Midwest Regional Rail Initiative

[Xing]

Originally Posted by jpIllInoIs

The reason the eastern corridor is preferred for true HSR (220mph) is because the CN/IC row from Chicago due south to Kankakee is FAR less congested with freight and is already a 4 track wide row in Chicago. The estimate for grade separations and ROW acquisitions and remediation through the current row towards Joliet has been ruled out as infeasible and impossible to accomplish due to space restrictions.

The CN/IC route is relatively unfettered and WIDE. Its a no brain-er and achieves the ultimate goal of City to City speed. The fact that it picks up the states largest university in Champaign and the forgotten city of Decatur (home of ADM) is considered a minor bonus.

If you notice that the southern route through St. Louis' Illinois suburbs also varies from the current routing. The same thing occurs in Granite City where the row is too congested and meanders through freight yards. The new ROW will be brand new construction that will traverse near SIU-Edwardsville just north of downtown Edwardsville.

The main thing is that 220mph service requires COMPLETE grade separation form freight and roads and that is impossible to achieve in the current Amtrak alignment in the CHI-StL corridor.

As long as it stops in STL and Chicago, I'll take either one.

[VivaLFuego]

Originally Posted by ardecila

Indeed. 18000 undergrads at IL State, 31000 at UIUC. Which one should HSR go to?

It could also shave 1.5 hours off of the Saluki and City of New Orleans, if they switched to HSR-compatible equipment.

Yes, but Bloomington-Normal has more business activity than C-U between State Farm, Country Financial, Mitsubishi, Electrolux, and such. Depending on where you draw the boundaries, the populations of the two areas are also fairly comparable.

On the balance I would guess there is probably more traffic at C-U, but I wouldn't be surprised if B-N edged it out, either. C-U has some important business players, particularly in the high tech sector which probably have a higher need for passenger connectivity than more blue collar work where freight connectivity is supreme, as in B-N. The other factor is to what extent the C-U alignment would add to the travel time, which would negatively impact the value/desirability of the service for trips between Chicago-St. Louis.

One could objectively analyze both scenarios on via all manner of productivity and efficiency measures, but of course the ultimate decision, should it ever even be a question, will be 100% political, as such decisions are in this country of ours.

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by VivaLFuego

The other factor is to what extent the C-U alignment would add to the travel time, which would negatively impact the value/desirability of the service for trips between Chicago-St. Louis..

Doesn't matter - if the western alignment doesn't have room for a dedicated 220mph ROW, it's not a feasible option. Not to mention the fact that UP is standing in the way of California HSR big-time by denying the sale or use of its ROW, and they will most likely do the same to a similar effort in Illinois. They're pulling the same shit on the Red Line extension, too, which has to be built totally outside of their 100-foot alignment. UP is only allowing the current 110mph project on the St. Louis line because all the improvements directly benefit their operations (at taxpayers' expense). The 12 passenger trains a day are a small price to pay.

[Busy Bee]

The other factor is to what extent the C-U alignment would add to the travel time, which would negatively impact the value/desirability of the service for trips between Chicago-St. Louis.

It seems like the MWHSRA study says something about only 6 extra minutes from the Eastern routing once the western routes sharp turns above East St. Louis are figured in.

[Busy Bee]

-----------------------------------
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
March 18, 2010
Contact: Rick Harnish (312) 339-0116
Laurent Pernot (773) 865-5381
www.midwesthsr.org/ORDSTL220

Illinois takes historic step toward bullet trains;
state senate votes to move forward with planning
Passage of SB 2571 adds to growing momentum for 220-mph service

Illinois today took a historic step toward creating a bullet train network as the Illinois Senate passed a bill creating the Illinois and Midwest High Speed Rail Commission (SB 2571). The 12-member commission would issue a road map by March 2011 on how best to structure a public-private partnership to design, build and operate a high speed rail system at speeds of 150 miles per hour and up. It also would issue recommendations on how to fund the network and integrate the new bullet trains with airports, Amtrak service and public transportation systems throughout the Midwest.

"With this historic bill, Illinois would become only the third U.S. state officially planning for world-class bullet trains," said Illinois Senator Martin Sandoval (D-Cicero), chair of the transportation committee and the bill's author. "Illinois has always been a national leader for the economy and transportation system, and bullet trains will make our state a 21st Century powerhouse in both."

