New Carrollton, MD (NCR) Second Platform

Amtrak posted this press release on its Media website on 1/22/21:

WASHINGTON – Amtrak is transforming Northeast Corridor train travel by enhancing the customer experience, both in stations and on board trains. As part of this effort, Amtrak is currently accepting Letters of Interest from interested contractors until Feb. 15, 2021, for construction associated work at New Carrollton Station in Maryland. The project involves work within the existing station and the construction of a side platform, and will be closely coordinated with Amtrak for minimal impacts to service.

This infrastructure work is underway in preparation for the introduction of the new Acela fleet scheduled to begin entering service in 2021. The project is necessary to support higher frequency Acela service by expanding the routing options available for high-speed trains in the busy triple-track territory between Washington, D.C. and Baltimore, which is also heavily utilized by commuter trains.

Constructed in 1983 as an intermodal facility, the New Carrollton station serves Amtrak and Maryland Area Regional Commuter (MARC) trains, Washington Metrorail, Metro buses, MTA buses and county transit, as well as many commuting drivers who connect to transit and Amtrak. The New Carrollton Station is served daily by Amtrak’s Acela, Northeast Regional, Palmetto and Vermonter trains. New Carrollton Staton is located on the Northeast Corridor (NEC), one of the busiest, most complex, and economically vital transportation systems in the world connecting eight states and the District of Columbia.

In an effort to make Amtrak the smarter way to travel, we are also upgrading our infrastructure and modernization efforts and improving track capacity and ride quality all along the Northeast Corridor. The New Carrollton Station project also complements other significant station expansion investments at New York Penn Station; the opening of the new Moynihan Train Hall in New York; and further development of stations in Washington, D.C., Baltimore and Philadelphia.

From the document at the "Letters of Interest" link:

This project involves selective demotion within the existing station and the construction of a side platform on the east side of Track 1 at the New Carrollton Rail Station. There is an existing high-level platform positioned between Track 2 and Track 3 therefore, all work shall be coordinated with train and passenger service.

The platform for Track No 1 will be a newly constructed platform south-east of all track alignments. The construction of this platform will require construction modifications to the existing back of house space, existing concourse, and installation of new passenger vertical circulation elements between the existing station concourse and the new platform(elevator, two new stair cases and two escalators). The new platform will be approximately 1050 feet long and its canopy will be approximately 700 feet long.

If I remember correctly, they can condense the station down by a third without any impact to customers. This is a big station waiting area.

About time they put the second platform out to bid. I was wondering about that 25 years ago!

The main purpose of this new platform is to allow northbound MARC trains to get out of the way of following Amtrak trains. Northbound MARC trains will crossover at "Hanson" from No.2 track to No.1 track to stop at the new platform. An Amtrak train following the MARC local could then platform on No.2 track. A new interlocking named "Hanson" (named after the nearby highway, NOT the band) is being built just south of the route 50 overhead bridge and the Landover Metro station. This interlocking will replace Landover interlocking.

Anyone have any sketches of where the platform will be? Is it closer to the DC Metro island platform? (Is there a possibility for a fourth track for better flow of traffic?)

Pensyfan19 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 28, 2021 8:37 am Anyone have any sketches of where the platform will be? Is it closer to the DC Metro island platform? (Is there a possibility for a fourth track for better flow of traffic?)

Trying to find the EIS for the project but all I get is a grand scale EIS. Still, if they can even tie a 2-1 cross-over at LANDOVER then that's the ballgame for this.

RRspatch wrote: ↑Thu Jan 28, 2021 12:40 am The main purpose of this new platform is to allow northbound MARC trains to get out of the way of following Amtrak trains. Northbound MARC trains will crossover at "Hanson" from No.2 track to No.1 track to stop at the new platform. An Amtrak train following the MARC local could then platform on No.2 track. A new interlocking named "Hanson" (named after the nearby highway, NOT the band) is being built just south of the route 50 overhead bridge and the Landover Metro station. This interlocking will replace Landover interlocking.

damn, I was going to say, Beck interlocking would have complemented that well.

scratchyX1 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 28, 2021 12:23 pm damn, I was going to say, Beck interlocking would have complemented that well.

As much as I'd would derail the conversation into Mighty No. 9 (Beck/Call)... the interlock namings are largely based on local features.

LANDOVER because it's in Landover, MD; CARROL because it's in New Carrollton, MD; BOWIE for the same.
GROVE is because you access it from Jackson Grove Road in Odenton, MD.
WINANS is an exception because there was an old station of the same name from the PRR days nearby and it's near the Wynnwood neighborhood.
FULTON is under Baltimore's Fulton Avenue. CHARLES is close to Baltimore's Charles Street -- PAUL is close to St. Paul Street.

I could go on.

