[Dave]

I was intrigued with the possiblity of the Trail Creek route for a few minutes -- run the SS tracks along the west bank of Trail Creek, under the US 12 bridge, then head west.

The problem is NICTD wants to be able to double track, and that means a right of way of what, 75 feet. And seeing as they want to be able to run their trains at 60 MPH, they are going to want to limit access to their tracks, which probably means fencing.

What initially looks like low impact turns into no development possible on Trail Creek because NICTD is going to want pretty much everything between Michigan Boulvard and the creek bank, and no pedestrian access. No additional boat slips, and seeing as the creek bank would be inaccessible from land, the boat slips currently there would probably be lost.

If we consider a new bridge, the length of the bridge and its approaches, let's do the math -- NICTD runs freight trains in addition to passenger trains, and they can only climb a grade on the order of 1% -- which means 100 feet horizontally for each foot higher or lower. Seeing as the bridge goes over a navigable waterway, that means it is going to be required to be at least 35 feet (IIRC) above the water (which is why the US 12 bridge is as high as it is). That means 3500 feet at 1% grade either side of Trail Creek. This has been addressed elsewhere. Some folks think it could be made pretty -- I suspect it would look like a railroad trestle, and cut off what view MC has left of the lake. As for travellers seeing the lake from a new station roughly where Swingbelly's is -- that's wishful thinking, because the dominant object in view at that point isn't the lake, it's the back end of the NIPSCO plant.

This post has been edited by Dave: Dec 10 2009, 07:39 PM

[Southsider2k12]

I'm not sure where or why you would want to put a 6000' to 9000' long bridge costing 250,000,000 or more in front of the park entrance or even if the Chamber of Comm. and City Hall etc. would need to be demolished. Yes some commercial properties will need to be purchased but that is a given with either route. It also appears that less human suffering would come into play with this route. I would like to see at least a crude engineering study done with a rough cost analysis , I'm sure that there are others that would be interested in this also. I've said before whatever route is taken will be in place for a long time, looking into alternatives is only being prudent. Anger never, disappointment yes if we can't work together for the best of all concerned.

I don't want that to happen, but that is the engineering necessary to do the proposed northern route over Trail Creek.

[Southsider2k12]

I was intrigued with the possiblity of the Trail Creek route for a few minutes -- run the SS tracks along the west bank of Trail Creek, under the US 12 bridge, then head west.

The problem is NICTD wants to be able to double track, and that means a right of way of what, 75 feet. And seeing as they want to be able to run their trains at 60 MPH, they are going to want to limit access to their tracks, which probably means fencing.

What initially looks like low impact turns into no development possible on Trail Creek because NICTD is going to want pretty much everything between Michigan Boulvard and the creek bank, and no pedestrian access. No additional boat slips, and seeing as the creek bank would be inaccessible from land, the boat slips currently there would probably be lost.

If we consider a new bridge, the length of the bridge and its approaches, let's do the math -- NICTD runs freight trains in addition to passenger trains, and they can only climb a grade on the order of 1% -- which means 100 feet horizontally for each foot higher or lower. Seeing as the bridge goes over a navigable waterway, that means it is going to be required to be at least 35 feet (IIRC) above the water (which is why the US 12 bridge is as high as it is). That means 3500 feet at 1% grade either side of Trail Creek. This has been addressed elsewhere. Some folks think it could be made pretty -- I suspect it would look like a railroad trestle, and cut off what view MC has left of the lake. As for travellers seeing the lake from a new station roughly where Swingbelly's is -- that's wishful thinking, because the dominant object in view at that point isn't the lake, it's the back end of the NIPSCO plant.

I think Joe actually said it would take a 45 foot clearance, which means a 9000 feet long bridge, 4500 to each side of the creek.

[lovethiscity]

I think Joe actually said it would take a 45 foot clearance, which means a 9000 feet long bridge, 4500 to each side of the creek.

