Will STL high speed rail line take priority over Detroit's?

[iheartthed]

Advocates on Tuesday unveiled an $11.5 billion plan for a Chicago-St. Louis high-speed line that could cut travel times to two hours from the current five. If built, it would be among the fastest U.S. lines and would rival high-tech systems already in place in Europe and Asia.

Under the proposal, electric-powered trains would zoom the nearly 300 miles between Chicago and St. Louis at up to 220 mph - more than 100 mph faster than diesel-powered trains under a comparatively modest plan already advocated by eight Midwestern governors.

The newer plan is generating excitement among rail enthusiasts, some of whom pooh-pooh the gubernatorial proposal - which envisions trains that reach top speeds of 110 mph - as too conservative.

Tuesday's proposal - the focus of a study released by the non-profit Midwest High Speed Rail Association - would require upgrading tracks and bridges as well as electrifying the line. The estimated price tag doesn't include costs of new trains or maintenance.

With backing from Illinois officials, the ambitious project could be done in time for the 2016 Summer Olympics, which Chicago is bidding to host, said Rick Harnish, the association's executive director. A deadline seven years away, he said, is ambitious but doable.

"You sometimes need an audacious goal," he said. "We also need to catch up to the rest of the world."

The proposal for a 220-mph service is intended to complement, not replace, the governors' plan, Harnish said. The 110 mph trains would serve more communities and make more stops en route, something Harnish and his Chicago-based group supports.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/0..._n_223500.html

St. Louis is also apparently much farther ahead than Detroit in implementing an area transit system as well...

http://www.grist.org/article/2009-06...ansit-systems/

Will the Chi to STL line steal the spotlight from a Chi to Detroit high speed train?

[professorscott]

EVERYBODY is ahead of Detroit in implementing a regional transit system. Of the top 20 US metro regions by population, we are the only one without light rail or other rapid modes of transit; we spend 1/3 the average per capita on transit; our bus service is thin, infrequent and to some extent unreliable.

If you were the folks in DC looking to spread transit money around, for high speed rail or anything else, Detroit is just about the last place you'd look. I mean, sure, I'd like to see it, but what are the odds? We've been trying for the past, oh, two or three years, just to get the rights to use freight railway tracks for a couple more Amtrak runs per day and call it "commuter rail", and we haven't even been able to get that done. And when a group of private business persons project a light rail line to be paid for out of their own money, my fellow bloggers log on to this board and absolutely blast them for it [[in favor of a fantasy line from DDOT, which hasn't enough money to pick its own nose).

So is St. Louis ahead of us, transit wise, in competition for federal rail dollars, and so forth? Absolutely fucking yes, they have their act together, and we just don't.

[Novine]

At the same time Lansing is slashing the meager support for Amtrak. Why would the feds invest in a state that won't invest in itself?

[gumby]

At the same time Lansing is slashing the meager support for Amtrak. Why would the feds invest in a state that won't invest in itself?

What money do you want the State to invest in itself? The State is broke.

[Lorax]

Either the feds are going to pay for such a high speed rail line, which is how it's done in other nations who now enjoy such convenient transportation, or it's going to be done by the private sector.

Private sector ownership of such lines is probably not a good idea in the long run, since there will be no limit as to the cost of travel for the individual, and could be sold off on a whim for freight purposes when the private sector decides it can't make it with only ridership fares, or is unable to squeeze enough in subsidies out of the government.

Better to expand Amtrak to build and manage such a system, but it goes back to properly funding it.

States should contribute to the costs of construction, however, much of that funding will likely come from the feds in the first place, so we're probably better off going back to the idea of making government include a national high-speed rail system in it's infrastructure improvements, managed by the Department of Transportation.

FDR proved that government can run such programs efficiently, and when properly funded, can form the foundation for really comprehensive system.

Look to the Interstate Highway system under Eisenhower as a model of what can be done to link the nation through automobile and truck travel.

High speed rail can be done, but we need to all have a stake in it, meaning it needs the government behind it.

[heedus]

I know that you can't believe everything that beaurocrats say, but Ray LaHood's statement in K-zoo a few weeks ago seems to be a pretty strong indicator that a Chicago to Detroit high speed line is up near the top of the list: "High-speed rail is coming to Michigan because of Gov. Granholm. There's no doubt about it."

http://www.detnews.com/article/20090...n-for-recovery

[BShea]

Private sector ownership of such lines is probably not a good idea in the long run, since there will be no limit as to the cost of travel for the individual, and could be sold off on a whim for freight purposes when the private sector decides it can't make it with only ridership fares, or is unable to squeeze enough in subsidies out of the government.

Is anyone advocating private ownership of these lines? I would think a P3 is what many would be advocating.

