HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #661  
Old Posted May 9, 2011, 2:00 PM
jpIllInoIs's Avatar
jpIllInoIs jpIllInoIs is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,210
Midwest scores BIG on reallocation

The Midwest Regional Rail Initiative did quite well with the reallocation of FloriDAH's rejected 2.4 billion. we scored 1/4 of the funds = to $672.3 million in addition to the initial awards announced last year.

The highlights are some funds for actual train sets - 7 locos and 48 cars. Also Michigan gets funds for the Chi-Det line for actual track work and acquisitions, Illinois gets funds for actual track work on the Chi -St.L route.

In all $651 mil is designated for actual construction and equipment.
The remainder is for EIS and design funding. But they do set up some important projects for any future construction funds.

This illustrate another reason why the Midwest's rail proposition was a good plan. With the incremental improvement approach you can actually do the fine dance between politics, funding and construction. We in Illinois are certain to have improved HrSR service to St.L and the Michigan cities. And there will be train equipment to operate.

We have scored well with the $133 mil for the Englewood Flyover. Station awards in Bloomington/Normal, Moline and Joliet. And the initial $1.2 billion award for the Chi-St.L line improvements which are already underway.

Noticeably missing is any award to Wisc. and their belated attempt to rescue the funds for Milw-Chi route and the train shed renovations. No surprise, that will have to wait till after the WI state recall elections in Fall of 2012.

From FRA website:

REGIONAL EQUIPMENT POOLS

Next Generation Passenger Rail Equipment Purchase – This state-of-the-art rail equipment will provide safe and reliable American-built vehicles for passenger travel, while boosting the U.S. manufacturing industry.

* Midwest Corridors – $268.2 million to purchase 48 high-performance passenger rail cars and 7 quick-acceleration locomotives for 8 corridors in the Midwestern States: Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, and Missouri.
* California Corridors – $68 million to acquire 15 high-performance passenger rail cars and 4 quick-acceleration locomotives for the Pacific Surfliner, San Joaquin, and Capitol Corridors in California.

MIDWESTERN REGION

Illinois – Chicago - St. Louis Corridor – $186.3 million to construct upgrades on the Chicago - St. Louis Corridor between Dwight and Joliet, IL with trains operating at 110 mph for more than 220 miles of track. This investment will reduce trip times, enhance safety and add more seats on the corridor, increasing the number of people who can conveniently travel by train.

Michigan – Kalamazoo-Dearborn Service Development – $196.5 million to rehabilitate track and signal systems, bringing trains up to speeds of 110 mph on a 235-mile section of the Chicago to Detroit corridor, reducing trip times by 30 minutes.

Michigan – Ann Arbor Station Project – $2.8 million for an engineering and environmental analysis to construct a new high-speed rail station in Ann Arbor, MI, that will better serve passengers and allow more than one train to serve the station simultaneously.

Minnesota – Northern Lights Express – $5 million to complete engineering and environmental work for establishing the Northern Lights Express – a high-speed intercity passenger service – connecting Minneapolis to Duluth, with 110-mph high-speed rail service.

Missouri – Merchant’s Bridge Replacement – $13.5 million to advance the design of a new bridge over the Mississippi River on the Chicago to St. Louis Corridor, replacing a bridge built in the 1890s.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #662  
Old Posted May 9, 2011, 2:17 PM
BrennanW's Avatar
BrennanW BrennanW is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Manhattan, Kansas USA.
Posts: 198
Now that is very impressive. I'm glad they aren't just talking about altruistic projects and instead assigning specific uses for the money finally.

