COSIM analysis at roadway intersection. This means project‐

generated increases in wayside train activity would not be expected to be sufficiently

large to cause or substantially contribute to a localized violation of the CO NAAQS.

Similar reasoning would apply to PM2.5 – another criteria air pollutant that can be

associated with localized impact – as well as air toxics.     

In addition, the proposed construction of grade separations along the 10th Street and 19th

Street corridors would decrease vehicular delay times. This decrease in vehicular delay

time is anticipated to decrease the build‐up of CO concentrations at locations currently

served by at‐grade crossings.  Therefore, Alternatives 2A and 2B are not anticipated to

result in CO concentrations in excess of the one‐hour or eight‐hour NAAQS of 35 ppm

and 9 ppm, respectively. Additional information on air quality can be referenced in the

Tier 1 Chicago‐ St. Louis High‐Speed Rail Draft Environmental Impact Statement.   

5.6.3 Construction Impacts 

Potential impacts to local air quality during construction are possible.  These potential

impacts include fugitive dust emissions, direct emissions from construction equipment

and truck exhausts, increased emissions and dust from construction vehicles on the

streets, and emissions from re‐routed vehicular traffic. Fugitive dust emissions vary with

the nature of the operations and the dust control methods employed.  Fugitive dust

generated during construction generally consists of large‐sized particulates which settle

on nearby buildings and vehicles.  People near a construction site would be exposed to

higher than average amounts of inhalable particulates.  However, the impacts associated

with construction activities are normally negligible, local, and temporary.

IDOT’s Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction include provisions on

dust control. Under these provisions, dust and airborne dirt generated by construction

activities would be controlled through dust control procedures or a specific dust control

plan, when warranted. The contractor and the Department would meet to review the

nature and extent of dust‐generating activities and would cooperatively develop specific

types of control techniques appropriate to the specific situation. Techniques that may

warrant consideration include measures such as minimizing track‐out of soil onto

nearby publicly–traveled roads, reducing speed on unpaved roads, covering haul

vehicles, and applying chemical dust suppressants or water to exposed surfaces,
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-49 Tier 2 Draft Document 

particularly those on which construction vehicles travel. With the application of

appropriate measures to limit dust emissions during construction, this project would not

cause any significant, short‐term particulate matter air quality impact.   

5.7 Noise/Vibration 

In accordance with Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and Federal Railroad

Administration (FRA) guidelines, a noise and vibration impact assessment was

conducted for the proposed project.  This section presents the information used in

conducting the noise and vibration assessment, the results of the assessments and

potential mitigation measures for both noise and vibration, where appropriate.

5.7.1 Noise and Vibration Projections 

Alternatives 2A and 2B include consolidation of the 3rd Street and 10th Street rail traffic

onto the 10th Street corridor.  The project also includes the construction of grade

separations at select streets throughout the city, street closures at some grade crossings,

and the establishment of quiet zones throughout the city.  The noise and vibration

assessment includes projections of the UP freight and Amtrak passenger train traffic, NS

freight traffic, CN freight traffic, and I&M freight traffic throughout Springfield.  This

assessment also includes the No‐Build condition which includes future projected growth

in train traffic but does not include the relocation of any tracks or the establishment of

quiet zones.  

For these alternatives, UP and Amtrak trains were modeled on new tracks along the 10th

Street corridor adjacent to the existing NS tracks from Stanford Avenue in the south to

Phillips Street in the north. From Phillips Street to Ridgely Avenue there would be a

section of new UP track, which would connect with the existing UP tracks to the north of

Ridgely Avenue.  In addition, NS trains were modeled in their existing locations

throughout the city with the track being shifted slightly in some areas along 10th Street

to accommodate the new UP tracks.  CN and I&M trains were modeled in their current

locations with no proposed changes to the tracks.   

For the No‐Build Alternative, UP and Amtrak trains were modeled on the existing 3rd

Street tracks, NS and CN trains were modeled on the existing 10th Street and 19th Street

tracks respectively, and I&M trains were modeled on the existing 19th Street tracks and

I&M tracks north of East Clear Lake Avenue.

5.7.1.1 Noise Projections

The primary components of wayside noise from train operations are engine/exhaust

noise for diesel locomotives and wheel/rail noise from the steel wheels rolling on steel

rails for freight railcars and passenger cars.  The projection of wayside noise was carried

out using models specified in the FTA Guidance Manual, with the following

assumptions:
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-50 Tier 2 Draft Document 

 Existing noise levels were measured throughout the project area to determine

existing noise levels.  The existing noise measurements were used to determine the

impact criteria for the project throughout Springfield.

 For the No‐Build Alternative, all trains were assumed to sound the locomotive

warning horns at all at‐grade crossings in the project area.  

 For Alternatives 2A and 2B all at‐grade crossings in the project area were assumed

to be part of quiet zones where locomotive warning horns would not be sounded

during normal operating conditions.  Modeling for Alternatives 2A and 2B omitted

train horn noise.

 The UP operations were assumed to consist of a total of 21 daytime and six

nighttime trains.  UP trains were assumed to consist of two locomotives and 75

railcars, with an approximate total train length of 6,500 feet.  UP trains were

assumed to operate at 40 mph.  UP operations on 3rd Street were assumed to

increase from five existing trains per day to a total of 27 trains per day for the No‐

Build Alternative.

 The Amtrak passenger train operations were assumed to consist of a total of 17

daytime and one nighttime trains.  Amtrak trains were assumed to consist of two

locomotives and four passenger cars, with an approximate total train length of 500

feet.  Amtrak trains were assumed to operate at 40 mph since they will all stop in

Springfield.  Amtrak operations on 3rd Street were assumed to consist of 10 trains

per day for the No‐Build Alternative. The UP freight operations will occupy all of

the remaining No‐Build track capacity. Additional passenger trains will require a

second track. This is discussed in more detail in Volume 1.  

 The NS operations were assumed to consist of a total of 18 daytime and nine

nighttime trains.  NS trains were assumed to consist of two locomotives and 57

railcars, with an approximate total train length of 5,000 feet.  NS trains were

assumed to operate at 40 mph.  For the No‐Build Alternative the NS operations

were assumed to increase from a total of 16 existing trains per day to a total of 27

trains per day.

 The CN operations were assumed to consist of a total of six daytime and three

nighttime trains.  CN trains were assumed to consist of two locomotives and 57

railcars, with an approximate total train length of 5,000 feet.  CN trains were

assumed to operate at 10 mph.  For the No‐Build Alternative the CN operations

were assumed to increase from a total of four existing trains per day to a total of

nine trains per day.

 The I&M operations were assumed to consist of a total of six daytime and three

nighttime trains.  I&M trains were assumed to consist of two locomotives and 57

railcars, with an approximate total train length of 5,000 feet.  I&M trains were

assumed to operate at 10 mph.  I&M operations were assumed to increase from four

to nine trains per day for the No‐Build Alternative.
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-51 Tier 2 Draft Document 

 Based on FTA guidance, the predictions assume that a single diesel locomotive

operating at 50 mph on ballast and tie track with continuous welded rail (CWR)

generates a Sound Exposure Level (SEL) of 92 dBA at a distance of 50 feet from the

track centerline.

