DC Long Bridge Replacement Study

Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

afigg

Engineer
Joined
Jun 8, 2009
Messages
5,896
Location
Virginia
The HSIPR funded Long Bridge Study held a public outreach meeting on June 6 and has posted the presentation and alternative boards on the project website. The Long Bridge is the two track CSX bridge across the Potomac River built in 1904 that is used by CSX, Amtrak, VRE. The current study is just the first round of what will be, forgive me, a long process of analysis and environmental reviews to settle on what exactly on what should be done with the bridge: nothing, an expanded 3 track bridge, 4 track bridge, ped/bike walkway, streetcar lanes, shared sreetcar/automobile lanes, bridge versus tunnel.

The presentation material for the alternatives (5 MB 10 page PDF) is very barebones, with just 1 slide on each alternative configuration. As I see it, the two main alternatives that should advance are #4 with 4 tracks and bike/ped walkway and #5 with 4 tracks + bike/ped walkway and two streetcar lanes. The plans have been for some time to build a 4th track on the Northern VA side from the bridge to Alexandria station to AF interlocking. A four track replacement bridge (or more likely a new 2 track bridge and an extended refurb of the current bridge) would allow 2 passenger tracks to AF interlocking and 2 freight tracks. Two streetcar lanes across the river would allow the planned DC and Alexandria/Arlington streetcar lines to connect.

The alternatives #6, #7, #8 with shared or seperated automobile lanes don't really make sense given that the Long Bridge is just south of the I-395 / Rt. 1 multiple bridge spans. Got plenty of car lanes there already. I figure those alternatives are there in part so if some pol demands why didn't they consider adding more car lanes across the Potomac River with this project, they can say they did and rejected it for the following reasons. Alternatives #9 and #10 with tunnels under the Potomac River would be seriously expensive.

The website has an email address and comment page for anyone who wants to comment on the alternatives.
 
Wow, that four track and street car bridge would be really, really broad. That's my first choice. Second being the pedestrian one. There's no good pedestrian or cyclist bridge over the Potomac.

The road one is moronic. I don't think there's serious capacity issues on the road bridges. Most of the rush hour traffic is made worse by terrible design on the interchange between 395 and GW.

Tunnel would be pretty cool but I'm not sure how it would actually fit with the Yellow line Metro tunnel being RIGHT THERE.
 
Thanks for sharing. :hi:

Just a couple of off the cuff comments/observations:

1) As ugly as it is, which is caused primarily from neglect, I actually like the existing bridge. Now I wouldn't fight to save it, but this does bring up the possibility of an effort to save it. I think this could explain Alternatives 9 and 10.

2) Recently completed - except for the aquatics center - Long Bridge Park has an 'Esplanade' - a great spot to watch trains and planes, btw - for walking and biking, which could seemingly easily connect in with a hiker/biker path over the new bridge.

3) Adding a fourth track to the AF interlocking should not be too tough, as the remnants of a former fourth track is still very evident in many locations.

4) As much as I'd like to see provisions for a trolley line on a new bridge, it is not going to happen. Every situation is different, but the new Wilson Bridge went through a similar 'space for future rail' vetting process. Those alternatives were dropped because, IIRC, there were no serious proposals to ever make rail happen. With Metro's Yellow Line in such close proximity, and the 'other side of the river' menatility that exists so stongly in the DC area, a trolley line will appear too redunant and too expensive.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
There's no good pedestrian or cyclist bridge over the Potomac.
I'm not sure what you mean by "good", nearly every bridge over the Potomac has sidewalks (Wilson, Mason, Memorial, Roosevely and Key) and all of them but the Memorial bridge had physical separators between the sidewalk and vehicle lanes. A good friend of mine bike commutes from Alexandria to the Navy Yard pretty much every day without issue.
It's far easier to get to downtown by bike/on foot from Virginia than it is from Maryland.

Really anything that gets 4 tracks across the river will be just fine by me.

Am I the only one that's amused by the use of a HHP-8 as the token Amtrak locomotive, since one will never travel across the bridge? :)
 
#5 would be sweet. With the new park there is a lot more bicyclists around gravelly point. Between the bicycle lanes and the trollery lanes, it would help to link Arlington to DC, especially in the Maine Avenue area.