WOW, The Franklin Street bridge ( I know no trains use it ) is no where close to the 45' range and the Amtrack bridge that crosses the same federal waterway has about 10' of clearance, length wise it is short of the 9000' by about 8900'

[Southsider2k12]

WOW, The Franklin Street bridge ( I know no trains use it ) is no where close to the 45' range and the Amtrack bridge that crosses the same federal waterway has about 10' of clearance, length wise it is short of the 9000' by about 8900'

It also opens to allow watercraft to go under it.

[joe.black]

WOW, The Franklin Street bridge ( I know no trains use it ) is no where close to the 45' range and the Amtrack bridge that crosses the same federal waterway has about 10' of clearance, length wise it is short of the 9000' by about 8900'

The new bridge would not be a draw or swing bridge - it would be a solid structure, high enough to allow water traffic under high tide conditions, consistent with Coast Guard regs. The current Amtrak bridge is a swing bridge, and the Franklin Street bridge is a draw.

[joe.black]

...Some folks think it could be made pretty -- I suspect it would look like a railroad trestle, and cut off what view MC has left of the lake. As for travellers seeing the lake from a new station roughly where Swingbelly's is -- that's wishful thinking, because the dominant object in view at that point isn't the lake, it's the back end of the NIPSCO plant.

I suspect that it would look substantially like a railroad trestle as well. Unfortunately for the northern route supporters (who have beautiful drawings on their web site which are far removed from reality), the bridge would have to support the operation of very heavy freight trains. That means it would have to be a fairly substantial structure, and I don't see how you could "pretty it up" very much.

[Southsider2k12]

The new bridge would not be a draw or swing bridge - it would be a solid structure, high enough to allow water traffic under high tide conditions, consistent with Coast Guard regs. The current Amtrak bridge is a swing bridge, and the Franklin Street bridge is a draw.

The fun part is that if it could be done, it would have to go either under, over, or through the train bridge which would be right in front of it.

[Beachguy]

The fun part is that if it could be done, it would have to go either under, over, or through the train bridge which would be right in front of it.

If you run down the east side of Michigan Blvd. where is it that you have to cross Trail Creek? Unless I am missing something here I see no need for a bridge what so ever. You would have to cross Hwy. 12 than turn towards Franklin St. and cross south of the draw bridge. Forget the bridge and forget the grade inc., keep it simple.

[Southsider2k12]

If you run down the east side of Michigan Blvd. where is it that you have to cross Trail Creek? Unless I am missing something here I see no need for a bridge what so ever. You would have to cross Hwy. 12 than turn towards Franklin St. and cross south of the draw bridge. Forget the bridge and forget the grade inc., keep it simple.

The east side of Michigan Blvd is not even close to the 60 feet wide that is needed.

[Dave]

If you run down the east side of Michigan Blvd. where is it that you have to cross Trail Creek? Unless I am missing something here I see no need for a bridge what so ever. You would have to cross Hwy. 12 than turn towards Franklin St. and cross south of the draw bridge. Forget the bridge and forget the grade inc., keep it simple.

And as I said in post #221, forget Trail Creek redevelopment as well.

[lovethiscity]

And as I said in post #221, forget Trail Creek redevelopment as well.

This is Michigan City folks! Town of study after study yet nothing happens, why get worked up over this one? In twenty years talk will be of another study to relocate the tracks that are still running down the center of 11th street.

[joe.black]

This is Michigan City folks! Town of study after study yet nothing happens, why get worked up over this one? In twenty years talk will be of another study to relocate the tracks that are still running down the center of 11th street.

Don't count on it. With a federal mandate to have Positive Train Control installed, tested, and in revenue service by December, 2015, the railroad has little choice but to get the tracks out of the asphalt one way or another.

[Southsider2k12]

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?Sectio...ArticleID=27685

Our Opinion:
The Issue:

School board tables resolution on street closings.

Our Opinion:

Everyone, from the school board to Amtrak, must participate in this major decision.
South Shore
School board defers taking stand

Editorial

The board of Michigan City Area Schools tabled a stand on the South Shore commuter rail realignment proposal Tuesday.

