Connecticut New Haven Line and Shore Line East Service Levels and Cuts

Does anyone know more about the state's plan to cut Shore Line East service to 44% of Pre-Covid levels?

What? Where'd you hear this?

Shore Line East, for example, is only operating at two-thirds the level it did before the pandemic, while the more popular New Haven and Hartford lines have returned to full service. In his proposed budget for the next two fiscal years, Lamont has proposed cutting Shore Line East service even further to 44 percent of pre-pandemic levels. (The governor’s budget also proposed cutting New Haven line service to 86 percent of its pre-2020 level to reflect a slower-than-expected return of riders).

https://www.ctinsider.com/politics/arti ... 895076.php

That's ridiculous. Maybe they should encourage TOD and actually have anything around the stations, and bring the schedule back. If the schedule sucks, of course the ridership will.

Problem is single-family homes and NIMBYs, but the parking lots are absurdly large and could easily fit a couple hundred apartments.

The DOT shouldn't be spending any money on expansions before increasing service and improving the molasses New Haven Line.

daybeers wrote: ↑Fri May 05, 2023 4:08 pmThat's ridiculous. Maybe they should encourage TOD and actually have anything around the stations, and bring the schedule back. If the schedule sucks, of course the ridership will.

Problem is single-family homes and NIMBYs, but the parking lots are absurdly large and could easily fit a couple hundred apartments.

The DOT shouldn't be spending any money on expansions before increasing service and improving the molasses New Haven Line.

In general, you are right about TOD and land use, but my observations of people getting on and off SLE is that a significant chunk of its ridership are using it as a regional rail system and not as daily commuter rail.

There's probably some opportunities for TOD, and more stations east of OSB to serve more people with existing trains. Extending to Mystic and Westerly would also increase ridership.

They're running 11 trains eastbound compared to 18 pre-covid. Of those, two are at 5 and 6 in the morning, and are completely useless for all intents and purposes. If I recall correctly, there was only one ultra-early train pre-Covid. So as far as a normal rider is concerned, it's 9 trains versus 17.

Twelve daily round-trips would be adequate if they were utilized effectively. Inexplicably, the 10:50 arrival in New London turns around and goes back to New Haven at 11:05 PM, most likely empty. This means that the 5:30 AM from New London requires a deadhead in the morning, in addition to the 5 and 6 AM eastbound departures. Keeping the 10:50 arrival in New London overnight would eliminate a costly deadhead from New Haven. They could also leave one train in Old Saybrook overnight as well, and have it deadhead to/from New London. That move right there eliminates two totally empty revenue runs, and replaces a 51 mile deadhead with an 18 mile one.

Now that we've opened up an extra round-trip or two, we could bridge the gap between the 6:40 and 9:45 trains, improve AM peak frequency, and/or add a mid-afternoon train to bridge that three-hour gap. Trains that would actually, you know, carry people.

Long story short - 12 or 13 round trips a day is a reasonable number if they're ran in a way that is useful to passengers.

ElectricTraction wrote: ↑Fri May 05, 2023 4:23 pm

daybeers wrote: ↑Fri May 05, 2023 4:08 pmThat's ridiculous. Maybe they should encourage TOD and actually have anything around the stations, and bring the schedule back. If the schedule sucks, of course the ridership will.

Problem is single-family homes and NIMBYs, but the parking lots are absurdly large and could easily fit a couple hundred apartments.

The DOT shouldn't be spending any money on expansions before increasing service and improving the molasses New Haven Line.

In general, you are right about TOD and land use, but my observations of people getting on and off SLE is that a significant chunk of its ridership are using it as a regional rail system and not as daily commuter rail.

There's probably some opportunities for TOD, and more stations east of OSB to serve more people with existing trains. Extending to Mystic and Westerly would also increase ridership.

For TOD - Old Saybrook has it and their main lot still fills up even these days. I suppose an extra apartment or two could be built in the overflow lot. Westbrook's lot is pretty constrained by marsh and houses. Clinton is already getting it. Madison just had a new apartment building go up less than a quarter-mile from the station. Guilford is in a flood zone and is surrounded by NIMBYs, plus I don't think that lot is wide enough for anything. Branford is the big one - a massive, empty lot that was ridiculous when it was built. They really should build something on that, even if it's just a small 10-12 unit development. There's also some stuff across the street.

nomis wrote: ↑Fri May 05, 2023 2:56 pm

Shore Line East, for example, is only operating at two-thirds the level it did before the pandemic, while the more popular New Haven and Hartford lines have returned to full service. In his proposed budget for the next two fiscal years, Lamont has proposed cutting Shore Line East service even further to 44 percent of pre-pandemic levels. (The governor’s budget also proposed cutting New Haven line service to 86 percent of its pre-2020 level to reflect a slower-than-expected return of riders).

https://www.ctinsider.com/politics/arti ... 895076.php

It's kind of hard to bring the ridership back when the train frequencies were never restored to the pre-COVID levels in the first place.

Traingeek3629 wrote: ↑Fri May 05, 2023 8:54 pm Keeping the 10:50 arrival in New London overnight would eliminate a costly deadhead from New Haven. They could also leave one train in Old Saybrook overnight as well, and have it deadhead to/from New London. That move right there eliminates two totally empty revenue runs, and replaces a 51 mile deadhead with an 18 mile one.