I'd also suggest that no passenger rail service makes it on fares alone. All require subsidies. Whether we use the line or not, we're all going to pay for it. A government-owned rail line will require the taxpayers to pay for it. That's pretty much beyond dispute.

It feels like private backers can get these things start, to break the ice as it were, then turn them over to a P3. I'd rather have a government-owned rail system run by a private company, which likely means it will offer a higher quality service, efficiency and cleanliness than, say, the post office or Amtrak. You'd have efficiency for users and taxpayers, and government safeguards.

[ghettopalmetto]

Private sector ownership of such lines is probably not a good idea in the long run, since there will be no limit as to the cost of travel for the individual, and could be sold off on a whim for freight purposes when the private sector decides it can't make it with only ridership fares, or is unable to squeeze enough in subsidies out of the government.

Is anyone advocating private ownership of these lines? I would think a P3 is what many would be advocating.

I'd also suggest that no passenger rail service makes it on fares alone. All require subsidies. Whether we use the line or not, we're all going to pay for it. A government-owned rail line will require the taxpayers to pay for it. That's pretty much beyond dispute.

It feels like private backers can get these things start, to break the ice as it were, then turn them over to a P3. I'd rather have a government-owned rail system run by a private company, which likely means it will offer a higher quality service, efficiency and cleanliness than, say, the post office or Amtrak. You'd have efficiency for users and taxpayers, and government safeguards.

In fairness, I can put a $0.42 stamp [[or whatever it costs now) on an envelope, drop it in the mailbox, and it gets ANYWHERE in the U.S. within 3 days. I'd say that's pretty good service.

On the East Coast, where Amtrak owns its own track and doesn't have to get sidetracked by freight trains or poorly-maintained track, trains run twice an hour. I can walk up 20 minutes before the train leaves, buy a ticket, and be on time at my destination. You ever fly into or out of the New York area? That's pretty good service on Amtrak's part, and their 60% market share of the combined air/rail market between DC and New York speaks volumes to that.

So remind us why your model of the federal government subsidizing for-profit passenger rail companies is an improvement? Considering you still have to pay for tracks and operations, and then make sure the company earns a profit for its shareholders, someone has to pay for that profit.

[Novine]

"What money do you want the State to invest in itself? The State is broke."

That state is NOT broke. Broke is when you aren't bringing in money and you can't pay your bills or that you owe so much that there's no possible way your current income will ever pay off your debts. Neither is true of Michigan.

What is broken in Michigan is the current system of financing and distributing tax dollars. When we spend more on prisons than we do on higher ed., that's an indication that the system is broken. When it comes to rail, we pay a relatively small subsidy to provide a service that no one else is providing. The same would be true of high speed rail. Both of those systems provide benefits that outweigh the costs. What the state needs to do is prioritize its funding so that we have money to invest in high speed rail and not waste it on programs or services that can be funded in other ways.

The same is true out in California with all of the talk of the state being unable to pay its bills. California has plenty of money coming into the state government. But it's system of allocating those dollars has been so distorted by the various voter initiatives that the system no longer functions.

[rbdetsport]

Has anyone went to the regional transit meetings that TRU is putting on?

[Bearinabox]

In fairness, I can put a $0.42 stamp [[or whatever it costs now) on an envelope, drop it in the mailbox, and it gets ANYWHERE in the U.S. within 3 days. I'd say that's pretty good service.

Yeah, I don't really get the dig at the post office either. It always works fine for me.

[Gsgeorge]

The short answer: Of course. Detroit could never get this together in time for funding or support. We're too busy taking bribes, knocking down historic buildings, ignoring our neighborhoods, creating superblocks, making it difficult to open small businesses, and most definitely COMPLETELY IGNORING THE BENEFITS OF TRANSIT. Leave it to our elected leaders to get it right!

[urbanophile]

Something to remember: Chicago is the hub of the Midwest system. Look at the map. Clearly, a St. Louis route has the most political support in Illinois because the route passes almost entirely through that state. That's why St. Louis is by far the highest priority HSR corridor politically.

[LeannaM]

There are good things about MetroLink in St. Louis. It takes people to the touristy places [[the stadiums, Union Station) and extends out to St. Louis County.

There are a few cons to it. It's not very extensive. It basically just stretches west from Downtown to Clayton, and not very much south into Soulard and Lafayette Square. IT also crosses the river into Illinois. Although the buses do go into the neighborhoods around the city.

Some of the bus lines were cut earlier this year because no one wants to fund the trains. St. Louis County voted I think like 55-45% to NOT pass a half-cent sales tax to fund MetroLink. Only St. Clair County, Illinois really funds it very well. Missouri finally did give MetroLink $12 million, but that's Federal money, not St. Louis County money.

