Roger Wyoming wrote: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.
California: up to $624 million
Florida: up to $342.3 million
Washington State: up to $161.5 million Illinois: up to $42.3 million
New York: up to $7.3 million
Maine: up to $3.3 million
Massachusetts: up to $2.8 million
Vermont: up to $2.7 million Missouri up to $2.2 million
Wisconsin: up to $2 million for the Hiawatha line
Oregon: up to $1.6 million
North Carolina: up to $1.5 million
Iowa: up to $309,080
Indiana: up to $364,980
Mill204 wrote:Wisconsin: up to $2 million for the Hiawatha line
Looks like the DOT may have mixed up Wisconsin and Minnesota . Minneapolis has the Hiawatha line and the point of the press release is that Wisconsin is forgoing its funding
In some ways, glad to see Florida and California get the bulk of it. Hoping for full funding of MoDOT's FY10 request. However, but beggers can't be choosers.
First, Florida can move forward in a big way without the political fight shaping up and give confidence in lining up private sources for HSR onto to Miami. Plus, it will be beneficial to get Mica onboard in order to see any hope of further HSR support.
Second, getting more to California in order to add on the currently planned segment is a boost in my mind. Especially if it ties Fresno and Bakersfield together. The 624 million leverages an equal share of state bonds. No one other state can do that at this moment. I think the Chinese are going to take a serious look at investng in California HSR if construction can get started.
Mill204 wrote:Wisconsin: up to $2 million for the Hiawatha line
Looks like the DOT may have mixed up Wisconsin and Minnesota . Minneapolis has the Hiawatha line and the point of the press release is that Wisconsin is forgoing its funding
Actually, it's a different Hiawatha Line. It's Amtrak's line between Chicago and Milwaukee. Anyway, enjoy spending our money. Apparently I moved to Wisconsin just in time for all the voters here to lose their minds.
Illinois gets $42M more for Chicago-St. Louis high-speed rail
St. Louis Business Journal
Date: Thursday, December 9, 2010, 1:34pm CST
Illinois will receive $42.3 million in additional high-speed rail funding to finance track and other improvements on the Chicago to St. Louis corridor. The money was freed up when U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood reprogrammed a total of $1.2 billion in funding that was rejected by the incoming governors of Ohio and Wisconsin.
“Illinois will be able to use this funding to break ground on projects that were included in the state’s application for high speed rail along the Chicago to St. Louis corridor, but not funded earlier this year,” U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., said in a statement. “Improvements to the route will decrease travel times even further and create jobs that our state badly needs.”
In January, more than $1.2 billion in federal high-speed rail funding was allocated for the Chicago to St. Louis corridor.
Looks like the first project, the $98M to replace tracks and ties from north of Alton to south of Lincoln, will be done Dec 23. Any word as to what is next?
My understanding is that HSR (110mph) track is currently planned between Alton and Dwight. With the current work between Alton and Lincoln finishing up, maybe these funds will go toward similar upgrades between Lincoln and Dwight (though probably not for that entire stretch).
These funds were suppose to have 20% match attached to them. Will have to dig and see what IL requested on their FY10 HSR application beyond new service from Chicago into Iowa. Matching funds should take the amount up to $50. If it this reallocation is intended for th Chicago area you might have some more leverage/funds via CREATE, the effort by the state, city and freight railroads to unclog bottlenecks.
Curious how it will all be spent and the timeline of it all since $98 million being spent is only a portion of the initial grant of significant value, up to or above $800 million in stimulus funds for the Chicago/St Louis corridor.
From KMOX, via the Business Journal, "Illinois officials say a new agreement may have passengers riding high-speed rail by 2014... Those trips are expected to be 48 minutes shorter than current rail routes."
Great news. This will have travel times from STL to CHI down to around 4hrs. 45mins.
So I listened to an interview with Lt. Gov. Peter Kinder on 97.1 FM the other day. When the topic of transportation came up he sounded a note similar to the newly elected Governors of Wisconsin and Ohio who are rejecting federal funds for high speed rail to their states (to the benefit of IL and MO). In fact he called the proposed Chicago to St. Louis plan a "boondoggle" and it sounded as though he would fight instead for widening I-70.
So all you Kinder fans please tell me again how he would be so pro-St. Louis or pro-urban issues?
It doesn't help the DOT admin and/or Illinois case but certainly helps Kinder's arguement when you see stories posted as this one by Engineering News Record _ as reported by Chicgao Tribune. In essences, the 2014 schedule is not very aggressive in part due to Springfield ROW issues (On a different note, I like how fiscal conservatives will take money only if it is used for they way the want to use it instead of asking drivers to pay for a higher gas tax to support more highway lane miles)
Going To Be Slow on Chicago-St. Louis High-Speed Rail Work
12/24/2010
Chicago Tribune
Text size: AA
By Jon Hilkevitch, Tribune Reporter
Only 20 miles of track on the 284-mile Amtrak route between Chicago and St. Louis will be upgraded to handle 110-mph trains by 2012, state officials said Thursday.
