DENVER — The first project director of Colorado’s Southwest Chief and Front Range Passenger Rail Commission is ready to help move forward plans to link Denver by rail to cities north and south.
Randy Grauberger, a 28-year veteran of the Colorado Department of Transportation, joins the rail commission after a stint with WSP Parsons Brinckerhoff. He arrives at a time when a new governor, legislature, and executive director at the Colorado DOT are all supportive of the rail mission.
“This administration and this new executive director certainly have put passenger rail on much higher priority than it’s been in the past few years,” Grauberger tells Trains News Wire. He was named to his position earlier this year. [See “Colorado rail commission hires project director,” Trains News Wire, March 5, 2019.]
Jared Polis, a Democrat, was elected as governor in the 2018 election, which also gave the party control of both the state Senate and House of Representatives. Polis appointed Shoshana Lew to head CDOT. Lew comes from the Rhode Island Department of Transportation, where she was chief operating officer, and previously served several high-ranking positions in the U.S. Department of Transportation during the Obama administration.
The rail commission was established in 2017 to plan and develop passenger service along the busy I-25 corridor from Fort Collins to Pueblo and to ensure continuation of Amtrak’s Southwest Chief. One of the nation’s fastest growing states, Colorado expects its population to increase more than 50 percent by 2050. Much of that will occur along the Front Range.
“Everybody understands there needs to be more mobility choices provided to folks over time and passenger rail is an obvious one,” says Grauberger. A variety of ideas have been bandied about, from commuter rail to high speed rail. It will be up Grauberger and his team to sort those out.
“The first priority is to determine a course of action,” he explains. Grauberger expects to issue a request for proposals by June 1 to engage a consultant who would develop a service plan along with a preliminary environmental report. The commission has a $2.5 million budget, with $1.5 million available for this study.
To date, the commission hasn’t surveyed voters to gauge the level of support for the project. Grauberger says they’ll need to look at “a lot of stakeholder involvement to decide what the public wants in terms of future passenger rail service and what they might be willing to pay for.”
A 2010 study from the Rocky Mountain Rail Authority concluded that high speed rail, then defined as speeds greater than 90 mph, was feasible along the I-25 corridor. In 2014, the Colorado Department of Transportation issued its Interregional Connectivity Study, which reinforced the viability of a Fort Collins-to-Pueblo high speed line. But that does not mean that the Front Range commission is focused solely on that approach. “There’s combinations of things that we’ll be looking at,” says Grauberger.
The 2018 election also saw Colorado voters turn down two ballot measures to fund transportation projects. Proposition 110, which would have increased the sales tax to pay for highways, mass transit, and other projects, lost by a 60-40 margin.
“You’re going to have to start getting a lot of public support” for the Front Range proposal, Grauberger says, describing his role as “being the ambassador for this effort.” He’ll be meeting with Colorado transportation commissioners, as well as local community and business groups.
The clock is already ticking. Costs, funding, and governance plans, as well as full environmental reports are to be completed in six years. Voters will have to approve financing and the creation of a regional transportation district. Design and construction are to take place in years seven through 15.
Grauberger calls Colorado home and says he’s never wanted to live anywhere else. He grew up in Sterling, a small agricultural community in the northeast corner of the state. He sees himself ready to tackle the challenges of bringing passenger rail to the Front Range. “I’m excited,” he says. “This is really a passion of mine.”
Roger Williams: In my first reading of the above post I did not get the idea that this was going to be a completely new rail line. After rereading I guess that is what is being suggested. In that case I agree. Paying for enhancements to the current railroads would make more economic sense. However, I would think that BNSF and UP would not lie down without a fight. it would be long and costly. If the service could be justified to Pueblo then that is where it should go but, only if current congestion warrants it. My proposal would be a commuter type service and only if enough people would commute that distance could it be justified. Otherwise build a park and ride south of Colorado Springs. The rest of your proposal as far as connecting to the SWC is pure garbage. What statistics do you have that suggests that a large influx of people would connect? What studies are you citing? If there was a demand for LD trains then we would have them. Amtrak’s average operating load today is about 63% and that includes the NEC and other corridors. Airlines are at over 80%. LD trains provide little or no vital functions that I can think of. Even most of the elderly railfan posters on the Newswire Forum admit that 4 hours on a plane is better than 2 1/2 days on the train. People who take the train today are generally doing it for “the experience”. If the trains didn’t exist they would go by other means and not think anything of it. You are just caught up in the railfan myth that LD trains are necessary. They are not.
