The future of Baltimore will depend on many things, but transportation on the Northeast corridor will be a major factor. Rail transit will be a matter of growing importance the more roadways like the infamous New Jersey Turnpike become congested at all times of the day.
To make it easier to get a quick overview I cut and pasted major components of the NEC study below:
NEC Facts and Figures
The Northeast Region:
- Is home to 51 million people (1 in 7 Americans) and is expected to grow to approximately 58 million by 2040.
- Generates 1/5th of the nation's Gross Domestic Product.
The Northeast Corridor is heavily traveled:
- 2,220 passenger trains use the NEC daily. View Train Animation
- 70 freight trains use the NEC daily (over 14 million car-miles of freight per year).
- 720,000 people ride along some part of the corridor each day.
- In 2011, there were 11 million passengers on Amtrak's Northeast Regional and Acela Express services.
- NEC riders account for 69 percent of the combined airline and rail market between Washington, DC and New York City and 51 percent between New York and Boston.
The NEC is 457 miles long and has:
- 17 tunnels
- 1,186 bridges
The current NEC took nearly a century to build. It was built by several railroad companies between 1830 and 1917.
Purpose and Need
The purpose of the NEC FUTURE program is to upgrade aging infrastructure and to improve the reliability, capacity, connectivity, performance, and resiliency of passenger rail service on the NEC for both intercity and regional trips, while promoting environmental sustainability and economic growth.
State of Good Repair
Service quality currently falls short, due to the aging and obsolete infrastructure that has resulted from insufficient investment in maintaining a state of good repair on the existing NEC. Achieving and maintaining a state of good repair is needed to improve service.
Connectivity
There is a need to improve the reach and effectiveness of the passenger rail network currently limited by gaps in connectivity among transportation modes and between different rail services.
Capacity
In order to accommodate both existing riders and future growth in ridership, improvements at critical infrastructure chokepoints are needed to fix severe capacity constraints that limit service expan-sion and enhancements.
Performance
In many markets, the trip times on passenger rail within the study area are not competitive with travel by air or highway. Improvements in travel times, frequency, or hours of service are needed to make passenger rail competitive with other modes.
System-Wide Resiliency
The NEC is vulnerable to the effect of severe storms. A more resilient and redundant passenger rail network is needed to enhance safety, security, and the reliability of the region's transportation system.
Environmental Sustainability
Throughout the Study Area, energy use and emissions associated with transportation affect the built and natural environment. Passenger rail can help meet the region's mobility needs with fewer environmental impacts.
Economic Growth
A transportation system that provides options for reliable, efficient, and cost effective movement of passengers and goods is need-ed for continued economic growth in the Northeast region. The region's knowledge-based economic sector, including academic research and medical facilities, is especially reliant on access to convenient, reliable, and frequent rail service.
Below a comparison between current conditions and three alternatives with progressive investments.
Klaus Philipsen, FAIA
Current service:
Number of Daily Intercity Trains between Representative
Station Pairs
Station Pairs
Number of Daily Intercity Trains - Connecting Corridors
Shortest Travel Time
Alternative 1 maintains the role of rail as it is today, increasing service to keep pace with growth in population and employment. This is accomplished by expanding capacity, adding tracks, and relieving key chokepoints, particularly through northern New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut.
Number of Daily Intercity Trains between Representative
Station Pairs
Station Pairs
Number of Daily Intercity Trains - Connecting Corridors
Shortest Travel Time
Alternative 2 grows the role of rail, with service that accommodates a larger proportion of Northeast travelers as population and employment grow. This alternative maximizes the capacity and service provided on the existing NEC. A supplemental route between New Haven, Hartford and Providence serves new passengers, reduces trip time and increases resiliency.
Number of Daily Intercity Trains between Representative
Station Pairs
Station Pairs
Number of Daily Intercity Trains - Connecting Corridors
Shortest Travel Time
Alternative 3 transforms the role of rail, positioning it as a dominant mode for Intercity travelers and commuters across the NEC. In addition to major service upgrades on the existing NEC, a two-track second spine is added within the Study Area to support high-performance rail service between major cities. Four route options are under consideration for the northern portion of the second spine, as shown on the map.
Number of Daily Intercity Trains between Representative
Station Pairs (average)
Station Pairs (average)
Number of Daily Intercity Trains - Connecting Corridors (average)
Shortest Travel Time
Hearing: Thursday, January 14 Baltimore, MD
What would be the cost of each alternative?
The Tier 1 EIS is a high level, programmatic study. As such, the cost estimates prepared in the Tier 1 Draft EIS represent relative levels of investment that could be required to fully build out each vision. These estimates are for comparative purposes. The estimated level of investment for the No Action Alternative is approximately $20 billion. Investment in improving the existing NEC would range from approximately $65 billion (Alternative 1) to $135 billion (Alternative 2). To improve the existing NEC and construct a second spine the length of the corridor would require an investment of approximately $290 billion. These costs would be spread over many years. Not all projects will necessarily be implemented, and some may be built differently as further studies are done.
For all of the Action Alternatives, projects would be implemented incrementally as needed to meet operational requirements. The FRA has developed a Universal First Phase, described in Chapter 10 of the Tier 1 Draft EIS, consisting of projects required to implement any of the three Action Alternatives. These fundamental building blocks are included in all of the Action Alternatives. They collectively address the Study Area’s most pressing capacity and state-of-good-repair challenges. The cost for this Universal First Phase would be approximately $34 billion and could be implemented over a 10-15 year time frame.
No comments:
Post a Comment