# Empire Corridor Information/Status



## Anderson (Sep 14, 2011)

What is the status of the upstate NY plans? I know it's not HSR in the sense that CA is, but I also know that there's a long-term plan here to knock a couple of hours off of train times from NYP-Buffalo. Are any major portions of this project into the EIS phase of things yet? And where can I find information?


----------



## JeffW (Sep 14, 2011)

We're not hearing much right now because they are in the middle of the Environmental Impact Study, which should be completed this winter. I think we're in the study stage that is going to feel like it drags out forever... Read more about it here: https://www.nysdot.gov/empire-corridor/schedule I haven't heard much beyond that.

The last big news I heard about the project was about a year ago when CSX was throwing a hissyfit about the HSR lines. Basically, they didn't mind the HSR lines on their right-of-way as long as they were 20 (or 50 feet away--something obscene like that). As you can tell, I don't remember the details, but someone did some negotiating, and it looks like things are still moving forward.

I'm looking forward to seeing how this project goes forward!


----------



## Anderson (Sep 14, 2011)

Good grief, these things take _forever_ to even _plan_. Why, oh why, could Obama not have at least put some pressure in to shorten this process (either by arranging hidden language in the stimulus to cut these requirements or by simply having the appropriate officials waive parts of the requirements)?


----------



## George Harris (Sep 14, 2011)

JeffW said:


> We're not hearing much right now because they are in the middle of the Environmental Impact Study, which should be completed this winter. I think we're in the study stage that is going to feel like it drags out forever... Read more about it here: https://www.nysdot.gov/empire-corridor/schedule I haven't heard much beyond that.


Unfortunately seems to take forever is too, too true.Looking at the schedule on the reference, which is



> Project Schedule•Scoping Process . . . . . . . . Fall 2010
> 
> •Prepare Draft EIS . . . . . . . Fall 2010-Winter 2011/12
> 
> ...


I hate to say it, but this is probably optomistic. Generally the preperation of the EIS involved dealing with every possible objection that those opposed to the project can dream up. Distribuiton of the Final EIS is the equivalent of throwing raw meat into shark infested waters. It brings out all those oppposed to the project and their lawyers, so a record of decision can be somewhere between months and years in the future.

Since this is mostly adjacent to or within the current NYC right of way, it may be esier, but then likely not, as objections to adding transit adjacent to rialroads have proven in quite a few locations.


----------



## Anderson (Sep 15, 2011)

George Harris said:


> JeffW said:
> 
> 
> > We're not hearing much right now because they are in the middle of the Environmental Impact Study, which should be completed this winter. I think we're in the study stage that is going to feel like it drags out forever... Read more about it here: https://www.nysdot.g...rridor/schedule I haven't heard much beyond that.
> ...


I _seriously_ wish they could reduce the grounds for legal objections. Political objections (including the cost of the project)? Those are fine and should be taken up with your representative(s) in the appropriate body, but the legal objections should pretty much be narrowed to either eminent domain-related issues (i.e. a project takes a ridiculous amount of land for the proposed purpose) or major issues over the option that has been chosen (even then, most of the issues are political, but for example I can see a major fight over selecting alignments based on intermediate services provided).

By the way, I do wonder if there isn't a way to sue to object to a "no action" alternative being selected.


----------



## George Harris (Sep 15, 2011)

Anderson said:


> By the way, I do wonder if there isn't a way to sue to object to a "no action" alternative being selected.


It is a requirement that a "no action" alternative be included in any analysis for this sort of poject.


----------



## Anderson (Sep 15, 2011)

George Harris said:


> Anderson said:
> 
> 
> > By the way, I do wonder if there isn't a way to sue to object to a "no action" alternative being selected.
> ...


Oh, I know that such an option has to be included. What I mean is hauling a state to court for choosing that over one of the action alternatives/making it hard on them for choosing not to pick an "action" alternative.


----------



## Anderson (Sep 26, 2011)

Though not a full set of upgrades, and not terribly detailed, I did find this on Yahoo Finance today:

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/NY-state-rail-projects-apf-1912920403.html?x=0&.v=1

Good to see that something is happening here, though it's a shame it's going to take nearly a year to get that project in order.