But it will be expensive and the streetcar portion will probably get axed, which is too bad. Most of the people I know simply refuse to ride a bus, but if you put steel wheels on it and run it down tracks, they will hop aboard and insist on sharing stories about their summer in Prague.
 
1) As ugly as it is, which is caused primarily from neglect, I actually like the existing bridge. Now I wouldn't fight to save it, but this does bring up the possibility of an effort to save it. I think this could explain Alternatives 9 and 10.
CSX may not want to pay their share of an entirely new bridge. One option might be to build a new 2 track bridge with a bike/ped walkway and possibly 2 streetcar next to the current bridge, either north or south it. Then temporarily move all freight traffic to the new bridge and rebuild/refurb the current Long Bridge over a 6 or 12 month period. Then move the freight trains back to Long Bridge and keep the 2 tracks on the new bridge only for passenger trains. IIRC, I read that the foundations of the Long Bridge are structurally sound, it is the spans that need work (and a paint job).
4) As much as I'd like to see provisions for a trolley line on a new bridge, it is not going to happen. Every situation is different, but the new Wilson Bridge went through a similar 'space for future rail' vetting process. Those alternatives were dropped because, IIRC, there were no serious proposals to ever make rail happen. With Metro's Yellow Line in such close proximity, and the 'other side of the river' menatility that exists so stongly in the DC area, a trolley line will appear too redunant and too expensive.
The rail line capability across the Wilson Bridge was retained. The bridge was designed to handle at least light rail lines across the wide median areas on both spans near the middle of the bridge. Don't recall if the new Wilson bridge was to be strong enough for heavy rail Metro. The concept is that someday the extended Purple Line or a separate LRT line from Alexandria to Branch Ave Metro would go across the Wilson Bridge.
Don't know if the streetcar lanes on the new Long Bridge will survive review because both DC and VA would have to contribute a fair amount of funds for it. However, the proposed SW Ecodistrict Initiative redevelopment plans to deck over the railroad tracks around Maryland Ave and I-395 to the south. The streetcar lines across the bridge could run over the tracks on the new deck and connect to the planned NS streetcar line around L'Enfant Plaza. There is more coordination in long range transportation planning between DC, MD, and VA under MWCOG and WMATA than there in most city regions.
 
Am I the only one that's amused by the use of a HHP-8 as the token Amtrak locomotive, since one will never travel across the bridge? :)
Probably a cut and paste of a pic of the front of locomotives by someone who didn't know the difference, but the tracks on the Long Bridge were electrified with catenary to the Potomac railyard. The catenary support poles are still visible on the bridge.
While the HHP-8s will be retired long before the new bridge is completed, once there are dedicated passenger tracks from the First Street Tunnel through Alexandria Station, I would not rule out electrification of the passenger tracks at least as far as Crystal City in a first round limited southward extension of electrification. That would allow MARC to run Penn Line through service south of Union Station to L'Enfant Plaza and Crystal City. If there is enough support, build a turn-around pocket track south of Crystal City for the MARC trains to pull into (the ROW id pretty wide there) and turn around. Dedicated passenger tracks to AF Interlocking provide the start point for a future electrified SE HSR corridor to Richmond and beyond.
 
Alexandria would literally poop itself over having cat ruin their sightlines or whatever nonsense Old Town loves to complain about.

I say this as a resident of Old Town.
 
The four track bridge is the best choice in my mind. It could be an exact match to the Metro bridge in appearance, both span lengths, depths, and profile of the alignment. Having bicycles, pedestrians, etc., etc. on the same bridge seems like a really bad idea. There are already the three parallel road bridges just to the west. If the bicyclists need it so bad, add it to or put it next to one of them.

Electrification into Union Station? Major clearance problem. I would be surprised to see it happen.
 
I like alternative five the most as well. One thing: VA currently has a $50m+/yr mass transit trust fund mechanism, so I can see a situation where they'd be up for running the streetcar into DC as an alternative to additional Metro capacity. Metro won't be happy and it may not make sense, but those tunnels are likely to be massively expensive. I'm not sure how far away the nearest streetcar is likely to be on the DC side, though.

