urbanSTL

So what should we push for?

1. Additional STL-KCY service. MO River Runner ridership was up 22.5% in Sept year-over-year. Mo's spending to improve OTP is paying off. Time to add 1 or 2 more trains.
2. Springfield MO-STL service
Amtrak Study read like a limp noodle.
3. Illinois Zephyr/Carl Sandburg to Hannibul eventually to STL via Louisiana and St Charles
Whig.com Article

Hicks said both he and Amtrak hope Hannibal will ultimately become more than the end of the line from Chicago, but rather, a key stop on a route from Chicago to St. Louis via Northeast Missouri.

Hannibul site w/ links to printable and online petition
4. 110 mph capable STL-KCY
5. Double-track the rest of STL-KCY ~120 Mi Jeff City-Pleasant Hill
6. STL-INDY
7. STL-Nashville
8. STL-MEM

Seems like #1 and #3 are the ones that MO could do quickly on its own which would better our chances of the others that would require help from other states and/or the Feds.

^Sounds like a good idea. I left STL-CHI true HSR out since I figure if Chicago wants it, it will happen, the ball is already rolling on it, and my list was meant as ways to make STL the center of things. I certainly do think we should push for STL-CHI true HSR too. We must ensure that a new MSR bridge is built for it and not have the terminus in ESTL.

It’s not like there isn't middle ground: It is possible to build a line that will eventually be capable of 200 MPH or faster... to save money at the onset, at the time of construction some very expensive features required on a 200+ MPH line can be omitted. At the time of opening it could easily run at 110-150 MPH… and after some upgrades (which are planned for / designed in) the system can be made to go faster (as demand increases / money becomes available). Plus the lower cost is a much easier pill to swallow to taxpayers footing the bill (and the people who utilize the system paying less for tickets).

IMHO the government (state/feds/Amtrak) shouldn't spend any money on upgrading existing privately owned rail lines without a complete overhaul in the way passenger trains are handled. The money we are spending now will be thrown away if the 220+ MPH HSR system is ever implemented. The Class 1s know the government is throwing money at the issue (for at least the next 2 weeks)... some have been delaying previously planned upgrades/maintenance along Amtrak corridors hoping the feds pay for the plans. If the feds don’t pay - they go ahead and do the work they had planned/funded. If they do get the gov’t to pay – Amtrak may get 4 -6 poorly dispatched trains a day while the freight railroad gets 65 – 70 prioritized trains.

Contractually – even though the feds /Amtrak/state are paying for these upgrades – the Class 1s don’t have to allow Amtrak to run above what is safe and prudent on their system. By the time we make it truly safe and prudent to run on their system at 110 – we could be 25 – 50% of the way to a 150/200 dedicated system where you can run 100 trains a day and not answer to anyone.

The only way to get true improvement is to stop placating the freight railroads, utilize a system that is completely independent of the freight system.

tbsqr, Of course true HSR will require separated ROW's and as you state a big benefit is that their is no clash with the freight rail network. However, I have to differ again that current investment doesn't result in substantial benefits. On the highway side its kinda like stating that you shouldn't fill the potholes because you want to build truck lanes to separate the fast from the slow and heavy traffic.

The reality is that a tremendous amount of freight is moving along these corridors at capacity. Any investment into their vitality is national interest as any freight that moves back onto the road has serious consequences. You can see in DOT TIGER grants how this playing out. If it is through passenger rail, so much the better.

Also, a national energy policy pushing for energy indepence, if we ever get one, will have to recognize that investing in moderate rail capacity improvements (which is what MoDOT & UP have planned for STL to KC)/innovation to have both intermediate (90-110 passenger rail service) and freight is a need inconjunction with a separate HSR network. In other words, the biggest problem I see with the Orlanda to Tampa's HSR is that they want to make up for weak Amtrak service by adding stops to a very short HSR route. This will be a very poor solution in the long term and actually hurt HSR investment. So any investment at this point, in either for 90-110 passenger rail or true HSR, is a big plus in my mind.

We received $3.6M from FY2010 moneys.

St. Louis – Kansas City: Through FY 2010 awards, a $3.6 million grant will build a third main track and pay for associated signal
and switch work in downtown St. Louis. This new track will improve rail access to St. Louis’s Gateway Multimodal Center
station.

Glad to see something come across. Every bit helps

Still dissappointed that only one of six MO projects, or $3.6 out of $36 million, applied for got grant money. I thought MoDot's application was a reasonable request that provided tangible results and could have been better funded. At one or two more projects of the six

http://www.modot.mo.gov/othertransporta ... ublish.pdf

Especially when some serious grant money has gone into St. Paul's Union Station (another $40 million with this round of grants on top of a Tiger I grant), $160 million into Michigan Deerborn route, and $150 million to start new Iowa/Illinois service (Chicago gain just as much as Iowa's any way you look at it).

