Dakota, MN & E RR extend rail line
February 23, 2006
VIA E-mail and
151 Class Mail
<<Email>>
<<CompleteOFFICIALName _Add ress>>
Dear <<Title>> <<Last>>,
The Dakota, Minnesota, and Eastern Railroad Corporation (DM & E) is trying to get
federal permission to extend their rail line to Wyoming to haul coal. They would add 34
trains per day (17 each way) going through Rochester, Minnesota.
It is our understanding that the City of Rochester is trying to get the Federal
Government to redirect the trains through Mason City to Marquette, through Dubuque,
down to Clinton and across the Mississippi. If this was to occur it would greatly
jeopardize Dubuque's Riverfront Development.
Over the past several years, the City of Dubuque in partnership with other public and
private entities, have invested $188 million to acquire land and redevelop the Port of
Dubuque. Due to this investment, our community has become known as the
"Masterpiece on the Mississippi". We are now beginning the second phase of the Port
redevelopment which we anticipate to leverage another $200 million and will include an
expansion of the National Mississippi River Museum. Based on the initial investment
and on our future plans, I'm sure you can understand the City's concern with a proposal
to relocate this coal transport route.
We are asking for your advice. What can we do to prevent this transport through our
downtown and redeveloped Port of Dubuque? Your immediate response would be
greatly appreciated.
Sincerely,
Michael C. Van Milligen
City Manager
MCVM:dh
Enclosure
cc: Cindy Steinhauser, Assistant City Manager
Barry Lindahl, Corporation Counsel
David Heiar, Economic Development Director
http://news.postbu Iletin.com/newsmanaqer/templates/localnews stOry. asp?a=248378
Austin, Iowa not thrilled with 'ultimate bypass'
Thu. Feb 23.2006
By Jeffrev Pieters
The Post.BuUetin
From Rochester's perspective, a rait line through Iowa looks like the Dakota, Minnesota ft Eastern Railroad's "ultimate bypass."
But government leaders in cities lying along the Iowa, Chicago &. Eastem Railroad in Iowa say they'd be just as opposed to increased, high-
speed coal traffic as Rochester has been.
"We already have umpteen coal trains a day coming through this town, along with other (train) traffic," said Pat McGarvey, interim city
administrator in Mason City, Iowa. "We've had to get accustomed to what's here, to the cost of $5 million" for a new street overpass,
opened last August.
McGarvey bristled at the suggestion that Rochester and its congressional delegation might broker a compromise with the railroad,
requiring it to divert coal traffic, up to an additional 34 trains per day, onto the IC&:E line.
"Sounds like we need to get our congressional delegation out there brokering a compromise," McGarvey said.
Rochester has suggested the IC&:E bypass requirement be made a condition of granting a $2.5 billion federal railroad construction loan.
DM&:E needs the money to upgrade its line and extend it 260 miles into Wyoming, where the railroad intends to meet coal mines in the
Powder River Basin region and haul the coal east.
Rochester has been at the forefront of groups fighting the project, increased traffic from which, they say, would cause vast harm to Mayo
Clinic and the overall Rochester economy, affect public safety and diminish quality of life for those living near the tracks.
Rerouting trains
Routing trains from the DM&:E line onto the ICaE line, at Owatonna, would spare Rochester that traffic. But others farther down that line
have economic concerns of their own.
Mike Van Milligan, city administrator in Dubuque, said his city has spent $200 million redeveloping its riverfront in recent years,
'The access to the riverfront area is over this rail line," he said. "Increasing the magnitude of train traffic by 34 trains would severely limit
the return on investment."
'We'd be strongly opposed" to imposing more traffic on the IC&:E line, Van Milligan said.
Effect on cities
In Austin, City Administrator Jim Hurm said, "[ don't think we'd be any more happy about it (coal train traffic) than folks in Rochester are.
... There would be no advantage for Austin. It would be backing traffic and on, and on, and on,"
In Mason City, added traffic on the IC&:E might be able to bypass the city on existing tracks. But other lines cross through the center of
the city, McGarvey said, passing within five blocks of the downtown core, three blocks from a medical complex and two blocks from a
new surgery center.
Existing coal-train traffic, on the Union Pacific line, amounts to 15 to 20 trains per day, f'.k.Garvey said. That traffic has not devastated
the town, he said, but neither is the city eager to add more trains.
'The track is probably as fine as you can find in the country," he said. The line consists of welded rail, such as what is proposed through
Rochester, the engines run more quietly than one would expect, and the trains slow down as they pass through the city, he said.
The city, with help from the Iowa Department of Transportation, raised $5 million over the course of several years to build one overpass.
If train traffic increased significantly on the IC&:E line, the city would have to build perhaps two more interchanges.
'The folks of Mason City are not interested in solving a new problem to the tune of $12 million to $13 million," McGarvey said.
Rochester's risks greatest, officials say
In a news conference on Wednesday, Rochester-area public officials and representatives of Mayo Clinic said they consider the potential
harms in Rochester likely greater than they would be anywhere on the line further south.
"There really is no equivalent situation," said Dr. Glenn Forbes, Mayo's CEO.
And Olmsted County Board Chairman Ken Brown said, 'There are no other big cities that are impacted by this."
When asked whether they'd been in contact with any of those cities, officials gave no indication that they had.
Kevin Schieffer, DMfrE's president and CEO, said Rochester's concerns over train traffic levels are perhaps overblown.
"It all boils down to this -- speculation," he said. "It's impossible to predict."
He said, however, that it is likely that a share of the eastbound traffic would leave the line at points west of Rochester. How many trains
leave the line could not be quantified, and Schieffer declined to desClibe likely destinations.
The federal Surface Transportation Board's Section of Environmental Analysis, in its 2000 review of the project, identified two coal-train
interchange points west of Rochester, in Mankato and Owatonna. DMfrE has been specifically prohibited from using the Owatonna
interchange, where the DMfrE line meets the ICfrE, for coal trains until after further environmental review is completed.
City officials believe the primary intent of DMfrE's project is to deliver coal to Eastern markets, and they do not expect coal traffic would
diminish much as it approaches and finally passes through Rochester.
Post-Bulletin Reporter Roxana Orellana contributed to this article.
Senator Tom Harkin
United States Senate
731 Hart Building
Washington, DC 20510
Senator Charles Grassley
United States Senate
135 Hart Office Building
Washington, DC 20510-1501
Congressman Jim Nussle
303 Cannon House Office
Building
Washington, DC 20515-1502