AMTRAK NEC: Springfield Shuttle/Regional/Valley Flyer/Inland Routing

[Arlington]

[T]he Providence-style station was the best of the available conceptual options and got the most public support... The train station's not going away as the all-modes transportation center. If it takes a 300 ft. walkway or people-mover to save a billion dollars, save the billion dollars. That's not a hard call.

Are there any visuals online for the option they chose? I can tell you have a very clear vision, but I find it impossible to picture.

{EDIT}Answer my own question:
Showing all options
http://i84hartford.com/img/documents/PA ... 010-14.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Showing lowered highway (and offset new station)
http://i84hartford.com/img/documents/I- ... Rev_11.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Nice set of docs: http://i84hartford.com/pac-materials.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[sipes23]

If it takes a 300 ft. walkway or people-mover to save a billion dollars, save the billion dollars. That's not a hard call.

No one seems to mind the underground walkway between the B and C gates at O'Hare, so there is a way to get an underground passage to be inviting. Saving a billion dollars sounds awfully inviting to me. And isn't there probably some "public art" money attached to the project? I think Illinois does that, so I'd not be surprised of there are some dollars available to make the walkway nice. Of course, there may not be.

[Station Aficionado]

If it takes a 300 ft. walkway or people-mover to save a billion dollars, save the billion dollars. That's not a hard call.

No one seems to mind the underground walkway between the B and C gates at O'Hare, so there is a way to get an underground passage to be inviting. Saving a billion dollars sounds awfully inviting to me. And isn't there probably some "public art" money attached to the project? I think Illinois does that, so I'd not be surprised of there are some dollars available to make the walkway nice. Of course, there may not be.

But there has been a lot of complaint about moving the platforms at Sacramento significantly further from the station (granted that's above-ground).

[Jehochman]

But there has been a lot of complaint about moving the platforms at Sacramento significantly further from the station (granted that's above-ground).

The new Hartford rail station, if designed properly, will be right on top of the tracks and could have a parking garage that's more convenient than what's there now. The current rail station is full of offices. In the basement there's a Subway a Dunkin Donuts, and an Amtrak ticket booth with stairs up to the platform. Anything new would likely be an improvement. The buses may remain at the old station, and there would be a walkway to the new train station. The new station and highway will probably be built over the existing parking, so new parking will need to be created. The new rail alignment will be straighter, and not have an ancient viaduct that's hard to maintain.

[Station Aficionado]

But there has been a lot of complaint about moving the platforms at Sacramento significantly further from the station (granted that's above-ground).

The new Hartford rail station, if designed properly, will be right on top of the tracks and could have a parking garage that's more convenient than what's there now. The current rail station is full of offices. In the basement there's a Subway a Dunkin Donuts, and an Amtrak ticket booth with stairs up to the platform. Anything new would likely be an improvement. The buses may remain at the old station, and there would be a walkway to the new train station. They new station and highway will probably be built over the existing parking, so new parking will need to be created. The new rail alignment will be straighter, and not have an ancient viaduct that's hard to maintain.

I don't disagree at all that the current situation is not good. I've been there on a hot summer day and it was pretty unpleasant--sort of a miniature Penn Station in some ways. But I thought from reading through this thread and looking at the documents that (under the lowered road alternative) the current station would continue to house the ticketing facilities, with passengers then walking over to the new platforms north of the current station. If I'm wrong about that, I will happily stand (or sit) corrected. Perhaps the plan is to have ticketing facilities closer to the platform and the powers that be don't want to (at this point) concede that the current station will just be a bus station (operating out the same current unpleasant locations? or are they going to kick out some of the headhouse tenants?), but that was not apparent to me.

I'll just throw in, as an outsider (and not a CT taxpayer) that surface-level and elevated freeways through the heart of a city are bad things. The should either be gotten rid of entirely (as in Portland and San Francisco) or buried (as in Boston--and, yes, I know about the problems with the Big Dig). If the lowered road alternative is indeed the final word, I would not be surprised if, in the pretty near future, Hartford were to realize that they should've been bolder (even if the upfront cost were higher). With that, I'll try to stop being off-topic.

[Jehochman]

A tunnel is 4-5 billion extra. They will put the highway in a cut and bridge the local streets over it, and probably have a deck over a portion that can be developed. Tunneling in Hartford would be complex because there is a buried river and a second buried creek. The surrounding industrial neighborhoods don't have the land value of Boston. Tunneling just won't be cost effective. Grade level might not be very nice, but it's a lot better than an ugly, noisy elevated highway.

Amtrak will put a ticket booth near the tracks. The plan shows a new station building right above the tracks. The old station will be for buses and office space.

[asull85]

So I feel the need to chime in here...

1. The shuttles do not make guaranteed connections with Metro North. The only time they might wait is if there is a service disruption and a deal is made to carry Amtrak's passengers.

2. Hartford Station isn't going anywhere. It will be too cost ineffective to move I-84 and the railroad. The viaduct needs some help but as of now there is no funding

3. The Connecticut River Bridge needs to be replaced, not repaired. It is way beyond that. Over the summer, I had heard they received funding to replace it but I haven't heard anything about it since.