Commercial rail service at speeds of 220 miles per hour operates in Asia and Europe. Such bullet trains have become a priority for U.S. many government leaders. Illinois Governor Pat Quinn called for "superfast" train service in Illinois in his State of The State address in January. The Obama administration has thrown its support behind active 220-mph projects in California and Florida.

"We must give Illinois the means of competing on a global scale in coming years," said Sandoval. "Bullet trains will erase the distances between our business, research and government capitals by putting Urbana and Champaign less than 45 minutes from Chicago and Springfield."

The bill's passage by the Illinois Senate is the latest in a string of successes that have built strong momentum behind high speed rail. In addition to the Obama administration's $8 billion in stimulus rail funds, Congress for the first time appropriated $2.5 billion for high speed rail for this year. The Illinois capital bill contains $400 million for high speed rail projects, and recent CREATE funding will allow for infrastructure upgrades that will pave the way for high speed rail.

"Thanks to the leadership of Governor Quinn, Senator Sandoval and members of the Illinois Senate, our state is positioning itself as a national and regional leader on high speed rail," said Rick Harnish, executive director of the Midwest High Speed Rail association. "Bullet trains address our crucial need for jobs, infrastructure and green energy."

The Midwest High Speed Rail Association proposes to transform the Midwest into one cohesive, compact economic entity with a network of 220-mph bullet trains, including a St. Louis to Chicago line that would serve Edwardsville, Springfield, Decatur, Champaign, Kankakee, McCormick Place, Downtown Chicago and O'Hare Airport.

Active engagement at the federal and state level is important to sustain momentum and avoid repeating earlier false starts on high speed rail in the U.S., which have resulted in our country lagging much of the world on this important technology.

"Asia and Europe are doing it. South America and the Middle East are following suit. It's a tremendous development that Illinois is positioning itself as a national leader on this issue," said Harnish. "It's one of the best investments in our future we can make."

An expert economic impact study by the Midwest High Speed Rail Association found that a 220-mph high speed rail link between Chicago and St. Louis via Kankakee, Champaign, Decatur and Springfield would create 40,000 jobs and grow Downstate economies by 1 to 3 percent. The project also is estimated to take 200 million pounds of CO2 out of the atmosphere each year.

About the Midwest High Speed Rail Association

The Midwest High Speed Rail Association (MHSRA) is a member-supported, non-profit organization advocating for world-class 220-mph trains linking major Midwestern cities and fast trains of at least 90-mph on other routes, forming a truely modern network linking the entire Midwest.

We believe that a strong network of fast, frequent and dependable trains will make the Midwest a more attractive place to live and do business, creating a more vibrant economy.Visit us at www.midwesthsr.org.

[Busy Bee]

Bump.

http://www.wisn.com/politics/23207992/detail.html

Gov. Doyle Testifies About High-Speed Rail To U.S. House Committee

April 20, 2010

CHICAGO -- Gov. Jim Doyle talked about high-speed rail today in Chicago.

He testified before the U.S. House Committee on Transportation.

Wisconsin is expected to receive $823 million to build high-speed passenger rail between Milwaukee and Madison, improve the service between Chicago and Milwaukee and to make final determinations on a route between Wisconsin and the Twin Cities.

WISN 12 News reporter Nick Bohr was there and reports that not everyone in the crowd is happy about the prospect to high-speed rail and was answering to critics.

U.S. Rep. John Mica fron Florida said that what Wisconsin is planning shouldn't be considered high-speed rail. Doyle responded that the routes would be running through major metropolitan areas and wouldn't be safe at speeds of 200 mph.

The project is estimated to create thousands of construction and engineering jobs in Wisconsin.

[Busy Bee]

Scanned this Tribune article I clipped. Almost sounds like current news, until you look at the date. A real testament to the years lost to no HSR priority or rail leadership under the Bush administration.


my scan

I was a high school junior when I clipped this article. Wow

[jpIllInoIs]

^Yes it sounds familiar because that is part of the evolutionary planning stages of a transformative public works project. It takes decades to build the private-public-governemnt structure before you can actually build the infrastructure.

There has been plenty of progress since that article. The MWRRI (formed in 1996?) has spawned the MWHSR, basically and advocacy group with no political or funding authority. The MWHSR is now seeding in-state HSR commissions (Illinois is forming the first one). The in-state commissions will begin to form the governing portion of the political structure and they will have bonding authority which will provide an additional source of revenue and not be reliant on hot/cold Federal funding.