But the issues school board member Beryle Burgwald raises are ones that the Michigan City community must face. Earlier this month, concerns about closing 17 of 34 street crossings along the 10th and 11th street corridor to move the train tracks to the south side of those streets prompted the City Council to ask that the relocation study give serious consideration to a northern route.

A northern route would parallel the Amtrak rail line across the North End rather than keep South Shore trains on the 10th and 11th street corridor.

Practically bisecting the city with a new fenced-off South Shore track poses problems for school bus routes and for children walking to school, and it also poses problems for many others as well, whether they walk or drive around the South Shore corridor, or are trying to get from one place to another in that part of the city.

While the engineering study that will analyze both routes remains to be conducted, those who favor the northern route are afraid it won't get serious consideration because of its much higher cost of the northern route, a perceived unwillingness on the part of the South Shore's operator to use the north route, and a concern that Amtrak won't work with the South Shore on sharing a corridor.

The relocation of the South Shore is a decision that could remain in effect 100 years. Engineering is a big component of the decision, as is cost. But the cost must be looked at over 50 or 100 years.

Further, it may take the offices of Indiana's U.S. senators to push Amtrak, but it would be nonsensical to think that Amtrak and the South Shore can't work together.

Everyone in Michigan City - certainly including school board members, bus drivers, students who walk to school and their parents - needs to offer input into this monumental decision.

[Southsider2k12]

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?Sectio...ArticleID=27751

What's next in the South Shore issue

Laurie Wink
The News-Dispatch

MICHIGAN CITY - Whether the 11th Street corridor or northern Amtrak route is the best for the South Shore commuter train continues to be a contentious issue heading into the new year.

It comes down to who's defining "best" and who will fund additional engineering studies and, ultimately, the South Shore realignment.

The City Council passed a resolution Dec. 1 supporting the Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation District's desire to move ahead with engineering studies. Both possible rail routes for the South Shore will be examined.

"I expect to call NICTD (this week) to discuss the next steps," Mayor Chuck Oberlie said. "While the city did not sign an agreement, the council has stated the desire for the study and its intended support for implementation."

NICTD was looking for an agreement with the city in April when it proposed a track realignment within the existing corridor on 10th and 11th streets. A series of public forums, facilitated by consultant Stu Sirota, slowed the city's response but, Oberlie said, having public meetings was the right thing to do.

At this point, funding is the key to advancing the project, according to John Parsons, NICTD planning and marketing manager

"Now that the city has passed the resolution," he said, "we need to find funding for the preliminary engineering study."

NICTD is looking for the most cost-effective alignment, Parsons said, and a lot more engineering analysis will be necessary.

"When it gets right down to it," Parsons said "it's going to be an issue of cost and available funding."

Fred Miller, a member of a vocal cadre of concerned residents known as the North End group, said they're more interested in what's best for the city. And, he said, "We aren't going away."

"Everything NICTD's proposing and the reason they're so fixed on 11th Street, is it's the shortest, least expensive commuter route available," Miller said. "None of that takes into consideration what's good for the city."

The North End group strongly believes in and is pushing for a South Shore route running parallel to the existing Amtrak line. The group cites problems with the South Shore proposal, including possibly closing 17 of 34 street crossings along the rail corridor, demolishing some 100 houses and businesses and reducing the quality of life of area residents. The group has more than 900 signatures opposing the South Shore changes, according to Miller.

The North End group points out a consultants' study of three possible South Shore routes found the northern route to be the most economically advantageous for Michigan City. But the study found significant economic benefits to the existing South Shore corridor, and mentioned the serious drawback in the north of replacing an aging swing bridge with a higher, more expensive bridge over Trail Creek.

The North End group believes federal funding can solve the bridge problem. They're banking on President Barack Obama's interest in high-speed rail, backed by an initial $8 billion in stimulus funds, to ultimately support the local improvements as part of a proposed Detroit to Chicago high-speed rail line.

Miller said the group plans to approach U.S. Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind., about making a case for federal funding of the project. Bud Ruby, a supporter of the northern route, is a friend of Lugar's and can help make the introduction, Miller said.

