Track Work At Saint Paul Union Depot....

[dabrilloman]

Took a walk through St, Paul Union Depot on July 20 and got a couple of photos of the work on the track connections. Looks promising for service to begin later this year.

 

[montana mike]

It has looked "almost ready" for the past several months each time I go by on the EB! I hope they will be able to finish this year, but my gut feeling says some time in 2014. It just seems to be taking forever!!!!!!!

 

[tonys96]

Darned shame I won't get to see the new (old) station in use next month.

 

[Nathanael]

Took a walk through St, Paul Union Depot on July 20 and got a couple of photos of the work on the track connections. Looks promising for service to begin later this year.

2013 Beerfest & Brian Wilson Concert 046.JPG

2013 Beerfest & Brian Wilson Concert 033.JPG

YAY. Thanks for the photos, although I can't see them without registering.

I've actually been putting off a trip to Minnesota until Amtrak moves into SPUD. I plan to go the first summer after Amtrak is there.

 

[NW cannonball]

Looking at the second photo and wondering about the operational consequences of exactly where the station track will tie in.

There's enough crossties stacked up in the photo for about 400 feet of track (8 bundles of 25 plus maybe 30 ties).

There's 3 places where the connection could be.

Just short of the red dwarf and the "ROBERT STREET" sign before the UP turnout to the lift bridge - the green grassy turnout from the near track towards the left in the photo. Believe this is UP track.

In this case - would both the UP and the CP dispatchers be involved for every westward departure and eastward arrival?

Or - connecting into the short stretch between that turnout and its connection with CP main track #1 just under the Robert Street bridge? What dispatcher(s) controls that?

Or- with a longer stretch of new track - directly to CP main track #1 just beyond the Robert Street bridge - which would need more new track but would likely simplify the dispatching?

How much signal work to do for any of these options?

Time will tell.

And as for the east end connection -- almost impossible to get good photos without trespassing - or using an impossibly fast long lens from the bluff or the Kellogg bridge.

 

[RRUserious]

In wet years, that's a flooding area. Anyone know the precautions against a flooding interruption?

 

[TraneMan]

I've never heard of water going up that far there.. The station is up a way from the water level.

 

[Rail Freak]

Showing my ignorance once again, but why wood ties opposed to concrete?

 

[dabrilloman]

About the flooding...the track level is way above any possible flooding...if it did ever get there I would be building myself an Ark! The new Amtrak ticketing office could possibly be in trouble if there were a record flood though. Below is a picture of Kellogg St. in the spring flood of 1966. The new ticket office would directly to the right in the photo. The water here is about 1-2 feet deep. I was 6 years old when that happened. Although there have been many floods since, they have been very good at keeping the river out of this area since as far as I know.

 

[TraneMan]

Showing my ignorance once again, but why wood ties opposed to concrete?

I'm guessing it's cheaper, and also it's a slow speed going into the station, so ride smoothness isn't an issue.

 

[NW cannonball]

According to an official report (citation below)- in 1965 (an exceptional flood indeed) the Union Depot tracks were closed for 2 weeks. The station area itself is unlikely to be flooded.
But the real problem is the connection to the main tracks at the low point east of the Union Depot where the new station tracks will tie in to the main tracks "down in the swamp" at the southeast corner of the big wye near Division Street switch.
In this photo (1965 again) you see the signal bridge at West Hoffman with the (now CP, then Milwaukee Road) tracks barely under water - BUT - the area to the right of those visible tracks and in the distance -- that is where the new station track will have to join the the BN main (also underwater in this photo).
It doesn't take a record flood to put this area under water. The whole area to the right in the mid-distance in the photo is the mouth of a multi mile long valley that drains many square miles to the north. Before the railroads came there was a seasonally significant stream there that sometimes flooded in the spring or with unusually heavy rainfall.
Now, the outlet for this natural drainage is blocked by the built-up CP mains, and Shepard Road.
Even absent big flooding on the Mississippi - this low spot gets mobile pumping units to move the water over the riverfront tracks and dump the built-up water into the Mississippi. Seen it many times in the spring.

If there was only some way that the station tracks could connect to the CP main on the east end without going down into the swamp.

[Floods of March-May 1965 in the upper Mississippi River Basin (Anderson & Burmeister GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLYPAPER 1850-A) page A17]

 

[RRUserious]

Shepard road gets covered with water frequently. By the way, when I took the Empire Builder to Chicago, it had to go on the east side of the Mississippi due to flooding on the west side. As I rode along, I could see the water was only a couple feet away from being over the tracks we were on. And of course floods in Minot shut the whole thing down for weeks. I don't know how these tracks got built on the level where they were, but the increased water in earth's atmosphere is going to cause schedule problems a lot in the future. Warm oceans don't mix well with ground transport.

