urbanSTL

Missouri will pursue nearly $1 billion in reallocated federal funding for rail projects

The application will include a two-phase proposal: immediate upgrades to improve speeds and schedule reliability along existing rail lines between St. Louis and Kansas City; and longer-term design, engineering and preparation for construction of a separate, dedicated high-speed line between the two cities.

If granted, about $373 million of the federal funds would be used in the immediate future for significant improvements and upgrades to rail equipment and infrastructure, and would complement the high-speed rail project already underway in the St. Louis to Chicago corridor.

http://governor.mo.gov/newsroom/2011/Mi ... l_projects

Thanks for posting Nixon's release. It looks like a great app and I hope we get the money at least to do the immediate upgrades. I think that we have a great story here in MO... we're showing that even with very modest improvements in the line, rail ridership is growing remarkably. Sho-Me Mo Rail!

quincunx wrote:Nixon: Missouri to apply for high-speed rail funds

Nixon's office says the application will include a proposal for immediate upgrades to improve speeds on existing lines between St. Louis and Kansas City, Mo. Meanwhile, a longer-term proposal will call for planning and engineering to prepare for construction of a separate rail line dedicated to high-speed passenger service.

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt ... 2bc8b.html

Man I was off the mark, I was thinking maybe $90-100 million if they went for additional train/rolling stock and he goes for a billion out of the gate. One of these days I might call one right.

It will be interesting to see what the immediate upgrades will be included in the application and if its about adding more double track between Jeff City and KC or more about grade crossings. One of the agruments being made by NC DOT and the Governor to their own constituents on why they wanted the HSR funds is that a good chunk of their obligated funding was going towards grade separations (no more waiting on trains) and thus an indirect benefit to non rail users - highway funds go to smooth benefit while rail funds clear find a way to get some of those desired bridges. Either way, any thought of HSR or speeds at 110 to 125 require significant investment in not only double track but also grade separations. Getting one and/or the other is plus for all parties, rail advocates, DOT's and railroads.

Roger Wyoming wrote:Thanks for posting Nixon's release. It looks like a great app and I hope we get the money at least to do the immediate upgrades. I think that we have a great story here in MO... we're showing that even with very modest improvements in the line, rail ridership is growing remarkably. Sho-Me Mo Rail!

Agree, I hope that they at least get the funding for the immediate upgrades. In some respects, I would rather see any additional funds beyond that go back into developing the CHI-STL HSR corridor first and foremost as getting at least one or two HSR corridors outside of the NEC up and running should be a priority over studying and doing EIS/preliminary engineering for a lorge number of corridors without actually building anything. Ohterwise, pursue a STL to INDY Hoosier extension of the river runner if the Feds and states truly want to develop the I-70 corridor on a regional basis (jus as IL wanted and got funded for additional service to Iowa)

No doubt more than we'd ever expected given the little things they applied for before. Time for another prediction. What might get funded? Two new train sets and a few more grade separations and sidings? We went 1/6 out of the FY10 moneys correct? I'll eat my hat if they get the $600M to design a true HSR dedicated line.

dredger wrote:

Roger Wyoming wrote:Thanks for posting Nixon's release. It looks like a great app and I hope we get the money at least to do the immediate upgrades. I think that we have a great story here in MO... we're showing that even with very modest improvements in the line, rail ridership is growing remarkably. Sho-Me Mo Rail!

Agree, I hope that they at least get the funding for the immediate upgrades. In some respects, I would rather see any additional funds beyond that go back into developing the CHI-STL HSR corridor first and foremost as getting at least one or two HSR corridors outside of the NEC up and running should be a priority over studying and doing EIS/preliminary engineering for a lorge number of corridors without actually building anything. Ohterwise, pursue a STL to INDY Hoosier extension of the river runner if the Feds and states truly want to develop the I-70 corridor on a regional basis (jus as IL wanted and got funded for additional service to Iowa)

I'm with you... I'd love to see the $300 million for immediate upgrades and the rest to get the Chicago-Saint Louis line further along. I really would love to see an I-70 line although Kasich is out in Ohio and I dunno what Indiana Gov. Daniels thinks. But, yeah, 110 mph from Kansas City to Pittsburgh (and beyond) and true high-speed to Chicago would be awesome investment in our future.