 Based on FTA guidance, the predictions assume that a single freight railcar or

passenger car operating at 50 mph on ballast and tie track with continuous welded

rail (CWR) generates an SEL of 82 dBA at a distance of 50 feet from the track

centerline.

 Warning bells, generating a sound level of 73 dBA at 50 feet (FTA‐VA‐90‐1003‐06,

May 2006), were assumed to be sounded at all gated crossings before and during

each train pass‐by for a total duration of 30 seconds. Train horn noise was measured

for this project and not assumed.

 Wheel impacts at turnouts typically cause localized noise increases of 6 dB (HMMH

measurement data).  

5.7.1.2 Vibration Projections

The potential vibration impact from trains in the project area was assessed on an

absolute basis using the FTA criteria.  The following factors were used in determining

potential vibration impacts along the proposed rail alignment:

 Existing ground‐borne vibration measurements were conducted at six sites in the

project area.  These measurement results were compared with the typical

locomotive maximum vibration level versus distance curve in the FTA Guidance

Manual, as shown in Section 2.8.  This curve was used to model vibration levels at

all sensitive receptor locations along the 10th Street corridor and the section of new

UP track between Phillips Street and Ridgely Avenue.  

 Because the only changes to the CN, NS and I&M operations is the establishment of

quiet zones outside the 10th Street Corridor, vibration was not assessed for the CN,

I&M, or on the NS tracks north of Phillips Street.  For the No‐Build Alternative, no

impact is assessed for the 10th Street corridor because there is not a significant

increase in the number of events (doubling of events) and there are no new or

relocated tracks (FTA‐VA‐90‐1003‐06, May 2006).  

 The existing vibration conditions in the project area were assumed to be in the

category of a “Heavily Used Rail Corridor,” as defined in the FTA Guidance

Manual.   

 In locations where the existing train vibration exceeds the impact criteria, the

project would cause additional impact with an approximate doubling of train

events.  If there is not a doubling of events, there would only be impact if the project

vibration is 3 VdB or more higher than existing vibration levels.
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-52 Tier 2 Draft Document 

 In locations where the existing train vibration does not exceed the impact criteria, or

for locations with new track, such as the UP between Phillips Street and Ridgely

Avenue, impact is assessed based on an exceedance of the vibration criteria.

 Because of the length of freight trains and the amount of time that the vibration

events last, freight operations were assessed using the “Frequent Events” category

in the vibration impact criteria, as defined by the FTA Guidance Manual.

 The vibration projections assumed that all UP freight, Amtrak passenger, and NS

freight trains are operating at a speed of 40 mph in the 10th Street corridor.

 Wheel impacts at turnouts typically cause localized increases in vibration of 10 VdB

(FTA‐VA‐90‐1003‐06, May 2006).

5.7.2 Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment 

No‐Build Alternative

A report entitled Springfield Railroad Consolidation Study – Noise and Vibration

Technical Report, June 1, 2012 was prepared for this project and can be referenced for

additional information.   

Table 5‐7 summarizes the combined results of the No‐Build Alternative noise impact

assessment at residential and institutional locations.  The term “number of noise

impacts” means the number of noise‐sensitive receptors that would experience

moderate or severe noise impacts. For the No‐Build Alternative, the noise levels include

locomotive warning horns.  In locations where no noise impacts are projected, the data

are provided for the noise sensitive receptor nearest to the tracks at each location.  No

noise impacts are projected at any institutional locations for the No‐Build Alternative.  

The results of the No‐Build Alternative noise impact assessment indicate that there

would be 1,789 severe noise impacts and 5,978 moderate noise impacts at residential

locations.  All of the impacts for the No‐Build Alternative occur at residential locations

with the exception of five hotels and nine hospital/medical buildings and the Sangamon

County Jail.  These noise impacts for the No‐Build Alternative are along the UP, NS, CN

and I&M tracks throughout the City and are a result of the projected additional UP, NS,

CN and I&M trains in areas where the existing noise levels are relatively high.  All trains

in the No‐Build Alternative would be sounding the horns.   

5.7.2.1 Noise Impact Assessment

Proposed Project Compared to No‐Build

Table 5‐7 summarizes the results of the noise impact assessment for the Proposed Project

compared to the No‐Build at residential and institutional locations. For the No‐Build the

noise levels include locomotive warning horns and for the Proposed Project case the

projected future noise levels do not include horn noise due to the establishment of quiet

zones. In locations where no noise impacts are projected the data are provided in the

noises sensitive receptor located nearest to the tracks at each location. No noise impacts

are projected at institutional receivers for the proposed project.  
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-53 Tier 2 Draft Document 

The results of the noise impact assessment for the Proposed Project compared to the No‐

Build indicate that there would be nine severe noise impacts and nine moderate noise

impacts at residential location from the project. These noise impacts are limited to one

area as shown in Exhibit 5‐1I. The noise impacts are located in the southern portion of

the study area near the intersection of the NS tracks and the existing UP tracks.  

The noise impacts are due to the projected additional UP and NS trains in the 10th Street

corridor in an area where the No‐Build noise levels are lower than in other areas along

the 10th Street corridor where the noise environment is dominated by train horn noise at

grade crossings. In the southern portion of the 10th Street corridor, there are grade

separation and closures where existing trains do not currently sound their horns.   

Overall noise impacts would be reduced throughout the rail corridor of the

recommended alternatives because of the proposed quiet zone.  The retained

alternatives (either 2A or 2B) would eliminate train horns from being sounded

throughout the City, on all rail corridors.  This positive affect for not only the residents

living and working along the 10th Street Corridor, but city‐wide, will benefit from the

proposed action even with an increase in the overall number of trains.

Table 5‐7 represents a summary of noise impact results between the No‐Build

Alternative and Alternatives 2A and 2B.

Table 5‐7. Summary of Noise Impact Results

Receptor Location 

No-Build Alternatives 2A and 2B 

Number of Impacts Number of Impacts 

Moderate Severe Moderate Severe 

UP/I&M Intersection 210 21 0 0 

UP 3rd Street Corridor from UP/I&M 

Intersection to UP/NS Intersection 

2,248 632 N/A2

 N/A2

Relocated UP from I&M to NS N/A1

 N/A1

0 0 

10th Street Corridor from Relocated UP/NS 

Intersection to East Stanford Avenue 

2,083 113 9 9 

NS from East Sangamon Avenue to 

Relocated UP 

716 233 0 0 

I&M from UP to CN 388 63 0 0 

19th Street Corridor from I&M/CN 

Intersection to East Stanford Avenue 

130 522 0 0 

CN from East Sangamon Avenue to I&M 203 205 0 0 

TOTAL 5,978 1,789 9 9 

1. This location is outside of the project area. 2. This location is outside of the project area. 

Source: Harris Miller Miller & Hanson Inc., 2011 
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-54 Tier 2 Draft Document 

5.7.2.2 Vibrations Impact Assessment

No vibration impacts are projected for the No‐Build Alternative.  The 10th Street corridor

is currently defined as “heavily‐used” (more than 12 trains per day).  For the No‐Build

Alternative, there is no change to the train speeds or track locations, only an increase in

the number of trains per day.  Because the number of trains per day is not doubling on

the 10th Street corridor in the No‐Build Alternative, there would be no vibration impacts.  