"We're asking him (Lugar) to get the transportation authority to bring Amtrak's top people to the table with NICTD's top people," Miller said. "It would be better for the two to work together on a dual track system that would provide a much better alternative route than 11th Street."

County Councilman Mark Yagelski, who is a NICTD board member, said NICTD has no problem using the northern route if enough funds are available. And, he said, the South Shore would need an agreement that its schedule wouldn't be tied to Amtrak's.

"Going into Chicago, there's only one track," he said. "If you miss the time by five minutes, you have to sit on the tracks and wait to come in (to Chicago). We can't be held up because of Amtrak."

The federal government is requiring commuter rail lines to achieve positive train control by 2015. Positive train control uses the latest global positioning technology to detect when two trains are heading for a possible collision and can override decisions of engineers to prevent collisions.

Yagelski said he's met with U.S. Congressman Joe Donnelly, D-Granger, to discuss funding for the South Shore project, and the congressman has asked if all parties are on the same track.

"He says if we have a common plan, he'll support it," Yagelski said. "The mayor needs to help direct the situation. We have to have common ground. It's going to take leadership."

q

Contact Laurie Wink at lwink@thenewsdispatch.com.

[Dave]

Considering the huge expense of the North End plan, I have to say I can't imagine it ever happening.

Just think about it. Under NICTD's 11th street plan, something like 150 buildings have to be removed. They could pay each and every one of those property owners a million bucks each, and it would STILL cost only a third of the price of the bridge over Trail Creek.

But hey, if they can somehow get the Feds to pony up the cash, more power to 'em.

[joe.black]

Ugh, where to start? The $8 billion that the North End group keeps throwing out there is *total* for the country, not just for the Chicago - Detroit corridor. As far as I know (and I've seen some of the proposals), the HSR line, if it ever gets built, will not be going via the current Amtrak route. Sorry if I sound a bit peevish, but I'm getting tired of people, when you ask how things are going to be paid for, screaming "stimulus!!!", and expecting that to end the discussion.

As I've said before, mixing high speed trains with conventional Amtrak trains and local commuter trains simply doesn't work, and it would not be done, for operational reasons.

Even if the current Amtrak route WERE chosen for HSR, the only way the South Shore could be re-routed up there would be for the HSR authority, out of the goodness of their hearts, to simply decide to build the South Shore an extra bridge deck and track, with no benefit whatsoever to the high speed trains. I don't see that happening.

Again, though - I don't have all of the engineering data, etc. No one does at this point. That's why the engineering study is being done: to define the alternatives at a more detailed level, develop cost information, and check constructability. Perhaps a third alternative might be developed that's a hybrid of the other two, or an entirely new third alternative...

[Southsider2k12]

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?Sectio...&TM=53443.5

What's next in the South Shore issue

Laurie Wink
The News-Dispatch

MICHIGAN CITY - Whether the 11th Street corridor or northern Amtrak route is the best for the South Shore commuter train continues to be a contentious issue heading into the new year.

It comes down to who's defining "best" and who will fund additional engineering studies and, ultimately, the South Shore realignment.

The City Council passed a resolution Dec. 1 supporting the Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation District's desire to move ahead with engineering studies. Both possible rail routes for the South Shore will be examined.

"I expect to call NICTD (this week) to discuss the next steps," Mayor Chuck Oberlie said. "While the city did not sign an agreement, the council has stated the desire for the study and its intended support for implementation."

NICTD was looking for an agreement with the city in April when it proposed a track realignment within the existing corridor on 10th and 11th streets. A series of public forums, facilitated by consultant Stu Sirota, slowed the city's response but, Oberlie said, having public meetings was the right thing to do.

At this point, funding is the key to advancing the project, according to John Parsons, NICTD planning and marketing manager

"Now that the city has passed the resolution," he said, "we need to find funding for the preliminary engineering study."

NICTD is looking for the most cost-effective alignment, Parsons said, and a lot more engineering analysis will be necessary.