 

[NW cannonball]

Getting off-topic - but hey happens all the time.

The tracks got built near rivers (and sometimes sea shores) because when the railroads were built all the population centers were near rivers or seaports (mostly they still are) - back then water transport was the mainspring of cities - and the railroads could beat riverboats or coastal sailboats hands down by doing 20mph. Hey - the "water level route" beat out the Erie Canal by a long long shot. Land in the flood plain was cheap. No serious grades or tunnels needed.

The likes of J.J. Hill went head-to-head with the steamboats, and won by a long shot.

Now, most of the lines that follow the Mississippi (and many other rivers) get flooded out from time to time.

Look at the thread about Empire Builder delays -- the Red River of the North and the Souris flood every few years, and have for generations. There - in the old Lake Agassiz basin the land is so flat that the floods spread out for miles and miles. Build the tracks a few feet higher every decade or so seems to be the only practical option.

One of my earliest memories of train travel was running down the east bank of the Mississippi on some Zephyr - it had a dome car - it seemed like we were running over the water - couldn't see the railbed or the bridges we were running on - maybe it was during the 1952 flood? Water water everywhere.

 

[Nathanael]

Looking at the second photo and wondering about the operational consequences of exactly where the station track will tie in.

I found some other photos, and of course I didn't bookmark them.
It seems clear to me from the grading work which is going on, which runs a long way west of the Robert St. Bridge, that the station approach track will run for a long distance, under the Robert Street bridge (so there will be three tracks in parallel running under the Robert Street bridge), and connect into the CP mainline well past the point where UP goes south across its bridge. So UP dispatcher will not be involved with Amtrak movements. I could be wrong -- for all I know they're doing that grading work and then planning to not lay rail on it (!?!) but that would be weird.

(Of course, they'd need additional work if they ever wanted to run trains from SPUD down UP to Northfield, but that seems like it won't happen for decades if ever, so whatever.)

The tracks in this area are all elevated. It would require a monumental flood to flood this section out. The Empire Builder tracks are extremely flood-prone *east* of Union Depot (as others have noted), and also quite flood-prone in various spots north of Minneapolis, so they'll still get flooded, but the actual trackage from Union Depot to Midway is pretty safe, barring a flood of 1965 size. (And some effort has been made in the last 40 years to detain floodwaters to reduce the likelihood of that.)

Regarding the more problematic trackage east of Union Depot, the long-term Ramsey County / regional freight transportation plan is:

- build a flyover of the Third Street Wye for passenger trains, which would start from the elevated Union Station trackage, and remain above flood level until it "landed" on the other side of the interlocking. The freight yards would still be flooded out in a major flood, but the passenger trains would just fly right over them....

- relocate the mainline trackage between St. Paul and the Mississippi River bridge at Hastings to the more inland of the two routes, which doesn't eliminate flood risk entirely (the bridge at Hastings can still flood pretty easily), but does reduce it a lot.

So Ramsey County has been thinking about this. I like Minnesota's tradition of good government.

 

[Nathanael]

The flyover plan is really intended to avoid the congestion at the Third St. Wye -- this was explained in the regional rail plan. BNSF doesn't want more passenger trains across the Wye. It's intended to be for passenger trains only so that it can be made lighter weight. The flood avoidance is a side benefit.

Of course the flyover is unfunded, and actually it's something like "stage 5" in a 5-stage plan for reconfiguring the tracks around the Third St. Wye and the nearby yards. But at least there's a plan.

 

[RRUserious]

When the depot starts full service, what exactly will it serve? Will the trains now go through downtown? And is the Transfer Road station open for some years to come?

 

[zephyr17]

My understanding is that train will follow its current route on the Minnesota Commercial between the CP and BNSF and the short-haul coach will still be cut off there at Midway yard, but it won't be a passenger stop.

Seems a waste because that is a slowwww way to go, when from St. Paul Union Station, they ought to be able to get back out on the BNSF main (Staples sub?) directly and that is a much faster route.

 

[NW cannonball]

When the depot starts full service, what exactly will it serve? Will the trains now go through downtown? And is the Transfer Road station open for some years to come?

Will serve Amtrak 7 and 8. And the Jefferson Lines buses to Duluth and Rochester and such (already stop there) And the casino buses that already stop there. And the local light rail when it starts. And a few local transit buses that already terminate there including express service to the airport.

The Amtrak trains have been going through downtown Saint Paul for the last 40 years (don't ask about the many railroads that stopped there before 1971) . Just didn't have a place to stop there. So I don't understand your question "Will the trains now go through downtown?" -- They always have and will continue.