Tables 5‐8 and 5‐9 summarize the results of the vibration impact assessment at

residential (Category 2) and institutional (Category 3) locations, respectively.  The tables

provide information by track location, including the distance to the nearest existing and

future tracks, train speeds in each location, existing and projected future vibration levels,

impact criterion, and number of vibration impacts.  The “number of vibration impacts”

means the number of vibration‐sensitive receptors that would experience vibration

impacts. Where vibration impacts are predicted, the tables provide the range of

vibration levels for those impacted receptors.   

The results of the vibration impact assessment for Alternatives 2A and 2B indicate that

there would be 129 impacts at residential (Category 2) locations and two impacts at

institutional (Category 3) locations. The vibration impacts from the project are on the

10th Street corridor, the new UP tracks between Phillips Street and Ridgely Avenue, and

on the new double track portion of the UP north of Ridgely Avenue. The vibration

impacts along the 10th Street corridor result from the new tracks and a significant

increase in train traffic along the corridor. The impacts between Phillips Street and

Ridgely Avenue result from the introduction of the new UP tracks in this location.  The

vibration impacts on the existing UP corridor north of Ridgely Avenue result from the

changes in the tracks and the presence of a number of crossovers. Vibration impacts are

also projected at the Caritas Hall Association and the Great Western Railroad Depot. The

Great Western Railroad Depot currently experiences vibration impacts with existing rail

traffic, the proposed project would reduce vibration levels from the No‐Build condition.  

All vibration impacts are limited to human annoyance, and the projected vibration levels

are below the criteria for potential damage to any building structures.

There are no vibration impacts projected on the section of the NS track north of Phillips

Street, or on the CN or I&M tracks because there is no change in the vibration levels in

those locations because of the proposed project.  Future operations would be on the

existing tracks with no change in speed.  Therefore there would not be any change in the

ground‐borne vibration levels at sensitive receptors adjacent to these portions of the

proposed project.

Alternatives 2A and 2B would reduce existing vibration levels and result in  no train‐

related vibration impacts at any sensitive receptors located along 3rd Street, including

the historic Dana Thomas House and the Memorial Medical Center and the Springfield

Clinic. These facilities are located approximately 3,000 feet from the 10th Street tracks and

the existing 3rd Street train traffic will be relocated to the 10th Street corridor.  
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-55 

Table 5‐8. Alternatives 2A and 2B Land Use Category 2 Vibration Impact Summary

Receptor Location

Distance To Near Track (ft)

Train Speed

(mph)

Existing/No‐

Build

Vibration

Level1

Projected

Vibration

Level1

V

C

Existing/No‐

Build Future

UP/I&M IntersectionE Sangamon Ave to E Griffiths Ave 65‐260 65‐220 10‐40 70‐84 72‐84 UP from I&M to NSE Griffiths Ave to E Black Ave 100‐170 70‐125 40 70‐75 73‐80 E Black Ave to N Grand Ave E2 95 300 40 76 61 N Grand Ave E to E Division St 80‐710 45‐135 40 55‐78 72‐85 UP/NS IntersectionE Division St to E Phillips St 40‐280 40‐185 40 63‐85 72‐85 10th Street Corridor from UP/NS Intersection to Existing UP (East Iles Avenue/West Highland Avenue)E Phillips St to E Carpenter St 35‐85 40‐95 40 77‐86 76‐85 E Madison St to E Monroe St 70‐95 45‐75 40 76‐80 79‐84 E Cook St to E Kansas/E Scarritt St2 230 155 40 67 71 E Kansas/E Scarritt St to E Cedar St 195‐200 100‐105 40 68 75 E Cedar St to E Ash St 130‐200 95‐140 40 68‐73 72‐76 E Ash St to E Princeton/Broad Pl 185‐200 115‐130 40 68‐69 73‐74 E Princeton/Broad Pl to E Iles/W Highland

Ave 35‐205 40‐135 40 68‐86 72‐86 

UP/NS from Existing UP Track to East Stanford AvenueE Stanford to E Iles/W Highland Ave 100‐190 40‐145 40 69‐75 73‐85 

TOTAL 

1 Vibration levels are measured in VdB referenced to 1 μ-inch/second. 2 There are no vibration impacts in this section. Data are for closest receptor in this location. 3 Vibration impacts are limited to human annoyance and are below thresholds for structural damage. 

Source: Harris Miller Miller & Hanson Inc., 2011 
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-56 

Table 5‐9. Alternatives 2A and 2B Land Use Category 3 Vibration Impact Summary

Receptor Name Receptor Location

Distance To Near Track (ft) Train

Speed

(mph)

Existing

Vibration

Level1

Projected

Vibration

Level1

Existing/No‐

Build Future

UP from I&M to NSCaritas Hall Association E Black Ave to N Grand Ave E 400 65 40 42 80 10th Street Corridor from UP/NS Intersection to Existing UP (East Iles Avenue/West Highland Avenue)Lincoln Depot E Monroe St to E Cook St 25 30 40 88 87 

TOTAL 

1 Vibration levels are measured in VdB referenced to 1 μ-inch/second. 2 Vibration impacts are limited to human annoyance and are below thresholds for structural damage. 

Source: Harris Miller Miller & Hanson Inc., 2011
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-57 Tier 2 Draft Document 

5.7.3 Construction Noise Impact Assessment 

Construction noise varies greatly depending on the construction process, type and

condition of equipment used, and layout of the construction site.  Many of these factors

are traditionally left to the contractorʹs discretion, which makes it difficult to accurately

estimate levels of construction noise.  Overall, construction noise levels are governed

primarily by the noisiest pieces of equipment.  For most construction equipment, the

engine, which is usually diesel, is the dominant noise source.  This is particularly true of

engines without sufficient muffling.  For special activities such as impact pile driving

and pavement breaking, noise generated by the actual process dominates.

Construction noise at a given noise‐sensitive location depends on the magnitude of noise

during each construction phase, the duration of the noise, and the distance from the

construction activities.  Projecting construction noise requires a construction scenario of

the equipment likely to be used and the average utilization factors or duty cycles (i.e.,

the percentage of time during operating hours that the equipment operates under full

power during each phase).  The noise impact assessment for a construction site is based

on:

 an estimate of the type of equipment that would be used during each phase of the

construction and the average daily duty cycle for each category of equipment,

 typical noise emission levels for each category of equipment, and

 estimates of noise attenuation as a function of distance from the construction site.

Construction noise estimates are always approximate because of the lack of specific

information available at the time of the environmental assessment.  Decisions about the

procedures and equipment to be used are made by the contractor.  Project designers

usually try to minimize constraints on how the construction would be performed and

what equipment would be used so that contractors can perform construction in the most

cost effective manner.  The project sponsor would evaluate potential construction noise

impact during engineering and design of the project, as more details of the construction

scenarios are known, including potential haul routes for excavated material.  

5.7.4 Noise and Vibration Mitigation 

5.7.4.1 Train Noise Mitigation Measures

Quiet zones are proposed to be established throughout the project area. Train horns

sounded near at‐grade crossings are the major noise source in the project area. Quiet

zones would eliminate this major noise source from freight train activities throughout

the project area.   

