Michigan among states vying for $2.4B for high speed rail

[GP30M4216]

From the Detroit News, "The Home Newspaper":

April 06. 2011 4:42PM
Michigan among states vying for $2.4B for high-speed rail

David Shepardson / Detroit News Washington

Washington— Michigan and 23 other states have submitted applications totaling nearly $10 billion for high-speed rail funding after Florida returned money it was allocated.

Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder's office said the state sought more than $200 million for four projects, including $196.5 million for a program to complete a "corridor enhancement program over the next three years between Kalamazoo and Dearborn" and would allow trains to travel up to 110 mph in that stretch.

Tim Hoeffner, MDOT administrator of high-speed rail and innovative projects advancement, said the improvement could be completed by the end of 2013 and shave 50 minutes off the Detroit-Chicago train trip — reducing it to about four hours.

Other requests include $5.2 million for Kalamazoo-Dearborn Deferred Maintenance Program that could begin this summer and $2.9 million for the West Detroit Connection Track Universal Crossover.

Currently, Amtrak trains make a slow left-hand turn from a Conrail track to a Canadian National track - "a very slow and cumbersome move," Hoeffner said. "This is a key project for high speed rail from Ann Arbor to Detroit and could cut 10 minutes off the trip," he said.

The new track would boost speeds from 15-25 miles an hour to 35-40 on that section and cut the distance. It would include the replacement of a rail bridge.

Michigan also sought $3.5 million to build a station in Ann Arbor that would be used for trains and buses — by Amtrak, the University of Michigan and Ann Arbor Transit Agency.

The state is one of four states jointly seeking $366.7 million to buy trains for use in Michigan, Illinois, Wisconsin and Missouri to buy 31 locomotives and 100 coaches.

The award would replace train equipment on all three Michigan Amtrak lines — the Blue Water, Pere Marquette and Wolverine. If successful, Michigan would get 13 locomotives and 37 coaches.

In total, the Transportation Department received nearly 90 applications from the states and the District of Columbia for projects. Florida turned down $2.4 billion in funding.

"Governors and members of Congress have been clamoring for the opportunity to participate. That's because they know that high-speed rail will deliver tens of thousands of jobs, spur economic development across their communities and create additional options for their citizens as the country's population grows," U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said. "We are extremely pleased to see the bipartisan enthusiasm behind all of the requests to get into the high-speed rail business."

Snyder met with LaHood earlier this year to discuss high-speed rail.

A merit-driven process will be used to award the newly available high-speed rail dollars to projects that can deliver public and economic benefits quickly, the department said.

A project's ability to reduce energy consumption, improve the efficiency of a region's overall transportation network, and generate sustained economic activity along the corridor are among the selection criteria.

In 2009, the Michigan Department of Transportation won $153.2 million in federal funding to improve a planned high-speed rail corridor between Dearborn and Kalamazoo.

Michigan also won $40 million in rail stimulus funding to build an Amtrak station in Dearborn and to renovate stations in Battle Creek and Troy.

In 2009, Michigan had sought more than $1.7 billion to make high speed rail a reality from Chicago to Detroit — including improvements in Indiana and Illinois — that was not approved in earlier funding rounds.

dshepardson@detnews.com

(202) 662-8735

From The Detroit News: http://detnews.com/article/20110406/POL ... z1ImTjfFsg

[Ben Higdon]

Interesting article, I hope MI ends up getting some more cash for this project. One question that occurs to me, is if/when track speeds are increased to significantly cut the travel time between Kalamazoo and Dearborn, will this allow the route to be extended? For example, instead of all three trains terminating in Pontiac, there are other options, such as operating one of the trains towards Port Huron or Toledo. There would be some serious costs involved with adding service to a new route, but I think it'll eventually be considered.

[KC8RBK]

I've always thought it would make sense for the Pere Marquette to be extended to Toledo interchanging with the other two routes to take passengers going east instead of everyone having to go to Chicago. Toledo has a decent size station. I don't know anything about the track arrangement or how complicated it would be. It just seems like a good idea in theory.

[justalurker66]

I've always thought it would make sense for the Pere Marquette to be extended to Toledo interchanging with the other two routes to take passengers going east instead of everyone having to go to Chicago. Toledo has a decent size station. I don't know anything about the track arrangement or how complicated it would be. It just seems like a good idea in theory.

Better rails would have to be built to make the connection worthwhile. It is one of those connections that can be made twice as fast by bus.

I like the idea of Chicago to Toledo via Kzoo and Detroit, but I don't expect to see it anytime soon.

[GTW6401]

Amtrak already has a pair of trains that run between Chicago and Toledo - The Lake Shore Limited and Capitol Limited. Only problem with these trains is that they stop in Toledo after 11pm each night.

They have a shuttle bus that runs from East Lansing to Toledo, making stops to pickup connecting passengers for the long distance trains.

[Norm]

They have a shuttle bus that runs from East Lansing to Toledo, making stops to pickup connecting passengers for the long distance trains.

They also run shuttle busses from Toledo to Detroit and Pontiac. In 2008 I contemplated taking Amtrak from Rutland, Vermont to Pontiac. When I discovered it would be nearly 48 hours via Amtrak I decided to fly back home with a friend. The flight took a little over two hours. Huge difference in time even though I would have appreciated the train ride. The time involved, and the overnight's in coach killed the deal. The busses don't reach Pontiac till the wee small hours.

[OwlCaboose2853]

CSX CEO on HSR: 'Not on my tracks' http://www.utu.org/worksite/detail_news ... leID=53988

[justalurker66]

Amtrak already has a pair of trains that run between Chicago and Toledo - The Lake Shore Limited and Capitol Limited. Only problem with these trains is that they stop in Toledo after 11pm each night.