I'm assuming that now that these individual projects have the funding, the respective DOTs will issue RFPs soon? Do we know who is planning on bidding on the "quick accel" locos and "high performance" rail cars?
__________________
Proud Kansan
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #663  
Old Posted May 9, 2011, 3:43 PM
afiggatt afiggatt is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Virginia
Posts: 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrennanW View Post
I'm assuming that now that these individual projects have the funding, the respective DOTs will issue RFPs soon? Do we know who is planning on bidding on the "quick accel" locos and "high performance" rail cars?
California received $68 million to purchase bi-levels and new locomotives in this round as well as $100 million of FY10 grants that was recently obligated. It is also possible that Amtrak may be looking to put in an order to start on Superliner 1 replacements for the LD fleet. Since this is all part of the "Next Generation Passenger Rail Equipment" plan to establish a sustained US passenger manufacturing base, this is likely to be a joint RFP, coordinated by Amtrak or the states. Could take a while to coordinate on putting out a combined RFP.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #664  
Old Posted May 9, 2011, 3:46 PM
Beta_Magellan's Avatar
Beta_Magellan Beta_Magellan is offline
Technocrat in Your Tank!
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Chicago
Posts: 648
Quote:
Originally Posted by jpIllInoIs View Post
Minnesota – Northern Lights Express – $5 million to complete engineering and environmental work for establishing the Northern Lights Express – a high-speed intercity passenger service – connecting Minneapolis to Duluth, with 110-mph high-speed rail service.
This seems a bit like overkill to me—from what I understand, frequency’s a bigger issue than speed when dealing with intercity corridors of this length—79 mph with more than a couple of trains a day would probably be sufficient.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #665  
Old Posted May 9, 2011, 4:22 PM
jpIllInoIs's Avatar
jpIllInoIs jpIllInoIs is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,210
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beta_Magellan View Post
This seems a bit like overkill to me—from what I understand, frequency’s a bigger issue than speed when dealing with intercity corridors of this length—79 mph with more than a couple of trains a day would probably be sufficient.
On Northern Lights, Minny-Duluth.

I am not a fan of referring to this as High Speed rail. It is that kind of nomenclature that derailed the Ohio Hub plan. It is not HSR or even HrSR. It is regional rail. I do like this award to Minn as a way to keep the momentum going on a good regional rail project.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #666  
Old Posted May 9, 2011, 4:26 PM
Beta_Magellan's Avatar
Beta_Magellan Beta_Magellan is offline
Technocrat in Your Tank!
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Chicago
Posts: 648
Yeah—I think this mix-up comes mainly from the fact that the grants are for “High Speed & Intercity Passenger Rail,” and people just shorten it to “high-speed” because it sounds newer and more glamorous (or threatening to freedom, depending on your POV).

I’m fine with the corridor itself too—it just seems like it could be done at 79 mph.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #667  
Old Posted May 10, 2011, 4:24 AM
LMich's Avatar
LMich LMich is offline
Midwest Moderator - Editor
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Big Mitten
Posts: 31,745
This is from an earlier press release by Senator Levin, last year...

Quote:
Funds totaling $7,912,773 will be used for the West Detroit Connection Track project, including a new bridge over Junction Avenue, construction of 1.34 miles of new connection track, relocation of .86 miles of existing track, construction of three new crossovers and signal improvements. This project will connect the Chicago-Detroit High Speed Rail to the Detroit New Center Station. The project will also serve the Ann Arbor-Detroit commuter rail line.
But, I'm really interested to see a map of what they are talking about, because I'm having a hard time visualizing it. Currently, the rail that Amtrak uses (Conrail) comes in from the west, and then hits the West Detroit junction at another rail (Grand Trunk) above Junction Street that sends it northeast into New Center where the station is located. I'd be interested to see exactly where 1.34 miles of new rail is to be added, and what exactly is the .86 miles of rail they'll be locating and where?

That said, I dream of nothing else than for the train to keep on going past West Detroit Connection and can continue in the existing rail tunnel beneath the Detroit River to Canada...like it used to. They could even use the existing Michigan Central Station, and if they didn't want to do that, shoot a spur closer towards downtown to a new station.
__________________
Where the trees are the right height
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #668  
Old Posted May 10, 2011, 2:24 PM
VivaLFuego's Avatar
VivaLFuego VivaLFuego is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Blue Island
Posts: 6,480
Quote:
Originally Posted by LMich View Post
This is from an earlier press release by Senator Levin, last year...



But, I'm really interested to see a map of what they are talking about, because I'm having a hard time visualizing it. Currently, the rail that Amtrak uses (Conrail) comes in from the west, and then hits the West Detroit junction at another rail (Grand Trunk) above Junction Street that sends it northeast into New Center where the station is located. I'd be interested to see exactly where 1.34 miles of new rail is to be added, and what exactly is the .86 miles of rail they'll be locating and where?