5.7.4.2 Train Vibration Mitigation Measures

The assessment assumes that the vehicle wheels and track are maintained in good

condition with regular wheel truing and rail grinding.  Beyond this, there are several

approaches to reduce ground‐borne vibration from train operations, as described below.
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-58 Tier 2 Draft Document 

Ballast Mats: A ballast mat consists of a pad made of rubber or rubber‐like material

placed on an asphalt or concrete base with the normal ballast, ties, and rail on top.  The

reduction in ground‐borne vibration provided by a ballast mat is strongly dependent on

the vibration frequency content and the design and support of the mat.

Resiliently Supported Ties: Resiliently supported ties have a rubber or other resilient

material placed between the ties and the ballast.  These ties may be effective in reducing

vibration 10 VdB at frequencies above 15 Hz.

Resilient Rail Fasteners: Resilient rail fasteners which are specially‐designed fasteners

between the rails and the ties.  Resilient rail fasteners may reduce vibration by 5 to 10

VdB at frequencies above 30 to 40 Hz.

Tire Derived Aggregate (TDA): Also known as shredded tires, a typical TDA installation

consists of an underlayment of 12 inches of nominally 3‐inch size tire shreds or chips

wrapped with filter fabric, covered with 12 inches of sub‐ballast and 12 inches of ballast

above that to the base of the ties.  Tests suggest that the vibration attenuation properties

of this treatment are midway between that of ballast mats and floating slab track.  While

this is a low‐cost option, it has only been installed on two U.S. light rail transit systems

(San Jose and Denver).

Floating Slabs: Floating slabs consist of thick concrete slabs supported by resilient pads

on a concrete foundation; the tracks are mounted on top of the floating slab.  Most

successful floating slab installations are in subways, and their use for at‐grade track is

less common. Although floating slabs are designed to provide vibration reduction at

lower frequencies than ballast mats, they are extremely expensive.

Special Trackwork at Crossovers and Turnouts: Because the impacts of vehicle wheels

over rail gaps at track turnout locations increases ground‐borne vibration by about 10

VdB, turnouts are a major source of vibration impact when they are located in sensitive

areas.  If turnouts cannot be relocated away from sensitive areas, another approach is to

use spring‐rail, flange‐bearing or moveable‐point frogs in place of standard rigid frogs at

turnouts.  These devices allow the flangeway gap to remain closed in the main traffic

direction for revenue service trains.

Property Acquisitions or Easements: Additional options for avoiding vibration impacts

(and noise impacts also) are for the transit agency to purchase residences likely to be

impacted by train operations or to acquire easements for such residences by paying the

homeowners to accept the future train vibration conditions.  These approaches are

usually taken only in isolated cases where other mitigation options are infeasible,

impractical, or too costly.

Vibration impacts are projected along the 10th Street corridor at the new UP tracks

between Phillips Street and Ridgely Avenue, and on the new double track portion of the  

   
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-59 Tier 2 Draft Document 

UP north of Ridgely Avenue.  A mix of special trackwork and other vibration mitigation

measures could reduce vibration levels at some locations.  However, vibration

mitigation generally does not perform well for freight trains because of the high axle

loads.  Some vibration mitigation measures would have limited effects at reducing

vibration levels from freight trains, but would not reduce vibration levels to below the

impact thresholds at all locations. Also the vibration impacts are only for human

annoyance levels and not for any structural damage to homes or businesses.

5.7.4.3 Construction Noise Mitigation Measures

Temporary noise during construction has the potential of being intrusive to residents

near the construction sites.  Construction activities would be carried out in compliance

with all applicable local noise regulations.  In addition, specific residential property line

noise limits would be developed during final design and included in the construction

specifications for the project, and noise monitoring would be performed during

construction to verify compliance with the limits.  This approach allows the contractor

flexibility to meet the noise limits in the most efficient and cost‐effective manner.  Noise

control measures that would be applied as needed to meet the noise limits include the

following:

 Avoiding nighttime construction in residential neighborhoods.

 Using specially quieted equipment with enclosed engines and/or high‐performance

mufflers.

 Locating stationary construction equipment as far as possible from noise‐sensitive

sites.

 Constructing noise barriers, such as temporary walls or piles of excavated material,

between noisy activities and noise‐sensitive receivers.

 Re‐routing construction‐related truck traffic along roadways that would cause the

least disturbance to residents.

5.8 Water Quality/Resources 

5.8.1 Surface Water Impacts 

The consolidation of rail to the 10th Street corridor would require regrading existing

drainage ditches alongside the additional rail alignments. Additional impervious

surfaces as a result of implementing either Alternative 2A or 2B would be the newly

constructed grade separations. Stormwater runoff in the project area would be collected

and treated in the same manner as the existing system. Over 90 percent of stormwater in

the project area would be collected in city combined sewers and routed for treatment to

the Sugar Creek Treatment Plant (for areas south of South Grand Avenue) or the Spring

Creek Treatment Plant (for areas north of South Grand Avenue). Stormwater runoff near

the project limits at Stanford Avenue and Sangamon Avenue are collected in city storm

sewers and routed to detention basins prior to discharge to waterways. Treatment and
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-60 Tier 2 Draft Document 

detainment of stormwater runoff would prevent further impairment of any receiving

waters as a result of the project. The No‐Build Alternative also has its stormwater runoff

collected in the City’s combined sewers.  

Construction and maintenance can potentially affect water resources in a variety of

ways.  Short‐term and long‐term impacts to surface waters as a result of construction

should be minimal because there are no waters of the U.S. (streams or lakes) within the

railroad right‐of‐way where construction is proposed.  

Short‐term construction impacts can result most directly from clearing, excavation and

fill activities that expose soils to erosion and elevate turbidity levels and siltation in

receiving waters.  Increases in suspended solids also can result in elevated levels of

coliform bacteria, total phosphorus, heavy metals and organic chemicals, such as

pesticides and herbicides.  Most of the discharges associated with construction activities

would be as temporary stormwater runoff into the City’s combined sewer system and

treated.   

Stormwater runoff from the project limit areas at Sangamon Avenue and Stanford

Avenue would be detained in stormwater basins and eventually discharge to Spring

Creek and Sugar Creek which flow to the Sangamon River.

Turbidity and sedimentation in the Sangamon River are expected to return to No‐Build

levels soon after construction.  Implementing erosion control measures outlined in the

Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan before, during, and after construction would

minimize impacts to the water quality of receiving waters as a result of stormwater

discharges from construction sites.

5.9 Utilities 

Each of the alternatives would require utility relocation, especially at any new

underpass. Each of the city streets that are to be reconstructed as grade separations

includes both overhead and underground utilities including gas, water, sewer,

telephone, cable TV and electric. These utilities are located within public right‐of‐way

and will remain within public right‐of‐way after construction. Cost and impacts for

utility relocation are included in the overall project. The existing utilities in 3rd Street

adjacent to the UP would need to be abandoned or relocated since the street would be

transferred to UP ownership to provide the required minimum right‐of‐way width for a

second track.  

The most significant utility relocation at the grade separations would be the large

diameter sewer on Ash Street.  This would be relocated to behind the abutments and

encased beneath the railroad tracks.  The cost of utility relocation is included in the

initial cost estimates. The No‐Build Alternative would require no utility relocation.
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-61 Tier 2 Draft Document 

5.10 Visual and Aesthetic Quality 

There is one sensitive visual resource that would be visible from Alternatives 2A and 2B.  