4. Back to the shuttles. There are no plans to take them off. In fact, they may add a round trip in the next year or two to fill some gaps. Also, there is talk about running a couple upto Northampton/Greenfield in the not so distant future.

5. The Springfield Line double track project will begin in Hartford (at least that was their plan a few weeks ago). They removed the Hartford Running Track and quite literally, dragged it out of the way. The plan is to install Track 2 along with a Controlled Siding from HART to MIDLAND in the spring. MIDLAND will be located just north of where FRY is now. After that is done, culvert and bridge work will begin. After the culverts and bridges have been completed, QUARRY to NEW will have Track 2 put down. New interlockings WILLOW (MP27ish) and JOHN ST. (MP28.5ish) will be cut in and QUARRY and NEW will be removed. Once all of that work is completed, Track 2 will be extended to WINDSOR and that interlocking will be removed. Finally, they will run Track 2 from CEDAR to HOLT. CP WALL will remain in service, having universal crossovers. As of now Hartford station and HAYDEN to FIELD will not be double tracked until the viaduct is repaired and bridge is replaced.

6. Once in a while I hear the rumor that the line will be electrified. NO!!! No it will not! Not in our lifetimes anyway.

7. The new signal system will be going in soon. Along with ACSES. Once all the work is completed, the track speed will be raised to 110mph, 90 in some curves, 60 through Meriden and Wallingford. To my knowledge, Hartford stays at 20mph.

8. Don't get me started on the 220mph high speed rail vision that some people came up with.

[asull85]

I can't wait for the faster speeds especially to and from Vermont. I doubt we will ever have Dual mode locomotives for Overhead wire to Diesel to get rid of the changeover in new haven.

Sorry bud, you'll just have to deal with the power change in NHV. It usually takes less than 10 minutes before the HEP is restored. Amtrak has no plans to acquire additional dual mode units. They are just now beginning to discuss replacing the P42's and F59's.

[F-line to Dudley via Park]

2. Hartford Station isn't going anywhere. It will be too cost ineffective to move I-84 and the railroad. The viaduct needs some help but as of now there is no funding.

1. CDOT says otherwise.

2. The Aetna Viaduct will fall over if it is not tended to. No funding = ¡find funding! even if they have to raid something else's funding. This is non-optional. It must be replaced starting within 10 years, and if it is being replaced by anything they intend to sink the highway into a cut.

3. Unless you have insider info in the CT state government saying they are changing the project, your personal opinion on the matter does not sway the state's own stated preferred alternative. They have made no project changes in recent community meetings.

3. The Connecticut River Bridge needs to be replaced, not repaired. It is way beyond that. Over the summer, I had heard they received funding to replace it but I haven't heard anything about it since.

This is also not true. And your personal opinion on its structural viability also does not change the engineering assessment of it and CDOT's plans to seek funding for a substantial rehab of it.

7. The new signal system will be going in soon. Along with ACSES. Once all the work is completed, the track speed will be raised to 110mph, 90 in some curves, 60 through Meriden and Wallingford. To my knowledge, Hartford stays at 20mph.

No, it will not. They are not funded for Class 5 (90 MPH) increases, let alone Class 6 (110). That requires a large amount of additional funding. The upgraded signal system is capable of higher speeds, but the track is not. It is Class 4/79 MPH max same as before until further upgrade money is available. Which it won't be until they finish funding the baseline double-track and upgrades north of Hartford. CDOT has a track chart on the NHHS website for the current project showing all post-upgrade speeds. The crossing gate upgrades mitigate some (but not nearly enough) of the painful Wallingford and Meriden slow zones, but the max speed on the Springfield Line does not increase beyond 79 MPH. To do more is an entirely separate project and entirely separate set of appropriations than what they are doing now.

[asull85]

All I will say is you are mistaken on almost every single item. It is too late in the day for me to go through every single thing and explain why you are. But I will say the speed limit on the MRS line is already above 79mph.

[Ridgefielder]

But I will say the speed limit on the MRS line is already above 79mph.

Can someone w an ETT verify?

[DutchRailnut]

my 2008 ETT says max speed 80 mph.

[F-line to Dudley via Park]

But I will say the speed limit on the MRS line is already above 79mph.

Can someone w an ETT verify?

I may not be all-knowing like our friend here who refuses to show his sources, but this is what CDOT's own implementation plan says the speeds will be:

http://www.crcog.org/publications/Trans ... alPlan.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Page 172. I don't see a >80 on there. I'm not even sure the recent project change to quadrant gate + wayside horns installations in Wallingford and Meriden is doing much to knock down those 25 MPH slow zones.

[DutchRailnut]

don't let a 2005 study confuse you what will actually happen, CDOT is known as agency full of sh*t, plans and no money for their plans.

[runningwithscalpels]

I can tell ya right now F-Line, his sources are more reliable than a crappy CDOT study.