Rail planners outline various remedies for Northeast Corridor

Federal planners on Wednesday outlined possible futures for passenger rail service on the Northeast Corridor, ranging from minimal service improvements to an entirely new high-speed rail corridor between Boston and Washington.

The presentation in Center City by Federal Railroad Administration officials was one of nine this month in cities along the 457-mile corridor to explain how the FRA is developing a final "NEC Future" proposal.

The four broad alternatives outlined Wednesday are the latest steps in planning for upgrading the corridor over the next 25 years.

A final proposal, including estimated costs and construction schedules, is to be released by late 2016, after environmental-impact studies are completed, project manager Rebecca Reyes-Alicea said.

The goal is to lay out a feasible plan for investing in the nation's busiest rail corridor through 2040, with proposals for updated equipment, more trains, new stations, and possible new routes.

"Dependability, definitely, and for my daily commute, I'd like to see more frequency of service," said insurance executive John Raymond of Downingtown, describing what he'd like to see in improved rail service.

Drew Marshall of Haddon Heights said, "It'd be nice to see some speed increases."

Some of the alternatives envision new stations in Center City and at Philadelphia International Airport, with continuing use of 30th Street Station for regional traffic.

Although the FRA has not made any cost estimates yet, Amtrak has said it would require more than $10 billion to simply restore the rail corridor to a state of good repair. And Amtrak has said $151 billion would be needed to develop a separate high-speed corridor between Washington and Boston to accommodate trains traveling at 220 m.p.h. and cut the travel time between Philadelphia and New York to 37 minutes.

"We are trying to get people to focus on what is possible and what we are willing to invest in," Reyes-Alicea said. "I hope this process elevates the desire to invest in the corridor."

The alternatives outlined by the FRA are:

No action. A "substantial" increase in maintenance and renewal spending from current levels just to continue today's service in the corridor through 2040.

Alternative 1. New rail service to keep pace with population growth, doubling train service and tripling the number of seats. Would include a new tunnel under the Hudson River with two additional tracks for service to and from Manhattan. It would not provide "meaningful travel-time improvements."

Alternative 2. New service and route improvements to grow rail service faster than the population. The entire corridor would have at least four tracks, with six tracks in New Jersey and southwestern Connecticut. A new downtown station in Philadelphia, with a stop at Philadelphia International Airport.

Alternative 3. "Transformative" improvements, including a second high-speed route that would parallel the existing corridor south of New York City and take a new route north of New York. Would position rail "as a dominant mode for intercity travelers and commuters across the NEC."

The current rail corridor, which handles more than 2,000 Amtrak, commuter, and freight trains daily, suffers from major congestion and delays, and "many components of the system are in a state of disrepair or worse, and have reached the point of obsolescence," the FRA says.

The FRA's full report on the preliminary alternatives is available at http://www.necfuture.com/

Source: Philly.com