My other thought, will DOT dole out some of the money that was being programmed for the new Hudson River tunnel that Gov Christi brought to a halt. I believe the Feds share was $3 billion. Would be nice to see them turn around and do more rail and Tiger grants. Give St. Louis/Missouri another shot.

By my calculations there are $165.2M of projects left on MODOT's list. Do you think none, some, or all will happen without federal help? Does UP chip in anything? It would be great if MODOT would purchase the 2 new trainsets and add more runs. Is that step dependent on completion of all the others? Surely not, I'd figure. BTW, OTP was 93% in Sept.

Exactly, what I'm talking about. Getting more of the $36 million for ready to go projects in the latest round would help chip away at a good list of projects on a vital corridor for the state. UP moves a lot of frieght with an impressive bi-directional operations and can avoid Chicago if it wants through NS and CSX connections in the St Louis area.

Improving it to allow 90-110 inter city passenger trains (car competitive) between KC and STL is a big deal in a state that is going to have trouble paying for just the maintenance of I-70 alone. I think MoDOT understands that very well even if though they are often stated as MoDOH.

MoDOT has a pretty good website highlighting future wants and desires including new trainsets as $50 million along this corridor.

http://www.modot.org/othertransportatio ... tyInfo.htm

NJ Governor Christie also got a letter demanding $172 million back of ARC money.

Agree on Talgo, I can even throw in ready to go manufacturing space with direct rail access in Fenton.

What my hopes for Missouri, if Wisconsin truly bails on a great opportunity (Still amazed that people buy his argument that 7.5 million is too much to afford on getting almost a billion dollars of infrastructure from the Feds), would be a $100 million dollar committment from the Feds.

- Fund remaining FY10 HSR grant apps beyond in addition to the exra lead track in St Louis, another $35 million in additional rail improvements.
- Fund $50 million in new rolling stock as per MoDOT's long term rail plan
- Fund Jeff City third main track and preliminary engineering on additional double track in the corridor, approximately $15-20 million.

The first two items give MoDOT 90 mph rail service with possibility of increased frequency between KC/STL while the second puts MoDOT/Union Pacific plan on track for 110 mph service. That is what you need for car competitive environment.

Illinois will try to get Wisconsin's money:

Chicago Sun-Times article

MODOT should go for it too. There's no state match for stimulus money right? It is 20% for the FY10 moneys.

Correct - Both Wisconsin and Ohio had no requirement for matches as they were both stimulus grants. The argument being made by respective Governor Elects is that future service requires a state operating subsidy from their respective DOT's. Just as Illinois does and to lesser extent MoDOT does (less trains)

Who are the right people to contact to encourage them to go for funds for more MO projects?

bprop wrote:Obama Replaces Costly High-Speed Rail Plan With High-Speed Bus Plan

Even better than that Chinese bus plan!

Talk about a good old political fight brewing on high speed rail stimulus funds. I believe it is single biggest chunk of stimulus funds not obligated. Too bad Missouri delegation can't put in its two cents worth/claim on extra funds. New train sets and some incremental improvements would be a plus for STL to KC service. Heck, Giving its support for reallocating more funds for the Chicago-St Louis line so it can get to 110 mph service would also be plus for the region

http://enr.construction.com/yb/enr/arti ... =152631186

GOP House Aims to Take $2B Back From Calif. High-Speed Rail
11/23/2010
San Mateo County Times
Text size: AA

By Mike Rosenberg, San Mateo County Times, Calif.

Nov. 23--Wasting no time after a victorious midterm election, GOP congressional leaders who promised to slash spending are looking to make an example of the nation's priciest public works project: California's $43 billion high-speed railroad.

http://enr.construction.com/yb/enr/arti ... =152635526

Conn. Lawmakers Ask Feds for Another $100M for Rail Line
11/23/2010
New Haven Register
Text size: AA

By Ed Stannard, New Haven Register, Conn.

Nov. 23--If other states don't want their federal high-speed rail money, Uncle Sam can send it to Connecticut, the state's congressional delegation said Monday in a letter to U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood.

The letter was a response to reports the newly-elected Republican governors in at least two states, Ohio and Wisconsin, don't want to use the money for commuter rail projects.

"We respectfully request that as you determine how to reapportion (high-speed rail) funds declined by other states, you consider directing an additional $100 million of those funds for the New Haven-Hartford-Springfield rail line," Connecticut's two senators and five congressmen wrote.

Dredger,
unfortunately it looks like any scavenging of returned funds will be the last good shot at federal $$ for awhile so hopefully St. Lou -KC or St. Lou - Chi gets something. But why do you say too bad our delegation can't weigh in... is there something preventing our members from doing so?

I say it because every player is making their case, whether for or against. I even thought MoDOT would have made a case by now with or without congressional delegations support. However, I haven't read or seen any statements from anybody in MO.

My point is coming down to the fact that usually the last person to the party is lucky to get the scraps.

AP has an article up that there will be an announcement today on redistribution of the $1.2 billion that rail funds that Wisconsin and Ohio will lose. Illinois was among the states to receive but no word on Missouri.