The Great Western Railway Station - a historic structure that was the location of

President Lincoln’s departure to Washington.  This resource would also be visible from

the No‐Build Alternative with existing rail traffic on the 10th Street tracks.  

Since no vertical elements, such as overpasses, would be added or removed at this

location, the change in the view would be minor since the view of the structure would

not be obscured by an overpass. .   

The NS overpass at North Grand Avenue would present a visual impact to the

surrounding homes and businesses.   Most homes and businesses are one or two stories

and the overpass would be 30 feet high.     

5.11 Special Waste 

The USEPA listing of potential, suspected, and known hazardous waste or hazardous

substances sites in the project area (i.e., the Comprehensive Environmental Response

Compensation and Liability Information System of CERCLIS list) was reviewed on

February 10, 2012, to ascertain whether the proposed project would involve any listed

sites. Based on this review, the proposed improvements associated with this project

would require right‐of‐way from one listed CERCLIS site, the Springfield Iron Company

at the northeast corner of the intersection of Ridgely Avenue and Factory Street (see

Exhibit 5‐1B). Another CERCLIS site, Nutronics, Inc., located at 1703 Peoria Road would

be within one block of the proposed improvements. More information regarding these

sites is located in Section 4.11.1 and Appendix B.  

Based on the information reviewed at this time, rail construction may encounter

petroleum‐contaminated soils at several locations within the project area. Construction

activities may require coordination with the responsible parties of the CERCLIS and

LUST sites and other reported sites concerning the disposal of excavated materials (see

Exhibits 5.1 and 5.2 for LUST site locations). Alternatives 2A and 2B both affect the same

number of CERCLIS and LUST sites. However, these sites are not anticipated to present

significant impairments to rail improvements associated with Alternatives 2A or 2B.  A

Preliminary Environmental Site Assessment (PESA) for special waste is recommended

prior to construction to determine risks and liabilities prior to land acquisition and

construction activities.

5.12 Special Lands 

The proposed action is adjacent to three Section 4(f) properties. These properties include

11th and Black Park, Iles Park and Lanphier Park (see Exhibits 5‐1 and 5‐2). There are

also three historic properties adjacent to the proposed rail R.O.W. These properties

include the Springfield Furniture Factory, Great Western Railroad Depot, and the Mine
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-62 Tier 2 Draft Document 

Rescue Station. No R.O.W. will be purchased from any of these properties and there is

no noise, vibration or aesthetic impacts resulting in Constructive Use, therefore these

properties do no result in any Section 4(f) impacts.  

11th and Black Park is two blocks north of North Grand Avenue. Eleventh Street borders

its west side with Black Avenue along the north, and a dead‐end street along the east

side. This park has four baseball diamonds that are primarily used for league play. A

pavilion and restroom facilities are on the north side of the park. Parking is provided

along the north side of the park.

A modified intersection at 11th and Black Avenue would be constructed. This

intersection is at the northwest corner of the park and is not anticipated to impact the

park access, parking, or require any right‐of‐way.  

Iles Park is along South 6th Street between Oak and Ash streets. Iles Park is city‐owned

and is one of the oldest city parks in Springfield having been acquired in 1903. The Iles

Park shelter was constructed in 1915 and is considered to be eligible to National Register

under Criteria A and C. However, the park has always experienced an adjacent railway

and no effects from Constructive Use or any additional right‐of‐way are anticipated

from the proposed project. To the north are residences and to the east and south are

commercial offices and warehousing. This 10.5 acre park has a variety of recreational

facilities and features including many mature trees that provide an attractive visual

quality to the park and surrounding area. The park is a popular lunch location for

people in nearby offices.

The park contains a stone picnic shelter, a smaller picnic shelter and restrooms. There is

also a playground, a lighted ball field, tennis courts and horseshoe courts provided in

the park.

On‐street parking is provided along Oak Street and along 9th Street. The park is

accessible to pedestrians from the surrounding residential neighborhoods by city

sidewalks. Two primary walkways are provided diagonally through the park.

The existing 10th Street railroad tracks are along the east side of the park separated by 9th

Street. The 9th Street access onto Ash Street would be closed. However, no impacts or

access changes to this park are anticipated.  

Robin Roberts Stadium is located in the south portion of Lanphier Park immediately

north of North Grand Avenue and is included in the park property. . This 5,200‐seat

baseball stadium is served by a 100‐vehicle parking lot, an office and maintenance

building and a playersʹ club house. The stadium is owned by the Springfield Park

District. This irrigated ball field is home of two collegiate level baseball programs and

several annual baseball tournaments.  
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-63 Tier 2 Draft Document 

Lanphier Park includes Robin Roberts Stadium and the area north of the stadium

between North Grand Avenue and Converse Avenue just east of Lanphier High School

and Memorial Stadium. The north part of the park has a picnic shelter, six lighted tennis

courts, a paddle tennis court, two full‐size basketball courts and small facilities

including a shuffleboard and horseshoe courts. The courts north of the stadium are used

by adjacent Lanphier High School and the surrounding neighborhoods.  

The proposed overpass at North Grand and the NS and I&M tracks would cause the

current access into Robin Roberts Stadium to be relocated about 500 feet to the west (see

Exhibit 5‐1J).  No additional right‐of‐way or other impacts are anticipated to this park.

Since the proposed project would not significantly affect the recreational activities,

features, and attributes that make this property eligible as a Section 4(f) property, a de

minimus use determination is anticipated.  A de minimis impact is one that does not

adversely affect the features and attributes of the 4(f) resource. Negotiations with the

property owner are continuing regarding this preliminary determination. A letter of

concurrence will be requested from the jurisdictional authority for any change in access

to the stadium. Coordination with the Park District will proceed until a concurrence

letter is received. Correspondence will be published in the Final EIS.  

Since there are no property takes from any of the three parks by the retained

alternatives, no Section 4(f) uses are anticipated (Table 5‐10). In addition, there would be

no impairment to any recreational activity of any of these parks as well, therefore no

substantial proximity effects would occur.  

Table 5‐10.  Potential Resources Not Qualifying for Protection Under Section 4(f)

Site Designation Site ID(1) Type Description Potential 4(f) Impact

11th and Black Park 5‐1B City Park Adjacent to proposed

project

No right‐of‐way required and

no substantial impairment to

recreational activities therefore

no Section 4 (f) use.  

Iles Park 5‐1G City Park Adjacent to proposed

project

No right‐of‐way required and

no substantial impairment to

recreational activities therefore

no Section 4(f) use.

Lanphier Park 5‐1J City Park Relocating parking

lot access 500 feet

No right‐of‐way required and

no substantially diminished

impairment to recreational

activities. However, a change in

access to the parking lot is

proposed.  

(1)Refer to exhibit number for location.  

5.13 Public Health, Safety and Security 

Reducing the number of crossings and improving crossing protection are the primary

ways to improve safety.  The anticipated number of vehicle‐train crashes in the design

year 2030 is shown for each alternative in Table 5‐11.  These were predicted using
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-64 Tier 2 Draft Document 

USDOT Grade Crossing Accident Prediction based on the method published in

summary of the IDOT Rail‐Highway Crossings Resource Allocation Procedure‐Revised,

June 1987 and Rail‐Highway Crossing Resource Allocation Procedure: User’s Guide,

Third Edition, August 1987.