The old Transfer Road station -- it seems -- will be used for PV and cleaning the seasonal CHI-MSP coach and for other technical work. Won't be a station stop

 

[NW cannonball]

My understanding is that train will follow its current route on the Minnesota Commercial between the CP and BNSF and the short-haul coach will still be cut off there at Midway yard, but it won't be a passenger stop.
Seems a waste because that is a slowwww way to go, when from St. Paul Union Station, they ought to be able to get back out on the BNSF main (Staples sub?) directly and that is a much faster route.

Don't think a backup move into the congested wye would save time. The short line is almost always clear - the slow time through the MNNR yard is small. (about 12 minutes for the 2 miles)

Actually the "Short Line" is shorter and likely faster than any of the BNSF mains -- and no need to back up into the overloaded wye in the swamp.

Yes, if a westbound clears through Hoffman and keeps going at track speed to Northtown -- yeah, that's faster than the Short Line. But with the station stop -- not.

Backup onto the main -- loses.

 

[Nathanael]

In the future, quite likely the easiest way to speed up the Empire Builder would be to improve the Short Line and Minnesota Commercial tracks. The "Short Line" is the shortest route, and avoids backup moves -- the only problem with it is that the speed limit on the track has been allowed to go down to very low levels.

The cost of upgrading the track & signal along this route, to allow, say, 60 mph (class 4 track) would probably be a lot less than any other speed improvement which could be made for the entire Empire Builder route. Even upgrading it all to class 3 track (30 mph) would be a great help, and has to be relatively cheap.

The current 10 mph speed limit through the yard *has* to be something which could be addressed. (Of course eliminating the stop at Midway would require moving servicing to St. Paul Union Depot, but there is room for that.) You could cut ten minutes, maybe twenty off the schedule.

Someone would have to pay to maintain the higher speeds. But it's not that long a piece of track.

 

[RRUserious]

It's really all about the Montana-North Dakota stretch. I don't frankly expect that to be solved. Riders on that stretch just have to adjust or choose another way of travel. I've often thought that a personal car is the way to go especially with cruise control. I once drove my wife and mother across that stretch in my Buick Regal on cruise control. It was a very comfortable drive. And I got 25 mpg in that giant car. You can get on the highway, set the cruise to 55 and just go and go for hours. Your hands on the wheel, eyes on the road ahead, then talk, sing to your music source, what ever amuses you since your gas pedal leg is totally relaxed. The ride is tons smoother than Amtrak on those crappy rails they use. Planes are much, much faster, naturally, and if scenery is of zero importance, a plane ticket is probably cheaper than anything else you can buy..

 

[TraneMan]

No way I could be in a car going across ND/MT... You can't move around unless you stop for gas/bathroom.. You don't meet new people, and visit a bunch of other passengers.

 

[RRUserious]

Some of the benefits of a train are lost, true. But you also don't sit for an indefinite time wondering when the freight train will clear the track so you can continue. Everything is a tradeoff.

 

[Ispolkom]

Some of the benefits of a train are lost, true. But you also don't sit for an indefinite time wondering when the freight train will clear the track so you can continue. Everything is a tradeoff.

I'd rather be sitting on a siding waiting for a freight train rather than sitting in a car stuck in the ditch on an icy night, waiting for the Highway Patrol.

I have traveled along the Hi Line for more than 40 years, mostly between Shelby and the Twin Cities. Any way you look at it, if you're on that route, you're going to be sitting an indefinite time. I'd rather be reading in my sleeping compartment than driving a 2-lane highway filled by oil trucks, morbidly counting the crosses Montana puts up to mark fatal accident locations. I'd be perfectly happy never to drive US 2 again. YMMV.

 

[RRUserious]

Some of the benefits of a train are lost, true. But you also don't sit for an indefinite time wondering when the freight train will clear the track so you can continue. Everything is a tradeoff.

I'd rather be sitting on a siding waiting for a freight train rather than sitting in a car stuck in the ditch on an icy night, waiting for the Highway Patrol.

I have traveled along the Hi Line for more than 40 years, mostly between Shelby and the Twin Cities. Any way you look at it, if you're on that route, you're going to be sitting an indefinite time. I'd rather be reading in my sleeping compartment than driving a 2-lane highway filled by oil trucks, morbidly counting the crosses Montana puts up to mark fatal accident locations. I'd be perfectly happy never to drive US 2 again. YMMV.

I don't factor that in because I've never come close to anything like that. I wonder what are the reasons it happens to drivers crossing North Dakota. And just to be clear, I've driven both ways many times. I tend to do it on cruise control. The wide open spaces are not an invitation to me to "open her up". Fuel costs matter to me.