A proposed bridge over Capital Boulevard would cost more than other options for routing passenger trains through downtown Raleigh, but state engineers say it would cause fewer problems for businesses, neighborhoods, streams and historic sites.
Raleigh residents will have a chance to learn about the new approach, and to compare it with options aired a year ago, at a public meeting 4-7 p.m. today at the Raleigh Convention Center. [9/28/11 update: see today's story from last night's meeting.]
It's part of the state Department of Transportation’s work on a proposed 162-mile track for trains that would run as fast as 110 mph between Raleigh and Richmond, Va. The new line would be 35 miles shorter than the route now used by Amtrak, and DOT says it would cut two hours of travel time for journeys from Raleigh to Washington and the Northeast.
The new downtown path devised by DOT engineers, called NC5, would be the most expensive option for a 3.4-mile segment of the rail route from a planned station near Hargett Street north to Whitaker Mill Road: a total estimated cost of $158.4 million.
It features a 700-foot-long bridge that would carry trains over traffic on West Street and Capital Boulevard between Peace Street and Wade Avenue.
Norfolk Southern Railway said last year it would suffer damages of $100 million or more if DOT chose a path, called NC3, to run the passenger trains through its freight yard along the western edge of Capital Boulevard. Residents of nearby Five Points neighborhoods expressed alarm about noise and destructive vibrations from speeding trains.
NC5 would force 48 businesses to relocate, instead of the 54 businesses that would be affected by the NC3 Five Points option, and its right-of-way costs are $11 million less. But the Capital Boulevard bridge makes its construction costs $32 million higher than NC3’s.
Norfolk Southern has not commented on NC5. Phil W. Poe, co-chairman of the Five Points Citizens Advisory Council, said Five Points residents appear to satisfied with the new option.
“I think everybody feels it’s a reasonable compromise,” Poe said.
Marc W. Hamel, the DOT project manager, said routing the trains across Capital Boulevard would sharply reduce projected noise and vibration impacts on existing buildings, and it’s the only option that avoids hurting historic residential and commercial sites including Seaboard Station, the Cotton Mill, Pilot Mills, Raleigh Bonded Warehouse and residential neighborhoods on both sides of Capital Boulevard.
“This is responding to the public and coming up with a better plan for everybody,” Hamel said. “This one actually makes sense.”
Maps have been posted on the Southeast High Speed Rail Corridor site to show the new option, called NC5, along with new modifications to three alternatives that were aired last year. All options are still on the table.
Here's an interactive Google map of the NC5 route posted by Steven Waters.
Bruce Siceloff reports on traffic and transportation. A News & Observer reporter, editor and blogger since 1976, he took over the
Comments
Why downtown
Wed, 09/28/2011 - 03:16 — Tommy69So what I want to know is why the station even needs to be downtown, it's not like it's a great place to park, and the city buses go plenty far north. Then again I really don't see the need for the new rail service either.
20 mph -- not this one
Tue, 09/27/2011 - 22:25 — MatthewEisleyThe 20 mph crossings are on the existing slow, indirect route through Selma, Rocky Mount, Roanoke Rapids, etc. The new, shorter route would be much more direct -- Raleigh through Wake Forest and Henderson to Petersburg and Richmond -- and much faster, hence the huge time savings.
If we're going to have rail service from our state capital to the nation's capital, which is not a given, this new route makes much more sense. Not everyone can drive or fly, or wants to.
And if we're to have the new route, the new NC5 downtown alignment makes the most sense, it seems to me.
Fix the Roadbed First
Tue, 09/27/2011 - 19:35 — jepthasThe cheapest option is to let people go to RDU and fly to DC. No problems with downtown crossings and historic buildings. But if trains are politically correct, then first we need to fix the current roadbeds so trains can maintain the usual 79 mph without the shake, shake, rattle and roll they have now, and yes, as first poster says, those 20 mph segments. Even north of DC, on Amtrak's high speed routes, the ride is rough and in the dining car waiters are knocked into tables as silverware flies to the floor. (Personal experience this past month). So let us fix what we have first.
Maybe you like airports, but...
Wed, 09/28/2011 - 00:25 — peetiepupIf i can take a train that will get me to DC in the same amount of time without having to pay a lot more, I'll take the train every time.
That's what these improvements are going to do, supposedly. The "fix what we already have first" isn't mutually exclusive with this improvement. Maybe the opposite.
The cost of these things won't be out of line with what it would cost to add another runway and terminal at rdu. Let's get in the 20th century, even if it's a little late. Can't get in the 21st until getting in the 20th.
Lets get all the facts
Tue, 09/27/2011 - 15:42 — stevemichaelsi take the train 2 x a month to DC - the issue of high speed trains is more than just a simple bridge in Raleigh - there are spots between raleigh and richmond where the train goes 20 mph - how do i know? i have become friends with the conductor - he indicates that where crossings do not have mechanical arms then the train can not exceed 20 mph - and this happens quite a few locations - i would love to have high speed rail, but if someone would read this article they would think that its these large urban areas that is the only issue -