I hope there is enough room to eventually construct an additional track in between Tracks 1 and 2 to allow northbound Amtrak services to eventually pass through the station non-stop. My visualization of this proposed platform is that it will be built on top of the flat slab adjacent to the Metrorail island platform, allowing Track 1 to remain where it is currently located and thus leaving room in the right-of-way for another track to be built later.

The description says that all platform access will be from below, but I am curious to know if a footbridge will eventually be built to allow for access between the Metro platforms and the Amtrak/MARC platforms without having to use the below-ground concourse. I know that Odenton will eventually get a footbridge to replace its below-ground access tunnel so I wonder if New Carrollton will also be so equipped.

TheOneKEA wrote: ↑Thu Jan 28, 2021 9:44 pm I hope there is enough room to eventually construct an additional track in between Tracks 1 and 2 to allow northbound Amtrak services to eventually pass through the station non-stop. My visualization of this proposed platform is that it will be built on top of the flat slab adjacent to the Metrorail island platform, allowing Track 1 to remain where it is currently located and thus leaving room in the right-of-way for another track to be built later.

The description says that all platform access will be from below, but I am curious to know if a footbridge will eventually be built to allow for access between the Metro platforms and the Amtrak/MARC platforms without having to use the below-ground concourse. I know that Odenton will eventually get a footbridge to replace its below-ground access tunnel so I wonder if New Carrollton will also be so equipped.

For New Carrollton, space between the existing island platform and what looks to be the fence between the two stations is... 64 feet, using Wikimapia's measurement guide (Google Maps matching it). (Note all of this is rough guestimate measurements)

Max train width is 10 feet, and you need at least a foot between the trains. So that's 21 feet out, 43 feet left. Adding another track needs another 11 feet, so that's 21 feet for a platform. Plausible!

For Odenton... The platform is 12 feet and behind it 18 feet of walkway. You can shove in a fourth track by pulling back the platform. However, the plans for this station had an express platform, and the ramp takes up 15 feet. My guess, since the tail track is abandoned, is to move track 1 18 feet east south east, lay down track A east of that, and rebuild the northbound track further north-north-east matching that of the southbound platform. From there, you got 18 feet to build a platform and open the ramp down to the existing tunnel. Any elevator set and footbridge would need to be on the other end of the platforms.

"Landover" will remain an interlocking, but will be slimmed down to only one switch PW 1 track to CSX Landover Sub.

TheOneKEA wrote: ↑Thu Jan 28, 2021 9:44 pm I hope there is enough room to eventually construct an additional track in between Tracks 1 and 2 to allow northbound Amtrak services to eventually pass through the station non-stop. My visualization of this proposed platform is that it will be built on top of the flat slab adjacent to the Metrorail island platform, allowing Track 1 to remain where it is currently located and thus leaving room in the right-of-way for another track to be built later.

I'm not sure why you'd need a bypass track between No.1 track and No.2 track at Carroll. My slightly out of date 1996 Amtrak employee timetable shows the speed on No.2 and No.3 track to be 100 MPH between MP 125 and Landover and that includes passing the platform at NCR. The biggest problem at Carroll back when I worked CETC 1 was congestion northbound on No.2 track between following trains. This occurred mostly in the afternoon with heavy MARC and Amtrak northbound traffic out of DC. The new platform on No.1 track at NCR coupled with new "Hanson" interlocking will solve this problem. Looking at Google maps it looks like the new N.21 (No.2 track to No.1 track) switch at "Hanson" will be a No.32 turnout which is good for 90 MPH. I see three switch machines at each end of the switch as well as movable frogs. Now a MARC train stopping at NCR won't be going through this crossover at 90 MPH but they certainly will be able to go faster approaching it before they have to slow down for the stop. I should add it looks like all the switches at "Hanson" are No.32 turnouts with the exception of the No.12 switch (No.1 to No.2) which would only be used by CSXT. This switch looks to be a No.20 turnout good for 45 MPH.

TheOneKEA wrote: ↑Thu Jan 28, 2021 9:44 pm The description says that all platform access will be from below, but I am curious to know if a footbridge will eventually be built to allow for access between the Metro platforms and the Amtrak/MARC platforms without having to use the below-ground concourse. I know that Odenton will eventually get a footbridge to replace its below-ground access tunnel so I wonder if New Carrollton will also be so equipped.

Building an overhead walkway between the Metro Orange line platform and the two Amtrak/MARC platforms would save very little if any time. The Metro platform is a paid fare area. You'd need two escalators, a stairway and an elevator leading up to a new overhead concourse. In this concourse you'd need faregates, Add-fare and farecard vending machines. from this concourse you'd need four escalators (two for each platform), two stairways (one for each platform) and two elevators (one for each platform. Since you'd still have to up and then back down as opposed to the current down and back up I'm hard pressed to see where the time savings would be.