----------



## afigg (Sep 26, 2011)

The agreement with CSX was reportedly signed late on Friday, but there was some news about the projects over the weekend. US DOT has put out a news release at http://www.fra.dot.gov/roa/press_releases/fp_FRA%2026-11.shtml

The Empire Corridor projects that were obligated were all at Schenectady or east of Schenectady. The projects that had their funding finally locked into place were:

-$91 million for the 17 miles of second track between Albany and Schenectady which is a major single track bottleneck. Quoting from the news release: "The existing single track causes significant delays, requiring trains to wait up to 26 minutes for the rail line to clear when another train is traveling in the opposing direction. Construction is expected to begin in late summer 2012."

-$58.1 million for a 4th track and platform improvements at Albany-Rensselaer, replacing the Schenectady station, relocation of signal wires on the Hudson Line which have been prone to outages.

I saw last week that another Empire corridor project had been obligated: $2.4 million for Grade Crossing Improvements from CSX MP 75 to 143 (Hudson line).

The only major selected NY state projects that have not been obligated are:

-the $58 million for 11 miles of 3rd track from MP 323 to 334 which was supposed to be 110 mph track for passenger trains. This may get stuck in limbo for some time if NY state, the FRA, and CSX can't reach an agreement on max passenger speeds and minimum track separation.

-$18.5 million for crossovers and reconfigure signals at Syracuse station and DeWitt yard. This is a FY 2010 grant (with at least 20% state matching) which means it has more time to get signed off on and the work started. If there are no 110 mph issues here, can't see why CSX would not agree to the project once the design and EIS documents are in place.

I looked at some of the many projects that NY state submitted applications for and there were other congestion and signal improvements projects between Schenectady and Buffalo. If NY state can't reach an agreement with CSX on a high speed 3rd track west of Schenectady, perhaps they should put their focus on the congestion improvements and selected 90 mph 3rd track segments at the bottlenecks for reliability & modest trip time improvements with what state rail money they have and whenever the federal HSIPR funding is turned on again. Put the emphasis on making the NYP to Schenectady section the "high" speed rail part for now.


----------



## eagle628 (Sep 26, 2011)

afigg said:


> The agreement with CSX was reportedly signed late on Friday, but there was some news about the projects over the weekend. US DOT has put out a news release at http://www.fra.dot.g...A%2026-11.shtml
> 
> -$91 million for the 17 miles of second track between Albany and Schenectady which is a major single track bottleneck. Quoting from the news release: "The existing single track causes significant delays, requiring trains to wait up to 26 minutes for the rail line to clear when another train is traveling in the opposing direction. Construction is expected to begin in late summer 2012."
> 
> -$58.1 million for a 4th track and platform improvements at Albany-Rensselaer



Good grief, I've heard about both of those for long enough I'll be in denial that they'll actually happen until I see them myself.


----------



## AlanB (Sep 26, 2011)

eagle628 said:


> afigg said:
> 
> 
> > The agreement with CSX was reportedly signed late on Friday, but there was some news about the projects over the weekend. US DOT has put out a news release at http://www.fra.dot.g...A%2026-11.shtml
> ...


Well they actually did get the old Albany station torn down recently, which is the first and needed step for a 4th track in ALB.


----------



## jis (Sep 27, 2011)

I went through Albany this past weekend. I noticed that they have also moved the equipment box that was occupying the space needed for the 4th track, and placed to temporary containers there instead, which can presumably be moved quickly when the new equipment box is constructed. The ROW for the 4th track is completely free of obstructions now, other than the two temporary containers.

There is considerable change planned to the interlockings at both ends of Albany, so there is quite a bit of track work involved beyond just laying the 4th track.

Work is scheduled to begin in right earnest in the Spring according to ESPA which has been the primary rail advocacy group championing this particular set of projects.


----------



## Anderson (Sep 27, 2011)

I'm glad to hear about the fourth track. I was on the LSL, and a bit of hell broke loose when the EB LSL showed up alongside us (it was behind schedule), was joined by _our_ Boston section...and was promptly joined by an Empire Service train out of NYP. I think we spent about two hours in the station while a complicated game of free cell was carried out to get our Boston section attached and get the other LSL out of the station with only two tracks to work with.


----------

