urbanSTL

That's really disappointing to read. The state is currently pouring billions into highway expansion but can't fund $38 million in state transit.

As I understand it, the Dallas-Springfield-St. Louis-New York route would be funded by the feds and not the state. Sure hope that's the case, or it's DOA the second it lands on a Missouri desk.

RockChalkSTL wrote: ↑

Apr 23, 2024

That's really disappointing to read. The state is currently pouring billions into highway expansion but can't fund $38 million in state transit.

As I understand it, the Dallas-Springfield-St. Louis-New York route would be funded by the feds and not the state. Sure hope that's the case, or it's DOA the second it lands on a Missouri desk.

This will most certainly return in the future. Worth noting the studies involving these services haven't been completed yet and its the first time this has been brought up. Recall most projects tend to not get passed first goaround. 

Yes the long-range routes are federally funded. Worth noting one of the other proposed long-range routes would use Kansas City to St. Joseph as part of the route. That would help push the needle for expanded River Runner since the infrastructure needed for service such as stations would be federally funded. 

The increasing ridership and reliability of the route will help gain support. One other element is not sure if there is much current slack in the Amtrak Midwest fleet to expand service at the moment. Especially since there will be new service elsewhere starting up in the next year.

I have seen that Kansas City is an alternative option for the New York-to-Dallas Amtrak line, but I do believe that the preferred alignment is for the line to instead go through Springfield. 

If the above proposal -- St. Joseph-Kansas City-Springfield -- does indeed return, I think it would be nice for St. Louis to also be connected to Springfield. It just makes sense to me for Missouri to connect its three largest economic engines.

The benefits of having a federally funded line do make an overlap of St. Louis-to-Kansas City tempting, however. 

RockChalkSTL wrote: ↑

Apr 24, 2024

I have seen that Kansas City is an alternative option for the New York-to-Dallas Amtrak line, but I do believe that the preferred alignment is for the line to instead go through Springfield. 

If the above proposal -- St. Joseph-Kansas City-Springfield -- does indeed return, I think it would be nice for St. Louis to also be connected to Springfield. It just makes sense to me for Missouri to connect its three largest economic engines.

The benefits of having a federally funded line do make an overlap of St. Louis-to-Kansas City tempting, however. 

It may very well be it wasn't approved now for reasons relating to seeing what happens with long-range routes at federal level, waiting on the studies, and being a rather new item and likely a number of things in the budget have been waiting to be done for some time. Best now is to make sure your local reps know about said support. 

Also, I am curious if maybe some groups can start a ballot initiative that involves having a guaranteed funding stream for transit at the state level. Maybe lock in a portion of existing taxes for it and used for things like Amtrak, mass transit, rail infrastructure and safety improvements, ports. Pitch it as something that can touch all corners of the state and as a way to reduce the demand for highway spending because both passenger and freight is moved off roads reducing traffic and wear to roads since having more goods travel by rail or river would go a long way in reducing need to widen roads and repair of roads.

RockChalkSTL wrote: ↑

Apr 23, 2024

That's really disappointing to read. The state is currently pouring billions into highway expansion but can't fund $38 million in state transit.

My thought as well when I read the latest on MO state budget as it relates to transportation

I hammer on Amtrak & Illinois for being Chicago centric but also can't blame them when the dance partner doesn't even want to show up to the dance hall, let alone step onto dance floor.  

DFW-STL-NYC route tied for 2nd in scoring of preferred new long distance routes. See page 178

https://fralongdistancerailstudy.org/wp ... or_Web.pdf

Being able to take the Amtrak to the northeast without going through Chicago would make that option much more viable.

Gotta wonder how the other NYC to Texas option being ranked highest effects the chances of the route through STL.  

We should just build them all. Not making any statement about Ukraine, but the reported spending of $175B would surely get us somewhere close. The investment would absolutely be worth it. (I know this isn't how life works)

verdantruins wrote:Gotta wonder how the other NYC to Texas option being ranked highest effects the chances of the route through STL.  

Would Illinois allow it. They should but likely won’t. We let trains go from KC to Chicago without going through St Louis on the way.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The top four on the ranking does give Amtrak some really good connectivity for the long distance/corridor network as well as tying in metro's that can add significant ridership..   I also think it would only encourage and promote the idea of Dallas and Atlanta as future Amtrak hubs offering some great state supported corridor services.   In addition, the distances in my mind of top 3 three hit a sweet spot where Amtrak can turn and utilize equipment more effectively.    

Not a big fan as of some of the long distance expansion from West Coast to East Coast in part that they will eat of resources and limit frequencies.   Instead, I think you see what happens with Brightline West as who knows with some success they continue the march up I-15 corridor to Salt lake city and or offer a future I-10 corridor phase to Phoenix as well as Feds supporting CaHSR (with right connections could support Brightline West into the Central Valley.    Electrifying and offering 125 to 150 mph on new West Coast services would be huge for the distances involved.    

Ebsy wrote: ↑

Jun 20, 2024

Being able to take the Amtrak to the northeast without going through Chicago would make that option much more viable.

9 hours of the 33 hour trip from Philadelphia to St. Louis is just transferring. 4 hours in Pittsburgh, 5 hours in Chicago. You can cut the Chicago layover down to 45 minutes by taking an earlier train but Amtrak won't let you book it on one ticket due to the likelihood of your train into Chicago running late. And if you do rebook on the earlier train, Amtrak charges you. For me it was $40, making the trip more expensive than the flight I was trying to avoid.

If $40 pushes you over the edge in terms of cost, and if you're going to be laid over in train stations for between nine and ten hours.... I think I'd get the flight anyway. 

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amtrak/s/aT5Wv1B0YI

Reddit is claiming that a 3rd River Runner train will begin service in April.

I'm curious on what the schedule for the increased service would be and if it causes any change in the existing frequency times.

Great news. Hope we see the same in MO.

WPMI - Amtrak's Mardi Gras service boosts Mobile tourism with higher than expected ridership

https://mynbc15.com/news/local/amtrak-p ... businesses

Auggie wrote:https://www.reddit.com/r/Amtrak/s/aT5Wv1B0YI

Reddit is claiming that a 3rd River Runner train will begin service in April.

Actual news source: https://www.stlpr.org/news-briefs/2025- ... -world-cup