Quote:
Originally Posted by bunt_q
So the transfer becomes BRT, so what? That's not a big deal, and planning always deals with moving targets.
I think you're reading the wrong part of the EIS. That section explains how alignments were compared, and I am sure that was a factor when comparing like alignments. But once you select an alignment, you still have to drill down into detailed operations. On 2-70, the description of the preferred alternative, it seems like they considered both double and single track alternatives within that alignment, and decided that in conjunction with express buses, single track would be adequate. It seems to imply a new track in the existing ROW.
As for the rolling stock they choose to use... people make way too much of that. We can find something that works. ROW, however, is much more difficult to conjure up. If you have a better idea for ROW, I'm sure they'd like to hear it.
See above.
Also, let's not discount the fact that CDOT is not RTD.
|
Read it more carefully. They are talking about single tracked in the sense that the East Corridor or NW is single tracked in sections because frequency does not require double tracking along the whole length. Except the single track in this case would be the existing BNSF railroad.
There is no scenario under which "the western rail lines would cost approximately 35 percent less than a comparable length of central rail line because the western line would utilize the existing BNSF rail line while the central line would require construction of new track" where the CDOT trains are not sharing track with BNSF.
I would build proper HSR along I-25 along ROW the state already owns.
For Cirrus:
Preferred Alternative Commuter Rail Service Plan
North of the South Transit Center in Fort Collins, the commuter rail would operate on 60 minute headways during both the peak and off peak periods. Between the South Transit Center and the FasTracks’ North Metro end of line, rail service would be provided every 30 minutes during the peak periods and every 60 minutes during the off peak periods. The FasTracks North Metro rail line will operate on 15-minute peak period headways and 30 minute off peak headways. The North I-25 commuter rail would operate as an extension of the FasTracks North Metro service, with every other North Metro train traveling on to Fort Collins.
From the CDOT State Rail Plan, a general discussion of the issues:
in planning for new intercity passenger rail services, two basic concepts are frequently evaluated. One is to use an existing rail corridor with added infrastructure to accommodate new passenger train services. The second concept is to develop an entirely new corridor in undeveloped or “Greenfield” property, with corridor facilities designed exclusively for the new passenger services. Each scenario has opportunities and issues that are described in the following sections.
Nearly all of the passenger rail services in the United States operate on existing freight railroad tracks. Even the Northeast Corridor, owned by Amtrak, is used by freight trains, except for limited segments through station areas such as Penn Station in New York. This can permit the use of existing rights-of-way in dense urban areas and can spur redevelopment and transit-oriented development at stations. By using the existing right-of-way, tracks, and bridges for passenger rail service, less property acquisition is usually required and a lower cost can potentially be achieved for start-up of a limited service on those existing tracks. Multi-modal stations are often possible with light rail, bus connections, and bicycle and pedestrian networks at downtown stations.
Shared corridors are only viable if the existing capacity is reserved for freight railroad expansion or if the freight corridor has declining demand. A win-win arrangement is possible if the passenger operations replace the capacity their service will consume. Environmental impacts are less likely to be identified by using the existing right-of-way and infrastructure rather than a Greenfield alignment. Freight trains already cause noise and vibration; they whistle at crossings; and they cause grade crossing delays for roadway traffic. In addition, existing rail lines are located in more densely developed areas, resulting in better market penetration. The use of existing rights-of-way may make passenger rail projects more acceptable to the public.
Issues: Shared Corridors
Whenever freight and passenger trains use the same tracks, operational conflicts occur due to the differing service requirements. Shared corridors often have limited capacity for new passenger services due to the volume of existing freight traffic. Passenger train speeds can be limited due to conflicts with slower freight trains. Shared corridors require agreements to share operating and maintenance costs. Private railroads will require protection of their freight capacity and will insist that the public fully pay for the capacity it consumes. For future passenger train operations, FRA regulations will require a Positive Train Control (PTC) signal system. While these systems may be costly, a well-designed system can increase rail capacity on a particular line. To preserve the capacity required for the railroad’s existing and future freight service, additional mainline track and passing sidings likely will be required. Passenger trains require higher track standards and improved signals for higher speeds. Even with the added tracks and signal improvements, delays to passenger trains can occur on shared tracks due to freight operations such as switching on-line industries.
Slow orders that are acceptable for freight operations must be corrected rapidly to avoid passenger delays. Freight operations limit allowable super elevation on curves, limiting passenger speeds. Freight railroads have to agree to any changes made to their track structure (i.e. super elevation) or their signal system. Potential disruptions with freight derailments are always possible, including hazardous materials spills.
Opportunities: Greenfield Alignments
With an entirely new “Greenfield” alignment, a new corridor right-of-way can be designed and built for higher speeds with standards for higher speed passenger trains. The new corridor, if only used by passenger trains, has many distinct advantages as witnessed by the TGV intercity passenger trains in France, the Shinkansen in Japan, and the new HSR lines in China. This can include steeper grades to reduce cuts and fills. In France, grades up to 4 percent are used as compared to a desired maximum of 1 percent in the U.S. for freight operations. Higher rates of super elevation on curves without freight trains are acceptable allowing passenger trains to attain higher speeds. All of the new capacity is available for passenger trains, potentially reducing the need for double tracks in some segments since there are no freight operating conflicts.
Opportunities: Greenfield Alignments
High-level platforms can be used for faster boarding and deboarding, and Americans with Disability Act accessibility requirements can be provided more easily. The potential also exists to use lighter weight rolling stock if the passenger trains do not operate on shared track with freight. Without the clearance requirements for freight trains, a new service could use a joint corridor with a freeway or a toll road. Lower track maintenance costs result from operations with only passenger trains without the track loads of heavy freight trains, particularly unit coal trains. Operations of the trains also are often under the control of the passenger entity. This provides more flexibility in scheduling frequent passenger trains without freight conflicts. The new corridor could serve outlying areas and new stations where new developments are occurring.
Issues: Greenfield Alignments
Offsetting these opportunities is the need for a new railroad right-of-way. This can result in very high property acquisition costs in developed areas. As a result, Greenfield alignments usually do not serve downtown areas directly. Creating a new linear corridor also could create a physical barrier to future development with the need for added bridges to cross the corridor. A new corridor could divide farm and ranch lands or residential neighborhoods. Construction of a brand new corridor would result in construction impacts, including numerous potential environmental impacts to wetlands, Section 4(f) properties, historic sites, protected species etc.
Prev
Linear Mode