Robert McGuire, Using the railroads that are already in place would greatly eliminate a lot of the problems that are associated with building a new dedicated line just for passenger trains. Working with Burlington Northern Santa Fe and Union Pacific in adding capacity enhancements would be a win for everyone involved. I find it strange that you think this service should be truncated at Colorado Springs and not include Pueblo. Also you are grossly underestimating the potential that exist by connecting this service to The Southwest Chief which would give Denver a connection to cities to the south,east and west. Contrary to what you have stated,there is a demand for the long distance trains as they provide a vital service of connecting corridors within their current routes. With the proper marketing,refurbished or new equipment,added connections and frequencies,these long distance trains such as The Chief would live up to their potential and provide huge economic benefits to the areas that they serve.
Robert McGuire – Not sure what you’re thinking here…..Pueblo and the rest of southern/eastern Colorado would find a passenger rail alternative a Godsend and a connection to the SWC at Trinidad/La Junta is something that is long, long overdue. That said, my only concern is the single-track portion between Palmer Lake and Kelker/Crews. Mudchicken knows way more about this kerfuechkle than I do but this stretch would need to be addressed to make passenger rail – something that is desperately needed along the Front Range – as successful as it could be.
Other possibilities MIGHT include on the north service to Cheyenne (WY capital and largest WY city) and Laramie (college town with potential student ridership); and on the south extensions to Santa Fe and Albuquerque, NM (capital and largest city in MN).
Robert, Connecting with The Southwest Chief would serve a double purpose and that is getting Front Range passenger train service initiated where it is needed and making much needed connections to The Chief. This initially would provide two daily trains in each direction for all cities from Pueblo and north to Denver. What a lot of people don’t understand is that a long distance train provides transportation for multiple city pairs along its’ route as people are getting on and off all along the way. Even though some do ride all the way endpoint to endpoint,that is not the main advantage of a LD train. As for as not having more long distance trains,it is mostly Amtrak’s failure to market them properly and to establish the proper connections and frequencies. Establishing new corridor trains is a good idea if the freight railroads were accepting of them and had the extra capacity to handle them,but even then,the LD trains would still play a vital role in connecting the corridors together and keeping the system fluid. As for BNSF and UP fighting this new service,if they had a lot to gain in the way of a much improved Joint Line south of Denver and also benefited from the extra revenue derived from the operation of these new trains,then it probably would not be a problem.
Roger Williams: You’re dreaming if you think that this would have a chance without all the consultants, environmentalists and NIMBY organizations being able to take a swipe at it. Besides, anything farther south than Colorado Springs is a waste of time. There is little demand or market for long distance trains so keeping it to the piece that is necessary (Fort Collins to Colorado Springs) to reduce congestion is best. Additionally the public has already turned down two ballot issues by hefty margins so why do you think they would approve another one. This ain’t gonna happen. At least not in the near future.
Instead of waiting years for all of these studies to be completed and spending untold amounts of money before a passenger train ever runs,it would seem more sensible to cooperate with BNSF,UP and Amtrak and get this up and running ASAP. There would always be time to make improvements such as increasing speeds and frequencies later on after rail service has been in operation for a while. I believe that the best way to get Front Range service underway is for a morning train from Denver connecting with the westbound Southwest Chief at La Junta and an afternoon train from Denver connecting with the eastbound Chief at Trinidad. This would serve Pueblo,Colorado Springs and Castle Rock with two daily trains in each direction and Walsenburg with one daily train in each direction. The northbound train from La Junta could also be extended past Denver and on to Ft. Collins and then a southbound train from Ft. Collins through Denver and on to Trinidad. With this service,Denver would be connected to St.Louis,Kansas City,Albuquerque,Flagstaff and Los Angeles along with numerous other new connections. Furthermore,if The Heartland Flyer is extended to Newton,KS, then,Dallas,Ft. Worth,Oklahoma City and Wichita would also be connected.
This is a much needed addition to the front range communities.