My proposal for near-future inter-town/city passenger rail expansions in Vermont! (MAP)DrToadley OP t1_j6jitfs wrote
Reply to comment by hunny_bun_24 in My proposal for near-future inter-town/city passenger rail expansions in Vermont! (MAP) by DrToadley
Why? The Ethan Allen Express was expanded to Burlington just last year, and Amtrak is currently planning an expansion of the Vermonter to Montreal as well. A Montreal to Boston rail connection seems like a no-brainer too, and then that only leaves a few more nice-to-have lines.
patsboston t1_j6jjryk wrote
It would never happen in a million years. Vermont would not add any other lines since it wouldn't make sense economically for the state. Our population is too small to support so many lines, especially when there are much more populated areas in the country without rail coverage.
contrary-contrarian t1_j6jnt0i wrote
Not with your attitude...
Europe is covered in train lines in rural places. It works there and it would work here, but too many people refuse to open their eyes and believe it.
headgasketidiot t1_j6k6qc2 wrote
Americans 150 years ago: We are destined by god to expand our dominion throughout the entire continent.
Americans today: building a modest rail network in Vermont could not happen in a million years.
Note: Manifest Destiny was genocidal and bad. I'm just poking fun at how small our collective vision for what is possible has become.
patsboston t1_j6k7xpu wrote
I would love to have it happen. What is the recent precedent? How would there be funding for this considering it would need bipartisan approval in congress?
patsboston t1_j6jpqyz wrote
It's called being realistic (which takes into account public sentiment). If this project would come into reality, it would cost hundreds of millions of dollars. When would that ever get approved? Look at the Concord to Lebanon line. That is about 60 miles between them. At current costs of building tracks, that would cost well over 100 million dollars. That doesn't include other costs related to it. It just doesn't make since in this environment to spend hundreds of millions of dollars in a place as rural as Vermont. We should always shoot for the stars but we need to be realistic.
contrary-contrarian t1_j6jqbvh wrote
It would have to be a federally backed project (like our highways).
I can totally see it being approved when gas is $12 a gallon
patsboston t1_j6jr4u5 wrote
How would we get federal funding for that when there is currently no line between Houston and Dallas? Nashville and Atlanta? Las Vegas and LA? Cincinnati to Cleveland? Rural lines in Vermont would be like 200th on the list.
The places that would get funding first would be higher population areas and areas with higher economic output.
patsboston t1_j6k7lnm wrote
Not sure why I am downvoting for mentioning the current state of rail funding in the US.
contrary-contrarian t1_j6jsowz wrote
Gotta start somewhere! I'm not saying it's going to happen tomorrow, but if there is political will in the state, and our federal reps are up for it, we can get that money.
I'm not sure if you're aware, but Vermont received 1.25 billion dollars in coronavirus relief funds (actually more than that if you count other programs). Despite being a small state, we have a decent amount of influence and could be a pilot project for the rest of the country.
goldenlight18 t1_j6jwkac wrote
This was really a one time funding coupled with Leahy's seniority in the senate pulling weight. With him retiring it will be a while before we have that influence again.
contrary-contrarian t1_j6jz241 wrote
This is mostly true, but it shows that large investments in small states is possible.
We could cut military spending by 1/64th and have enough funding to build light rail in most of the country...
cbospam1 t1_j6kfya0 wrote
From what I could find only Wyoming received less in Covid relief funds than Vermont, so while we got a lot of assistance it’s not much as all in context.
The govt will never dump big money into a rural mountainous state to build rail. If they won’t do it in Texas or California it’s not happening here.
helios_the_powerful t1_j6kdjis wrote
It might not make sense for Vermont alone, but that Concord to Lebanon line for instance would allow for direct travel from Montreal to Boston, which are much bigger market.
SkiingAway t1_j6lp62y wrote
If you want to do Boston-Montreal, realistically you're just going to run it out through Springfield and then north on the existing Vermonter/Valley Flyer route, letting you get more value out of planned/intended investments on those corridors for other services, higher/more useful frequencies, and valuable connectivity at the expense of an indirect routing.