Eventually the individual states will have to create a multi-state authority that can make policy across state lines. (I.E Bi-State Airport Commission in IL-IN). This Multi-state commission will be able to set participation parameters for the states that want to join in the HSR projects. The parameters will include funding requirements; maintenance and operating agreements; union contract rules; etc. They will be able to send RFP's and RFI's and then decide if SCNF or Amtrak or Talgo or whomever is the best candidate to run/build this system.

Right now everything being done in the Midwest Rail is just incremental build up of existing intercity lines that are operated by Amtrak. This method is ingenious for the Midwest because it does improve the system immediately and noticeably. We already as of today- have faster service between CHI-STL than we had 12 months ago. Within another 12 months the CHI-DET service will be markedly improved and the STL-KC service will be improved and the CHI-IND and CHI-CLE will be improved. Contrast this with FLA and CAL which will not have laid a single track 24 months out of receiving the FRA grants.

But also an important element is that the freight business,which is vital to the Midwest economy, will benefit immediately as well. (See CREATE)

As the passenger service lines are upgraded and extended to areas not served currently the ridership is projected to increase-and that has already happened. The standard rail service will then become like a feeder service to the true HSR system. Standard rail (79-110mph) will be able to stop in the smaller metros and extend to mid-metros like Duluth-Green Bay-Des Moines-Quad Cities-Rockford-Grand Rapids-So.Bend and it will feed into the True HSR(220mph) back bone.

True HSR will be centered in a Chicago hub with spokes out to Detroit, St.Louis, Indy-Cincy, Milw and Minny. But dont expect the true HSR to have many stops in between. The Chi-StL 220 rail study shows stops at the SSA (SoSub Airport), Kankakee, Champaign, Decatur,Springfield, Edwardsville (SIU-E) and St. Louis. But is will also offer express service with even more limited stops.

To me the current climate is moving at light speed compared to where we were back in the 00's, 90's and 80's. apology for the run on.

[the urban politician]

^ No, don't apologize. Thanks for explaining all of that.

[VivaLFuego]

I have trouble seeing any elected officials mustering the will to bypass too many station stops on any intercity service. It's just not how state politics work around here.

[jpIllInoIs]

^ Yeah but that is what a Quasi public/private partnership can do. They are not elected officials that have to be at the beckon call of locals. And fortunately the way Illinois' geo-political landscape lays out...there are not many towns that have sufficient clout to hold up the projects.

And most medium sized towns have access to the regular intercity rail lines. And this will hold true throughout the Midwest since the old industrial centers are all on rail lines leading to Chicago. These towns can be mollified with regular rail stations that benefit from our current investment of upgraded signaling, quad gate rail crossings and double tracking. In fact the midwest concept delivers rail service at a very comprehensive level.

What metropolitan areas are being left out of the grand plan?

Here are the current cities within the MWHSR states that are not currently served by regular intercity rail-Amtrak. And a note on the current stage of planning

Louisville, KY- long range plans-wholly dependent on Indiana to advance plan.
Columbus, OH- 400Mill federal grant for 3-C; State GOP is trying to kill project
Des Moines, IA- 1 mil grant for study to extend QC line.
Quad Cities, IA/IL - 60 mil state pledge to advance line within 2 years.
Rockford, IL- 70mil state pledge to advance line within 2 years
Madison, WI- 800 mill fed grant
Green Bay, WI- long range state plan
Duluth, MN- mid range state plan
Rochester, MN- 1 mil fed grant to study route
Peoria, IL- long range state plan
Evansville, IN- no real plan
Fort Wayne, IN- mid range plan for new CHI-CLE service.
Dayton, OH-400 mil fed grant for 3-C
Akron, OH-long range plan state or interstate line tbd.

Here is a map of the fully built out system


The biggest controversies are route selections in Wisconsin: Eau Claire vs. LaCrosse and Indiana: So. Bend vs. Ft. Wayne. In Iowa the likely hood of building lines to Ames and Cedar Rapids is slim, and I dont care if they do or not. In Illinois-Peoria may never get a downtown stop since it is only 38 miles from Bloomington. These little skirmishes will not affect the whole system. The main point is that the Chicago based Hub & Spoke system is ideally suited for the economic and political geography of the Midwest.

[electricron]

There will be high speed express services and slower speed local services just like on Amtrak's NE Corridor. Eventually, smaller towns (I suggest one per county) will have stops. It's just that not every town will have high speed trains stopping there.

I don't understand why Mid-Western states have to form their own multi-state agency to finance and run fast intercity trains in the MidWest. Amtrak does a fine job on the NE Corridor, and should do the same job in the MidWest too. If Amtrak doesn't think operating intercity trains is their business everywhere in the US, it's time for Amtrak to be replaced by something else......