I can actually see alternative eight somehow lurching to fruition, actually. It would be a mess, but I can see it happening.
 
The four track bridge is the best choice in my mind. It could be an exact match to the Metro bridge in appearance, both span lengths, depths, and profile of the alignment. Having bicycles, pedestrians, etc., etc. on the same bridge seems like a really bad idea. There are already the three parallel road bridges just to the west. If the bicyclists need it so bad, add it to or put it next to one of them.
Electrification into Union Station? Major clearance problem. I would be surprised to see it happen.
There are only slight problem areas in the Capitol hill Tunnel that can be fixed is what I was told by one of the Amtrak guys at the Washington DC NARP meeting last year. The Union Station Yard at the lower level inside the tunnel is all electrified anyway, so that is not a problem.
But of course this is all hearsay and one can never tell for sure without looking at the actual clearance diagrams.

Suffice it to say that electrification of Washington DC to Richmond is definitely in the various long term plans/visions for that segment, though of course all of the EISs and funding issues still remain to be addressed. But one thing that does not prevent it from happening is the biggest worry that railfans seem to have, and that is that double stacks cannot possibly run under catenary since they are too high. Little do they realize that double stacks run under the current NEC catenary everyday near Newark DE, and are forever immensely surprised when shown pictures of the same.
 
I like alternative five the most as well. One thing: VA currently has a $50m+/yr mass transit trust fund mechanism, so I can see a situation where they'd be up for running the streetcar into DC as an alternative to additional Metro capacity. Metro won't be happy and it may not make sense, but those tunnels are likely to be massively expensive. I'm not sure how far away the nearest streetcar is likely to be on the DC side, though.
Connecting the streetcar systems across the Potomac there to the planned N-S DC streetcar line (in the 22 core system plans - see www.dcstreetcar.com) may reduce the need for a split off DC Metro Yellow line running north under 10th St. But it won't address the pending bottleneck at Rosslyn where the Blue, Orange, and Silver lines will merge with 3 lines sharing 2 tracks through the city core with a max capacity of 26 trains per hour. The Blue Line will be the loser when the Silver Line opens with the Blue Line getting 5-6 tph at rush hour. The idea of splitting the Blue Line off to a new station at Rosslyn, then under the Potomac to Georgetown and east along M Street, NJ Ave to Union Station is likely to advance in planning.
Besides the streetcar systems will be for local traffic. Streetcars may take some short range trips from the Metro, but the Metro may see more riders in the long run as the streetcars lead to more residents & visitors taking transit instead of driving. But discussions of the DC Metro and streetcar plans are better left to the transit forum.

The relevance to Amtrak is that the above emphasizes that the Long Bridge replacement/second bridge will not be an isolated project. There are many groups that have different goals: CSX, Amtrak, VRE, Virginia DRPT for VA trains, Southeast HSR, Alexandria, DC, MARC and Maryland (for possible future through service), MWCOG, WMATA, the SW redevelopment groups with GSA heavily involved, and the NEC Future & Commission for the impact on NEC growth. The study is being lead by DC DOT, which doesn't have much at stake in 2 vs 4 tracks, except where the new bridge and tracks may require buildings or infrastructure to be removed. The bike/ped trail and possible streetcar lanes parts are more relevant to the DC DOT planners.

My point is that with so many different agencies and groups involved is that the study, making the decisions, and preliminary to final design stages will be a drawn out process, likely taking many years.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Alexandria would literally poop itself over having cat ruin their sightlines or whatever nonsense Old Town loves to complain about.
I say this as a resident of Old Town.
Agreed, I can foresee resistance and complaints from the Old Town sector if 2 tracks were to get catenary. But the line through Alexandria is an active 3 track freight train corridor, hardly a bucolic trail. In a few years when CSX completes their clearance project, with the replacement of the Virginia Avenue tunnel as the big project in DC, there will be long double stack container trains rumbling through. Complaints about the sight lines of modern catenary will be a bit silly, but that is democracy for you.
 