"When it gets right down to it," Parsons said "it's going to be an issue of cost and available funding."

Fred Miller, a member of a vocal cadre of concerned residents known as the North End group, said they're more interested in what's best for the city. And, he said, "We aren't going away."

"Everything NICTD's proposing and the reason they're so fixed on 11th Street, is it's the shortest, least expensive commuter route available," Miller said. "None of that takes into consideration what's good for the city."

The North End group strongly believes in and is pushing for a South Shore route running parallel to the existing Amtrak line. The group cites problems with the South Shore proposal, including possibly closing 17 of 34 street crossings along the rail corridor, demolishing some 100 houses and businesses and reducing the quality of life of area residents. The group has more than 900 signatures opposing the South Shore changes, according to Miller.

The North End group points out a consultants' study of three possible South Shore routes found the northern route to be the most economically advantageous for Michigan City. But the study found significant economic benefits to the existing South Shore corridor, and mentioned the serious drawback in the north of replacing an aging swing bridge with a higher, more expensive bridge over Trail Creek.

The North End group believes federal funding can solve the bridge problem. They're banking on President Barack Obama's interest in high-speed rail, backed by an initial $8 billion in stimulus funds, to ultimately support the local improvements as part of a proposed Detroit to Chicago high-speed rail line.

Miller said the group plans to approach U.S. Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind., about making a case for federal funding of the project. Bud Ruby, a supporter of the northern route, is a friend of Lugar's and can help make the introduction, Miller said.

"We're asking him (Lugar) to get the transportation authority to bring Amtrak's top people to the table with NICTD's top people," Miller said. "It would be better for the two to work together on a dual track system that would provide a much better alternative route than 11th Street."

County Councilman Mark Yagelski, who is a NICTD board member, said NICTD has no problem using the northern route if enough funds are available. And, he said, the South Shore would need an agreement that its schedule wouldn't be tied to Amtrak's.

"Going into Chicago, there's only one track," he said. "If you miss the time by five minutes, you have to sit on the tracks and wait to come in (to Chicago). We can't be held up because of Amtrak."

The federal government is requiring commuter rail lines to achieve positive train control by 2015. Positive train control uses the latest global positioning technology to detect when two trains are heading for a possible collision and can override decisions of engineers to prevent collisions.

Yagelski said he's met with U.S. Congressman Joe Donnelly, D-Granger, to discuss funding for the South Shore project, and the congressman has asked if all parties are on the same track.

"He says if we have a common plan, he'll support it," Yagelski said. "The mayor needs to help direct the situation. We have to have common ground. It's going to take leadership."

q

Contact Laurie Wink at lwink@thenewsdispatch.com.

[Southsider2k12]

http://thenewsdispatch.com/articles/2010/0...a9580335686.txt

Moving Amtrak opens possibilities

Published: Tuesday, January 26, 2010 4:17 AM CST
Michigan City is riding this economic typhoon fairly well, it seems. However, the decisions made by people higher up the government food chain could hinder or encourage development in Michigan City. I have heard rumors that high-speed rail between Chicago and Detroit will not use the current alignment.

If that’s true, does that mean Amtrak plans to abandon its line segment between New Buffalo and Porter? What development opportunities in Michigan City would abandonment stimulate? What impact would abandonment have on the opinions of citizens who oppose NICTD’s “Great Wall” project on 11th Street? In my opinion, picking up the Amtrak rails makes good sense. Turning that roadbed into a trail that connects New Buffalo to the Prairie Duneland Trail in Chesterton is the green thing to do.

Without tracks blocking access, marina/housing developments would become more attractive to investors, thus stimulating that making money-spending money thing. Whatever decision is made, I am pleased the powers that be are not making hasty decisions.

Phil Grams

Michigan City

[joe.black]

Stay tuned. The final rule on PTC is out from the FRA, and it appears from my very preliminary reading of this dense, 400+ page document that there may be a way for NICTD to exempt the 11th St. tracks from the PTC requirement. Still reading- I'll let you know what I think once I know what I think.