Amtrak wasn't formed to just run intercity trains on the NE Corridor.

[ardecila]

The multi-state agency would handle planning and construction, coordinating the various state DOTs to form a regional network. Operation could easily be done by Amtrak or a private corporation, either domestic or local.

[VivaLFuego]

Originally Posted by electricron

I don't understand why Mid-Western states have to form their own multi-state agency to finance and run fast intercity trains in the MidWest. Amtrak does a fine job on the NE Corridor, and should do the same job in the MidWest too. If Amtrak doesn't think operating intercity trains is their business everywhere in the US, it's time for Amtrak to be replaced by something else......

Amtrak wasn't formed to just run intercity trains on the NE Corridor.

Amtrak owns the Northeast Corridor (or most of it), whereas it owns almost none of the track on which it operates in the midwest. a multistate agency helps to coordinate operating funding subsidies -- the Hiawatha is subsidized by both Illinois and Wisconsin, while the Michigan services are predominantly subsidized by Michigan, and so on. Presumably Wisconsin's operating subsidy will increase upon the opening of the extension of the Hiawatha to Madison. The existing midwest network, which already has usable (albeit speed-limited) service from to Chicago to Milwaukee, St. Louis, and Detroit, depends on a patchwork of interstate subsidies in a way that the linear Northeast Corridor doesn't.

[jpIllInoIs]

Originally Posted by electricron

I don't understand why Mid-Western states have to form their own multi-state agency to finance and run fast intercity trains in the MidWest. Amtrak does a fine job on the NE Corridor, and should do the same job in the MidWest too.

For one bonding and taxing authority for system expansion & maintenance. Also to make sure each State has skin in the game. Even now we have reluctant participants who are only in it to the extent that they have received Fed funds. Indiana has yet to put any of their own money into the system. They did apply for an ARRA grant for NS trackwork that mainly benefits Michigan/Chi, so they are cooperative. But there is a deep seated reluctance in that state to fund rail transit. The feds do no want to referee a regional train sharing agreements so you have to have an authority that can supersede individual states.

A Midwest authority at least can negotiate some mid range agreements that the states must sign on to before they can begin to get train service. Remember the MWHSR is buying the Talgo sets. Right now they are under Wisconsin's state appropriations, but they were applied to under the MWHSR plan.

If Amtrak doesn't think operating intercity trains is their business everywhere in the US, it's time for Amtrak to be replaced by something else......

Amtrak wasn't formed to just run intercity trains on the NE Corridor.

Yet another big advantage to having a regional rail authority....negotiating with Amtrak. Right now each state has to negotiate separately for their state run services. Michigan, Missouri, Illinois and Wisconsin all have agreements with Amtrak. Just recently Amtrak came back to Michigan and requested a substantial increase in fees for running the Wolverine and Blue Water and Pere Marquette services. Michigan balked but in the end had no alternative but to cave.

So a MWHSR authority will negotiate for 9 states and own their own trainsets and be able to sign long term contracts. That will open up a more competitive bidding environment and should result in a more stable operating plan.

[electricron]

Originally Posted by jpIllInoIs

For one bonding and taxing authority for system expansion & maintenance. Also to make sure each State has skin in the game. Even now we have reluctant participants who are only in it to the extent that they have received Fed funds. Indiana has yet to put any of their own money into the system. They did apply for an ARRA grant for NS trackwork that mainly benefits Michigan/Chi, so they are cooperative. But there is a deep seated reluctance in that state to fund rail transit. The feds do no want to referee a regional train sharing agreements so you have to have an authority that can supersede individual states.
A Midwest authority at least can negotiate some mid range agreements that the states must sign on to before they can begin to get train service. Remember the MWHSR is buying the Talgo sets. Right now they are under Wisconsin's state appropriations, but they were applied to under the MWHSR plan.
Yet another big advantage to having a regional rail authority...negotiating with Amtrak. Right now each state has to negotiate separately for their state run services. Michigan, Missouri, Illinois and Wisconsin all have agreements with Amtrak. Just recently Amtrak came back to Michigan and requested a substantial increase in fees for running the Wolverine and Blue Water and Pere Marquette services. Michigan balked but in the end had no alternative but to cave.
So a MWHSR authority will negotiate for 9 states and own their own trainsets and be able to sign long term contracts. That will open up a more competitive bidding environment and should result in a more stable operating plan.