More details are showing up in the PD article:

Replace the Merchant's Bridge? Well it may need to be replaced but rarely does an Amtrak train take it, correct? Never in my travels at least.

$150 million to replace the Merchant's Bridge near downtown St. Louis and $75 million to buy three new passenger train sets.

$48.4 million to double-track the line between Lee's Summit and Pleasant Hill, Mo., to help trains run faster, and an additional $10 million to double-track the line between Pleasant Hill and Jefferson City.

The application seeks $11 million for a new Jefferson City station; $11.6 million for a "passing siding" in Kingsville, and $19.1 million to replace a bridge in Kansas City. It also includes crossovers and grade-separation projects

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt ... 2bc8b.html

I believe the Terminal Railroad, TRRA, owns the Merchant's bridge. I wonder what conservations have been going on between MoDOT, respective states and the TRRA to put in a request to replace the Merchant's bridge. I can't believe it is shoot from the hip and discuss later.

Also, will a new bridge still be owned by TRRA? what agreement/obligation will be in place? Will it support double track? How does it impact IL side. Will UP put some support behind it as it certainly helps with capacity on the busy crossing that Amtrak currently uses.

On the cool side, having passenger trains passing through the Arch grounds.

Yes the TRRA owns the Merchants Bridge (they also own the MacArthur Bridge). Sometimes Amtrak trains use it, although I have never had the pleasure. For $150M I'd figure you couldn't get a whole new bridge. Maybe replace the three main spans? Or will there be a big contribution from the TRRA owners? I suppose we'll know when we can get a hold of the application.

What's weird is how Nixon was touting KCY-STL when this would help the STL-CHI. $150M of $373M is a big portion.

TRRA owners:
BNSF Railway (1/7)
Canadian National Railway (1/7)
CSX Transportation (1/7)
Norfolk Southern Railway (1/7)
Union Pacific Railroad (3/7)

From the P-D: "Missouri's application for immediate projects also includes $48.4 million to double-track the line between Lee's Summit and Pleasant Hill, Mo., to help trains run faster and an additional $10 million to double-track the line between Pleasant Hill and Jefferson City."

$10 million for double-track from Pleasant Hill to Jefferson City sounds impossibly low. The 9,000 foot siding at California, MO (the one responsible for most of the on-time improvements) cost $8.1 million, and a new "passing siding" at Kingsville is expected to cost $11.6 million. Also, double-tracking the 13 miles from Pleasant Hill to Lee's Summit is projected to cost $48 million. Pleasant Hill to Jefferson City is about 125 miles of track (almost 45% of the entire line). If they can do that for $10 million dollars it sounds like a total bargain and should be a priority. I just have to question the accuracy of that projection.

If I were at USDOT, I would not grant the Merchants Bridge replacement. Does it really help HSR or intercity passenger service that much? If it's a big freight bottleneck (apparently only one train is allowed on it at a time despite being double-tracked) and thus a national priority then the moneys should come from some other part of the USDOT funding. Is IDOT on board? No point in upgrading the route south of the Merchants Bridge on the IL side if it is to become the main route for Amtrak. Plus the view of downtown from the MacArthur Bridge and approach is great.

I'd rather get more double-tracking out west, concrete ties and new rails, grade separations, straightening, or double-track the approach to the MacArthur on IL side if there's congestion or anticipated congestion if the STL-CHI does ever go to 9 dailies.

quincunx wrote:

wabash wrote: I just have to question the accuracy of that projection.

I noticed that too. I'd question the accuracy of the reporting. Maybe it's $100M. We'll see when we get a copy of the application.

