Passenger Trains > Potomac bridge replacement key to growth, VRE says

Long Bridge replacement key to future growth, VRE says
Progressive Railroading
Sep. 26, 2014

> The U.S. Department of Transportation has awarded $2.8 million to the
> District Department of Transportation (DDOT) in Washington, D.C., to
> conduct an environmental study on the proposed replacement of the
> Long Bridge over the Potomac River...Replacing the bridge is crucial
> to the (VRE) System Plan 2040, according to a VRE press release.

> "Expansion of the Long Bridge is the single greatest opportunity to
> add needed capacity to increase VRE's operation from the 30 trains
> that use the bridge each day during peak commuting hours," said VRE
> Chief Executive Officer Doug Allen.
>
> A new bridge would be necessary for the railroad to consider
> expanding "run-through" service into Maryland, he added.
>
> VRE officials plan to work with the DDOT and bridge owner CSX
> Transportation to determine the capacity and mix of modes the bridge
> needs to address and develop a plan to secure funding. Currently, the
> bridge is at 98 percent capacity during peak hours and is used by 56
> passenger and 23 freight trains daily, VRE officials said.
>
> By 2040, freight traffic on the bridge is expected to grow to 34
> daily trains, while passenger train traffic is projected to rise to
> 132 daily trains, they added.

Long Bridge replacement key to future growth, VRE says

How are they going to through run to Maryland, unless it is just the MARC Brunswick Line, when they have all Gallery cars that are incompatible with high level platforms ? They sold their 13 regular bi-level cars to MARC.

I would love to know exactly what kind of information is uncovered in a 2.8 million dollar environmental study.
So all of the previous studies across the region and the nation yield no insight as to what building a new bridge across a river will do to the environment? (If anything).
And what if...after spending 2.8 million dollars to learn all these environmental secrets of the Potomac, it's decided that no bridge can be built?
Do we get our 2.8 million back? Nooooo... I'm sure all this enviro-knowledge will be folded into the next 2.8 million dollar enviiro study, which by then will be 3.4 million dollars.

Danny Harmon
Tampa

EISs are usually about very specific impact of a specific route and sometimes even design choice. So all of the general information while useful, still needs to be applied to the specifics of the specific route.

What are the major capacity restrictions on the current bridge?

I know it's double track, but a double track line should be able to handle more trains than the 90 or so currently there.....

It's not the number of trains but the timing and direction. Morning and evening, and even mid-day windows. I've been stuck sitting near Alexandria trying to go south on 89 while NB and SB CSX freights maneuvered around us.

RichM Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It's not the number of trains but the timing and direction. Morning and evening, and even mid-day
> windows. I've been stuck sitting near Alexandria trying to go south on 89 while NB and SB CSX
> freights maneuvered around us.


It's triple tracked both between AF interlocking (~1 miles south of Alexandria)and Long Bridge as well as between Long Bridge and Virginia Avenue (cut-off to Washington Union Station), so there should be some dispatcher flexibility.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/26/14 13:21 by hazegray.

I don't think it's triple-track between the Long Bridge and CP-Virginia. Google Maps appears to show a double-track line from RO, on the south end of the bridge, up past the sharp curve at Maine Ave SW, where the railroad is covered, and it's triple-track where the track becomes visible again at 12th Street. There's only a platform on a single track at L'Enfant VRE station, which would be a bottleneck, although there's a switch in the middle track at CP-Virginia so that it's double-track both into Union Station and toward the CSX Virginia Avenue tunnel.

The Crystal City station only has a platform on one track, too, and there looks like a shortage of crossovers between the south end of the bridge and AF, below Alexandria station. It doesn't look like a very flexible stretch of railroad.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/26/14 13:19 by knotch8.

knotch8 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't think it's triple-track between the Long Bridge and CP-Virginia. Google Maps appears to
> show a double-track line from RO, on the south end of the bridge, up past the sharp curve at Maine
> Ave SW, where the railroad is covered, and it's triple-track where the track becomes visible again
> at 12th Street. There's only a platform on a single track at L'Enfant VRE station, which would
> be a bottleneck, although there's a switch in the middle track at CP-Virginia so that it's
> double-track both into Union Station and toward the CSX Virginia Avenue tunnel.
>
> The Crystal City station only has a platform on one track, too, and there looks like a shortage of
> crossovers between the south end of the bridge and AF, below Alexandria station. It doesn't look
> like a very flexible stretch of railroad.


1) Correct on RO to CP trackage. My bad. :-(

2) Besides Alexandria, I think almost all VRE stations are single track platform, possibly excepting Quantico, Fredericksburg and Manassas.

