Track construction should help Amtrak
A new section of track under construction west of Jefferson City should make riding Amtrak a more predictable experience.
Crews broke ground today on a $8.1 million, 9,900-foot side track near California, Mo. that will allow freight trains to pull over when Amtrak trains need to pass. Amtrak uses a single track between Jefferson City and Kansas City that’s similar to a one-lane road. It has pull-over points, known as sidings, that allow trains to pull over when other trains approach and need to pass. But they’re too short for freight trains. Until now, Amtrak trains have had the burden of pulling over whenever a freight train approaches, adding minutes and sometimes hours to passenger trips. (The track between Jefferson City and St. Louis is double track.)
When finished in December, the new track will be long enough to hold the 1.5-mile-long trains that haul coal from Wyoming to electric utilities in the St. Louis area. The Legislature approved money from the project, which helped the Missouri Department of Transportation secure federal funds as well.
Once complete, the new track is expected to reduce Amtrak delays between St. Louis and Kansas City by 17 percent.
This is wonderful win for Amtrak riders between KC and STL.
Another issue at play here regarding Missouri rail transport is the abandoned Katy bridge in Boonville. The railroad - which owns the bridge - wants to relocate it down river so as to double track the Osage River crossing. And now all the environmentalists are crying and whining because its removal threatens the legal existence of the Katy trail… I think (as do most level-headed people) the efficient movement of our nation’s cargo and people is far more important than a bike path, and the trail can still be retained.
Now let’s get that extra rail east of Jefferson City to St. Louis.
Bassora - the Jeff City Sub is (already) double-tracked east of Jeff City.
The only issue I have is that it sounds like a lot of money to reduce delays by only 17%. Has anyone done cost-benefit analysis to see if this makes sense. Since we’re talking the government here, making logical sense probably doesn’t matter. Just say the word “jobs” and any budget item passes. Never forget that it’s the taxpayers money being used to create the “jobs” and this money would be in the taxpayers pockets which would create more efficient jobs.
One of the most important benefits of this imporvement as well as the construction of a second siding closer to Kansas City is an increase in frieght capacity that will relieve congestion on the highways. If Fact, in a number of other states a cooperative relationship has developed between frieght rails and the public resulting in addtional capacity, faster passenger service and consequent reduction in the requirement to add road capacity. Adding rail capacity is in fact faar less expensive than comparable addtional capacity on Interstates. For an expample look to the $4,000,000,000 Modot wants to expend on I-70. For a fraction of that amount the entire stretch between Jefferson City and KC could be double tracked.
John Roach - You are spot-on. For the huge wad of cash MODOT wants to blow on extra highway lanes, why not resurrect some of the main-line railroads (ex: Rock Island’s STL - KC route, Wabash Kirksville - Des Moines route) that have disappeared from our state map?
* Hundreds of new jobs
* Reduction of trucks = less dependence on foreign oil, less accidents, less traffic, less pollution, less damage to roads and consequently, less of our tax money going to maintain roads
* Significant economic growth for online communities
* Potential for expanded cross-state passenger service
I guess it just makes too much sense. MODOT = a highway department & nothing else.
Any improvements to Amtrak are welcomed. It is a mode of transportation that is peaceful, and relaxing. See the USA !
Any improvements to Amtrak should be applauded. It is a relaxing and entertaining mode of transportation for some and an efficient method of commuting for so many.
Scott - I believe that the law which allowed the Katy Trail to be created specifies that the trail must be preserved in a condition such that it could eventually return to rail service. If that condition is not met, then I think that the property owners adjacent to the trail have a legal right to claim the trail land as theirs, thus removing the trail from existence or extracting a possibly inflated price for the land.
The law can be found here:
http://straylight.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode16/usc_sec_16_00001247—-000-.html
It’s 16 USC § 1247(d).