• Amtrak Buffalo Exchange Street Replacement

  • Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.
Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.

Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, mtuandrew, Tadman

  by mtuandrew
 
Pensyfan19 wrote: Fri Nov 20, 2020 7:12 pm There's also the possibility of increased frequencies for the Empire Service, the eventual NY High Speed Rail on the corridor, and even GO Transit expanding to Buffalo; all of which would justify the use of a larger and grander station (of course being Central Terminal) that can hold more trains and represent the city's greatness.
(Emphasis mine)

Why is that a certainty? There’s a lot of undeveloped or underused land along the CSX track between Exchange Street, Washington Street, I-190, and the Larkinville wye. Some is within the CSX right-of-way, some is publicly-owned, and some looks privately-owned, but it looks like a mix of utilities, light industrial, and parking lots that can definitely have value added. In the past I’ve suggested a Larkinville station, but Buffalo chose to expand Exchange Street Station - it’s obviously the local choice and should continue to be.

Someday we need to have a discussion about Buffalo-Depew’s role in this area though.
  by Rockingham Racer
 
Ford is retaining only two tracks for possible future passenger rail at Michigan Central. Nothing grandiose at all.
  by Pensyfan19
 
Rockingham Racer wrote: Sat Nov 21, 2020 7:47 am Ford is retaining only two tracks for possible future passenger rail at Michigan Central. Nothing grandiose at all.
I am aware of the tragedy that is Ford's redevelopment of Detroit's Michigan Central Station by turning the platforms and track areas into what looks like car testing areas. However, I do not think there are any plans of the like for redevelopment of Buffalo's Central Station. There have been some attempts to restore the interior of the building, and even talks of bringing back rail service, but nothing much so far. I was referring to Buffalo's Central Station, not Detroit's.
  by Roadgeek Adam
 
You can have 50 trains a day going through Buffalo, from Amtrak to HSR to GO Transit to VIA. It still doesn't mean Buffalo Central Terminal would be the pick of the expansion. No, Buffalo-Exchange Street wouldn't either, but the costs for Buffalo Central Terminal are insane.

The active tracks to the headhouse is a long trip of 560 feet, involving crossing active freight tracks that commonly have double stacks on them. Yes, there is a lot of room for yardage and stuff, but there is the ADA accessibility and restoration costs that would make things questionable. Will there ever be ridership near justifying the couple billions it would probably cost to retrofit the station with elevators, walkways, ramps and connection restoration? We likely can't even make the reconnection due to double stacks.

I am going to hope Buffalo-Depew eventually is next in reconstruction from an Amshack to a proper high-level station. Doesn't seem likely as there are more important stops ahead.
  by MattW
 
GO Transit to Buffalo? Cross-border service on a commuter route? That's...interesting.
  by Roadgeek Adam
 
MattW wrote: Sat Nov 21, 2020 11:25 pm GO Transit to Buffalo? Cross-border service on a commuter route? That's...interesting.
I literally just used it since someone mentioned it above. It will never, ever happen. It's illogical in many areas.
  by Ridgefielder
 
Roadgeek Adam wrote: Sat Nov 21, 2020 1:00 pm You can have 50 trains a day going through Buffalo, from Amtrak to HSR to GO Transit to VIA. It still doesn't mean Buffalo Central Terminal would be the pick of the expansion. No, Buffalo-Exchange Street wouldn't either, but the costs for Buffalo Central Terminal are insane.
Stations like Bridgeport, CT or New Brunswick, NJ handle 80+/day with two platform tracks. Stamford handles 120+ with four. There's zero reason even exponentially expanded service would require a resuscitated BCT.

Remember, even in a NYS HSR scenario we're not going back to the Central's "Great Steel Fleet." The trains aren't going to require 15-20mins of station dwell time for mail & express handling, taking on coal and ice, or cutting in/out the through Pullmans for Jamestown or Canandaigua or some such place.
  by Gilbert B Norman
 
Ridgefielder wrote: Mon Nov 23, 2020 9:34 am The trains aren't going to require 15-20mins of station dwell time for mail & express handling, taking on coal and ice, or cutting in/out the through Pullmans for Jamestown or Canandaigua or some such place.
Mr. Ridgefield, at the risk of dragging the discussion off topic, allow me to quickly note that Jamestown was on the ERIE and had "three a day" up until "The End" which was '66. Two of 'em had through Pullmans, and the third was noted in the PTT as "Primarily Mail and Express".
  by mtuandrew
 
We’re also assuming trains aren’t terminating at BFX, or if so, that they would continue to a distant storage yard somewhere further toward Niagara Falls. Can’t store trains at the station without essentially nullifying its capacity.
  by Ridgefielder
 
Gilbert B Norman wrote: Mon Nov 23, 2020 10:45 am
Ridgefielder wrote: Mon Nov 23, 2020 9:34 am The trains aren't going to require 15-20mins of station dwell time for mail & express handling, taking on coal and ice, or cutting in/out the through Pullmans for Jamestown or Canandaigua or some such place.
Mr. Ridgefield, at the risk of dragging the discussion off topic, allow me to quickly note that Jamestown was on the ERIE and had "three a day" up until "The End" which was '66. Two of 'em had through Pullmans, and the third was noted in the PTT as "Primarily Mail and Express".
Mr. Norman-- I remembered after I posted that the Central only served Jamestown through its connection with the Jamestown, Westfield & Northwestern. And I have no idea if there was ever a through sleeper to Canandaigua.

My bigger point is still valid, though. No regional service today requires the kind of intensive servicing and station-dwell time that a train like, say, The Knickerbocker (NY/Boston - St. Louis, carrying through sleepers Boston-Chicago, Toronto-Cleveland, NY-Cincinnati, and Buffalo-St Louis) would have required in 1946.

Less station dwell time = less need for platforms.