Well, let’s inject a bit of reality into this for a moment.

There’s no place in New London or Old Saybrook to store a train overnight. Storing on the main track isn’t an option.

There is no mechanical presence in New London or Old Saybrook to perform required daily inspections or any maintenance issues that may need to be addressed.

There is no crew base in New London or Old Saybrook. How do you get crews home at night, and to their train in the morning?

Providing all of those things costs a lot of money, takes real estate, and requires Amtrak participation. Likely non-starters.

Jim

Erie-Lackawanna wrote:There’s no place in New London or Old Saybrook to store a train overnight. Storing on the main track isn’t an option.

Old Saybrook has a third track that is electrified, and a train sat overnight on it pre-Covid. New London also has a third track, although I don't believe it's electrified yet. If a train sitting on one of the main tracks isn't possible, then you could easily store a second train on that Old Saybrook siding - it runs for quite a while. Actually, I just looked at an old schedule, and it looks as if two trains were stored on it.

Erie-Lackawanna wrote:There is no mechanical presence in New London or Old Saybrook to perform required daily inspections or any maintenance issues that may need to be addressed.

The daily inspection can just as easily be performed once the train arrives at New Haven. If there's a maintenance issue, then just deadhead it to New Haven and run another set out in the early morning.

Erie-Lackawanna wrote:There is no crew base in New London or Old Saybrook. How do you get crews home at night, and to their train in the morning?

They use their cars? Not sure why it makes a difference where they commute to, especially if they live somewhere east of New Haven.

Traingeek3629 wrote: ↑Fri May 05, 2023 9:01 pmFor TOD - Old Saybrook has it and their main lot still fills up even these days. I suppose an extra apartment or two could be built in the overflow lot. Westbrook's lot is pretty constrained by marsh and houses. Clinton is already getting it. Madison just had a new apartment building go up less than a quarter-mile from the station. Guilford is in a flood zone and is surrounded by NIMBYs, plus I don't think that lot is wide enough for anything. Branford is the big one - a massive, empty lot that was ridiculous when it was built. They really should build something on that, even if it's just a small 10-12 unit development. There's also some stuff across the street.

TOD has little to do with parking demand. If a station is popular, it's going to need a good amount of parking. Not all towns are ideal for TOD, but in some places it may make sense within the 1/2 mile walkshed of a station.

Erie-Lackawanna wrote: ↑Sat May 06, 2023 7:07 amThere is no mechanical presence in New London or Old Saybrook to perform required daily inspections or any maintenance issues that may need to be addressed.

That and isn't there some issue with ACSES that it has to be activated in New Haven? Not sure how P&W handles it though, since they enter the NEC at Groton from dark territory.

In general, though, railroads should get rid of scheduled deadheads and just let people ride them, like that weird SLE train. MN has a bunch of scheduled deadheads, they should just make them super-expresses.

ElectricTraction wrote: ↑Sat May 06, 2023 9:01 pm

Traingeek3629 wrote: ↑Fri May 05, 2023 9:01 pmFor TOD - Old Saybrook has it and their main lot still fills up even these days. I suppose an extra apartment or two could be built in the overflow lot. Westbrook's lot is pretty constrained by marsh and houses. Clinton is already getting it. Madison just had a new apartment building go up less than a quarter-mile from the station. Guilford is in a flood zone and is surrounded by NIMBYs, plus I don't think that lot is wide enough for anything. Branford is the big one - a massive, empty lot that was ridiculous when it was built. They really should build something on that, even if it's just a small 10-12 unit development. There's also some stuff across the street.

TOD has little to do with parking demand. If a station is popular, it's going to need a good amount of parking. Not all towns are ideal for TOD, but in some places it may make sense within the 1/2 mile walkshed of a station.

What I'm saying is that the lots, with the exception of Branford and Old Saybrook, aren't really big enough to be built upon.

I was not aware of that being an issue with the ACSES. If so, then their hands are tied. I'm certain they kept at least one train at OSB overnight pre-Covid, though.

Traingeek3629 wrote: ↑Sat May 06, 2023 9:17 pmWhat I'm saying is that the lots, with the exception of Branford and Old Saybrook, aren't really big enough to be built upon.

It's not necessarily the lots themselves, but upzoning property within 1/2 mile walkshed of the station.

The original comment I was replying to specified lots, although I did mention nearby developments in Madison/Clinton. Branford is ripe for more TOD both in the second lot and around the station - there's still a good deal of vacant land near the current developments. Nothing will be built by Guilford - that area floods on a good hightide.

Traingeek3629 wrote: ↑Mon May 08, 2023 8:34 pmThe original comment I was replying to specified lots, although I did mention nearby developments in Madison/Clinton. Branford is ripe for more TOD both in the second lot and around the station - there's still a good deal of vacant land near the current developments. Nothing will be built by Guilford - that area floods on a good hightide.

There's different ways to crack the nut of TOD. Flooding alone isn't really that big of a deal- people build stuff by the beach all the time, with park garages on the first level, or the whole thing just elevated up. It's more a question of the NIMBYs since that is right next to a historic area (not sure where the historic district proper is), and if there's any land there to actually build on.