The disclosure on the slow pace of constructing Illinois' first higher-speed passenger rail line was buried in a pre-holiday announcement by Illinois Transportation Secretary Gary Hannig.
Officials said they are aiming to finish an approximately 190-mile section of 110-mph track and high-tech signals downstate by 2014, but no timetable has been set for the final segment closer to Chicago. The entire project is estimated to cost about $4 billion.
The new details emerged from an agreement signed this week between the federal and state governments, the Union Pacific Railroad and Amtrak to move ahead on the project to introduce faster passenger trains on portions of the Chicago-to-St. Louis route, according to the Illinois Department of Transportation.
Union Pacific owns the tracks, and Amtrak will operate the higher-speed service. Amtrak already provides service at up to 79 mph along the route.
The first 110-mph service is scheduled on a segment between Dwight and Pontiac, IDOT said. For that to happen, better warning and protection systems at rail-roadway grade crossings will need to be installed, officials said.
If work goes according to plans, the approximately 190-mile segment of new track and signals between Alton and Pontiac will be installed and tested in 2012 and 2013, and 110-mph service will begin in 2014, IDOT spokesman Josh Kauffman said.
A completion date for the remainder of the route between Dwight and Chicago will be determined after an environmental-impact study that is expected to be finished in 2011, he said. Options for routing the high-speed rail service through Springfield are also still being evaluated, he said.
The Obama administration awarded Illinois more than $1.2 billion this year for higher-speed rail projects. The state is counting on more federal money next year.
Travel times are expected to drop from about 51/2 hours currently at 79-mph service to about 41/2 hours between Chicago and St. Louis when the higher-speed project is completed, IDOT officials said. But the trip would be shaved to two hours under an ambitious plan being studied to build a true bullet-train line with a top speed of 220 mph, officials said.
The deal signed this week calls for five daily round trips between Chicago and St. Louis starting in 2014, including three daily higher-speed round trips.
Lame. The rest of the time savings in the application (4 hr STL-CHI) comes from STL-ALN and Dwight-CHI. Why does this take so long? And it's no even the whole enchilada? Frustrating.
The big issue at the moment has to be Springfield's alignment. I don't believe one of the two possible routes has been picked due to significant grade xing issues for the downtown segment vs nimbyism on the other route. I think this plan is reflecting that issue. Unfortunately, in some ways, you can't just declare a project, give some compensation and start bulldozing as they do in China nor do we have the long term planning framework in place or even the political will to make national or regional projects happen as do other countries.
Dwight to Chicago is whole another issue. However, I would think their is plenty of ROW with the various rail lines between Alton and East St. Louis to separate out passenger rail (for HSR, to intercity, to even futre commuter) and freight trains. I still think the region would be better off the sooner they could make it happen. If anything else, it should be pused up EW Gateway's priority list
I've been keeping close tabs on the Springfield alignment. The nimbyism is over double-tracking 3rd St and the resulting increased traffic. Double-tracking is way down the line as the $1.1B is for single-track 110 mph service. Of course they want the route settled before upgrading anything. They're supposed to complete a study early 2011. My hope is that it'll be passenger on 3rd St and freight on 10th. The 3rd St station is ideally located. Another problem is that putting traffic on 10th is expensive since they'd have to demolish the IEPA building to connect it back up with UP's line and it involves another railroad.
I'm no expert at planning these types of projects, but I'd figure all the track and tie replacement and all the crossing upgrades outside of Springfield could proceed without delay. The trains won't go through Springfield at 110 anyways since they'll all stop there. I suppose the signaling needs to be put in along the whole route in one go. And to properly bid on that one needs to know exactly where it's going.
Also if Springfield has to stay slow because they want it that way (they want to keep their grade crossings or wjatever), then put the funds towards improving the remaining areas, STL-ALN or Dwight-CHI. A ton of time could be saved on STL_ALN. We averaged 33 mph when I rode last week.
Wabash wrote:From KMOX, via the Business Journal, "Illinois officials say a new agreement may have passengers riding high-speed rail by 2014... Those trips are expected to be 48 minutes shorter than current rail routes."
Great news. This will have travel times from STL to CHI down to around 4hrs. 45mins.
High speed rail my ass. You can drive this route faster at less cost. But it's still an improvement for some I suppose.
Certainly can understand the arguments or response but the context of why you need to spend that much for such intial little gain is lost or very poorly explained. HSR in the US is essentially at its infancy stage. The reality is their going to be a high front end cost to secure the ROW and rebuild infrastructure in and around any rail improvements, from closing down road crossings, building seperation and upgrading a whole host of items.
