Buffalo Central Station under Amtrak (Past, Present, Future)

As someone that went to college in Buffalo and then lived nearby for, well, since then, I'm pretty familiar with the area.

I have picked my sister up at the Depew station more than once. It's perfect. I'm not being sarcastic, either. No, it's not pretty, and it's not huge, but the Buffalo area is not exactly Metro New York, is it? How much size would that station need? Additionally, it is close to the thruway and numerous roads to get you anywhere you need to go.

Exchange Street is disgusting. I have seen trains come and go, and I think I've read here that it requires a reverse move to get to it, but I'll have to defer to others about that. I can say that it's under an overpass, with no aesthetics involved at all. It's not TOO hard to get around after you've picked someone up, but it's nowhere near as easy as Depew.

As a freshman in college, I accompanied several others to find that "big tower" in the middle of nowhere that we would see from the 33. It turned out to be the Central Station. You can't say we broke in, because the place was wide open, but we definitely trespassed...although I don't remember seeing one sign saying so. We wandered about the place, even taking pictures from pretty high up in the tower...though I don't remember going to the very top, and I wanted nothing to do with sticking my head out the windows that high, as my friends did. We did see signs laying around where you could buy OJ Simpson dolls, and a lot of paper.

Central Station is too far removed, really, to be a centerpiece for rail in Buffalo. It would be a beautiful symbol for us, and for all, regarding presevation, but the neighborhood notwithstanding, it's not easy to get out of there and go elsewhere. The lack of functionality dooms it for Amtrak. Since HSR belongs elsewhere in Railroad.net, I won't get into that here.

I believe that the DL&W station is still around downtown, and at least in location, it would serve better as a new station, but I suspect that the trackage doesn't support THAT conclusion, either.

Chicago desperately needs to have its maze of trackage solved. For Buffalo, I think I remember seeing that a replacement bridge for NS to help remove the CP-Draw bottleneck was in the stimulus package, and that litle piece alone will do something interesting to the flow in and around Buffalo. Assuming I'm right, and that the traffic flow changes will happen as a result, maybe we're looking at returning Amtrak to the wrong station.

Western New York is a weird place in every way, and nowhere is this more evident than with rail. The placement of the NYC station, the ongoing and continuing Metro Rail saga, CP-Draw and so on...it's pretty far down the list for the residents in and around Buffalo. I see status quo ruling.

Dave Becker

MI Central's station is much the same, and even Philadelphia's 30th st was "off the beaten path" when it was built since the office and retail corridor of import was east of city hall. If the station is difficult to get to from the road, it won't be a good sub for both stations...and I'd imagine HSR is going to have no room for TWO stops in Buffalo.

Folks:

1) If you're going to link to a news story, you must provide a brief quote

2) Extensive coverage of this topic in the New York State Forum:

http://railroad.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=128&t=63425

-otto-

Flat-Wheeler wrote:Wouldn't be the Belt line. CSX would not want it interfering with their ops, and the right of way is too narrow to add a 3rd track. Amtrak is currently the sole operator of the Niagara River line, so it would only make sense for them to continue high speed service along the river. However, I don't see either line seeing high speed service anytime soon, let alone in my lifetime.

The line through Buffalo Exchange Street to Niagara Falls cannot be used for high speed rail. Read the studies; the conclusion is that it has too many sharp curves, too few tracks, and is impossible to widen due to narrow right-of-way.

Accordingly, the current high-speed rail plans don't even propose increasing the speed of the trains from Buffalo to Niagara Falls! The high-speed trains would just run slow there. The trains heading to Cleveland and Chicago will continue to go south of the lake, especially given that border crossing problems are getting *worse*; an upstate NY-Chicago route via Canada and Detroit is untenable due to that, although physically and in terms of passengers it would be the best option.

Fundamentally what's wanted is a train station which is as connected to downtown as possible, but is also on *both* the Niagara Falls *and* the Cleveland routes. This could be at Exchange St. & Hamburg St.

For Niagara Falls, however, what would be ideal (but likely impossible) is to reinstate rail along the torn-up route
which crosses by Main St. and Lasalle Avenue -- providing a fast run to Niagara Falls from the east -- and the torn-up route through downtown Niagara Falls (largely occupied by a highway now), so as to provide a much better rail station for Niagara Falls. This would involve building a tunnel or bridge across the subway and people's houses, and bridges to run down the middle of a highway, among other things. Apparently this was the Erie route before it was ripped up; CRTC was proposing it for a MetroRail extension, but this is the best high-speed route. This would invite a station at the intersection with the subway. But would demand a station near Exchange & Hamburg for the Chicago-bound traffic, and for a joint station would also require either Depew, or reversing operations and some fairly messy track connections.

Perhaps, absurd though it may sound, _MetroRail_ should be extended at the south end (on the surface) to the Exchange & Hamburg location to meet a new station. This would provide downtown service for Cleveland-bound trains, and although I don't know the city, Google Earth makes the route look like it goes through some pretty dense areas for that one mile. Alternatively, if the city was set on using BCT (which I approve of, really) MetroRail could be extended further from Exchange & Hamburg along the north side of the railroad route to BCT.

Buffalo has, actually, a lot of options.

