Replies

[Southsider2k12]

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?Sectio...amp;TM=39824.82

17 crossings may be eliminated
The NICTD preliminary concept for rerouting the South Shore through Michigan City eliminates 17 of the current 34 street crossings. The 17 intersections are marked on the preliminary concept for the South Shore relocation. While the crossing at Washington Street is not Xed out, that is the proposed location for a new train station. Based on the plan, the following crossings would be closed:

Carlon Court and adjacent alley, Donnelly Street and adjacent alley, Claire Street, Kentucky Street, Tennessee Street, Elston Street, Manhattan Street, Buffalo Street, Spring Street, Cedar Street, Lafayette Street, York Street, Oak Street, Maple Street and Phillips Avenue.
More South Shore details released

Laurie Wink
The News-Dispatch

MICHIGAN CITY - Property owners with parcels south of current South Shore tracks on 10th and 11th streets await an uncertain future until plans for realigning the commuter train are adopted.

The Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation District operates the South Shore and announced last week it intends to significantly re-configure more than two miles of track running through Michigan City. NICTD's preliminary downtown rerouting concept, developed by TranSystems of Chicago, shows the tracks heading south of 10th Street at Sheridan Avenue and proceeding through town to a point just east of Michigan Boulevard, where the regular route resumes.

John Parsons, NICTD spokesperson, said properties north of 11th Street will not be affected. He said the specific houses and properties that would be impacted by the change have not yet been identified. He said the project, estimated at $65 million, has been developed at a "gross level of detail" and changes could be made as the engineering process moves forward.

A map labeled "Preliminary Downtown Reroute Concept" shows a South Shore station and 775-space parking area between Franklin and Wabash streets and from Warren Street north to 11th Street. The map includes station information that lists the current 11th Street parking lot at 42 spaces and the Carroll Avenue station at 155 spaces. Those stations would be replaced with the new downtown station.

The new route is designed to eliminate the curve between 10th and 11th streets near the Amtrak intersection, and also remove the curve at Cedar and Lafayette streets. As now indicated on the map, the tracks run parallel but one row of houses south of the existing 11th street tracks between Kentucky Street and Michigan Boulevard.

At Sheridan Avenue, looking east, the proposed route angles to the right, eventually running well behind the houses on the south side of 10th Street and linking directly with the portion of track that would be just south of 11th Street.

Chicago Street would be rerouted, but it would retain a crossing of the South Shore tracks.

Depending on funding and station design, Parsons said a parking ramp could be constructed, allowing for private developers to create an activity center in the areas surrounding the station.

An environmental impact statement will be required before property can be purchased, Parsons said.

"An environmental impact statement and public hearing are required as part of the process," he said. "The specifics will follow as part of the on-going process to qualify for federal funding."

NICTD has yet to obtain funding for the detailed engineering plan that comes next, Parsons said.

Michigan City Mayor Chuck Oberlie has reviewed the NICTD preliminary downtown route and will present the plan to the City Council for its approval. Parsons expects some issues to be raised by the council at that point.

"We certainly want to develop a plan in concert with Michigan City that meets their needs," Parsons said.

Contact Laurie Wink at lwink@thenewsdispatch.com.

[Dave]

NICTD does employ some facilities people who are responsible for that type of maintenance, but that's in addition to other tasks. I don't agree that it's NICTD's responsibility in all cases, sorry. If your neighbor throws his trash in the street and the wind blows it onto your property, I think you'd probably be more likely to lay the responsibility for that at your neighbor's feet, and probably confront him/her about it. I will admit, though, that to follow this analogy out, you'd probably clean your neighbor's junk up the first few times.

Most of the trash in my neighborhood isn't due to the people who live here, it's due to transients going through. Hard to confront someone who just threw a McDonald's bag out of their window as they drive away at 40 mph. My experience. gathered through 50 summers, has been that most people don't litter in their own yards. There are notable exceptions to this, of course.

Perhaps, but I'll tell you now that full double track is a medium to long range goal of the railroad, and the intention is to set aside enough ROW to accomplish a full double track at some point in the future (or at least to not do something that would preclude it).

You might not see it, but I'm telling you that that is the goal, in either the medium or long term. As I've said, double tracking is the single most cost-effective and dramatic means to increase capacity and reliability.

I'll concede that double tracking is "the single most cost-effective and dramatic means to increase capacity and reliability." The real issue, however, is the cost. In dollars, and in the effect doing so would have on Michigan City. NICTD may have their point of view due to their concerns regarding efficiency, etc., but this is where we live. Our viewpoint is somewhat different.

As a total aside, sometimes I think this issue comes down to engineering versus sociology. I read somewhere, sorry no cite for this, that if engineers ran the world the whole planet would be bulldozed flat so as to make transportation easier and more efficient. Needless to say, doing so would have certain costs which most non-engineers would not be willing to pay.