Table 5‐11. Predicted Crashes

Alternative Predicted Crashes per Year (2030)

No‐Build 1.30

2A 0.26

2B 0.08

Alternatives that consolidate rail traffic on corridors with grade separations at the

busiest streets (2A and 2B) have the lowest projected number of crashes.  Simply

building more grade separations without consolidating is not as effective as

consolidating and building grade separations (2A and 2B).  The No‐Build Alternative

would also not fully address the 3rd Street pedestrian safety issues because rail traffic

would remain on the 3rd Street corridor.    

Each of the existing rail corridors through Springfield creates barriers to emergency

access during grade crossing closures.  Alternatives that consolidate rail traffic and

construct grade separations on future corridors (2A and 2B) are most effective in

eliminating the barriers to emergency vehicle access.

The 10th Street corridor would be fenced for each of the alternatives to minimize

trespassing on railroad property.  Alternatives 2A and 2B result in the fewest miles of

unfenced railroad property through the city.

The passenger station would be in a well‐lighted, highly visible location for each of the

alternatives.  

5.14 Permits 

The following permits are anticipated for the construction of Alternative 2A or 2B:

 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit

It is anticipated this project would result in the disturbance of one or more acres of total

land area. Accordingly, it is subject to the requirements for a National Pollutant

Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit for stormwater discharges from the

construction sites. The NPDES program requires a Notice of Intent, the development of a

Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan, and the submission of a Notice of Termination

when final stabilization of the construction site has been achieved. The Storm Water

Pollution Prevention Plan would identify potential sources of pollution which may

reasonably be expected to affect the quality of stormwater discharges from the

construction site and would describe and ensure the implementation of practices which
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-65 Tier 2 Draft Document 

would be used to reduce the pollutants in discharges associated with construction site

activities and assure compliance with the terms of the permit.

Since no waters of the U.S. or wetlands would be impacted by the proposed action, it is

not anticipated that a Section 404 permit of the Clean Water Act would be necessary.

5.15 Construction Impacts 

All of the necessary track work likely would need to be constructed prior to relocation of

rail traffic from 3rd Street to 10th Street.  This work would be completed in stages.  The

underpasses on the 10th Street corridor could be constructed concurrent with the track

work to minimize disruption of rail and street traffic.  NS traffic likely would use a

combination of existing and proposed tracks and UP traffic would remain on 3rd Street

until cutover to the new corridor.  

Construction of grade separations could be staged to minimize street closures.  This

could be accomplished primarily by closing the outside lanes during retaining wall and

bridge abutment construction while maintaining traffic on the inside lanes.  Street

closure could be limited to four to six months for underpass excavation and placement

of new street pavement.  The adjacent parallel streets would be used for detour traffic

during street closure. The contractor would work with the railroads and the City to

develop a construction staging plan that minimizes impacts to motorists and businesses.

The overpass at 15th Street and North Grand Avenue, and the underpasses at 19th

Street and Ash, and 19th Street and South Grand Avenue could be constructed

separately from the track work based on the availability of funding.

5.16 Indirect and Cumulative Impacts 

5.16.1 Indirect Impacts 

Indirect impacts are defined as reasonably foreseeable future consequences to the

environment that are caused by the proposed action, but that would occur either in the

future (later in time) or near, but not in the same location as, direct impacts associated

with implementation of a build alternative.  Under the CEQ regulations, indirect

impacts are defined as those that are “... caused by the action and are later in time or

farther removed in distance but are still reasonably foreseeable.  Indirect effects would

include growth‐inducing effects and other effects related to induced changes in the

pattern of land use, population density or growth rate, and related effects on air and

water and other natural systems, including ecosystems” (40 CFR 1508.8b).

Indirect impacts can be associated with the consequences of land‐use development that

would be indirectly supported by changes in local access or mobility.  Indirect impacts

differ from those directly associated with the construction and operation of a project

itself and are often caused by what is commonly referred to as “induced development.”  

Induced development would include a variety of alterations such as changes in land use,

economic vitality, property values and/or population density.  The potential for indirect
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-66 Tier 2 Draft Document 

impacts to occur is determined in part by local land‐use and development‐planning

objectives and the physical location of a proposed action.   

With the No‐Build Alternative, the existing rail service along the project corridor would

continue.  Over time, continued and increasing delays of vehicular traffic at roadway

crossings, air quality would worsen in the rail crossing vicinity.   

Alternatives 2A and 2B would result in indirect impacts as the additional passenger

train service could stimulate further development in the vicinity of the station.  The train

station and associated parking will be located on the block east of 10th Street (see Exhibit

3‐7). Access would be from Adams Street and 11th Street. The impacts are included with

overall project impacts. This development would be transit‐oriented and occur in

already built‐up areas and would be consistent with local plans. The Sangamon County

Regional Planning Commission has proposed a multi‐use transportation facility and

surrounding residential housing and recreational areas for the area around the proposed

train station. Local planning agencies would be responsible for investigating the impacts

to water, sewer, traffic and other environmental factors from any future development.  

Alternatives 2A and 2B would eliminate rail traffic on the 3rd Street corridor encouraging

renewed economic development in both the Downtown area and the Medical District.

Growth in these areas has long been inhibited by the presence of an active rail line.

Removal of that rail line would increase the attractiveness of Downtown to a variety of

businesses, especially commercial and retail. It would also make the Downtown area

more desirable for residential development.  

The Medical District’s master plan calls for growing the Memorial Medical Center and

St. John’s Hospital campuses towards one another along Carpenter Street to ultimately

create an integrated medical community serving patients from central and southern

Illinois. The master plan envisions a combined live‐work campus where residential

development supports the expansion of medical facilities and professional employment.  

Relocating the corridor would open up the opportunity for new construction and the

jobs associated with building new facilities, such as permanent, high‐wage medically‐

related jobs normally associated with new clinical facilities.  

This growth in the corridor would likely result in an increase in property values,

economic vitality and population density. Since the project area is primarily urban, other

environmental resources will not be significantly affected. Small areas of undeveloped

land and agriculture will likely be developed for commercial or multi‐residential use.  

Eliminating rail traffic in the 3rd Street corridor, and train horn noise in all of the

corridors, would improve the attractiveness of residential property in those

neighborhoods. The new overpasses along 10th Street and 19th Street would improve

access, especially for emergency vehicles and reduce the barrier effect of the rail lines.

This would work to increase property values and aid in encouraging the trend toward a

population increase in these communities.  
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-67 Tier 2 Draft Document 

5.16.2 Cumulative Impacts 

The consideration of cumulative effects consists of an assessment of the total effect on a

resource, ecosystem, or community from past, present, and future actions that have

altered the quantity, quality, or context of those resources within a broad geographic

scope.  Under the CEQ regulations, cumulative effects are defined as “... the impact on

the environment which results from the incremental impact of the action when added to

other past, present and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency

(federal or non‐federal) or person undertakes such other actions.  Cumulative effects can

result from individually minor but collectively significant actions taking place over a

period of time” (40 CFR 1508.7).  The cumulative effects analysis considers the aggregate

effects of direct or indirect impacts – from federal, non‐federal, public, or private actions

– on the quality or quantity of a resource.  

