Ethan Allen Discussion, including Expansion (Burlington)

I'm impressed by Vermont's incremental approach to this project. I think it would be a good model for Maine. Sometimes it seems as if it is harder to play "small ball" than it is to try and grow by leaps and bounds.

gokeefe wrote:I'm impressed by Vermont's incremental approach to this project. I think it would be a good model for Maine. Sometimes it seems as if it is harder to play "small ball" than it is to try and grow by leaps and bounds.

It helps to some degree that Vermont's rail network is relatively small, has very little route duplication compared to the other New England states, is overwhelmingly comprised of cross-state mainlines with zero remaining branchlines that were ever more than < 5 mile stubs, and has a remarkably intact map subject to very few abandonments over the last 50 years.

Current state rail map: http://vtdigger.org/vtdNewsMachine/wp-c ... oadMap.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Historic 1896 state rail map: http://www.history-map.com/picture/004/ ... nt-Map.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Current GIS state rail map including landbanked lines: http://vtrans.maps.arcgis.com/apps/Comp ... a6c5bb5b9e" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

NECR, VRS Western Corridor, and the VRS Conn River stake out opposite ends of the state. NECR, VRS/Green Mountain, and Clarendon & Pittsford connect equidistantly in the middle. 3 Western connections (if you count VRS & Hoosick Jct. and CN @ Cantic Jct. as primarily VT-oriented) to the D&H/Adirondack corridor, all more or less equally spaced the whole length of the western border. All of the above with current or future passenger potential. Including the upper Conn River and a return of ski excursions on GMRR (possibly with a KIllington train also pinging down C&P after the EAE fully relocates off it) in the non-Amtrak or private carrier tier.

The only places that are chewed up are connections east (third-world NH's fault) and to the St. Lawrence & Atlantic main. Save for various eye-rolling Mountain Div. proposals that haven't yet passed the laugh test. But this is a state that's got pretty laser-like focus on what to do to get the most out of its network with limited resources.

As much as I have been to Burlington, biked the right-of-way that used to run from Burlington up to Grand Isle, and ridden the Vermonter, I can not figure out where the existing rail line along Lake Champlain (Vermont Railway Inc.) diverges to join the line up at Essex (the NECR). I've heard there is a tunnel involved? There is a yard in Burlington, just south of the ole Burlington Union Train Station. Can anyone tell me from there where the line diverges and connects up to Essex?

Personally, I can't wait till when the Ethan Allen is extended to Burlington. The quickest way to get to Burlington now is typically the Adirondack up to Port Kent and then ferrying over to downtown Burlington. Often I've gone up to Plattsburgh and rented a car from there to cross and come down to Burlington. It at least gets you to Burlington by dinner time. Typically I will take the Adirondack northbound to Burlington and then the Vermonter southbound.

On Google Maps, search for Penny Lane in Burlington.
You will see where the rail line crosses at the intersection
of Penny Lane and Depot St. Follow the rail line north (up)
and you will see it turns to the east (right) and you will see
North Avenue. That street runs above the tunnel. See
details on the tunnel here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burlington_Tunnel" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If you wish to contiue to Essex, it looks like you will
have to head east on some local streets, take US2/US7 N/E
and look for VT #15 east, which roughly paralells the rail
line and you will cross the NECR main line just south of
Essex Jct (Amtrak), which is one block north.

The tunnel info is off the web. I never have personally
visited the tunnel.

Arlington wrote:So has work started? Any CWR been dropped?

The first rail train has arrived on the property. Not sure what the timeline is for installation yet.

rovetherr wrote:

Arlington wrote:So has work started? Any CWR been dropped?

The first rail train has arrived on the property. Not sure what the timeline is for installation yet.

Neato. Given VT's incremental approach, what increment do we think/believe is covered by this new CWR (As Heisenberg teaches us, even if we don't know "when", maybe we can know "where" (the physical extent of the work)

On the general topic of going from Burlington to Essex Junction, I had remembered the track being in very poor shape
about 10 years ago when we studied it; the entire section from the downtown Burlington station to Essex Jct. was going
to have to be replaced. That was not projected to be very cheap. Has the state given any consideration to a budget for doing
it now?

trainhq wrote:On the general topic of going from Burlington to Essex Junction, I had remembered the track being in very poor shape
about 10 years ago when we studied it; the entire section from the downtown Burlington station to Essex Jct. was going
to have to be replaced. That was not projected to be very cheap. Has the state given any consideration to a budget for doing
it now?

Not yet because that branch is owned by NECR, and NECR's focus right now is finishing the track rehab from St. Albans to the E. Swanton division post. The VRS Western Corridor is all state-owned and Class 2 that only needs to go Class 3. Mile-for-mile they get much better economy of scale putting their resources there first and hitting that 2017 goal for start of Burlington service.

