Iowa Interstate which operates the former Rock Island mainline between Chicago and Council Bluffs has been a healthy regional road for some time now and with a somewhat diversified traffic mix its future looks bright enough. But can any of you out there envision a scenario where the IAIS becomes a target for takeover by a Class I road; be it UP, CN, CPRS or someone else? Remember back in 1989 the UP acquired an option to purchase the IAIS at a time when erstwhile CNW was fighting off a takeover bid by Japonica partners. So I guess you can never say never.
Of any class one I could see BNSF gives them a Saftey Valve for traffic since the Iowa Interstate would give them another way across Iowa if needed when traffic picks up.
Couple of other possibilities:
Norfolk Southern – IAIS gives 'em longer haul on transcontinental traffic, to Council Bluffs versus Chicago; complements their haul to Kansas City.
Union Pacific (probably less likely) – Buying keeps NS out of Council Bluffs and thereby protects their transcontinental earnings; can also serve as either a safety valve for their Central Corridor, and as a partial bypass around Chicago for transcontinental traffic.
CSX (by my lights, less likely than UP) – IAIS extends their transcontinental haul beyond the confines of Official Territory. Problem for CSX = cash needed to buy IAIS.
Food for thought…
Keep in mind that NS had a way to Omaha once (or at least N&W did), and Chessie may have had a chance to buy more of the line than it did (chose to just cherry-pick the business). If I’m not mstaken, UP still has the option on this line (at least the part CSX doesn’t own). But, for reasons discussed on previous threads, they’d probably rather add a third track to the former CNW if they needed more capacity. I would assume that BNSF would apply the same logic. If CP wanted to get to Council Bluffs/Omaha, they could make it work–west of the Quad Cities (I’m sitting in Muscatine as I write this, watching an ICE train go by). CN might be interested, but then the former CC&P would be downgraded and probably abandoned in places.
Living in new Lenox, IL and seeing Iowa Interststate trains I doubt it. This appears to be a very well run railroad. If it is privately held I would expect it to try and buy up some more track or shortlines. If publically held anything is possible.
About the only Class 1s that could use it for additional capacity are the UP or BNSF. I’ve never heard of tight capacity on the BNSF across southern Iowa, although the BN supposedly at the time of the RI shutdown looked into buying from Council Bluffs to West Liberty, IA to Burlington for coal trains.
The UP retains trackage rights between Council Bluffs and Des Moines and uses them every so often. I think their option to actually buy the IAIS expired many years ago. Ever since I hired out in 1998 I’ve heard that eventually the UP will need a third main across Iowa. They have looked at the IAIS a few times in the past but nothing has ever come from it. Right now the UP has other projects (a new bridge at Clinton and double tracking the Blair sub) on their radar.
One possible reason no one has seriously tried to buy the IAIS is right now you would not only have to deal with Metra about getting into Chicago, but also CSX. CSX doesn’t own their exRI trackage. They still lease it, the current owner being Internation Mining Corp (unless somethings changed since last summer), on a 50 year lease that has about 20 years left on it. When it expires and if there is a possiblity of ownership from CB to all the way to where Metra ownership begins (around Joliet IIRC) maybe the IAIS will look more attractive.
I don’t see that CP/ICE would have any real reason to go to Council Bluffs. I have thought, and this is admittedly from way out in left field, that maybe we could see in the future the Iowa Northern, Cedar Rapids & Iowa City, and the Iowa Interstate coming together under one owner. I wouldn’t look for the current owners of either the IANR or IAIS to sell out, but who knows when the current heads of both retire. The new people in charge may look at things differently and be
Wouldn’t the STB make a stink about UP acquiring IAIS in terms of anti-competition? Shippers in central Iowa would be (it seems to me) pretty well forced to go with UP for rail transportation of grain unless they wanted to truck it all the way to the BNSF (I’d think CN and ICE/DME/CP would be too far north for grain shippers in central Iowa).
Hmmm, one company to own the IAIS and IANR as was mentioned in a previous reply (with CRANDIC thrown-in)? Could we envision the reincarnation of The Rock?? Oh to see that bankruptcy blue & white livery again!
Which is the greater value of the route? Is it the business on line, or as a connecting line? What about the developing passenger element.
Politicians are taking positions on returning passenger service to part and possibly all of this route. It may mean public money for physical improvements. It may also mean playing tag with passenger trains on a single track line.
That no major system has opted to make a serious attempt to purchase, what changes in business patterns would it take make the majors make a play for the route?
IAIS does not have good connections in Chicago, as anybody who has seen the connection with IHB at Blue Island will attest. This probably contributes to the relative lack of interest in IAIS as a through route for overhead traffic.
Well yes and no. If BNSF bought it a connecting track in or near Joliet to the ATSF main could be done fairly easily. Also the EJ&E/CN trackage just east of Joliet and CN has a track through Joliet station or near ther also
[quote user=“jeffhergert”]
About the only Class 1s that could use it for additional capacity are the UP or BNSF. I’ve never heard of tight capacity on the BNSF across southern Iowa, although the BN supposedly at the time of the RI shutdown looked into buying from Council Bluffs to West Liberty, IA to Burlington for coal trains.
The UP retains trackage rights between Council Bluffs and Des Moines and uses them every so often. I think their option to actually buy the IAIS expired many years ago. Ever since I hired out in 1998 I’ve heard that eventually the UP will need a third main across Iowa. They have looked at the IAIS a few times in the past but nothing has ever come from it. Right now the UP has other projects (a new bridge at Clinton and double tracking the Blair sub) on their radar.
