Passenger Trains > Roanoke platform construction to start

http://www.roanoke.com/news/local/roanoke/building-of-roanoke-s-amtrak-platform-expected-to-start-this/article_de0bcc63-8479-55c1-b053-1d483e576bed.html

Wow. 9 million dollars for just a platform. A few weeks ago, the step boxes used on the 611 trips seemed to work just fine. There are hundreds of platforms in this country with only a track level platform and no shelter.  Sometimes, not even that. More wasted tax payer dollars. 

ADA compliance. Easy to say "do without it" unless you have a disabled relative. Once-in-a-blue-moon excursions and daily service are not the same.

In comparison, Raleigh is spending $100M for a new station that will open with only one platform. $10M sounds like a thrifty project.

What a waste of money, Gold plated sidewalks . Of course you have to allow for all the padding for the elected officials wallets
 

In some cases the documentation and certification that the plans are in compliance may cost as much as the pouring of concrete and painting of lines for a "simple" job.

Let's hope they hired a different contractor than the crowd being used in Albany, NY.

andersonb109 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Wow. 9 million dollars for just a platform. A few

Well, there is undoubtedly more to it than that.  The platform itself will be a couple million.  Tack on a canopy, ramps and steps, lighting, probably some parking lot improvements and access paths, and more.

> weeks ago, the step boxes used on the 611 trips
> seemed to work just fine. There are hundreds of
> platforms in this country with only a track level
> platform and no shelter.  Sometimes, not even
> that. More wasted tax payer dollars. 

Step boxes don't work fine for disabled people, people with bad knees and backs, people with heavy luggage, little kids, the elderly, and many more Americans you disdain with your comment.

There are hundreds of platforms in this country that really need the same work.  I think that is what you meant to say.

Chessie1963 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Let's hope they hired a different contractor than
> the crowd being used in Albany, NY.

or Lancaster PA station.  That turned into an enormous sink hole

I will offer a slight dissent. There are other ways to handle accessibility in lieu of a continuous high level platform. A partial high-level platform could have (and should have) been considered. That gives the state more flexibility, should they choose to run trains with bi-level equipment at some time in the future. We should not assume service to Roanoke will always be yoked to Amtrak and the NEC. I think it's short-sighted to be locked in to operating single-level equipment. As there are no other high-level platforms in the state, Roanoke will represent an oddball configuration.

Paul Wilson
Arlington, VA

Amtrak service patterns over the last 40 years indicate that Cincy - Tidewater service has evolved into Cincy - DC service. Do you really see a Superliner-equipped "Pocohantas" in VA's future ? ADA says full length, level boarding. I don't know if you can have high level plaforms in segments for 8 car Amfleet trains. It would be very difficult to walk along the platform.

 



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/24/16 15:00 by joemvcnj.

Dcmcrider Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I will offer a slight dissent. There are other
> ways to handle accessibility in lieu of a
> continuous high level platform. A partial
> high-level platform could have (and should have)
> been considered.

What part of "full length level boarding" don't you understand?  Or do you advocate a Jim Crow-like system for disabled Americans?

> bi-level equipment at some time in the future. We
> should not assume service to Roanoke will always
> be yoked to Amtrak and the NEC. I think it's

No, hopefully it also extends to Cinci and Chatanooga and beyond, but its going to go to the NEC given the population there.

> short-sighted to be locked in to operating
> single-level equipment. As there are no other

Why do you assume bi-level equipment would be used elsewhere out of Roanoke?  If a station is tied to serving NYC, Boston, or Philly, it should get high level platforms.

> high-level platforms in the state, Roanoke will
> represent an oddball configuration.

Soon enough, there will certainly be other high level platforms in Virginia.

Whatever you say, abyler.  

No, Roanoke shouldn't necessarily get high-level platforms.  North Carolina's service and its future are fairly well tied into the Northeast Corridor, but they haven't made the extremely expensive investment of full-length high-level platforms, just because the NEC does.

And it's snarky of you to call not wanting to spend $9 million on full-length high-level platforms a "Jim Crow for disabled people."  That opinion is why people decide to build nothing at all, instead of being prudent with expenses and making accommodations in order to do a cost-benefit analysis.  The extremely high costs of engineering projects in the US is why more and more things don't get done.  It's also why rail projects are being jettisoned in favor of less-expensive Bus Rapid Transit.  

knotch8 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> No, Roanoke shouldn't necessarily get high-level
> platforms.  North Carolina's service and its
> future are fairly well tied into the Northeast
> Corridor, but they haven't made the extremely
> expensive investment of full-length high-level
> platforms, just because the NEC does.

They will.

> And it's snarky of you to call not wanting to
> spend $9 million on full-length high-level
> platforms a "Jim Crow for disabled people."  That

Well, that is what it is.  The behavior is the same behavior we saw after Brown vs. Board of Education in 54, where it took until the Nixon Administration during 68-72 for any serious desegregation to occur.  ADA was passed in 1990 - 26 years ago!  Amtrak and several other passenger railroads dragged their feet for 20 years pretending to not understand what the law required or claiming compliance was impossible.  How many station projects were carried out and how much equipment was bought during that time and tried to dodge the requirements of the law?  Dozens, if not hundreds of stations, and hundreds of cars.  Some agencies only began to grudgingly comply in the mid 2000's, meaning 15 years of capital programs were wasted building non-compliant infrastructure.  If you want to bring up costs, why don't you bring that up?

