When Florida Governor Rick Scott rejected $2 billion in federal funding for high-speed rail earlier this year, NYSDOT Commissioner Joan McDonald was quick to the draw, helping to secure almost $900 million in funds for the Northeast region. Part of that money has been set aside for preliminary engineering to rehab or replace the Livingston Avenue Bridge, a freight and passenger rail bridge which connects Albany and Rensselaer and is currently a bottleneck in Amtrak’s passenger rail service. Now, the unanswered question for the adjacent communities is whether NYSDOT will apply its regional goals of including bicycle and pedestrian accommodations to the revamped bridge.
The 144-year-old swing bridge is owned by freight railroad CSX and is deemed as the “critical link” connecting New York City to northern and western New York, as well as Amtrak’s national rail system. It used to have pedestrian access—and at one point, tolls were actually collected from those who crossed—but conditions have deteriorated and there is now no legal access across. Community leaders in Albany and Rensselaer view bike and pedestrian access as key to their waterfront revitalization efforts, connecting trail systems and improving multi-modal access to the train station. The concept has loomed large in various plans over the last twelve years, most recently in “Albany 2030,” the city’s draft master plan released for comments last month.
According to Richard Filkins, manager for the project, NYSDOT has not decided yet if this bridge will include bike and pedestrian access. Filkins said there were few examples of bikes, pedestrians, and rail co-habiting on bridges, though he mentioned the possibility of cantilevering a structure off of the bridge to provide access. Some rail bridges that include such accommodations include the Steel Bridge in Oregon and Harpers Ferry Bridge in Virginia, both of which are mentioned in a report issued by the Federal Highway Administration in 2002 titled “Rails with Trails: Lessons Learned.” Parks and Trails NY also submitted a letter in November that has ample examples of bike-ped trails adjacent to rail, though not across bridges.
In December, Cohoes Mayor John McDonald III sent a letter to DOT emphasizing that the Capital District Transportation Committee had signed off on the project “contingent on restoring pedestrian and bicycle accommodation across the bridge,” and called it a “once-in-a-lifetime opportunity that shouldn’t be missed.” However, Maurice O’Connell, Vice President of Government Affairs with CSX, told MTR that “we have real safety concerns for both the public and our crews.”
With discussions ongoing with CSX over several areas, it’s not clear whether NYSDOT will push hard for bike and pedestrian access on the bridge. In the meantime, as the bridge goes through preliminary engineering and environmental review inside NYSDOT offices, local advocates are nervous. Lorenz Worden from Albany Bicycle Coalition told MTR “there really is no other good option across the river.” Filkins anticipates an early fall informational meeting, and recommends that comments be sent to Commissioner Joan McDonald at any time. “Our goal is to come up with a solution that makes everyone happy,” he said.
Normally I’d consider having pedestrians and bike riders on a bridge for trains to be absurd, but this seems like an appropriate exception. Of course, a Taj Mahal installation is not needed. Costs must be viable.
Railroads always object to adding ped/cyclist access since it puts people in close proximity with trains that are nearly impossible to stop in time to avoid a collision with someone who decides to venture on to the tracks. No matter what kind of barrier they put in place between the tracks & trail, there’s always a liability threat.
Finally an improvement to a vital rail transportation through the state capital. In the 1970s the state highway system destroyed original track layout and a magnificent railroad station. There were once more trains running through Albany (32) then the Pennsy ran on the Northeast corridor. In an age of terrorism it is difficult to share railroad bridges with pedestrians.
Rail operators consistently attempt to cry foul over phantom liability concerns about trespassers, but consider a few facts:
– There are several million miles of rail in the US that have no barriers what-so-ever to prevent folks from getting on the tracks. Consider the entire CSX/Amtrak line through Albany county.
-There are several hundred miles of trails existing safely adjacent to train tracks. (many examples, like a short section of the Zim Smith Trail, are in this very area)
-Each and every lift bridge along the Erie Canalway trail has pedestrian access and gates to prevent people from falling off the bridge when it lifts. People can stand on the bridge while it lifts (quite an experience)
-The Livingston Ave. Bridge was constructed with a publicly accessible walkway. Advocates are asking for a replacement, not an addition. Although the walkway has been closed, and barricaded, for years, there are no barriers on the track to prevent people using the bridge to cross the river now – thus, on occasion, people do use the bridge, albeit illegally, to cross. The RR will be liable whether or not there is a walkway.
From the above facts, the conclusion can be drawn that a walkway on the the Livingston Ave. bridge is not an exotic, or dangerous concept when considering that the bridge may very well be used by people anyway as a crossing. Contrary to @clever title’s comment) there are a number of ways that tracks and the walkway can be safely separated. Considering the bridge could still be used for a crossing, and that the RR is liable either way, the replacement of the walkway should be a no-brainer.
Finally, the reconstruction of this bridge is being paid for by public dollars. The regional consensus, going back several decades, has been that this connection is an important one. Perhaps, if CSX doesn’t like that the walkway replacement is a requirement of the bridge, they don’t have to accept the subsidy that will be used to rebuild.
I didn’t say that I considered CSX’s liabilty concerns substantial, but I do understand that if given the choice, they would not want to have the potential liability, and be able to call anyone on the bridge a trespasser.
And I totally agree that if the public is providing the funds, the public should be able to make demands for access via a walkway.
A late follow-up to @explorer’s comment “In an age of terrorism it is difficult to share railroad bridges with pedestrians.” I can only assume he/she is inferring that pedestrian access to bridges could make terrorist acts easier. While this does indeed have a kernel of truth to it, @xplorer fails to consider the tens of millions of miles of track around the US with no barriers or fencing, the several thousand at grade rail crossings, several hundred rail bridges and stations with little to no security what-so-ever. Using terrorism as an excuse not to have a safe, assessable, healthy transportation system is like citing a shark attack and telling people not to take baths.
The Federal Rail Administration (part of Federal DOT) published a report “Rails with Trails” documenting the many examples of the US Rail lines that safely carry bike and walk facilities, and recommended design standards for these transportation systems. So such a combination is not a novel or an unsafe idea.
Regarding @explorer’s concerns; recently, a bridge had to be demolished because of it’s derelict condition across Lake Champlain at Crown Point. It required many hundreds of pounds of explosives carefully set over several days. It is hard to think of this being done unobserved by bicyclists and pedestrians. On the other hand, freight train cargoes can sometimes be a cause for concern, and a large run-away barge, especially with a load of flammable materials can pose real dangers. Your concerns are about the proposed use that least endangers the bridge.
[…] bill, Senator Schumer was pushing for the inclusion of a pedestrian/cyclist path in plans to rebuild Albany’s Livingston Avenue Bridge. The aging span, which connects the capital with the City of Rensselaer across the Hudson, […]
[…] you know that New York’s Capital District has its own “Walkway over the Hudson.” Well, it used to anyway. Tri-State’s ally for a more sustainable transportation network, Parks & Trails New […]