Actually, I think double track did exist there at one time. Look at all of that open space to the north of the railway. Double track catenary, especially the newer, hardier type that NICTD is installing (called "constant tension catenary), usually takes up a bit more space than the simple pole construction that is the norm east of Gary (but which won't be after the Phase II catenary work is finished).

Let me see if I'm getting this right -- you think two tracks may have run under that 38 foot wide structure at one time? Gee. that would fit in the 40 foot wide streets. And if I'm reading what you're saying correctly. NICTD is going to be replacing a bunch of those between Gary and South Bend? It's a shame they're so superannuated, otherwise NITCD could just recycle them to run them, and double track, along the existing 11th street without having to do much outside the area between the curbs.

Just a thought. I could be wrong.

That would be a good subject for a study, I think.

Here's another bonus for my version -- if NICTD doesn't knock down all those houses (on the south side of 11th and the area for the two city block parking lot), they're still going to part of LaPorte County's tax base, and one of the obstacles I've seen people throwing up in front of NICTD's plan is the reduction in real estate taxes due to removal of all that property from the tax base.

Additional note to any NICTD people reading this thread: still feel free to steal my ideas. Or you could hire me as a consultant. Resumé available upon request.

My point is that there shouldn't be a need for people to "get out of the way". Railroad ROW is private property, and the grade crossing warning systems are there for a serious reason. It is illegal to drive around lowered crossing gates or ignore flashing warning lights, just as it's illegal to drive your private auto recklessly.

To me, the fact that it takes a greater distance for a train to stop is not an argument for lower train speeds, it's an argument for better warning systems, and for people not breaking the law.

This is a residential area with children present, especially in the area west of Franklin. Do I need to elaborate on that?

[joe.black]

Most of the trash in my neighborhood isn't due to the people who live here, it's due to transients going through. Hard to confront someone who just threw a McDonald's bag out of their window as they drive away at 40 mph. My experience. gathered through 50 summers, has been that most people don't litter in their own yards. There are notable exceptions to this, of course.

And in the area that we're talking about, I think that applies - the "notable exceptions". One only has to look at the condition of the rest of the area to get a sense of how much priority is placed on keeping the area reasonably clean. You don't see it in many of the other places that the South Shore runs through.

I will say, though, that I can't shake the feeling that you're right about this on some level. I guess I focus more on the practical aspects of running a railroad, but your "good neighbor" argument is very persuasive.

I'll concede that double tracking is "the single most cost-effective and dramatic means to increase capacity and reliability." The real issue, however, is the cost. In dollars, and in the effect doing so would have on Michigan City. NICTD may have their point of view due to their concerns regarding efficiency, etc., but this is where we live. Our viewpoint is somewhat different.

As a total aside, sometimes I think this issue comes down to engineering versus sociology. I read somewhere, sorry no cite for this, that if engineers ran the world the whole planet would be bulldozed flat so as to make transportation easier and more efficient. Needless to say, doing so would have certain costs which most non-engineers would not be willing to pay.

Well, that's certainly a bit of hyperbole (although, it's pretty funny). I think you also have to put into your equation what double-tracking would do for the system as a whole; there are system benefits to it as well that go beyond "efficiency". But, I understand why people who live in the city would have some concerns. Maybe this is an argument for the northern route!

Let me see if I'm getting this right -- you think two tracks may have run under that 38 foot wide structure at one time?

No.

I can see where you'd think that, but no. Those are single-track structures. There was double track there at one time, but it's long gone, along with the structures that would have supported it.

Here's another bonus for my version -- if NICTD doesn't knock down all those houses (on the south side of 11th and the area for the two city block parking lot), they're still going to part of LaPorte County's tax base, and one of the obstacles I've seen people throwing up in front of NICTD's plan is the reduction in real estate taxes due to removal of all that property from the tax base.

The counter-argument to which is that a vastly improved station, consolidation of the to MC stations into one, provision of more and better parking, and improvement of the service (i.e. travel time, etc.) will lead to the TOD (transit-oreiented development) that the MCNEAT study hung on, growing the tax base beyond what it is now.

Additional note to any NICTD people reading this thread: still feel free to steal my ideas. Or you could hire me as a consultant. Resumé available upon request.

I don't know about NICTD, but I could get you a job here in the northeast if you reeeeeeeeaaly want to be a consultant.

This is a residential area with children present, especially in the area west of Franklin. Do I need to elaborate on that?

Of course not, but there are railroad rights of way that run through areas with a lot of children today, all over the world, with 70 mph freight trains and 100+ mph passenger trains. Is Michigan City so much different than the rest of the world?

[Dave]

And in the area that we're talking about, I think that applies - the "notable exceptions". One only has to look at the condition of the rest of the area to get a sense of how much priority is placed on keeping the area reasonably clean. You don't see it in many of the other places that the South Shore runs through.