The intent of a cumulative‐effects analysis is to determine the magnitude and

significance of cumulative effects, both beneficial and adverse, and to determine the

construction of the proposed action of those aggregate effects.  Contributions to

cumulative effects associated with the No‐Build Alternative on the resources analyzed

would be limited to those derived from the direct and indirect impacts of the action.   

The Baseline Alternative would have a negative contribution to cumulative impacts. The

No‐Build Alternative would not provide as many benefits to safety, traffic congestion

and delay times as Alternatives 2A and 2B primarily because trains would continue to

run along two independent corridors and there would not be as many grade separations

constructed.  In addition, with increasing delay times at at‐grade crossings, air quality

would worsen in the vicinity of rail crossings.  

The construction of Alternative 2A or 2B would allow for the continued planning and

future construction of a multimodal facility on 10th Street between Washington and

Adams Street (see Exhibit 5‐1E).  This multimodal facility would facilitate transit

between trains, busses (both intercity and city), and taxi service.  This facility would be a

catalyst for growth on Springfield’s east side.  The proposed complex would provide

small shops, restaurants, office space for new businesses, daycare, meeting rooms, mini‐

parks and parking.  This facility would create much needed jobs in the neighborhood.  

Additional information for this proposed development can be found on the Sangamon

County Regional Planning Commission’s website at:

www.co.sangamon.il.us/Departments/RegionalPlanning/Special_Projects_Programs/

ThinkingBeyondTransit: Transit Oriented Development in Springfield, IL: A Planning

and Urban Design Exercise.  

The proposed improvement to freight and passenger rail service, in conjunction with the

proposed grade separations, would have beneficial contributions to the cumulative

impact to air quality of previous projects and foreseeable future projects along the 10th

Street corridor. The largest anticipated contribution to air quality is the implementation

of grade separations at several high traffic crossings. Free flow of vehicular traffic along

the rail line would reduce concentrated build‐ups of air pollutants such as CO. Also, the

proposed project would have an overall reduction in impacts to natural resources
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-68 Tier 2 Draft Document 

resulting from the reduction of sprawl into undeveloped areas around the perimeter of

Springfield.   

5.17 Other Impacts 

5.17.1 Railroad Operations 

Alternatives 2A and 2B would have identical length, travel time, and switching

requirements; the only difference being the number of at‐grade street crossings. Neither

of the alternatives would require additional switching at turnouts or crossovers. There

would be no appreciable change in length from existing operations for any of the

railroads.  Each of these alternatives would require the same number of tracks through

the City.  None of the affected railroad companies have expressed opposition to these

alternatives.    

At‐grade street crossings provide conflict points for rail traffic, safety concerns and

vehicle delays.  Minimizing these conflicts benefits both street and rail users.  The

number of at‐grade street crossings, length and travel time for each alternative is shown

in Table 5‐12.   

Table 5‐12. Number of At‐Grade Street Crossing for each Alternative

Alternative Number of At‐Grade

Street Crossings Length

(miles)

Travel Time

at 40 MPH

(minutes)

No‐Build 68 4.77 7.1(1)

2A 32 4.77 7.1

2B 28 4.77 7.1

(1) The improvements to the UP line that are currently being constructed (the No‐Build

Alternative) will allow UP freight and passenger traffic to operate at 40‐50 mph through

Springfield. The passenger operations will continue to operate at the same average

speed through Springfield under the Build Alternative, due to the need to stop at the

Springfield station.   

5.17.2 Reduce Train Horn Blowing 

The large number of at‐grade street crossings in Springfield produces frequent train

horn blowing, which can affect livability.  The most effective ways to reduce the

frequency of train horns is to consolidate rail traffic to corridors that have fewer at‐grade

crossings or to create quiet zones. A quiet zone is a segment of track where normal train

horn blowing is eliminated. This is typically achieved with the installation of four

quadrant gates or raised medians to prevent vehicles from entering the crossing when

the gates are down.     

The predicted duration of train horn blowing in minutes per day is shown in Table 5‐13.  

This was calculated based on the number and duration of horn blowing for each train as

it approaches each crossing in the City.  Horn blowing sequences are prescribed by law.  

Alternatives 2A and 2B assume that quiet zones are established.  
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-69 Tier 2 Draft Document 

Table 5‐13. Horn Blowing  

Alternative Horn Blowing min/day (2030)

No‐Build 314

2A 0

2B 0

Under Alternatives 2A and 2B, quiet zones will be created along both the 10th Street and

19th Street corridors by installing four quadrant gates or raised medians to prevent

vehicles from driving around the gates.  

5.18 The Relationship Between Local Short-Term Uses and 

Man’s Environment and the Maintenance and 

Enhancement of Long-Term Productivity 

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) regulations [40 CFR 1502.16] require a

discussion of the “relationship between short‐term uses of the environment and the

maintenance and enhancement of long‐term productivity” as part of an Environmental

Impact Statement (EIS).  NEPA requires the evaluation of a project to determine whether

long‐term benefits are worth the short‐term adverse effects.  

Short‐term effects are anticipated with the construction of any of the build alternatives.  

These effects include, but are not limited to, energy use during construction, travel

delays, traffic congestion, restricted access to residences, visual intrusions to residents

and motorists, and dust and noise to residents.  

Construction mitigation would reduce short‐term effects, but temporary construction‐

related disruptions would still occur.  In the long‐term, any of the build alternatives

would increase the railroad’s system capacity and passenger services and improve

safety, traffic congestion and delays through Springfield.

While the project would require a commitment of resources in the short‐term railroad

construction, it would conform to national and regional planning and would result in

long‐term benefits by accommodating anticipated train and vehicular traffic volumes,

reducing air emissions through an efficient flow of rail and vehicular traffic, and limiting

encroachment into sensitive environmental resources by utilizing existing right‐of‐way

to the extent possible.  

5.19 Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of 

Resources 

To facilitate a comparison of project alternatives, NEPA requires a consolidated

discussion of environmental consequences to focus on any irreversible and irretrievable

commitments of resources.  Irreversible resource commitments represent a loss of future

options.  It applies primarily to the use of nonrenewable resources, such as cultural

resources or fossil fuels, and to factors that are renewable only over long time spans.  An
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-70 Tier 2 Draft Document 

irretrievable commitment of resources represents opportunities that are foregone for the

period of the proposed action.  It relates to the use of renewable resources, such as

timber or human effort, as well as other utilization opportunities that are foregone in

favor of the proposed action.  

Implementation of the proposed action would result in the irreversible and irretrievable

commitment of natural and man‐made resources to the construction and operation of

the proposed action.  The primary commitment of resources would come from the

construction phase, but there would be some commitment of resources for operation of

the rail line.  In general, the commitment of resources would be common for all of the

build alternatives.  

The build alternatives would result in the irreversible and irretrievable commitment of

construction materials, such as steel, concrete, ballast rock, and wood. Though largely

irretrievable, these resources are not in short supply and many of the materials could be

recycled for other projects when they no longer meet the design needs of the passenger

or freight rail service.  In addition, energy resources (fuel) and financial resources would

be committed to the project for construction, operation, and maintenance.  Some land for

additional right‐of‐way would also be irretrievably and irreversibly committed for

conversion to the railroad.  

Human effort would be irretrievably committed during the planning, construction and

operation phases of the project.  The commitment of time and available labor in the

construction of the proposed action would also represent an irretrievable commitment of

resources.   

