|
Red Arrow
|
 |
« Reply #120 on: January 31, 2010, 06:04:33 pm » |
|
It's long lost, my friend, long lost. Red it has been and red it shall stay. The sad part is for our loyalty we get relatively little.
EDIT: And actually to clarify a bit, I mean "third tier" in comparison to, say Dallas or Chicago as first tier, and Kansas City and St Louis and Oklahoma City as second tier and us, Little Rock, and Wichita, etc as third tier. And our commercial corridor, while maybe regionally important, doesn't really fall within the sphere of influence of one of those first tier cities. If we were, say, Milwaukee, or Austin, it might be different. But we're pretty far from any of those major hubs.
I actually agreed with most of your post. I just objected to the idea that since we are a red state that we deserve to get punished. You may think that we do, I just object to it. Also, the exercise of trying for the money will make us better prepared if/when there is a next time. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
we vs us
|
|
« Reply #121 on: January 31, 2010, 07:41:08 pm » |
|
I actually agreed with most of your post. I just objected to the idea that since we are a red state that we deserve to get punished. You may think that we do, I just object to it.
I don't believe we deserve punishment for being a red state. I do believe that, politics being what it is, we're going to find ourselves on the lower end of a Democratic President's priority list. If the GOP believed in investing in infrastructure, I'd expect us to be at the top of their priority list. EDIT: But yes, I think we're in agreement.  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Red Arrow
|
|
« Reply #122 on: January 31, 2010, 08:24:47 pm » |
|
I don't believe we deserve punishment for being a red state. I do believe that, politics being what it is, we're going to find ourselves on the lower end of a Democratic President's priority list. If the GOP believed in investing in infrastructure, I'd expect us to be at the top of their priority list. EDIT: But yes, I think we're in agreement. I have to admit that rail is not the top priority for infrastructure among many on the right side of the fence. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
stageidea
|
|
« Reply #123 on: February 04, 2010, 09:26:26 am » |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
SXSW
|
|
« Reply #124 on: February 04, 2010, 10:53:58 am » |
|
If we are awarded the TIGER funds, which should be announced in the coming weeks, they can begin work on the new I-244 bridge which is critical for high speed rail and also commuter rail. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
we vs us
|
|
« Reply #125 on: February 08, 2010, 09:29:17 am » |
|
We're not the only ones in the region who'd benefit from a line out of KC: Councilman pushes Springfield into rails race
Passenger service to Springfield is a long way off, but discussions are brewing
Jennifer Muzinic
Reporter
Springfield leaders are dusting off an old playbook and beginning what could turn out to be a very, very long game. The prize: a passenger rail system that would connect Springfield to Kansas City, St. Louis and Tulsa.
In the wake of an announcement that the state of Missouri will receive $31 million in federal stimulus money to improve passenger rail service between St. Louis and Kansas City, city leaders have met with Missouri Department of Transportation to find out how to put a southwest Missouri corridor on the government’s radar.
“Right now, (stimulus money) is headed to Missouri, primarily to the connection between Kansas City and St. Louis. We know at some point, there’s going to be a connection to the south,” said City Councilman Dan Chiles, who is championing the push for a passenger corridor through Springfield. “We want to make sure Springfield can make an argument when that happens.”
Down the line
Chiles has the ears of Springfield Mayor Jim O’Neal and City Manager Greg Burris, but each recognizes they’re entering a long-range discussion.
“We’re at the top of the first inning of a very long game,” Burris said.
MoDOT Multimodal Director Brian Weiler said such passenger rail discussions already have gone on for decades.
“There have been multiple studies and multiple efforts,” Weiler said.
Since 1996, the nine-state Midwest Regional Rail Initiative has been planning a 3,000-mile passenger rail system using Chicago as a hub, Weiler said. And Missouri nabbed its $31 million slice of an $8 billion pie – money the U.S. government earmarked for its High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail program – by submitting applications that stemmed from three years of planning, Weiler said.
Even though the grant money comes from the high-speed rail fund, it won’t actually go to install a high-speed rail system, according to MoDOT. It will lay the groundwork for high-speed services by helping with improvements Missouri already was making to the passenger line between Kansas City and St. Louis.
“When the administration announced there was money for the high-speed rail program, that work became the basis for our application,” Weiler said.
Chiles said a passenger transit system that would share existing freight lines in Missouri – owned by the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway – would need to be established before high-speed rail travel through southwest Missouri is considered.
For its part, BNSF would not propose or pursue an arrangement with a passenger rail service, said BNSF General Director of External Relations Steve Forsberg. Shared freight and passenger lines are not uncommon, however.
“Commuter trains have been operating on freight rights of way since the 1860s,” Forsberg said, pointing out that BNSF is willing to share rights of way if passenger services are willing to pay their share of capital expenses. “That’s critical, the cost of capital. Even the most successful commuter rails in Europe and Japan, the ones that are turning a profit, haven’t earned enough to cover the cost of building their infrastructures.”
Roll it out
A first step for Springfield would be to study ways to fund a passenger rail connecting Springfield to existing services in St. Louis, Kansas City and Tulsa, Chiles said.