I will say, though, that I can't shake the feeling that you're right about this on some level. I guess I focus more on the practical aspects of running a railroad, but your "good neighbor" argument is very persuasive.

This may sound like rambling, but it gets to the point eventually --->

I eat at cheap restaurants a lot. Well, when I eat out, that is. Spending twenty bucks for lunch seems extravagant, so I prefer more economical places (local references: Memo's, Mary's Country Kitchen, Sophia's).

So when I get my bill, it's often something like eight bucks. So I have to decide on a tip. I've always thought leaving change is a bit annoying to the waitstaff -- not that they'd prefer not getting it, but carrying around a pocket full of change isn't fun when you're running around as much as they do -- so I leave paper money as my tip.

So, how much do I leave as a tip on an eight dollar bill? One buck is 12.5 percent, which might be acceptable in some places. But if I leave two bucks, one additional buck, what does the waitstaff think of me them?

Which leads to the saying my sweetie and I often use: "The difference between being a hero and a schmuck is a buck. Why not be a hero?"

The point being, sometimes a small investment can have larger results. If NICTD would spend more money -- and it probably wouldn't be a huge amount -- keeping their ROW's (figured that out after a while, Right Of Way) looking good, maybe the people across the street would clean up some themselves. Maybe not, but either way, NICTD would come off looking good. Why not be a hero?

Well, that's certainly a bit of hyperbole (although, it's pretty funny). I think you also have to put into your equation what double-tracking would do for the system as a whole; there are system benefits to it as well that go beyond "efficiency". But, I understand why people who live in the city would have some concerns. Maybe this is an argument for the northern route!

As far as I can tell, the only way the northern route happens is if the Bridge Fairy comes in the middle of the night, waves her magic wand, and the bridge is suddenly there. Doesn't seem to be a likely scenario.

No.

I can see where you'd think that, but no. Those are single-track structures. There was double track there at one time, but it's long gone, along with the structures that would have supported it.

Damn. But couldn't those be used between the curbs for single tracking on 11th? It seems they'd be better than the wooden poles there now. And they'd fit between the curbs.

The counter-argument to which is that a vastly improved station, consolidation of the to MC stations into one, provision of more and better parking, and improvement of the service (i.e. travel time, etc.) will lead to the TOD (transit-oreiented development) that the MCNEAT study hung on, growing the tax base beyond what it is now.

I think what I'm suggesting achieves all of those goals. Station and parking in the parking structure, check. TOD. check. Improvement of service, well I think getting the rails out of the asphalt to allow PTC, reducing the number of crossings would add a check here. You and I have discussed the issue of high level platforms before (and you might want to explain to the folks reading what those are vis-a-vis passenger and freight trains on the same line), but I have to think even a high level platform could be fit in there one way or another.

My version would be an improvement over their current situation, they'd get PTC, and they can do it in such a way as to be heroes. I'd call that a win.

I don't know about NICTD, but I could get you a job here in the northeast if you reeeeeeeeaaly want to be a consultant.

So the only job requirement for being a consultant is having a big mouth?

Of course not, but there are railroad rights of way that run through areas with a lot of children today, all over the world, with 70 mph freight trains and 100+ mph passenger trains. Is Michigan City so much different than the rest of the world?

I bet those places have highly controlled access. Unless you're suggesting 12 foot high fences with razor wire on top (which simply ain't going to happen) and pedestrian proof crossing gates (something I've never seen) where the remaining crossings will be, I'm thinking reasonably low speeds for this 2 1/2 miles are probably the way to go. NICTD trains, at least the passenger trains, are going to have to slow down going into the station, and accelerate going out of the station anyway.

[IndyTransplant]

I bet those places have highly controlled access. Unless you're suggesting 12 foot high fences with razor wire on top (which simply ain't going to happen) and pedestrian proof crossing gates (something I've never seen) where the remaining crossings will be, I'm thinking reasonably low speeds for this 2 1/2 miles are probably the way to go. NICTD trains, at least the passenger trains, are going to have to slow down going into the station, and accelerate going out of the station anyway.

Tim, If you are reading all of this, I would love to hear an observance opinion from an eye witness. I am aware of the high speed bullet trains running through Japan. We had a japanese exchange student and we spoke about them. (I realize much of them are somewhat off the beaten track, but they enter and leave large cities.) What is the access around all of their track systems?



I can tell you as a little girl I lived in a trailer at the edge of a railroad track and since we were in the country and there were very few crossings, the trains flew down the tracks at quite high speeds. The tracks were not fenced off and we as children used to walk down the tracks, play on the tracks and put our ears on the tracks to hear them coming from miles away. Should our parents have kept us off of them? Absolutely. But that is our parents responsibility and our own personal responsibility, not the railroad company. We knew we were on private property not belonging to us and we knew we should not be there.