It could be for required EIS statements and preliminary engineering design for double tracking the entire portion, In that context $10 million sounds about right. In the context of a politician, it also makes sense to generalize and highlight the key word - doubletrack. laying track is tangible where as EIS and preliminary design doesn't get nearly the support of the taxpayer.

quincunx wrote:Yes the TRRA owns the Merchants Bridge (they also own the MacArthur Bridge). Sometimes Amtrak trains use it, although I have never had the pleasure. For $150M I'd figure you couldn't get a whole new bridge. Maybe replace the three main spans? Or will there be a big contribution from the TRRA owners? I suppose we'll know when we can get a hold of the application.

IDOT's currently evaluating the options for the approach into St. Louis. One of the options under consideration is shifting trains permanently to the Merchants Bridge.

$150 million only has to replace the main spans. TRRA already replaced the approaches a few years ago. Once the main spans are replaced, the load restrictions can be lifted on the bridge, doubling its capacity by opening up the second track for simultaneous operations.

Since Amtrak would be the main user of this extra capacity, it makes sense for the government to fund the project. It also gives Amtrak some leverage over TRRA to ensure on-time performance with its passenger trains.

What's weird is how Nixon was touting KCY-STL when this would help the STL-CHI. $150M of $373M is a big portion.

True, but currently Illinois is the only one paying for a big rail project that benefits St. Louis greatly. It makes sense for Missouri to chip in some money, even if that money ultimately comes from the Feds. Illinois would sacrifice a bit by doing this, since IDOT's plan was to put a new station in East St. Louis and continue using the MacArthur Bridge. With trains shifted to the Merchants Bridge, the only Metro East stop will be in Alton.

Maybe somebody can clarify for me, State Senator Lembke is proposal $300 million in other cuts of federal funding as a compromise to his fillabuster. Which includes 22 million of HSR planning.

Now my confusion, what funds is he exactly talking about?

Funds already secured which doesn't make sense as most funds have gone to actually build sidings, a new brige over the Osage river and track extensions with some minimal funds for MoDOT to put together a state rail plan.

If not recently secured funds, is he talking Nixon's/MoDOT's proposal that was due this week? those funds are still up for grabs and MO might end up with a big fat 0 since their was four times the amount requested then what Florida returned. If so, is it strictly the planning funds on not the other items such as replacing McArthur bridge spans, additional sidings and track extensions, etc?

IDOT applied for funds to study a new station in East St Louis or Granite City. I think the downtown station is well connected to the east side via Metrolink. Plus the last thing the STL-ALN segment needs is something else to slow it down. I also worry that if this happens we might find someday that not all th e trains make it across the river, especially if there's a true HSR line built.

http://www.connectthemidwest.com/wp-con ... CATION.pdf

They could help the transit dependent better by building Metrolink into Madison County.

Thought you guys might like this...on CNN today...

http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/04/21/h ... tml?hpt=T2

Can this really be the reason??!!

dlpoep wrote:Thought you guys might like this...on CNN today...

http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/04/21/h ... tml?hpt=T2

Can this really be the reason??!!

Just was getting ready to post that myself

The Tea Party's support has dropped to about 25% of the population.

The same quarter of the population that thinks Obama is a Kenyan born Muslim and still think interracial marriage should be illegal.

Can't we just ignore what they think about high speed rail they will never use anyways?

southsidepride wrote:The Tea Party's support has dropped to about 25% of the population.

The same quarter of the population that thinks Obama is a Kenyan born Muslim and still think interracial marriage should be illegal.

Can't we just ignore what they think about high speed rail they will never use anyways?

That's the democratic solution! Ignore those with differing ideas!


(Tea Partiers are idiots, in my opinion)

Good news, Mo senators yesterday defeated Senator Lembke's push to kill rail $$.

Roger Wyoming wrote:Good news, Mo senators yesterday defeated Senator Lembke's push to kill rail $$.

Good to hear, maybe some state representatives understand that a portion of the request, some $375 million, not only strengthens current river runner passenger service as an alternate to I-70 but helps a railroad maintain a top notch freight corridor betwee KC and STL.

Very importanat considering that the other rail corridors in the state either favor a KC to Memphis or KC to Chicago direction. Where as KC to STL corridor allows UP as well as shippers and industry to bypass a very congested Chicago to and from the East Coast.