Now the MARC station at Odenton is a whole different story as there's no paid area or faregates to deal with. The current tunnel is a nice low tech option with gentle ramps which solves the ADA issue. Whether or not the proposed overhead walkway uses elevators ($$) or ramps (see Aberdeen) will probably have to be decided.

amtrakhogger wrote: ↑Fri Jan 29, 2021 10:01 pm "Landover" will remain an interlocking, but will be slimmed down to only one switch PW 1 track to CSX Landover
Sub.

That surprises me that Amtrak will keep the No.91 switch and the three signals protecting it. Looking at Google maps it looks like a right of way was graded along side No.1 track between Landover and Hanson. Heck, it's not even that far. Extend the two freight tracks from Landover to Hanson and kill Landover all together. Of course they could just turn the No.91 switch as well as those three signals over to Jacksonville and be done with it.

RRspatch wrote: ↑Sat Jan 30, 2021 2:34 am Now the MARC station at Odenton is a whole different story as there's no paid area or faregates to deal with. The current tunnel is a nice low tech option with gentle ramps which solves the ADA issue. Whether or not the proposed overhead walkway uses elevators ($$) or ramps (see Aberdeen) will probably have to be decided.

Given the existing parking lots, it would be an elevator like that of Halethorpe, and likely will reduce parking. I can't see building a ramp up to MD 175 to utilize the bridge.

I can't see them not putting in an express platform at Odenton. Odenton (pre-pandemic) is damned busy!

STrRedWolf wrote: ↑Sat Jan 30, 2021 12:27 pm

RRspatch wrote: ↑Sat Jan 30, 2021 2:34 am Now the MARC station at Odenton is a whole different story as there's no paid area or faregates to deal with. The current tunnel is a nice low tech option with gentle ramps which solves the ADA issue. Whether or not the proposed overhead walkway uses elevators ($$) or ramps (see Aberdeen) will probably have to be decided.

Given the existing parking lots, it would be an elevator like that of Halethorpe, and likely will reduce parking. I can't see building a ramp up to MD 175 to utilize the bridge.

I can't see them not putting in an express platform at Odenton. Odenton (pre-pandemic) is damned busy!

If there were enough space to do so I could see Odenton being equipped with four platforms on all tracks and timetabled for express services that skip every other intermediate stop except for BWI Marshall. I don't think the space requirements for an elevator-equipped footbridge would be bad enough to reduce the available parking, especially since there are long-term plans to build a multi-day parking garage at the station.

RRspatch wrote:

TheOneKEA wrote: ↑Thu Jan 28, 2021 9:44 pm I hope there is enough room to eventually construct an additional track in between Tracks 1 and 2 to allow northbound Amtrak services to eventually pass through the station non-stop. My visualization of this proposed platform is that it will be built on top of the flat slab adjacent to the Metrorail island platform, allowing Track 1 to remain where it is currently located and thus leaving room in the right-of-way for another track to be built later.

I'm not sure why you'd need a bypass track between No.1 track and No.2 track at Carroll. My slightly out of date 1996 Amtrak employee timetable shows the speed on No.2 and No.3 track to be 100 MPH between MP 125 and Landover and that includes passing the platform at NCR. The biggest problem at Carroll back when I worked CETC 1 was congestion northbound on No.2 track between following trains. This occurred mostly in the afternoon with heavy MARC and Amtrak northbound traffic out of DC. The new platform on No.1 track at NCR coupled with new "Hanson" interlocking will solve this problem. Looking at Google maps it looks like the new N.21 (No.2 track to No.1 track) switch at "Hanson" will be a No.32 turnout which is good for 90 MPH. I see three switch machines at each end of the switch as well as movable frogs. Now a MARC train stopping at NCR won't be going through this crossover at 90 MPH but they certainly will be able to go faster approaching it before they have to slow down for the stop. I should add it looks like all the switches at "Hanson" are No.32 turnouts with the exception of the No.12 switch (No.1 to No.2) which would only be used by CSXT. This switch looks to be a No.20 turnout good for 45 MPH.

Once the NEC is widened to four tracks between FULTON and GROVE, I see no reason why the four-tracking should not be planned for a further extension south to HANSON. It would allow for all Amtrak services to use the center pair of tracks, and all of the MARC services (and the occasional CSX freight on/off the Pope's Creek Sub at Bowie) to use the outer pair of tracks.

The new interlocking will absolutely solve the problems you've identified and experienced with pathing MARC and Amtrak on the existing three tracks, but if/when the fourth track is added through the station, it won't need a platform - no northbound Amtrak service would ever need to stop there in service, and the interlocking will have to be adjusted anyway since the Magruder branch won't be widened for at least the next 20 years.

What's "selective demotion"? Should that say "demolition"? In the words of a broken heart, it's just demotion (actually, the song said, "it's just emotion").