That said, I dream of nothing else than for the train to keep on going past West Detroit Connection and can continue in the existing rail tunnel beneath the Detroit River to Canada...like it used to. They could even use the existing Michigan Central Station, and if they didn't want to do that, shoot a spur closer towards downtown to a new station.
I've only taken this route as far as Ann Arbor, so I'm not sure exactly what it does past Dearborn, but...

Looking at the track layout, it looks like trains need to do a reverse movement to get through this junction to switch railroads, and the project described would allow for a straight-shot. This project alone probably cuts a good 10-15 minutes off the travel time of the route; similar projects are needed south of Chicago Union station to remove the tedious reverse-movements there as well on other Amtrak routes.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #669  
Old Posted May 10, 2011, 5:43 PM
jpIllInoIs's Avatar
jpIllInoIs jpIllInoIs is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,210
Chicago - Iowa City still on the table

According to this Forbes article. The Iowa Money that was awarded in the previous round of grants is still there for Iowa to use...$230 mil Fed waiting for Iowa to match $20 mil and budget $3 mil per year operating.......

"Federal officials have made $230 million available for that route, but it would require $20 million in state matching money and a $3 million annual expense. Gov. Terry Branstad says it's up to lawmakers whether to approve that money.

"Ultimately, the future of high-speed rail will be determined by legislative funding and we defer to them on that decision,"' said Branstad spokesman Tim Albrecht.

Branstad in the past has worried about the state's ongoing obligation to subsidize the rail operation, but Albrecht said the governor is content to leave the issue with lawmakers for the moment.

"If it makes it through, we'll make a decision, but why do that if it's not coming to us," said Albrecht.

Braley said building the new rail route, a project scheduled for completion in 2015, would create 588 jobs.

"Passenger rail is critical to the continued economic development of the region," said Braley. "This is one more step to create jobs and put Iowa's economy back on track."

Sen. Bob Dvorsky, D-Coralville, who heads the Senate Appropriations Committee, said funding for the rail operation is included in legislation fleshing out the state's 2013 budget. He said Democrats who run the Senate are bargaining with Republicans in charge of the House over the issue."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #670  
Old Posted May 10, 2011, 6:10 PM
k1052 k1052 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,235
Quote:
Originally Posted by VivaLFuego View Post
I've only taken this route as far as Ann Arbor, so I'm not sure exactly what it does past Dearborn, but...

Looking at the track layout, it looks like trains need to do a reverse movement to get through this junction to switch railroads, and the project described would allow for a straight-shot. This project alone probably cuts a good 10-15 minutes off the travel time of the route; similar projects are needed south of Chicago Union station to remove the tedious reverse-movements there as well on other Amtrak routes.
I think the general idea is to keep Amtrak trains out of the Bay City Junction which already is too congested. There was a previous connection between the two railroads over Junction Ave which is what the plan intends to restore along with the 2nd track to 25th St.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #671  
Old Posted May 11, 2011, 4:22 AM
LMich's Avatar
LMich LMich is offline
Midwest Moderator - Editor
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Big Mitten
Posts: 31,745
Wait, so you guys are saying that it actually passes the West Detroit Connection at Junction, and then has to back-up at the "Y" just west of Grand to get going back north? I thought there was still a switch at Junction, but I haven't ridden this route since I was little. I can see how incredible time-consuming that must be.
__________________
Where the trees are the right height
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #672  
Old Posted May 11, 2011, 5:32 PM
jpIllInoIs's Avatar
jpIllInoIs jpIllInoIs is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,210
Come on Iowa, show some foresight, just like you did with same sex marriage. The state of Iowa has been a great state for moderate poitics on both sides of the spectrum, choosing to be more practicle and pragmatic. Let hope you do it again...

http://easterniowagovernment.com/201...-rail-funding/

Braley prods Iowa Legislature for passenger rail funding
May 11, 2011, 11:33 am
By James Q. Lynch/SourceMedia Group News

U.S. Rep. Bruce Braley is calling on Iowa lawmakers and Gov. Terry Branstad to fund the state’s share of the cost of developing a high-speed rail connection between Iowa City through the Quad Cities to Chicago.