5.20 Transportation Impacts 

5.20.1 Service Development Plan 

There are no differences among the Springfield alternatives regarding:

 Rail service alternatives

 Service levels/frequencies

 Ridership/revenue

These issues are evaluated at the overall Chicago to St. Louis corridor level.

5.20.2 Capital Cost 

Capital costs for each alternative were estimated based on the required infrastructure

improvements, including station improvements and grade separations necessary to

accommodate increased freight and High‐Speed passenger traffic (Table 5‐14).  These

costs include construction, right‐of‐way, engineering and utility relocations.  

Construction quantities were computed for each of the major items of construction, and

average unit prices were applied to these quantities.  An appropriate contingency  
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-71 Tier 2 Draft Document 

varying from 20 percent to 25 percent of construction cost, depending on the complexity

of construction, was added along with engineering costs.  Land acquisition costs were

based on assessed values.  Costs were estimated in 2011 dollars.  

Table 5‐14. Capital Cost for each Alternative

Alternative Cost in Millions (2011)

No‐Build 0

2A $315

2B $338

5.20.3 Travel Benefits 

There are no differences among the Springfield Build alternatives regarding:

 Rail travel time

 Rail reliability

 Passenger train operational capacity

 Improvements in travel, more choices

The No‐Build Alternative would not provide the same rail reliability as the Build

Alternatives since passenger trains would operate on the single track UP line. There is

not sufficient capacity on the single track to accommodate 27 UP freight trains and the

proposed High Speed Rail service.  

These issues are evaluated at the overall Chicago to St. Louis corridor level, Volume 1.  

5.20.4 Additional Impacts to Rail, Air and Bus Service 

None of the Springfield alternatives would impact commuter rail services. Under the

No‐Build Alternative, UP freight rail would continue to operate, along with passenger

service, on a single track corridor. The Build Alternatives include two tracks for UP

freight and passenger service. The UP line would relocate from 3rd Street to 10th Street

and would be the same length as existing. NS freight would relocate to a corridor

immediately adjacent to the existing NS corridor. No change in length or operations are

anticipated. CN freight operations would remain unchanged. The City of Springfield

plans to construct a multimodal (rail, bus and airport shuttle) station on 10th Street. This

would improve access to air service by providing additional service to the airport. Public

transit riders will have improved access to rail service since the bus station would be

adjacent to the rail station.  This corresponds to Alternatives 2A and 2B.

5.21 Mitigation Actions 

Table 5‐15 summarizes proposed mitigation actions as they apply to each resource.  
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-72 Tier 2 Draft Document 

Table 5‐15.  Mitigation Actions

Resource 

Impacted Mitigation 

Land Use IDOT would implement the provisions of the State of Illinois

Relocation Assistance Plan in accordance with the Uniform

Relocation Act as mitigation action where ROW acquisitions and

land use changes occur.

Social/Economic Any adverse impacts of the proposed project would not be

disproportionately borne by minority or low‐income populations

yielding no need for mitigation action.

Cultural

The Section 106 process would continue with Memoranda of

Understanding for any adverse effects to National Register or

National Register eligible sites pending SHPO’s review of this Draft

Document.  

Natural Resources Avoidance, minimization, and best management practices

implementation would reduce adverse impacts. Section 7 of the

Endangered Species Act consultation would be ongoing to protect

threatened and endangered species in the project area.

Air Quality IDOT’s Standard Specification on dust control would be

implemented during construction to limit dust emissions during

construction.  

Noise and

Vibration

Quiet zones would be created throughout the City on all rail

corridors traversing the City.

Water

Quality/Resources

BMPs would be utilized to protect water quality. Almost all runoff

from construction would be diverted directly into the City’s

combined sewer system during and after construction and treated

by the Springfield Metro Sanitary District.  

Visual and

Aesthetic Quality

Views of trains and new rail lines would be considered a minor

adverse visual impact. IDOT would determine potential ways to

help reduce minor impacts, such as planting vegetation screens or

providing aesthetically pleasing features as part of the design.  

Special Waste Special waste sites purchased for additional right‐of‐way would be

remediated prior to construction of the proposed action.  

5.22 Preferred Alternative 

IDOT recommends selection of Alternative 2A. FRA will identify the Preferred

Alternative in the Final EIS after consideration of public and agency comments on the

Draft EIS.  

Alternative 2A consists of relocating the existing UP freight and passenger rail corridor

to a new location parallel to the NS tracks on 10th Street. The improvement consists of

constructing two UP tracks at 20 foot centers in a 75 foot right‐of‐way. The NS right‐of‐

way would be 65 feet wide with one main track and provision for a future track at 15

feet from the main track. The existing underpasses at Cook Street, South Grand Avenue,

5th Street and 6th Street would remain and be modified as necessary to accommodate the

new track.
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-73 Tier 2 Draft Document 

New grade separations would be constructed at the following locations:

 Ash at 10th (underpass)

 Laurel at 10th (underpass)

 Madison at 10th (underpass)

 Jefferson at 10th (underpass)

 Carpenter at 10th (underpass)

 North Grand at new UP track (underpass)

 North Grand at NS (overpass)

 Ash at CN (19th Street) (underpass)

 South Grand at CN (19th Street) (underpass)

The existing rail crossings would be closed at 10th Street and:

 Jackson

 Adams

 Reynolds

 Miller

 Enterprise  

Streets would be closed at the following locations:

 Princeton at 6th

 9th at Ash

 10 1⁄2 at Ash

 9th at Laurel

 10 1⁄2 at Laurel

 Division at new UP

 Reservoir at new UP

 10th at North Grand
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 5-74 Tier 2 Draft Document 

 Michigan at North Grand

 Wirt at Ash

 McCreery at South Grand

Improvements would be made to the remaining at‐grade crossings to allow

implementation of quiet zones on the CN, UP and NS rail corridors in the project area.  

The new rail passenger station would be located adjacent to the 10th Street rail corridor

north of Adams Street. The cost and impacts for the station are included with the overall

project. The existing NS rail yard would be purchased. Costs are included in overall

project costs.   

Rail traffic would be eliminated from the existing UP corridor from north of Ridgely

Avenue to south of Iles Avenue. Portions of Ridgely Avenue, Factory Street, Iles Avenue

and Burton Drive would be realigned to accommodate the track improvements.  

Alternative 2A is the IDOT Recommended Alternative for the following reasons:

 Alternative 2A would have lower capital cost than Alternative 2B.

 Alternative 2B would have lower delays, crash rates and lifecycles costs, but this

results primarily from constructing new grade separations at Monroe and

Washington Streets and closing Capitol Avenue and Enos Streets. The grade

separations both have a benefit/cost ratio much less than 1.0. The grade separations

and street closures create undesirable access and adverse travel issues as discussed

in Section 5.2.3.1 and 5.2.3.2.  

 Alternative 2B would require more right‐of‐way acquisition, and would result in

more commercial displacements and more parcels with a change in access.  

 Alternative 2B changes the access to the Great Western Railroad Depot due to the

construction of an underpass grade separation along Monroe Street.  

 There are no other anticipated differences between the impacts for Alternatives 2A

and 2B including environmental justice concerns, Section 4(f) properties, noise or

vibrations impacts.