This was essentially true for the Interstate Highway system and Aviation. In other words, it is a lot cheaper and easier to replace pavement on a existing roads or runways then to build from skratch. Something that politicians conveniently ignore. A good example is Hwy 141 extension to the new Maryland Heights Expressway Connector in West County, Federal stimulus funds, state and local funds north of $175 million are being used to essentially extend a four lane road ten miles at most for a very very local benefit.
Whats debateable? Was it a wise decision to spread the stimulus funds to multiple corridors for higher speed services such as CHI to STL or throw all or nothing into one HSR line as congressman Mica has been arguing (All of the 10.5 billion going to FL along with private funding might have been enough to pull off a Miami/Orlando/Tampa HSR line or eliminate some very nasty Northeast corridor bottlenecks). As far as St. Louis, any reduction in travel time and dependable frequency is a win win situation for the region
Took the survey. I found it interesting that it included a checkbox for interest in a 220mph train service from St. Louis to KC (among other regular services in the state). MoDOT I guess does cover rail although you'd never think about it with the amount of focus on highways. Its great to think about, but I find it difficult to believe that MO could or would fund a project of that size. Hope I'm wrong though. Imagine, getting off work, taking the Metrolink to the bullet train, bullet train to KC or Chicago, take the EL or KS transit (if they build one), have dinner with some friends, get back home the same night. Its fun to daydream
Dredger wrote:The reality is their going to be a high front end cost to secure the ROW and rebuild infrastructure in and around any rail improvements, from closing down road crossings, building seperation and upgrading a whole host of items.
This was essentially true for the Interstate Highway system and Aviation. In other words, it is a lot cheaper and easier to replace pavement on a existing roads or runways then to build from skratch. Something that politicians conveniently ignore. A good example is Hwy 141 extension to the new Maryland Heights Expressway Connector in West County, Federal stimulus funds, state and local funds north of $175 million are being used to essentially extend a four lane road ten miles at most for a very very local benefit.
Whats debateable? Was it a wise decision to spread the stimulus funds to multiple corridors for higher speed services such as CHI to STL or throw all or nothing into one HSR line as congressman Mica has been arguing (All of the 10.5 billion going to FL along with private funding might have been enough to pull off a Miami/Orlando/Tampa HSR line or eliminate some very nasty Northeast corridor bottlenecks). As far as St. Louis, any reduction in travel time and dependable frequency is a win win situation for the region
Excellent post. MODOT's top priority is rebuilding I-70 from ex-urban St. Louis to ex-urban KC with truck-only lanes at a cost exceeding $3.5 billion. Now that is amazing lunacy!
Roger Wyoming wrote:
Excellent post. MODOT's top priority is rebuilding I-70 from ex-urban St. Louis to ex-urban KC with truck-only lanes at a cost exceeding $3.5 billion. Now that is amazing lunacy!
Double-tracking the rest and upgrading to 110 mph service STL-KCY would cost about that much.
pat wrote:Imagine, getting off work, taking the Metrolink to the bullet train, bullet train to KC or Chicago, take the EL or KS transit (if they build one), have dinner with some friends, get back home the same night. Its fun to daydream
This is actually very smart... FRA requirements will dictate that true HSR have no grade crossings or other freight trains on the same line – else a MUCH heavier FRA certified train would be demanded - and therefore not 220 MPH.
On the KC to STL line - it would nearly double the overall cost to purpose build HSR from the western edge of Metro STL to downtown and also do the same in KC from its eastern edge to Union Station. A cheaper alternative would be to have the trains drop you off at a transit hub in the suburbs (maybe Lambert in StL and at Arrowhead in KC) and have other local rail transit (Metrolink and KCRR) take you to downtown (or your destination).
One option for the HSR route to/from Chicago is to utilize the proposed extension of Metrolink to the north and have a HSR transit hub at the its new northern terminus (Edwardsville?). Another option would be to have HSR alignment nearly to the Mississippi River crossing. Once there, access to GTC is short enough that the lower speed here wouldn't matter (as far as travel times anyway). However this would require some complex track work (mainly on the existing bridges and approaches) but is still possible.
Repeat this at Mid-America (Indy and Evansville/Cincy Lines) and in south county (Memphis Line) and St. Louis is - for a fraction the cost of Chicago - the main HSR hub (though without a major singular urban station). Further down the line if it makes fiscal sense – extend the HSR all the way downtown and build your new European style terminal.
or, you could simply do what the Europeans do. Their HSR trainsets simply share the rails with existing non-HSR inter city rail service into the city centers. Simply put, they have both HSR networks and a very strong inter city rail service. We have neither.
. Minneapolis has the Hiawatha line and the point of the press release is that Wisconsin is forgoing its funding