I hope this high speed rail proposal passes. I think a 2-hour trip instead of a 5-hour trip could encourage some teams to train in St. Louis, once Chicago fills up. Although even now the teams can just fly between the two points.

St. Louis has been working for a while to turn Lambert Airport in St. Louis into the Midwestern hub for Chinese imports. It sounds promising, but negotiations take a while. Although Chinese commissions have come to St. Louis a few times, and St. Louis commissions have gone over there.

$12 billion project
Here's a PDF
http://www.midwesthsr.org/docs/06_30..._STL_Study.pdf

[Glowblue]

This is just a proposal with so far no money or political backing behind it. It's interesting, but unless the feds come through with alot of money, it isn't happening, and it seems pretty far from that point. Oh, and there is probably zero chance of it getting built by 2016.

[Hardhat]

For what it's worth, this just in from the Granholm Administration.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
July 27, 2009
Contact: Megan Brown
517-335-6397

Granholm Signs Agreement on High Speed Rail; Eight States Will Work for Funding for Midwest Corridor
Memorandum of Understanding Signed at Chicago Summit

LANSING – Governor Jennifer M. Granholm today signed a memorandum of understanding [[MOU) that establishes a partnership among eight states to work cooperatively to fund the Midwest Corridor, a regional high-speed rail plan that will connect cities throughout the region with frequent, reliable high-speed and conventional intercity rail service. The initiative, which includes a Michigan Detroit-Pontiac-Chicago line, is modeled after the larger vision of President Barack Obama and U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood to create a nationwide rail network.

“The Midwest Corridor is a one-of-a-kind partnership that will create jobs for Michigan workers, enhance transportation options for citizens, and provide significant economic development opportunities for communities,” Granholm said. “I am pleased that the Obama administration recognizes the importance of this regional initiative and the extensive planning that has already been done to prepare for this opportunity. Today’s action is another important step in the process to make high-speed rail and the jobs that come with it a reality in Michigan and the Midwest.”

The MOU, signed at the Midwest High Speed Rail Summit in Chicago, establishes a multi-state steering group to provide a single voice in support of the region’s collective high-speed rail priorities. Through coordination, the region hopes to capture part of the $8 billion that President Obama has made available through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act [[Recovery Act) for high-speed passenger rail, the largest investment that the federal government has made in over a decade.

According to the American Association of Railroads, every dollar spent on investments in our nation’s railroads – tracks, equipment, locomotives, bridges – yields $3 in economic output. Additionally, each $1 billion of investment creates 20,000 jobs.

The state of Michigan submitted its pre-application for Recovery Act high-speed rail funding on July 10; the next deadline for the application process is August 24. Please visit http://www.michigan.gov/mdot/0,1607,...8528--,00.html for a copy of the seven pre-applications already submitted for Recovery Act high-speed rail funding.

[dcmorrison12]

You definitely do not want the private sector to build a rail line. They don't have to answer to anyone while planning/designing. They don't have to take in ANY public input, and most likely won't even both to do so. Any decisions they make will be based on personal preference. Take M-1 Rail for instance, it's a great example. They've sidestepped the public completely and designed their own rail line, didn't take in any real public input. I've spoken to M-1 Rail, their media relations department specifically. When asked what studies they did to choose Woodward from Downtown to New Center as the corridor/line lenght and why they chose Modern Streetcar as the transit mode, I was given a direct quote "personal preference." I was dumbfounded.

If you realize how bad of a project M-1 Rail is, you'll understand what I'm saying.

All I can say is, once these DDOT/M-1 Rail negotiations are complete, I really hope the plan looks like what DDOT came up with. It's truly a fantastic plan.

[Russix]

Come on dc, you have to give transit by dictation over transit by representation a chance. People don't actually know where they want to go, they just wonder around aimlessly. So where ever you put up a stop, people will magically appear out of thin air to ride it before vanishing again. Rich people who never ride transit are paying for it, so it must be good for the rest of us!

[dcmorrison12]

Russix, I can toss out the couple years I've spent closely following DDOT and M-1 Rail and all of the research I've done. I like your logic... let's go with that!

[professorscott]

Well, it's very encouraging that the eight states plan to work together at some level. I think high speed rail in the midwest will be built up by degrees, especially considering the level of funding available [[even if we get all the federal money for this that is allocated over the entire country, which we won't). That is to say, there are various bottlenecks in the different lines that make it impossible for trains to go at decent speeds - not high speed, but 60 to 90 mph - and if we can first eliminate those bottlenecks, that makes the train service at least more reliable.

Next, SEMCOG reports it has reached agreements with the various freight railways to fire up an abbreviated version of the Detroit - AA commuter rail [["abbreviated" meaning an additional four round trips per day, much less than they'd have liked, but better than nothing). So that will require us [[the region) to do some amount of track upgrades, particularly just west of midtown.

