posted
I see on Trains' newswire that Colorado has decided to proceed with a study to relocate rail lines around Denver in order to provide capacity for passenger service along the front range (Ft. Collins-Boulder-Denver-Colo. Springs-Pueblo).
This seems to be a pretty ambitious project and is certainly a long way from actually happening. But it is good to see the state is thinking along these lines. Certainly there is no chance passenger service would succeed if it had to fight the 30 coal trains a day on the existing joint service line through Denver.
Now the railfan in me can think about the day when this enables Colorado to hook up with the New Mexico owned line from Trinidad to Albuquerque. Takes me back to my one ride on this route in the 60's. A roomette in a 6-6-4 pullman on Burlington's overnight train No. 7 from Denver to Amarillo for ATSF connections for a roundabout way to get home.
George Harris Member # 2077
posted
This study relates to an idea that is somewhere between old enough to vote and old enough to draw social security. Probaly not worth the electricity it would take to download it, much less the time it would take to read it.
Do you really think that a new railroad on a new alignment in the middle of the plains of Colorado is going to happen without massive objections from anybody and everybody within 20 miles of it? No way.
palmland Member # 4344
posted
To save a few kilowatts, here is the Trains.com blurb that summarizes info on the link.
"DENVER - The Colorado Department of Transportation will study the possibility of moving through freights from the Denver-Pueblo, Colo., "Joint Line" to a new parallel route to the east. The relocation would be aimed at opening regular passenger service over the Joint Line, now the domain of Union Pacific and BNSF Railway freights.
According to the DOT, it will study two freight bypasses. One would begin east of Denver on BNSF's Alliance, Neb.-Denver line at Roggen, Colo., and run southward to a connection with UP's Kansas City-Denver route at Byers, Colo. It would use the Kansas City-Denver line southeast to Wild Horse, Colo., then over a new alignment southward to meet BNSF's La Junta, Colo.-Kansas City line at Las Animas, Colo. The second would run straight from Brush, Colo., to Las Animas, through the eastern part of the state.
Colorado is considering the relocation because it doubts efficient passenger service would be possible over the Joint Line as long as through freights continue to run. About 30 daily through freights, many of them unit coal trains, use the line, and they often travel slowly due to steep grades. The state worries these trains would slow any passenger trains over the route.
The study is set to be completed in December. Between now and then, Colorado DOT will hold meetings around the state to hear from the public. For more information, visit the DOT Web site at www.dot.state.co.us."
Having spent a fair amount of time in the high plains this summer, land there sells for $500 an acre and I know the farmers I talked with would be happy to sell. Seems to be a cheaper option than more interstate lanes but no doubt George is right and the naysayers and NIMBY's will prevail.
SubwayNut Member # 3948
posted
I am currently living in Colorado Springs (and only about 1/2 a block from the tracks, I can hear the BNSF wissles that are frequent) and was very happy to read about the article. We desperately need Colorado Springs to Denver Regional Rail service, or better the ABQ to Cheyenne, WY rail service. It though couldn't be successful with the amount of freight traffic each day.
There is definitely ridership potential, a realitively new bus service (it started in 2004 I believe). The Front Range Express from the springs to denver along I-25. Seems to be a success, I've never ridden it during the real rush hour, but every time I've haven't gotten two seats to myself.
Greyhound, along the front Range is also terrable, only two departures a day from the springs to ABQ, the one time I had to take it the stupid bus route went into the mountains and via Alamosa. Taking 7+ hours (it was late) to get to santa fe-a four and a half hour drive.
rresor Member # 128
posted
The proposal I've seen would involve relatively limited construction of new railroad, way east in the dryland prairie where not many folks live. Hard to imagine much NIMBYism in the likes of Limon, CO. If you haven't been there, you have no idea how empty the land is.
On the other hand, the Joint Line is hemmed in by dense settlement, features a tough climb south out of Denver to Palmer Lake (albeit it is double track), has a light rail line adjacent to the ROW from downtown Denver south to Mineral, and the single track from Palmer Lake to south of Colorado Springs is slow and curvy, and could not easily be double-tracked. The line is pretty much AT capacity.
So if commuter or intercity trains are to run up and down the Front Range, the freight traffic (mostly BNSF coal trains from the PRB to/from Texas) will have to go somewhere else. Since they current come southwest from Northport, NE to Denver, building a few pieces of track out in the prairie to stitch together some existing lines is a cheap and (to my mind) NIMBY-free way to get freight trains out of where they're not particularly wanted.
posted