I'm sure the Essex Jct. extension is a mere formality as a Phase 1.5 tack-on later. It makes too much sense for the ridership of both the Vermonter and EAE to have a common union station at Essex, and would help the VRS-NECR interchange to get that relatively short branch upgraded to 286K just like the rest of the works. It just doesn't have to be done by Day 1 for Burlington service, and the state it making it a priority that this project can be self-funded and opened in only 5 years (which so far is looking good).

trainhq wrote:On the general topic of going from Burlington to Essex Junction, I had remembered the track being in very poor shape
about 10 years ago when we studied it; the entire section from the downtown Burlington station to Essex Jct. was going
to have to be replaced. That was not projected to be very cheap. Has the state given any consideration to a budget for doing
it now?

That would explain why the Champlain Flyer extension never got past the planning stage. With such low ridership it would've been futile to spend $$$ to re-build. I would say extending the Ethan Allen to Essex Jct. has a much better chance of happening, even if only after service to Burlington meets/exceeds expectations.

F-line to Dudley via Park wrote:Not yet because that branch is owned by NECR, and NECR's focus right now is finishing the track rehab from St. Albans to the E. Swanton division post. The VRS Western Corridor is all state-owned and Class 2 that only needs to go Class 3. Mile-for-mile they get much better economy of scale putting their resources there first and hitting that 2017 goal for start of Burlington service.

I'm sure the Essex Jct. extension is a mere formality as a Phase 1.5 tack-on later. It makes too much sense for the ridership of both the Vermonter and EAE to have a common union station at Essex, and would help the VRS-NECR interchange to get that relatively short branch upgraded to 286K just like the rest of the works. It just doesn't have to be done by Day 1 for Burlington service, and the state it making it a priority that this project can be self-funded and opened in only 5 years (which so far is looking good).

So you're saying that extension to Essex Jct. is basically a done deal at this point? Or at least going to be the next major focus for the route?

No. Not a done deal, and not funded. Burlington's the big draw, and that's what they're working to get open by 2017. Essex Jct. is a logical follow-on that the state has expressed interest in pursuing at a later date, but they don't own that line and NECR's preoccupied with higher upside trackwork elsewhere in the state so now's not the time.

Arlington wrote:Neato. Given VT's incremental approach, what increment do we think/believe is covered by this new CWR (As Heisenberg teaches us, even if we don't know "when", maybe we can know "where" (the physical extent of the work)

They will be dropping Burlington south, filling the holes of bolted rail left up north. Not sure how far they will get, rumor is perhaps between Vergennes and New Haven. I will get first-hand knowledge this weekend, I'm conductoring the RDBD/BDRD train Saturday.

If Vermonter extension to MTR and Ethan Allen extension to Burlington and beyond to SAB were coordinated, then Amtrak wouldn't be creating "interim" arrangements in Burlington and any Amtrak personnel in SAB would likely be able to stay put. But things rarely work out so neatly...

EDIT: does Amtrak have any Thruway ferries? Because Port Kent to Burlington seems like it should be one

Is this the right map? And are we basically talking about CWR drops in one or all of the three purple segments (from south of Vergennes to south of Burlington?). It seems they're satifisfied (from a MOW standpoint) to start service with the CWR they have (in green), some jointed rail (in red) and this new CWR (in purple)...and some bridge/culvert/washout work (presumably to underpin/replace some structures to support 286k loads? (or some other higher loads/speeds?)
PDF of Image

From: http://rail.vermont.gov/passenger/future_services" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; (at Western Corridor Passenger Rail)

Western Corridor Passenger Rail
Another vision for future passenger rail service in Vermont includes the current service plus the addition of service to communities along the route 7 corridor not presently served. The project to achieve that vision is known as the ABRBE (Albany-Bennington-Rutland-Burlington-Essex Junction) Project. It is anticipated that the communities of North Bennington, Manchester, Middlebury and Burlington would be served by this new service. The first priority of this project is to complete improvements to the rail infrastructure that would allow the extension of the present Ethan Allen Express service up to Burlington. The second phase will include service to those communities south of Rutland.

In order to this service, track upgrades have to be performed.
The addition of Continuous Welded Rail for the entire line
Repair and maintenance at various points along the line
You can see where these upgrades are needed in the map below.
This will be an ongoing process and VTrans appreciates the public's patience as we plan and budget these upgrades.

The line's been getting a slow churn of upgrades for years. The areas they're working on now are the ones most critical for the Class 3 passenger uprate and 286K freight uprate. Whatever jointed rail is staying isn't mission-critical for either goal and will probably get cycled later. Remember, the state's paying for nearly all of this by itself so they're only doing over the parts of the corridor that are limiters for adequate service. Hitting that start date within budget has a lot riding on it, because they also want to advance on Phase II of the project relocating the train off the Adirondack route and Clarendon & Pittsford to an end-to-end Western Corridor routing out of Hoosick Jct. spanning the whole state. That they do need outside help on with fed grants because the southern part of the corridor requires a lot more work. Their chances of qualifying for grants increases considerably if they get Burlington off and running, ridership growing, and a plausible case for adding frequencies. And that's why both the south half Phase II and the Essex Jct. connector are out-of-sight/out-of-mind for the time being. Those don't matter until Burlington's in-service and they have something to show for their current efforts.