If we can improve things enough to drive up demand, then we have a chance of getting to the next level of service, the 110 mph trains. If you want to go much beyond that, you have to eliminate at-grade crossings, and then you're talking real money. But it'd be nice to see a start!

I noticed in the newspaper they referred to one of the proposed high speed lines as "Detroit - Pontiac - Chicago". Really? I always get on at Pontiac and then go through Detroit on the way to Chi-town, but maybe that's just me.

[Stolberg]

Chicago to St. Louis, Chicago to Madison and Chicago to Detroit are all likely to see construction work next year. Illinois is in the best position because the state recently approved $400 million for high speed rail and $150 more for other intercity passenger rail. Wisconsin has plans ready to go, especially for the stretch from Milwaukee to Watertown. Wisconsin governor Doyle just topped Granholm by announcing a $47 million deal with Spanish trainmaker Talgo to produce aluminum railcars in Wisconsin.


Michigan's requests for high speed rail funding are all quite practical and reasonable. Michigan should have probably requested more including some new trains for the increased service frequency.



These are the funding priorities as I see it for Michigan service:

1. Englewood flyover, Chicago.
   Estimated cost: $140 million.
   Estimated federal contribution: $100 to $133 million.
   Description: construct a railroad overpass for commuter rail tracks [[Rock Island line) over Norfolk Southern rail lines at 63rd Street and I-90/94 on Chicago's south side to reduce delays due to train interference. NS lines also carry Amtrak service to Detroit, Boston, New York and Washington D.C. The project eliminates a major railroad bottleneck identified by the Chicago CREATE study and is supported by the City of Chicago, the State of Illinois and all 6 North American Class I railroads. On-time performance will be improved for Pere Marquette, Bluewater, Wolverine, Lake Shore Limited, Capitol Limited, Hoosier State, City of New Orleans and Illinois service to Champaign and Carbondale.
2. Conrail shared assets, Detroit
   Estimated cost: $32 million.
   Estimated federal contribution: $10.5 to $26 million.
   Description: new passenger rail tracks to bypass the Detroit Intermodal Freight Terminal. Improved track configuration and signals to allow for better flow of trains that will get both cars and trucks off of the interstates.
3. West Detroit Connection
   Estimated cost: $16 million.
   Estimated federal contribution: $10 million. State and local share to be primarily land acquisition.
   Description: One mile of new passenger rail track connecting Vinewood to the West Detroit Junction and associated crossovers and signals. Eliminates a major bottleneck.
4. New sidings at New Buffalo andDowagiac
   Estimated cost: $37.5 million
   Estimated federal contribution: $37.5 million
   Three new sidings to allow for increased frequency and reduced delays. An 11-mile siding from Three Oaks to the Indiana state line will also improve on-time performance for Pere Marquette service. This is on right-of-way owned by Amtrak, portions of which are already operating at 95 mph.
5. Track upgrade Dearborn to Ann Arbor
   Estimated cost: Michigan has applied for $247.5 million to upgrade tracks from Dearborn to Kalamazoo. I expect the feds to request that the application be split into two segments at Ann Arbor. The segment from Ann Arbor to Dearborn will benefit both Amtrak and commuter rail service.
   Estimated federal contribution: 80%.

I expect that all five items above will get funded. Service from Pontiac to Detroit will probably be seen by the feds as lower priority than Detroit to Chicago. Indiana has a request in for track improvements from the Illinois state line to Porter, IN but they don't have plans and don't really know what's needed.

[ASR89]

Stolberg, thank you for the specifics. I agree that doing track improvements will benefit both the commuter rail and Amtrak services. The railroad right of way and tracks are completely straight from Ypsilanti to West Dearborn so I imagine the trains could easily run at 110 mph. Right now, the maximum is 70 mph.

[PQZ]

Apples and oranges.

The Detroit - Chicago rail plan is an upgrade of exisiting rail that will enable conventional trains to travel at a higher average speed. Remove crossings, improve curves, improve trackage and you can move much more quickly with a conventional diesel locomotive system. The Chicago - Stl is a whole differnt game, essentially a bullet train.

Your real competition is not a bullet train to St. Looey, but the South East Rail Corridor, which will be of similar scope to the Det - Chicago rail corridor project. The South East Corridor will connect Atlanta to Charlotte to Raleigh to DC. Portions of the upgrade are already designed and under construction. On a cost benefit basis to the federal gov't the SE Corridor makes far more sense.

[Detroit500]

We really need to take back the route that would allow Detroit-New York. This pathetic thing where we have to be routed via bus to Toledo is appalling. Of course, AMTRAK these days is a total sham -- in most instances it's far cheaper to fly and you get there faster.

[Russix]

You can't even take your bike on Amtrak in Michigan. No bike racks or freight serivce for Detroit.