Alexandria would literally poop itself over having cat ruin their sightlines or whatever nonsense Old Town loves to complain about.
I say this as a resident of Old Town.
Agreed, I can foresee resistance and complaints from the Old Town sector if 2 tracks were to get catenary. But the line through Alexandria is an active 3 track freight train corridor, hardly a bucolic trail. In a few years when CSX completes their clearance project, with the replacement of the Virginia Avenue tunnel as the big project in DC, there will be long double stack container trains rumbling through. Complaints about the sight lines of modern catenary will be a bit silly, but that is democracy for you.
In an effort to symbolically link Washington, (where Amtrak goes right by the Tidal Basin and its cherry trees) with Alexandria, (George Washington's hometown) maybe the catenary towers could be disguised by making them appear to be alternating giant cherry trees and giant axes through Old Town. :D

And what will all those new residents of Potomac Yards think? I can hear it now... "I don't care. Enough is enough. So what if my townhouse sits on a former railyard? Those damn trains are so noisy, dirty and unsightly!" :eek:hboy:

Now the reduction in diesel exhaust could be a selling point...
 
The rail line capability across the Wilson Bridge was retained. The bridge was designed to handle at least light rail lines across the wide median areas on both spans near the middle of the bridge. Don't recall if the new Wilson bridge was to be strong enough for heavy rail Metro. The concept is that someday the extended Purple Line or a separate LRT line from Alexandria to Branch Ave Metro would go across the Wilson Bridge.
That's right. I'd forgotten. On paper, at least, the option exists for a light rail line. Personally I think this option is useless, when what is needed is a heavy rail Metro line that does the 66 mile Cap. Beltway loop. I don't think it matters anyway, as new rail or road projects seem to take 30 years - or more - to come to fruition and I think we will see Wilson Bridge, Version 3.0, before rail crosses it.

There is more coordination in long range transportation planning between DC, MD, and VA under MWCOG and WMATA than there in most city regions.
True, but MWCOG and WMATA really came about because there was such a need. Government is so layered and fractured in the regoin, and (even though it was 150 years ago) with some of the political and cultural differences that led to Virginia being on one side of the Civil War and Maryland and DC being on the other side still lingering and manifesting, I'll just say that both MWCOG and WMATA have had, and will continue to have, their work cut out for them..
 
In an effort to symbolically link Washington, (where Amtrak goes right by the Tidal Basin and its cherry trees) with Alexandria, (George Washington's hometown) maybe the catenary towers could be disguised by making them appear to be alternating giant cherry trees and giant axes through Old Town. :D
And what will all those new residents of Potomac Yards think? I can hear it now... "I don't care. Enough is enough. So what if my townhouse sits on a former railyard? Those damn trains are so noisy, dirty and unsightly!" :eek:hboy:

Now the reduction in diesel exhaust could be a selling point...
The developers at Potomac Yards are likely to build a fence or berm and place short trees to block the view of the CSX tracks. There was enough of a fuss over the possible visibility of the proposed alternate locations of the Potomac Yard Metro infill station from the GW Parkway.

Your idea of making the catenary towers look like fake trees is not a bad one. That is done for some cell phone towers. Add fake branches and leaves to the side of the catenary away from the tracks to make it sort of look like a tree. Then tell the locals to think of the catenary wires as long vines hanging between the trees. Maybe they will accept that. :huh:
 
DC DOT has posted the final report for the Long Bridge Study. Still no updates on fhe offical Long Bridge study website, but this is DC DOT.

i skimmed the final report, no actual decisions made for which alternative to pursue, just general findings on the design goals, and a fair amount of costing data and environmental study documentation. This is a Tier I EIS report at best. I expect the $2.8 million FY2014 TIGER grant along with matching funds from DDOT and VA will be used for the next stage, generating the Tier II Final EIS and getting to a Record of Decision, which will select the design alternative. A lot of money and work to justify the obvious alternative: a 4 track bridge with a pedestrian/bike lane. The tunnel alternatives at circa $6 billion cost estimates are a serious non-starter against a $400 or $600 million 4 track bridge.

With VA planning officials now openly advocating upgrading the DC to Richmond Main Street corridor to a 90 mph corridor by 2025, the Long Bridge replacement is a critical part of their expansion plans. So if the Long Bridge replacement FEIS and ROD are completed by 2018, maybe start of construction in the early 2020's timeframe?

BTW, CSX has started construction work on the Virginia Avenue tunnel rebuild, although the Committee of 100 is still seeking to block the project in court. CSX Virginia Ave Tunnel website.
 
DC DOT has posted the final report for the Long Bridge Study. ...

...

i skimmed the final report, no actual decisions made for which alternative to pursue, just general findings on the design goals, and a fair amount of costing data

With VA planning officials now openly advocating upgrading the DC to Richmond Main Street corridor to a 90 mph corridor by 2025, the Long Bridge replacement is a critical part of their expansion plans. So if the Long Bridge replacement FEIS and ROD are completed by 2018, maybe start of construction in the early 2020's timeframe?

...
This article, "Virginia bets on higher-speed rail by 2025" from the June 4 Washington Post

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/dr-gridlock/wp/2015/06/04/virginia-bets-on-higher-speed-rail-by-2025/

says the FRA and VA planners want a 90-minute train ride Union Station to Richmond by 2025.

Curiously, the Washington Post does not mention the Long Bridge, but that upgrade seems essential to a truly fast route.
 
This article, "Virginia bets on higher-speed rail by 2025" from the June 4 Washington Post

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/dr-gridlock/wp/2015/06/04/virginia-bets-on-higher-speed-rail-by-2025/

says the FRA and VA planners want a 90-minute train ride Union Station to Richmond by 2025.

Curiously, the Washington Post does not mention the Long Bridge, but that upgrade seems essential to a truly fast route.
I read the Wash Post article last week, but decided to not post about it here (forum, not this thread) because I found it to be a confused article where the reporter mixed up a lot of stuff. The is an EIS process studying a range of alternatives from no improvements to many from Alexandria to Richmond. The Long Bridge study is a separate study covering the route from L'Enfant Plaza to Alexandria which is why it was not part of the EIS presentations.

The Virginians for High Speed Rail are pushing for 90 minutes DC to Richmond, but that can't really be done with a 90 mph max speed corridor. I think the VA DRPT and state transportation officials goals for 2025 will end up being to reduce the trip time from WAS to RVM by 30 minutes. The public meeting presentations from last week are available as an on-line meeting here. One of the sticky issues is what to do in Ashland? A 3 track tunnel under Ashland would be one solution, but seriously expensive and would encounter serious, major league opposition in Ashland.
 
The public meeting presentations from last week are available as an on-line meeting here.
A couple of thoughts - I had always assumed that the 4 SEHSR trains Washington-North Carolina included the Carolinian, but evidently it's 4 SEHSR plus the Carolinian - and it shows the Carolinian perhaps operating on the current route rather than the new proposed SEHSR tracks.

Also, the Richmond-Norfolk shuttle train - I guess that would likely be a connecting train from one of the trains passing through Richmond.
 
This article, "Virginia bets on higher-speed rail by 2025" from the June 4 Washington Post

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/dr-gridlock/wp/2015/06/04/virginia-bets-on-higher-speed-rail-by-2025/

says the FRA and VA planners want a 90-minute train ride Union Station to Richmond by 2025.

Curiously, the Washington Post does not mention the Long Bridge, but that upgrade seems essential to a truly fast route.
The Long Bridge study is a separate study covering the route from L'Enfant Plaza to Alexandria which is why it was not part of the EIS presentations.

...

The Virginians for High Speed Rail are pushing for 90 minutes DC to Richmond, but that can't really be done with a 90 mph max speed corridor. I think the VA DRPT and state transportation officials goals for 2025 will end up being to reduce the trip time from WAS to RVM by 30 minutes. ...

...
I took the article to be an umbrella piece, trying to put the Richmond line in perspective. It dodged more than one trap, like any mention of the costly stretch just beyond Richmond to Petersburg. And while the Norfolk Corridor and the Raleigh short cut were on the map, no mention of them in the text either.

I'm wondering who pitched the story to the paper, the VA DRPT officials or the Friends organization? The state officials may need to start quietly edging back from election season promises to push the Lynchburger down to Bristol, and remind people that the D.C.-Richmond line has top priority. I do hope they're serious about getting most of those minutes out of the timetable within 10 years. They'll need to find some serious money.

Looking at the timetables on Amtrak.com, the scheduled trip time D.C. to Richmond is 2 hours 5 minutes or so. If they aim to get it down by 30 minutes, as you say, it will be about 90 or 95 minutes.

Faster and more frequent trains on this corridor would unleash a ridership boom here, and on the feeder routes from Norfolk and Newport News. Chopping 30 minutes off the runs of the Palmetto, Silver Meteor, Silver Star, and Carolinian would be a nice sweetness for these trains as well.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
NCDOT has wanted to retain the current route of the Carolinian after SEHSR becomes operational (if it ever does). The current Carolinian route protects intrastate passengers who travel Charlotte-Wilson, Greensboro-Rocky Mount, etc. If one assumes that the Silver Star will be rerouted over SEHSR, the Carolinian would be the only remaining train to run over the Raleigh-Selma link that connects "down east" with the rest of the state -- unless there is a Raleigh-Selma-Goldsboro-Wilmington train someday.
 
I'm wondering who pitched the story to the paper, the VA DRPT officials or the Friends organization? The state officials may need to start quietly edging back from election season promises to push the Lynchburger down to Bristol, and remind people that the D.C.-Richmond line has top priority. I do hope they're serious about getting most of those minutes out of the timetable within 10 years. They'll need to find some serious money.

Looking at the timetables on Amtrak.com, the scheduled trip time D.C. to Richmond is 2 hours 5 minutes or so. If they aim to get it down by 30 minutes, as you say, it will be about 90 or 95 minutes.

Faster and more frequent trains on this corridor would unleash a ridership boom here, and on the feeder routes from Norfolk and Newport News. Chopping 30 minutes off the runs of the Palmetto, Silver Meteor, Silver Star, and Carolinian would be a nice sweetness for these trains as well.
When I was discussing 90 minutes to Richmond, I was thinking of WAS to Richmond Main Street. Which is currently about 2:40. Virginians for High Speed Rail spokesman may have been talking about WAS to Staples Mill. With 2 stations in Richmond (1 downtown, 1 serving the northern suburbs) and a presently very slow speed travel time between RVR to RVM, it is important to clarify which is meant by "Richmond".

If the tracks are improved between RVR and RVM and the route south of RVM is restored, so all the Amtrak trains (except for the AT of course) are routed through RVM, Main Street will become the primary station when referring to the "Richmond" station. I suspect the Silvers and Palmetto will get a nice bump in ridership from going through RVM and tapping the downtown & city center market.

As for the Wash Post article, it was related to the public outreach meetings they had for the EIS last week. There was a similar article in the Richmond paper on the EIS study and plans for improved DC to Richmond service. Main Street Station is also starting a final $48 million renovation project to add an indoor market: Renovated Main Street Station train shed envisioned as "wonderful gateway" to Richmond. The Broad Street BRT line and Main St station project lead me to expect that there will be a push to get going on track and bridge upgrade projects to be able to run the Norfolk Regionals & other Amtrak trains through RVM when the Roanoke extension wraps up.
 
SEHSR is promoted in North Carolina as 4 hours from Raleigh to Washington, and RVM is the working assumption as the primary station in Richmond. 2 hours are allotted for Raleigh-RVM. Therefore, if the overall project is to deliver on its promise, RVM-DC would have to be 2 hours -- or slightly less, to allow dwell at RVM.

Whether SEHSR actually achieves 2 hours RGH-RVM is a question of money. Rebuilding the ex-SAL on the former roadbed for 79 or 90 mph instead of 110 would be far less costly, with the consequence of adding time to the schedule. After the 49-59-69-79 rule came into effect, SAL ran the Silver Meteor RVM-RGH in as little as 2 hours 34 minutes. That was 79 mph with only 1 intermediate stop at Petersburg, although the route was slightly different because of the consolidation under SCL between Centralia and Burgess as well as a slightly different station location at RGH. My guess is that 79 mph today would allow 2 hours 45 minutes RVM-RGH with an additional stop at Henderson, NC... perhaps 2 hours 35 minutes at 90 mph.
 
Back
Top