A 2007 study determined that Amtrak passenger service between Springfield and St. Louis wasn’t economically feasible. Chiles contends those results are outdated.
“That study assumed we had an unlimited amount of money to spend, certain congestion patterns, a certain economy in place, certain fuel prices. That’s all changed,” he said.
City manager Burris is less optimistic about the changes since 2007, pointing out that the Amtrak study found making use of existing rail lines would cause a six-hour ride to St. Louis. Chiles disagrees, saying investment could speed travel time.
New data could resolve that difference of opinion. Chiles is proposing a second study, in the event a passenger service through Springfield moves forward, that would examine a link between that service and high-speed rail hubs in Chicago and Dallas.
However, study funding is unknown at this time, and Burris said the city hasn’t discussed helping to cover the cost of a study.
“There are a lot of unknowns,” said Tim Conklin, director of the Ozarks Transportation Organization, whose board of directors is anxiously watching how the Kansas City-St. Louis passenger rail project progresses.
OTO hasn’t committed to any research work.
“A lot of additional work can be done in that area, through a joint effort between the state and local parties, looking at what needs to be developed and how to pay for it,” Conklin added.
For that matter, the city of Springfield hasn’t officially made a commitment to further pursue passenger rail service, either.
Chiles has placed the issue among the city’s 2010 legislative priorities, which are up for a vote at the Feb. 8 council meeting. Once he gets council’s endorsement, Chiles said the next step would be to put together an informal group to research the idea.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
rwarn17588
Guest
|
|
« Reply #126 on: February 08, 2010, 09:47:33 am » |
|
Y'know, that's an interesting wrinkle to the rail argument. I know that KC, Dallas, St. Louis and the other usual suspects are always mentioned in expansion of rail. But I think Springfield, Mo., is the wild card that might actually get this thing done and it be beneficial to Tulsa. Springfield is the third-largest city in Missouri, and it's been growing fast for decades. Forward-looking planners might consider more of an I-44 route for rail because of this, even though it's no picnic building such infrastructure through the Ozarks. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
we vs us
|
|
« Reply #127 on: February 08, 2010, 10:11:21 am » |
|
It also points up the obvious: that especially for new rail infrastructure, the argument has to be regional. And that regional partners don't necessarily have to be first tier cities.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
SXSW
|
|
« Reply #128 on: February 08, 2010, 11:03:59 am » |
|
Y'know, that's an interesting wrinkle to the rail argument.
I know that KC, Dallas, St. Louis and the other usual suspects are always mentioned in expansion of rail. But I think Springfield, Mo., is the wild card that might actually get this thing done and it be beneficial to Tulsa. Springfield is the third-largest city in Missouri, and it's been growing fast for decades. Forward-looking planners might consider more of an I-44 route for rail because of this, even though it's no picnic building such infrastructure through the Ozarks.
Springfield is actually a pretty nice city and you're correct in that it has been growing steadily for the past decade primarily due to its expanding public university Missouri State (formerly SW Missouri State) which is the second largest in the state with 21,000 students. Connecting St. Louis to Springfield and then to Tulsa and on to OKC and Dallas would be the missing link between the Midwest and Texas for HSR. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Conan71
|
|
« Reply #130 on: February 15, 2010, 02:26:43 pm » |
|
Y'know, that's an interesting wrinkle to the rail argument.
I know that KC, Dallas, St. Louis and the other usual suspects are always mentioned in expansion of rail. But I think Springfield, Mo., is the wild card that might actually get this thing done and it be beneficial to Tulsa. Springfield is the third-largest city in Missouri, and it's been growing fast for decades. Forward-looking planners might consider more of an I-44 route for rail because of this, even though it's no picnic building such infrastructure through the Ozarks.
Hmmm, one thing which might help even more would be to get a corridor between Branson and S'field incorporated into that for tourism, maybe even going on further south to Eureka Springs. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"It has been said that politics is the second oldest profession. I have learned that it bears a striking resemblance to the first” -Ronald Reagan
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transport_Oklahoma
|
|
« Reply #132 on: February 24, 2010, 05:31:53 am » |
|
“That study assumed we had an unlimited amount of money to spend, certain congestion patterns, a certain economy in place, certain fuel prices. That’s all changed,” he said. Surely what he really said or meant to say was that the 2006 study assumed there would be almost NO money to spend on track upgrades. I am familiar with that study and that was an assumption going in. There were no federal matching funds available in 2006. That is why Amtrak assumed a nearly six hour travel time between STL and SGF. The existing railroad through there will never support travel times as a quick as Interstate 44, except maybe in winter weather. It just has too many curves. Nevertheless, a segment of the travel market will trade some speed for rail's other benefits. Also, if you look at the line as an extension of the ORD-STL (Chicago-Saint Louis) high speed corridor (110 mph), the overall average speed comes up. If Missouri moves on this, Oklahoma should be ready to partner with them and get the line at least to Tulsa. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
nathanm
|
|
« Reply #134 on: March 01, 2010, 01:53:30 pm » |
|
I wonder if that is largely due to the circus that is airline security these days. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"Labor is prior to and independent of capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration" --Abraham Lincoln
|
|
|
|