> opinion is why people decide to build nothing at
> all, instead of being prudent with expenses and
> making accommodations in order to do a
> cost-benefit analysis.  The extremely high costs

People's civil rights are not subject to a cost-benefit analysis.

> of engineering projects in the US is why more and
> more things don't get done. 

Station construction costs were much lower in the 1990's before the big run up after 2004 in energy and material costs for concrete and steel, and construction labor.  People whining about costs now to meet legally required accomodation of all Americans should not have been obstructionists back then, which is what they were given the lawsuits required to get any action on this topic.

Now that there is no more dodging the law, we have to hear about how expensive it is to comply with it.  Well tough luck.  Treating all Americans fairly is not an impediment to projects being completed.  And pretending the wealthiest country on earth can't afford basic decent treatment of its own vulnerable citizens is bullcrap.  Lastly, the high costs of projects is often driven by a refusal to provide consistent funding to complete the overall work.  If there were a steady stream of projects using standard plans and material, material and construction costs would drop significantly.  At least one agency (SEPTA) demonstrated this point by builidng in a span of about 10 years with dedicated in-house crews numerous useful, tasteful, beautiful, and compliant projects with pre-fab uniform material and plans for very reasonable costs (SEPTA's completed projects included the following: Melrose Park, Fort Washington, Ambler, North Wales, Lansdale-9th St., Colmar, Link Belt, Chalfont, New Britain, Del Val College, Olney, Cheltenham, Ryers, Allen Lane, Primos - a number of these included not just platforms but new station buildings)

abyler Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
(snip)
>
> Now that there is no more dodging the law, we have
> to hear about how expensive it is to comply with
> it.  Well tough luck.  Treating all Americans
> fairly is not an impediment to projects being
> completed.  And pretending the wealthiest country
> on earth can't afford basic decent treatment of
> its own vulnerable citizens is bullcrap.  Lastly,
> the high costs of projects is often driven by a
> refusal to provide consistent funding to complete
> the overall work.  If there were a steady stream
> of projects using standard plans and material,
> material and construction costs would drop
> significantly.  At least one agency (SEPTA)
> demonstrated this point by builidng in a span of
> about 10 years with dedicated in-house crews
> numerous useful, tasteful, beautiful, and
> compliant projects with pre-fab uniform material
> and plans for very reasonable costs (SEPTA's
> completed projects included the following: Melrose
> Park, Fort Washington, Ambler, North Wales,
> Lansdale-9th St., Colmar, Link Belt, Chalfont, New
> Britain, Del Val College, Olney, Cheltenham,
> Ryers, Allen Lane, Primos - a number of these
> included not just platforms but new station
> buildings)

Septa's in house design and build produced some very nice results.

In NJ, that level of work would have meant somebody's connected brother in law got the job. And ran over budget, and under expected output.

Regardless of the party in power.

> North Carolina's service and its future are fairly well tied into the Northeast
> Corridor, but they haven't made the extremely expensive investment of
> full-length high-level platforms

Raleigh will get HLPs.

< North Carolina's service and its future are fairly well tied into the Northeast Corridor, but they haven't made the extremely expensive investment of full-length high-level platforms. >

Only the Carolinian. The Piedmonts never see the NEC, and NC would never want their precious Heritage cars anywhere near SSY for servicing.

On the subject of North Carolina tying into the NEC.  Raleigh supports eight direct flights a day to DC, taking just over an hour.  Greensboro, about the same.  I suspect that the principal purpose of NC's investment is to make travel within the state more convenient for people who don't live near a major airport.

 

We're straying OT but I'll pile on. NCDOT has already said that a replacement station in Charlotte, when it's finally built, will also have HLPs. Existing stations in NC don't have HLPs because those stations sit astride NS or CSX mainlines, and HLPs pose clearance problems for freight. Gauntlet tracks drive up capex and opex. In addition, retrofitting those stations with HLPs without creating other barriers to the disabled because of legacy station layout would be expensive. The pragmatic compromise by NCDOT was to limit HLPs to new stations, at least for the time being.  

HLPs are not just about accommodating the disabled, children, etc. Loading and unloading passengers is faster when HLPs are used. HLPs eliminate more than 90% of loading/unloading injuries to passengers, a significant financial liability for train operators. And as we see elsewhere in the world, train doors with HLPs do not have to be staffed with car attendants.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 05/26/16 06:59 by ctillnc.

The "new" Union and "Roselle" stations on the Conrail Lehigh Line / NJT Raritan Valley line both have gauntlet tracks, don't they?  That can't be cheap to install.  And relocate the freight mains to accommodate a center platform.  Which needs its own tunnel, elevator. etc

I can see a lot of expenses beyond throwing down a patch of asphalt and hanging a sign.

Engineering parable for government sponsored projects:

"Any project not worth doing is worth doing right, no matter how many tries it takes."

RailNet802, owevaaaah