Speaking of options..... why not run the trian from the mainline up the Sonwil warehouse track and have it stop at the airport, loop it back down to the mainline and head to CLE or Niagara Falls. Have the NFTA run the extension from Exchange to the airport via the WS to make connections. Close Depew. Even run the extension to Clarence or Akron via the WS. Actually, why not just run the High Speed from Rochester to Buffalo on the WS row with a stop at Clarence, the airport and then CLE or Niagara FAlls.

Having the train go to the Buffalo Airport is not a ludicrous idea. I work at the airport and speak to many passengers. Many of them are from Canada. Many of them drive from north of Toronto to take advantage of the fares out of Buffalo. But the biggest complaint I get from Canadian passengers is Customs. I believe US Customs is set up in the Toronto airport. So they pass through Customs before getting on the plane. The passengers compain that US Customs in Canada are terrible. They would rather drive to the US and cross the border rather than deal with them at YYZ. How many passengers would ride the train to the airport instead of driving? Plus, there are plenty of hotels in the immediate area of the airport which would allow Canadain passengers to come the night before to grab a 6am departure the next day. Which is what they are already doing via the car.

If the Buffalo Airport didn't have Canada as a neighbor, we'd be a pretty small airport.

SST wrote:Speaking of options...

I think we're starting to drift afield here... back to BCT.

I disagree.

My statement above says, indirectly, that the BCT isn't a good idea. There are better options available to utilize this new service. If the BCT is selected, you'd better get the NFTA connected with it. You need to get people moving to where they want to go. If all your considering is just passengers who live here, it's going to be a flop!

There is nothing in the area of the BCT. No hotels, no place to eat...NOTHING! How many of you have watched passengers board AMTRAK at Depew or Exchange. Not many. The most I've ever seen get on or off a train is something like 20 people. And I thought that was a lot. Do you even think that ridership here in Buffalo is going to improve with high speed trainage? High speed trains bring higher fares. If you can afford the rail fare you''ll probably fly instead.

If you live along the east coast from BOS to NYC to WAS you have a huge population to tap into. The BCT, no matter how beautiful it is is sitting in a depressed area, with no easy access, that has nothing to offer in a city that is slowly dying. If you're going to try and increase ridership you'd better go to where the passengers want to go.

SST wrote:Speaking of options..... why not run the trian from the mainline up the Sonwil warehouse track and have it stop at the airport, loop it back down to the mainline and head to CLE or Niagara Falls. Have the NFTA run the extension from Exchange to the airport via the WS to make connections. Close Depew. Even run the extension to Clarence or Akron via the WS. Actually, why not just run the High Speed from Rochester to Buffalo on the WS row with a stop at Clarence, the airport and then CLE or Niagara FAlls

I think the ROW you're looking at is (a) less straight than the current mainline, and (b) poses even more serious difficulties in reinstating it than the Erie ROW I was talking about, for less benefit. The quarry is a particular problem; Oakfield is another. Interestingly, the phase 1 high-speed-rail projects proposed by NYS only run westfrom Rochester as far as Chili, which would be the logical point to turn off onto the ROW you suggest.... so a little advocacy work and you might have yourself a proposal

I was just looking at my charts and I can see that the WS line has a few curves in it after Bergen. I'm not familiar with Oakfield so I don't know what the restriction would be. But, the quarry in Clarence could pose an obstacle. I think the row is still in place. The train is going slow through the area anyways so any quarry traffic would have to stop at the track like a regular crossing. The operator would probably object to it. I suggested the WS line simply because there is no other operator on the line. Coming in from ROC via the WS or CSX mainline will only be a few minutes differenct anyways.

Assuming that this follows the entire CSX mainline.....do you think they'll pull up existing track and lay new track or will they expand the row and lay new track on that?

Why don't they just skip Buffalo all togther! hahaha Run the train to Batavia and then retake the Peanut Line to the Niagara Falls branch. Wye right to Canada or wye left to CLE. Have a small station at UB North campus for students headed back to NYc.

In all honesty, at BCT, or elsewere in the Buffalo area, it doesn't really matter. Does anyone REALLY think that New York State will get the hi speed rail money, and then actually make agreements with CSX, and then actually build a system across the state? Within our lifetimes? I want people's honest opinion.

-B in B

Railroaded wrote:In all honesty, at BCT, or elsewere in the Buffalo area, it doesn't really matter. Does anyone REALLY think that New York State will get the hi speed rail money, and then actually make agreements with CSX, and then actually build a system across the state? Within our lifetimes? I want people's honest opinion.

-B in B

No. Haha. Sad truth is i think we have a 1 in 100 chance of it happening, but that's better than no chance, and i'll be damned if we lose this opportunity if the New York corridor is chosen, and nobody fought for the central terminal to be a stop along the way.

While you're digging up a dead terminal for a destination, and relaying a dead railroad from Chili to Buffalo, you better start raiding the cemeteries for dead people to put in the seats 'cause there's nobody else that needs it! You can spend all the billions from our pockets that you can take, but that does not create a NEED for this pipe dream!

BR&P wrote:While you're digging up a dead terminal for a destination, and relaying a dead railroad from Chili to Buffalo, you better start raiding the cemeteries for dead people to put in the seats 'cause there's nobody else that needs it! You can spend all the billions from our pockets that you can take, but that does not create a NEED for this pipe dream!

I disagree. There is a huge market in New York State for people who don't care to drive across the state by car unless they need to.