State transportation officials have reached an agreement with the BNSF Railway that will bring more and faster trains to the Amtrak Cascades service between Seattle and Portland.
In a release today (Sept. 3), the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) said the accord “clears the way for the state to begin initial work this fall” on projects being underwritten by $590 million in federal high-speed rail (HSR) funds. The agreement provides ground rules and operational goals for using most of the money, which the federal government awarded to Washington last January. The sum is part of $8 billion in HSR stimulus money authorized under the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.
For Washington and the 30 other states getting the HSR funds, plenty of questions remain to be answered, however. The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), which is doling out the dollars, is aiming to issue all the checks nationwide by Sept. 30. As of now, however, the agency has gotten only $600 million or so out the door.
Disbursement of the billions has stalled as the railroad administration, states and railroads fine-tune rules and agreements that are terra incognita for the FRA, formerly a strictly regulatory agency. In an interview, Ron Pate, the state's director for the Cascades program, said some of the $590 million will probably arrive this fall, but he declined to be more specific.
BNSF, which owns the track, "could probably go to work in the next few weeks, but we have to get this agreement with FRA to get the money flowing,” Pate said.
In addition to funding various new sidings and bypasses, the $590 million is expected to pay for a new set of tilting cars, seating some 300 and similar to the trainsets currently used in the Cascades corridor, which runs from Eugene to Vancouver, B.C. The improvements will translate into two new daily round-trips on the state-supported Amtrak line between Seattle and Portland, bringing the total to six, as well as speed and safety upgrades. Pate hesitated to say when the new trips would become reality, but did state that the enhancements would shave about 11 minutes off the current 3.5-hour travel time between Seattle and Portland.
U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said in the release that the agreement “could not have occurred without a strong commitment from both parties, and their partnership will serve as a model for other states and railroads.”
Lloyd Flem, executive director of All Aboard Washington, a passenger rail advocacy organization, said, “We're pleased that our state and BNSF have put together an agreement that once again seems to be leading the country.”
WSDOT is seeking about $80 million in a new round of applications for federal HSR money. That application includes several projects on the Seattle-Vancouver, B.C., line, which got only a tiny slice of the $590 million.
The current projects and proposals do not include establishing two tiers of service — local and express — even on the popular Portland-Seattle route. “Even at six round-trips, we're not in a position to operate two tiers,” Rail and Marine Office deputy director Andrew Wood said in an interview. AAWA has proposed the two-tier format as a means of both allowing faster travel on limited-stop trips and introducing service to communities such as Auburn, which the Cascades do not now serve.
Like what you just read? Support high quality local journalism by becoming a member of Crosscut.com today!

Print
Email






Twitter
Facebook
RSS Feeds
Comments:
Posted Fri, Sep 3, 6:11 p.m. Inappropriate
Money very well spent.
Amtrak seems to be at "build it and they will come" status in the Seattle-Portland corridor. More frequency will mean rail will work for more people. The added speed is a bonus. It's already the best combination of speed and cost between my company's offices in Downtown Seattle and Downtown Portland. Driving means parking and traffic jams, and flying means a three-part trip and interminable waits.
The physical upgrades will also help freight and commuter rail. Win-win.
Posted Sat, Sep 4, 3:15 a.m. Inappropriate
I had heard that one of the 'improvements' Amtrak was contemplating was to 'straighten out' the train route down in the Tacoma area--in effect cutting out the loop around the peninsula which affords some of the finest water views you'll ever witness on a train ride. Although I can understand the desire to make the trains 'more efficient,' by shaving off some of the travel time between Seattle and Portland, is a reduction of, say, 10 minutes really worth the cost in aesthetic pleasure which that particular route affords travelers? Is 'efficiency' really everything when it comes to train travel? I made a trip down to Portland with some friends back in July. My friends were going to drive, but I convinced them that we should go instead by train--and one of the selling points I used was that beautiful route which goes near the Narrows Bridge. We all had a great time, and one of the reasons was that scenic excursion. I hope Amtrak reconsiders its plans on this.
Posted Sat, Sep 4, 5:38 p.m. Inappropriate
I'd take the 10 minutes anyday. It's a nice stretch, but just a typical view around here.
I'd argue it's good for Tacoma to have fewer unnecessary trains running along its waterfront too.
Posted Sun, Sep 5, 9:58 a.m. Inappropriate
On Talgo trips between Portland and Seattle, the scenic stretch between Lacey and Tacoma is its fantastic highlight, no doubt about it. On the other hand, operational delay on this stretch of track regularly increases the average time to 20+ minutes shaved off via the Lakewood route, plus a more reliable schedule and the track space to operate the two additional runs including the run from Portland to Vancouver BC.
The Talgo-type high-speed trainsets should readily be proven far more applicable to US passenger rail systems than electrified Acela-type systems. Thus the investment to Amtrak Cascades has a significant multiplier effect nationally. The Tacoma/Steilacoom/Lacey shoreline route could be more profitable as an excursion train ride one day, especially as rail service between Seattle and Tacoma improves.
Posted Tue, Sep 7, 7:50 a.m. Inappropriate
Does anyone know why Amtrak is reluctant to do short stops like Auburn or Steilacoom? Anybody know how much time it adds by the time slowing down and getting back up to speed is figured in?
The Longacres stop, with all the easy and accessable parking, is the greatest thing since sliced bread.
Posted Tue, Sep 7, 9:04 p.m. Inappropriate
Auburn is close enough to Tacoma. Steilacoom doesn't generate enough ridership. The Longacres aka Boeing's own discreetly personal stop is a sign of its wicked power and influence.
Posted Wed, Sep 8, 11:10 a.m. Inappropriate
Quick, somebody alert Michael Ennis! I'm sure he can tell us that these improvements are too expensive, that it would be cheaper per passenger mile for travelers to carpool in a Yugo.
Posted Tue, Sep 14, 10:52 a.m. Inappropriate
UM............ UH........... HELLO! 11 minutes? That's it? I guess if you work within walking distance of each city's train station, then that's great. I suppose Amtrak makes some sense if your alternative is Driving Alone - in a Hummer - Towing a boat. But if there's two of you going? It's less expensive and far more convenient to just drive your dang car. I do not travel on business but I do have a friend in the Portland Area. If I could get there significantly faster by train, I might pay a little bit more than the round trip gas bill.
Let's say you're driving a Suburban 2500 4WD, a big giant Earth Killing machine with an EPA Estimate of 15 mpg on the highway. Given an estimated cost of gas a $3.00 per gallon, than means you would need to spend $69 to get from King Street Station to Union Station and back (346 miles/15 = 23 Gallons X $3.00 = $69). Now, let's say that there's 3 people in that same Chevy - the gas bill now costs, um $69. Go ahead and book 3 round trip tickets on Amtrak and let me know how that works out for ya.
Oh, and according to the fine folks at Google, it should take me about 2 hours and 55 minutes to drive one way (3 hours, 30 minutes in traffic).
So, Amtrak is going to shave 11 minutes off their travel time of 3 and a half hours? woo.......... hoo.
To review, the train takes longer and, unless traveling alone to a buisiness walking distance from Union Station, costs more. Brilliant.
Talk to me when there is true High Speed Rail. When I can get from Downtown to Downtown in under 90 minutes, I might be interested. Until then, I think I'll just drive.