One possible reason no one has seriously tried to buy the IAIS is right now you would not only have to deal with Metra about getting into Chicago, but also CSX. CSX doesn’t own their exRI trackage. They still lease it, the current owner being Internation Mining Corp (unless somethings changed since last summer), on a 50 year lease that has about 20 years left on it. When it expires and if there is a possiblity of ownership from CB to all the way to where Metra ownership begins (around Joliet IIRC) maybe the IAIS will look more attractive.
I don’t see that CP/ICE would have any real reason to go to Council Bluffs. I have thought, and this is admittedly from way out in left field, that maybe we could see in the future the Iowa Northern, Cedar Rapids & Iowa City, and the Iowa Interstate coming together under one owner. I wouldn’t look for the current owners of either the IANR or IAIS to sell out, but who knows when the current heads of both retire. The new people in charge may look at things differently and be open to other i
Has there been actuall discussions from a class 1 on wanting the Inerstate? I have not heard of know of anything on this. Perhaps our BNSF forum members @ Galesburgh may be able to shed more on this topic.
Premerger review by the DOJ under Hart-Scott-Rodino will actually be the bigger issue - if the DOJ blocks the merger due to violating the Clayton or Sherman Antitrust Act, it will never reach the STB - if the DOJ doesn’t block the merger, the STB is likely to approve with conditions.
Seems to me that just about any and every railroad is for sale as long as the price is right…
If the Blair sub is double tracked, can the Missouri River bridge be modified to be doubletrack or will it remain a single track chokepoint?
I missed that earlier, Jeff- now that I read that again, I’m very intrigued- what are they proposing for the replacement at Clinton? Another swing bridge, or a veeeeeeerrrrrryyyy long high bridge?
See UP’s 2008 letter (from UP CEO Jim Young, dated August 28, 2008 to the Surface Transportation Board. The letter is posted in UP’s website under the “Media” section) which details the carrier’s plans for the upcoming peak (harvest/pre-holiday) season – as if STB could do anything to change things it didn’t like hearing about. In that missive, UP spells out some of the major capital projects for capacity expansion – things that it had begun, or planned to begin, in 2008 or 2009, subject, of course, to the vagaries of the economy.
In its letter, UP mentions a number of projects, including double-tracking the Blair Sub, but says nothing about adding a second bridge where the Blair Sub crosses the Missouri River. Nothing in the letter about replacing their Mississippi River crossing at Clinton, either. Having said that, keep in mind that UP (and BNSF and other roads) all maintain a portfolio of future capital projects the undertaking of which depends on today’s needs and tomorrow’s anticipated needs, and since, pretty much by definition, the economic climate is dynamic, always changing, the ranking of those needs changes, too.
Herewith a guess (I’m in no way attached to UP, and I don’t know anyone there anymore): when the replacement Kate Shelley Bridge is finished, and economy permitting, UP will start in either on the Blair Sub or the span over the Mississippi. The latter is an antique that goes back almost as distant in time as the rickety old Kate Shelley, and I’m sure the higher-ups in Omaha would prefer a structure carrying Central Corridor tonnage that more closely measures up to Harriman standards. Who knows, maybe UP could legitimately s
That something is going to happen is a given. Exactly what or exactly when, is more rumor.
What’s making the rounds out here is that after the Kate Shelley bridge is finished, they are going to start work at Clinton. If the economy doesn’t change plans, I would guess work would begin next year. The bridge is to be high enough to be a fixed bridge, it won’t have to open for river traffic.
The present yard and yard office will be gone. Part of the land where it sits in Clinton may be going to ADM for it’s expansion plans. A new yard and office are planned for Low Moor, Iowa, about 7 miles west of the current one. I’ve heard that’s been put on hold for the moment. Low Moor isn’t thrilled about having the UP build near it. I don’t know if it’s that or the economy that has slowed things.
After the Clinton bridge is up, then the Blair project is supposedly going to begin. I’ve heard that a second track will be installed on or near the current line. I’ve also heard of a possible completely new alignment from the Missouri Valley area to the Fremont area. The current bridge at Blair can’t be double tracked, a second one would have to be added, unless they wanted to keep a bottle neck like they had at Cedar Rapids, a single track bridge on an otherwise double track railroad.
Maybe Larry or Carl can add to what I’ve heard. Maybe they have heard something completely different.
Jeff
I have to agree with Jeff here There have been so many rumors on the double tracking on the blair sub it is impossible to keep track of them, The bottom line is that we wont know if or when these projects will take place until we see a lot of cinstruction equipment arrive on site. The main thing at Blair is the bridge is less then a 100 feet from the Highway 30 bridge and with a Cargill plant just south of that location along the river , it limits your options on where you build the new bridge Just a thought Larry
I also wonder, depending upon what project(s) UP eventually decides to undertake and if indeed one of those projects in the long-run includes some sort of plan to have a third main across Iowa and/or between Omaha/Fremont and Gibbon just what impact that may have on future new Amtrak service on either IAIS or UP’s “Overland Route”. I know that there would be a big push to have Amtrak serve Des Moines, Iowa City, and the Quad Cities but so much work would have to be done on IAIS that it might make it economically unfeasible to do so. Which would then leave the “Overland Route” mainline as the next choice which is “ready right now” in a sense but even I can understand that UP simply doesn’t have much capacity left to handle new Amtrak service on its showcase route - even if it were to drop its anti-Amtrak/passenger rail stance.