3) On the other hand, some more crossovers are much cheaper than new bridges to buy flexibility.... and on the NEC, I don't think there are ANY triple track bridges. PHL may be the one exception...

Newark NJ has a triple track bridge, New Brunswick has a four track bridge, Trenton to Morrisville is either three or four.

Would there be an advantage to running one or more VRE trains to Banning Yard or all the way around to New Carrollton and the Metro station there? Does the metro connection offer advantages to commuters, and space for train storage?

Trenton and Philadelphia are 4 tracks. Susquehanna at Perryville is 2 tracks, as are Bush River and Gunpowder River down in Maryland. Drawbridges are Susquehanna (2 tracks), Passaic River at Newark, Hackensack River (Portal), 2 tracks, Pelham Bay (2 tracks), several 4-track bridges on Metro North, and some double-track bridges between New Haven and Mystic, CT.

I wonder who would own and control the new bridge? Makes me wonder if VRE would try to somehow gain control of the former RF&P and restrict CSXT to operating windows like NS deals with on Amtrak. Just a thought. I hope that scenario doesn't happen.

Will never happen. Virginia is way too deep in bed with Amtrak in the past couple of years to allow VRE to control the railroad. And CSX's price would be so high no one could afford it.

They're all stuck negotiating with CSX for the use of this astonishingly valuable real estate.

knotch8 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Trenton and Philadelphia are 4 tracks.
> Susquehanna at Perryville is 2 tracks, as are Bush
> River and Gunpowder River down in Maryland.
> Drawbridges are Susquehanna (2 tracks), Passaic
> River at Newark, Hackensack River (Portal), 2
> tracks, Pelham Bay (2 tracks), several 4-track
> bridges on Metro North, and some double-track
> bridges between New Haven and Mystic, CT.

Passaic River Bridge at Newark (Dock) North to South is 3 (NEC) + 2 (PATH) + 1 (NEC), and not just two tracks. NEC is at least 4 track upto the east end of Dock or the beginning of Rea. It is 3 track from thence to Hudson.

Yes. The Delaware River Bridge at Trenton is 4 tracks, as is the Raritan River Bridge at New Brunswick.

How is Long Bridge structurally? The article talks about replacement, but would you keep the old bridge and just add more capacity with a second bridge?

What really needs to be done is to develop a freight bypass around DC, and get most freights out. Considering the cost of a new bridge and the cost of the Virginia Avenue tunnels, a freight bypass might be the most cost effective alternative.

I would think unless a radical shift were made (more than ten miles in either direction) you're up against a bigger problem... the aesthetics of DC and the Potomac. Doing anything that alters the appearance of the landscape now you trigger years of arguments and delays. It may not be a perfect solution, but a low profile additional two track span adjacent to the current bridge is the simplest action.
Upriver the land is too expensive and the topography difficult, downriver there are clearance issues... bridge would have to be higher, with or without a draw.

ts1457 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> What really needs to be done is to develop a
> freight bypass around DC, and get most freights
> out. Considering the cost of a new bridge and the
> cost of the Virginia Avenue tunnels, a freight
> bypass might be the most cost effective
> alternative.

Wonder what CSX stockholders would say about how "cost effective" that might be. There are no RR bridges south of Long Bridge on the Potomac...

hazegray Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ts1457 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> >
> > What really needs to be done is to develop a
> > freight bypass around DC, and get most freights
> > out. Considering the cost of a new bridge and
> the
> > cost of the Virginia Avenue tunnels, a freight
> > bypass might be the most cost effective
> > alternative.
>
> Wonder what CSX stockholders would say about how
> "cost effective" that might be. There are no RR
> bridges south of Long Bridge on the Potomac...

Since CSX stockholders are unlikely to have to pay for either a hypothetical bypass or the proposed replacement Long Bridge, except for perhaps a token contribution, I am sure they will not have much to say about it.

hazegray Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Wonder what CSX stockholders would say about how
> "cost effective" that might be. There are no RR
> bridges south of Long Bridge on the Potomac...

I should be more specific. In this case I was talking about cost effective for society as a whole. A bypass of DC for most freight could be accomplish by building about 15 miles of a new route with a long tunnel under the Blue Ridge, and upgrading existing lines. Here is a discussion about the idea:

http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?2,3326649,3327442#msg-3327442

Even though you would have to twist the arms of CSX and NS, both would see real benefits. However for Maryland, Virginia, and DC, a whole lot of capacity would become available for new passenger services. This would be an infrastructure project worth getting behind.