The old line wasn't particularly fast when it did exist and while a BOS-SPG-WRJ-MTL routing won't be faster than the historic timetables had for the old line (which were ~2hrs WRJ-Concord, ~4hrs WRJ-Boston on an express making very few stops), it won't be a lot slower either.
patsboston t1_j6kie3f wrote
Of course I would love that. How big of a priority would that be. Just the tracks alone (not including any other expenses) would be over 100 million (based on the 1-2 million dollar estimates for cost per mile). Is there enough squeeze for that when there is already a Boston to Montréal proposal going through Maine?
helios_the_powerful t1_j6l2j4s wrote
Let's be honest, that proposal through Maine is juste a pipe dream. It might happen, but it's nowhere near a priority for any of the states it goes through.
However, this corridor might have more momentum then you think it has. Amtrak has already identified the Boston-Concord corridor as a potential corridor to invest in. Mass. is invested in expanding the MBTA and upgrade the lines all over the state. On the other side, New England states have made a top priority to extend the Vermonter to Montreal and double its frequency. Work is on the way for preclearance facilities at Montreal Central Station.
$100M isn't that much, really. If they manage to build enough ridership on each side of that gap, that would repay itselft really quickly. The only serious obtacle would be New Hampshire, which is notoriously opposed to passenger rail.
DrToadley OP t1_j6l55tj wrote
I'm really hopeful WRJ to Concord happens because it would both be the most direct route between Montreal/Burlington and Boston as well as hitting the most number of smaller cities along the way. Going through Maine or western Massachusetts would be slow and would also not serve communities which are presently poorly served by rail. Of all that this map proposes, I'm most hopeful that that line is built someday. Heck, build it in the I-89 median to avoid right-of-way problems - I know interstate median rail isn't ideal but if it gets it to happen, it's better than nothing.
NonDeterministiK t1_j6kw9x7 wrote
The Vermonter used to be called the Montrealer. The line is still there, and yet it still ends in St Albans after 2 decades. Why is it taking so long to reopen the last short leg to Montreal? This would greatly increase the ridership on the Vermonter, which is now basically empty once it exits Burlington.
BackgroundCat t1_j6l6r7t wrote
Giving up that rail corridor between White River and Concord, et als in favor of a rail trail was so short-sighted. Anybody have any idea what the ownership of that looks like today? Is reinstalled rail even an option?
DrToadley OP t1_j6l8rm2 wrote
Didn't even know this existed. I really do hope so!
Willie_the_Wombat t1_j6llvvy wrote
Yeah, the problem here is that Vermont is obviously a rural state with no real cities. As a consequence almost everybody who has somewhere to go already has a car. Those folks who are already necessarily paying for a car along with all the associated costs aren’t going to want to pay for railways they aren’t going to use. Especially when those cost would be coming out of funds that go to the relevant departments/agencies that already can’t maintain the roadways to serviceable standards.
greenmtnfiddler t1_j6kpzxs wrote
How likely is the Montreal extension, and how soon?
I'd be SO freaking happy to see it in my lifetime.
DrToadley OP t1_j6ks4nq wrote
Amtrak has it on their website as a planned expansion!
greenmtnfiddler t1_j6kvbo4 wrote
Well, yeah...it's been there a while. I was hoping you'd been to a planning meeting and heard something a little recent/hopeful.
I'm old enough to remember when it last existed, was actually planning my first trip when it stopped, so I'm cynical :(
tbdsniper t1_j6kzbg9 wrote
Track upgrades have been completed between St. Albans and the Canadian border. It is now up to both governments on how to handle the border crossing. Within the last few years it was decided to have a port of entry in Montreal without having to stop at the border.
DrToadley OP t1_j6kzzjr wrote
Wish we had an EU-type agreement with Canada! Ah well...
cbospam1 t1_j6kewet wrote
Those expansions didn’t require totally new track. They run on existing track owned by freight companies.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments