Platform height an issue in Milwaukee station renovation

Discussion in 'Amtrak Rail Discussion' started by CHamilton, May 29, 2014.

Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

  1. May 29, 2014 #1

    CHamilton

    CHamilton

    CHamilton

    Conductor AU Supporter Gathering Team Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2011
    Messages:
    5,275
    Location:
    Seattle
    Why Milwaukee’s New Train Platform Will Be Built at Two Heights

     
  2. May 29, 2014 #2

    John Bobinyec

    John Bobinyec

    John Bobinyec

    Conductor

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2009
    Messages:
    1,682
    Location:
    CYN
    I've never been up that way, so I'm guessing:

    Empire Builder - Superliners - low level boarding

    Everything else - low level boarding or high level boarding

    Is that right? If that's true, why don't they just leave the platforms low and use the portable lift?

    jb
     
  3. May 29, 2014 #3

    jis

    jis

    jis

    Conductor AU Lifetime Supporter Gathering Team Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2003
    Messages:
    24,752
    Location:
    Space Coast, Florida, Area code 3-2-1
    Specially in a station like Milwaukee which has multiple platforms, this sounds bizarre. Someone in Wisconsin is asleep at their job again I suspect.
     
  4. May 29, 2014 #4

    bgiaquin

    b

    bgiaquin

    Service Attendant

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2013
    Messages:
    219
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Milwaukee has 3 platforms (one side, two island). I think the best option would be make the two island platforms high level, make the side one low level.
     
  5. May 29, 2014 #5

    PerRock

    PerRock

    PerRock

    Conductor

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2006
    Messages:
    1,827
    Location:
    Ann Arbor, MI
    ADA requirements are apparently now requiring new stations to have platforms set at train-floor-height. This is fine for most stations that use one or the other, but there are a handful of stations along corridor routes which have to serve both. I don't know, it seems like a stupid rule to me as well. However there are a number of stations that have been recently re-done in the east; which have two platform heights.

    peter
     
  6. May 29, 2014 #6

    jis

    jis

    jis

    Conductor AU Lifetime Supporter Gathering Team Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2003
    Messages:
    24,752
    Location:
    Space Coast, Florida, Area code 3-2-1
    I will let others chime in and repeat the discussion of the platform height topic from the other thread. Suffice it to say that the FRA ADA rules are a much misunderstood topic as to what it really requires.

    If you want quick preview you could start at this article and follow the thread.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 29, 2014
  7. May 29, 2014 #7

    the_traveler

    the_traveler

    the_traveler

    Conductor

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2007
    Messages:
    25,554
    Location:
    Whatever siding I'm sitting on!
    As an example, KIN has a low level platform (which is something like 12-15 cars long). When it was redesigned about 10-15 years ago, to comply with ADA requirements, they built a ramp up to a high level platform for 2 Amfleet I doors on each track. So KIN has both high and low platforms (currently).
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 29, 2014
  8. May 29, 2014 #8

    afigg

    a

    afigg

    Conductor

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2009
    Messages:
    5,896
    Location:
    Virginia
    The problem is that the Hiawatha service will continue to use the Horizon coach cars which are high level. The Talgo trainsets and the corridor bi-level cars are low level. So the high level platform is being built for an aging set of equipment which will someday be replaced in all likelihood by low level corridor bi-level cars.

    If it had not been for the poorly considered Talgo order, WI would not have sunk money into the Talgos and Gov. Walker, despite campaigning to kill the Madison extension, might have had WI join in with IL, MI, MO to get the corridor bi-level cars for the Hiawatha service. But he didn't, so the level boarding requirement enacted by US DOT in September 2011, is an issue that the station project has to contend with.

    Amtrak has posted a series of reports to Congress on how it is dealing with the level boarding requirement and the exceptions to the rule for stations across the system. Those reports are available on the website under reports and documents. In the east, the result will be upgrades or new stations to high level platforms or mini-high platforms, depending on the station and circumstances. Not just on the NEC, but the eastern Keystone, New Haven to Greenfield, many upper NY state stations, and stations south of WAS where the platform is on pull-over tracks or where a mini-high is suitable.

    What could happen in WI is that the station is built with a high-level platform. Then in a few years, either under a new Governor or maybe under Gov. Walker once the Talgo issue blows over, WI joins the IL, MI, MO consortium and orders enough bi-levels from Nippon-Sharyo to support the Hiawatha service. Then the Hiawatha service is equipped with the new bi-levels, the high level platform then becomes useless and will cost money to be removed. Not the best use of public funds.
     
  9. May 29, 2014 #9

    neroden

    n

    neroden

    Conductor

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2014
    Messages:
    7,337
    Location:
    Ithaca, NY
    Basically everything out here is low-level boarding. However, Scott Walker refused to buy the already-paid-for Talgos, and as a result the Hiawathas are going to be running Amfleets for the forseeable future.

    Michigan, Missouri, and Illinois got waivers to build 15" platforms even though they currently run Horizons, because they've already ordered replacement cars with 15" boarding. Wisconsin... hasn't ordered replacement cars, so it didn't get a waiver.
     
  10. May 29, 2014 #10

    Shawn Ryu

    S

    Shawn Ryu

    Conductor

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2010
    Messages:
    1,096
    Location:
    NYC or Chicago
    So what, Milwaukee will have a NEC style high level platform?
     
  11. May 29, 2014 #11

    neroden

    n

    neroden

    Conductor

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2014
    Messages:
    7,337
    Location:
    Ithaca, NY
    You haven't followed Governor Walker closely enough -- he would never have done that. Ever. He's very much a cut-off-nose-to-spite-face politician.
     
  12. May 29, 2014 #12

    me_little_me

    m

    me_little_me

    Conductor

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2010
    Messages:
    2,832
    Why not do the same as the buses? Have a tilting train so us old people can climb aboard. Then they too can make that "Beep! Beep! Beep!" sound so everyone can look out and say "Look at those old people that are boarding! They are the reason we have to hear that irritating sound" and then they glare at you as you board.
     
  13. May 29, 2014 #13

    Eric S

    E

    Eric S

    Conductor

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2009
    Messages:
    2,466
    Location:
    Milwaukee
    Yes, this is my worry as well. And the cost will likely not just be converting the high level platforms to low level platforms, but also making necessary changes/adjustments to the elevators, escalators, and stairs that are used to access the platforms. So far WisDOT has not updated the website with any additional information, so it remains to be seen how the platforms will actually be laid out (in terms of which sections are high and which are low, and in terms of elevator/escalator/stair access).
     
  14. May 30, 2014 #14

    John Bobinyec

    John Bobinyec

    John Bobinyec

    Conductor

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2009
    Messages:
    1,682
    Location:
    CYN
    Intriguing. This is from the report that afigg alluded to. I hope whatever they come up with, it's impervious to snow and ice.

    jb
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 30, 2014
  15. May 30, 2014 #15

    jis

    jis

    jis

    Conductor AU Lifetime Supporter Gathering Team Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2003
    Messages:
    24,752
    Location:
    Space Coast, Florida, Area code 3-2-1
    Their solution is basically set back platforms with longish bridge plates. The detail is how the bridge plates get deployed.
     
  16. May 30, 2014 #16

    prech786

    p

    prech786

    Train Attendant

    Joined:
    May 8, 2014
    Messages:
    62
  17. May 30, 2014 #17

    PerRock

    PerRock

    PerRock

    Conductor

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2006
    Messages:
    1,827
    Location:
    Ann Arbor, MI
    The train cars aren't tilting down a few inches, it's more a few feet. And even with the "kneeling" buses handicapped people still have to use a ramp to board.

    peter
     
  18. May 30, 2014 #18

    neroden

    n

    neroden

    Conductor

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2014
    Messages:
    7,337
    Location:
    Ithaca, NY
    Yeah. The "four foot long bridgeplates" are one of the stupidest things ever, and really extremely unsafe. In a real country, we would have bought the track and installed real platforms. The freights can move their high-and-wides elsewhere. This isn't a functioning country any more. I hope it is functioning again before I die.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 30, 2014
  19. May 30, 2014 #19

    jis

    jis

    jis

    Conductor AU Lifetime Supporter Gathering Team Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2003
    Messages:
    24,752
    Location:
    Space Coast, Florida, Area code 3-2-1
  20. May 30, 2014 #20

    SubwayNut

    S

    SubwayNut

    Conductor

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2011
    Messages:
    1,397
    Bridgeplates like that would be an operational mess, 4 feet long! I dread to know what the dwell times would be like. It also removes the possibility of MUing doors.

    On the Downeaster the bridge plates take long enough to deploy and mean just a few doors open at each station. I even saw one that said No Freeport written in sharpie on the back. I asked the conductor about it and was told that the gap there is unusually big and this individual bridgeplate was smaller than the others.
     
  21. May 30, 2014 #21

    neroden

    n

    neroden

    Conductor

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2014
    Messages:
    7,337
    Location:
    Ithaca, NY
    On the CSX-owned part of the Empire Corridor, the plan seems to be now simply to have separate passenger tracks at stations. So the two-track route expands to 4 tracks at stations, two platform tracks for passengers and two bypass tracks for freights. This is quite viable on this heavily used route.

    Gauntlet tracks are used on NICTD's South Shore Line.

    I guess this sort of solution isn't considered viable on all the other single-level routes, or they wouldn't be coming up with crazy-ass stuff like four-foot bridgeplates, which are completely ridiculous. I don't really see any reason why it isn't considered viable to put in bypass tracks, at least for stations with significant ridership.
     
  22. May 30, 2014 #22

    rickycourtney

    rickycourtney

    rickycourtney

    Conductor

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2012
    Messages:
    1,614
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    Wisconsin not making the best use of public funds? Shocking.

    Wisconsin got greedy and tried to get the jump on the other states in the Midwest coalition. Now taxpayers are paying the price for politicians betting on the wrong horse. Now Wisconsin taxpayers will likely spend millions paying for trainsets... that will only spend time on Wisconsin tracks, to leave the state.

    All in all seems like a great use of public funds to me.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 30, 2014
  23. May 30, 2014 #23

    neroden

    n

    neroden

    Conductor

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2014
    Messages:
    7,337
    Location:
    Ithaca, NY
    Maybe if Burke is elected she can rush-order two trainsets and redesign Milwaukee station to be all-15".
     
  24. May 30, 2014 #24

    MattW

    M

    MattW

    Conductor

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2008
    Messages:
    1,729
    Location:
    East of Atlanta, GA
    Ok, I'm confused now. On the Miami Central thread, it seemed to be that the platform only had to be level with the height of the lowest railcar, which in this case would be Superliners. Is that not the case here?
     
  25. May 30, 2014 #25

    NorthShore

    NorthShore

    NorthShore

    OBS Chief

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2013
    Messages:
    998
    Location:
    Chicago
    Why not just leave the platforms alone/as is in the renovation, thus not triggering ADA?

    Really, they only use one platform, the closest to the station house, anyway, so each platform ought not need to be rebuilt. And, since making one boarding place, alone, should suffice for compliance, simply having one end of one platform available to serve one car ought to suffice. Later, when all equipment is low level, they can put down new concrete for added capacity, should it become necessary.

    Of course, if I wanted to be cheeky about it, I could ask, "What about Private Varnish cars?" Milwaukee does serve occasional excursion trips, especially for 261 and the cars its society owns, afterall.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 30, 2014

Share This Page

arrow_white