Neither would serve a Kalamazoo to Toledo and east customer.

They have a shuttle bus that runs from East Lansing to Toledo, making stops to pickup connecting passengers for the long distance trains.

That is part of the market that extending Chicago to Detroit down to Toledo would serve. Although the market probably isn't big enough to pay for the extra miles of rail service.

[Ben Higdon]

I've thought for a long time that the Pere Marquette would be better off running via Kalamazoo. I like the idea of a Grand Rapids to Toledo train via Lansing and Detroit.

[GP30M4216]

The bus presently serves the Capitol and Lake Shore Limiteds connecting at Toledo Central Union Station (MLK plaza). The bus meets the eastbound trains having picked up passengers in East Lansing, Ann Arbor, Dearborn and Detroit. Then the bus picks up passengers off the westbound trains early in the morning and takes them back to the mitten. I took the bus from Toledo to Ann Arbor after getting of 49 in February and almost every seat on the bus was taken. I'll take the bus from Toledo to Dearborn and back on the next train trip to Michigan I take from Connecticut. The Michigan stations the bus serves are some of the busiest in the state. Toledo is Ohio's busiest station. It's no coincidence. Yes, the bus is not a train, and a train would be best. But it's definitely better than nothing. The connection is guaranteed by Amtrak and connecting tickets are purchased when you buy your train tickets. I wrote an article about this bus connection to the long distance trains at Toledo in an issue of The Michigan Passenger a couple years ago.

According to the Wolverine timetable, the same bus also does connect to trains 352 and 353 on the Michigan side, but it's not really set up to work out well that way. Thus, a passenger from Kalamazoo could take 352 to Dearborn, detrain there, wait for the bus, take the bus to Toledo, and continue east. The worse connection would be coming back west, where you'd be stuck waiting at the Dearborn station all morning before boarding 353 to go west. If you are in Kalamazoo or that area, it would be better to drive the hour and 15 south to Elkhart to board the train there. The station building is open at train time in Elkhart and the arrival and departure times for all trains are better at Elkhart than Toledo. Interestingly enough, with the May spring/summer timetable release, train 30 (EB Capitol Ltd.) will depart Chicago sooner in the evening by a little bit, meaning better boarding times for Elkhart, Toledo and other cities in Indiana ad NW Ohio. Instead of leaving Toledo at 11:49pm, as it does now, the train will leave at 11:06pm. Instead of 9:29pm at Elkhart, it will now be 8:53pm. The other Water Level Route trains appear unchanged.

I think it would be unfortunate if Amtrak moved the PM off the C&O and down to a Kalamazoo routing. YES, it would be a way to connect GR and Kal, and provide an additional option for west Michigan passengers along the Michigan Line. But it would cut out those passengers from along the lakeshore in and near St. Joe, Bangor, and Holland. A fair number of passengers are represented there; the majority of those from Holland, but it's enough to count for something. The Grand Elk from GR down to Kalamazoo would need to be substantially upgraded. A wye track in the NW quadrant of BO would need to be reinstalled. I doubt you'd be able to attract many GR to Kalamazoo passengers, since 131 is a pretty quick drive between the two. In my opinion, the PM should stay where it is.

Side note: Amtrak today released their ridership figures for March and it's another month of strong growth. Here are a few for routes in an near Michigan:

Route March FY11 March FY10 % change
Wolverine Service 41,051 37,971 +8.1
Blue Water 16,006 12,780 +25.2
Pere Marquette 8,881 8,076 +10.0
Capitol Limited 19,810 18,201 +8.8
Lake Shore Limited 33,205 29,937 +10.9

Oct-March
Route FY11 FY10 % change
Wolverine Service 243,185 209,091 +16.3
Blue Water 85,823 68,030 +26.2
Pere Marquette 48,787 45,732 +6.7
Capitol Limited 104,103 97,358 +6.9
Lake Shore Limited 182,920 165,287 +10.7

[GTW6401]

I wouldn't want anything to do with Amtrak running on trackage owned by shortlines, which is what you have between Kalamazoo and Grand Rapids. Clumping along at 10mph doesn't exactly say high speed rail to me, plus all the cost that would be invovled to raise train speeds for Amtrak. Its bad enough that NS has them down to 40 now between Ann Arbor and Jackson.

[Buster Manning]

The reason 30 is leaving an hour sooner is account of tunnel work somewhere in Penns. I believe; was told by a manager that 30 will NOT hold for any mis-connects as it has to run on schedule to be able to slide thru the work window. Plan is for 48 and 50 to grab the mi-connects.

[Ben Higdon]

I wouldn't want anything to do with Amtrak running on trackage owned by shortlines, which is what you have between Kalamazoo and Grand Rapids. Clumping along at 10mph doesn't exactly say high speed rail to me, plus all the cost that would be invovled to raise train speeds for Amtrak. Its bad enough that NS has them down to 40 now between Ann Arbor and Jackson.

I agree there. I guess I'm still living in the past, when Conrail maintained that line well. Routing the train via Kalamazoo was in the planning back around 1980 or so.

At this point in time, rerouting would have the advantage of using the higher speed Amtrak Line. What I really would have liked to see would be if the Grand Rapids to Muskegon line wasn't torn up, and the route would be Muskegon-Grand Rapids-Kalamazoo-Chicago. I think that route would have generated some good ridership.

[Steve B]

Looks like Congress is going to soon pass the budget bill, which cuts *all* high-speed rail money for 2011. Posted today by Trains Magazine.

http://tinyurl.com/3n4s9mp