Iowa and Illinois have secured $230 million in federal funding for an Amtrak route between Chicago and Iowa City. The project now depends on Branstad and the Legislature fulfilling Iowa’s $20 million commitment to the project, according to Braley, whose district includes the Quad Cities......
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #673  
Old Posted May 12, 2011, 4:36 AM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 16,356
Quote:
Originally Posted by jpIllInoIs View Post
Missouri – Merchant’s Bridge Replacement – $13.5 million to advance the design of a new bridge over the Mississippi River on the Chicago to St. Louis Corridor, replacing a bridge built in the 1890s.
Damn, I was hoping for the full amount. Waiting another few years will only increase construction costs and make it more difficult to produce a signature design that would be the most visible component of the Chi-StL line.

Obviously the new bridge would be a through truss, but there's a world of possibilities even within that category (nighttime lighting, Vierendeel, K-truss, lenticular, tension-cable designs, etc).
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...

Last edited by ardecila; May 12, 2011 at 4:52 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #674  
Old Posted May 16, 2011, 12:20 AM
afiggatt afiggatt is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Virginia
Posts: 333
Came across this news article on another forum about the status of the Englewood Flyover and Indiana Gateway projects which I thought would be of interest here. "Porter Junction $71.4 million rail project depends on negotiations" at http://www.indianaeconomicdigest.net...rticleID=59986

Excerpts:
"The $71.4 million Indiana Gateway at Porter Junction is one of the Federal Railroad Administration's top five priority high-speed rail projects, but work will not begin until there's a deal for fixing the Englewood crossing in Chicago, Administrator Joseph Szabo said.

They are both critically important projects for both the fluidity of the freight network as well as the passenger network," Federal Railroad Administration's Szabo said Friday at the Golden Spike Seminar at Valparaiso University. "The Indiana Gateway going through Porter there is some of the most congested track in the nation from a freight standpoint, and virtually every passenger train that flows eastward out of Chicago has to go through there."

Amtrak, Norfolk Southern Corp. and the Illinois Department of Transportation are close to an agreement on building a flyover for Metra trains at Englewood and then the focus will be on Porter Junction, Szabo said."

"Construction work on Englewood will begin later this year and work on Porter Junction could begin later this year or next, Magliari said."

These awards were announced in late January, 2010. It takes 17 months to negotiate the terms of the agreements and contracts? Good grief.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #675  
Old Posted May 16, 2011, 2:07 PM
jpIllInoIs's Avatar
jpIllInoIs jpIllInoIs is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,210
Quote:
Originally Posted by afiggatt View Post
These awards were announced in late January, 2010. It takes 17 months to negotiate the terms of the agreements and contracts? Good grief.
17 months...sounds like some lawyers smell a large pot of money....
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #676  
Old Posted May 16, 2011, 3:51 PM
orulz orulz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 584
Two things about that article.

First, I did not realize that the Englewood flyover would have three tracks. Is that a recent change in scope?

Second, the reason these negotiations are taking so long is probably that the FRA is requiring stiff conditions from freight railroads regarding on-time performance from these improvements.

Fred Frailey from Trains Magazine has blogged about the impact this has had on other corridors, especially Cascades, several times this year. (1) (2) (3).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #677  
Old Posted May 16, 2011, 6:28 PM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 16,356
The third Metra track would indeed be a change in scope. It's really a far-sighted decision if it's true, since the Rock will be seeing SouthWest Service trains and potentially added express service in the future.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #678  
Old Posted May 16, 2011, 6:46 PM
jpIllInoIs's Avatar
jpIllInoIs jpIllInoIs is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,210
According to the CREATE Project P1, the plans have always been for a 3 track Metra flyover. The only question is will it flyover 4 or 5 sets of NS tracks with the 5th track being dedicated fro Amtrak intercity lines to the East.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #679  
Old Posted May 16, 2011, 8:33 PM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 16,356
Back in 2007 the plan was for only two tracks.
http://www.createprogram.org/meeting...1_map_june.pdf
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #680  
Old Posted May 16, 2011, 10:44 PM
Beta_Magellan's Avatar
Beta_Magellan Beta_Magellan is offline
Technocrat in Your Tank!
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Chicago
Posts: 648
CMAP’s list of capital projects specifically mentioned three tracks on the RI as a means of accommodating a rerouted SW service and express trains, although the express point seemed a bit odd to me since the triple-tracked sections would start north of 79th, leaving 35th as the only station to skip. And with the new station apparently not leaving any room for a third track, I don’t know where all of this fits in now.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 1:08 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.