You're never going to get all 9 states to agree to everything. That's why the US Congress made Amtrak in the first place to run intercity trains. Amtrak has the only legal right to run trains at a very cheap rate on most of the corridors. It's Amtrak that must make the legal deals with freight railroads to run passenger trains on them. All Amtrak asks from the states is to provide all the subsidizes for the operation of the intercity trains.

I repeat my suggestion once again, Amtrak should be providing the management and leadership of all intercity trains in the country, including High Speed Rail. I'll go even further and state my opinion that every route State agencies take control over weakens Amtrak's national charter.

While it is true Amtrak wishes for more State financing because GOP leaders have cut it to the bone, each time States subsidize intercity trains, and too many are doing so today, takes one more disc out of Amtrak's backbone. Eventually Amtrak will be too weak to even stand up, even in the NE Corridor.

We either must believe Amtrak should have a national charter with a national scope, and finance it exclusively with Federal funds, or believe States or a consortium of States should take over all intercity trains in the country. The idea some States must subsidize train services while other States don't isn't fair, no matter who owns the corridors the trains run on.

[emathias]

Originally Posted by jpIllInoIs

...
Here is a map of the fully built out system

...

Looking at the map, I hope that after things get well under way, it will be successful enough to add a few things:

1) Lafayette to Champaign with HSR along I-74 to Danville and then northeast to Lafayette: connects two great universities, and allows a (albeit not especially direct) HSR connection between St. Louis and Indy without having to build the whole route along I70, which probably can't be cost-justified. Also allows Indy to route to Springfield (through Lafayette), connecting two capitals and increasing trains (and connectivity) between Lafayette and its state's capital. Seems like a no-brainer to me.

2) Indy to Ft Wayne with HSR: allows Indy better access to Detroit and Cleveland, as well as could bring Ball State into play, depending on the exact routing.

3) KC to St Louis as HSR.

4) Madison-Rockford-Chicago as HSR (Wisconson would lose with this, but Illinois would benefit)

5) The Chicago-Detroit route through Michigan as HSR could be very good for Michigan and bolster the possibility of a Chicago-Detroit-Toronto and/or Chicago-Detroit-Buffalo (through Canada) run. If Detroit-Buffalo was a non-stop, sealed-train run, you could probably even avoid customs and immigration issues.

Another thing with this map is the observation that, in addition to Chicago, the big winner with the plans shown is Cleveland, with HSR to Chicago, New York, Pittsburgh, Philly and Detroit. Chicago would no doubt benefit, but Cleveland would could out looking pretty good, too.

[ardecila]

I'm not sure if any of that is really necessary. The lines that are green are for 110mph service, which is what the projected corridor traffic justifies in the given city pair. In all likelihood, it will be set up so that travelers won't have to change trains where the line switches from purple to green. There would probably be 1 or 2 through trains each day, and then several other point-to-point trains. The only thing I would add to the map is a Champaign-Lafayette-Ft Wayne segment, at 110mph.

It's wasteful to build a second 220mph line through southern Michigan... it may make an economic splash, but it's completely redundant when 220mph Chicago-Detroit service is already provided via Ft. Wayne/Toledo, and 110mph service would already serve southern Michigan. Explain to me why Kalamazoo and Battle Creek justify the expenditure of billions of dollars for a dedicated high-speed line. Even in Europe and Asia, you don't build redundant high-speed lines just to add tiny cities onto the network. It won't generate much additional traffic and it will pull riders off of the parallel line. Only now, 46 years after the Tokaido Shinkansen opened, is Japan considering a parallel line from Tokyo-Osaka, and only because the original line is the world's busiest and only built to a 160mph standard.

All that is FAR down the road, though. The only Midwestern city pairs in the top 50 for airline travel either begin/end in Chicago, or leave the Midwest. We should have 220mph service between Chicago and Minneapolis, St Louis, Detroit, and Cleveland before we even think about the secondary links.

[VivaLFuego]

I'd rather we start with reliable, and effective (i.e. reasonably frequent) 110mph service from Chicago to those major cities... Milwaukee/Madison/MSP, STL, Indy/Cincy, & Detroit, and just go from there. If the service is reliable and frequent it will gain market share and political support for the massive and domestically unprecedented expenditures to start upgrading the corridors for true HSR service at 150-220 mph top speeds. If throwing all those little branches and completely new corridors on the map helps build political support for Phase I, then sure I guess so, but the first phase needs to be done in a slam-dunk and efficient fashion (reasonable targets with a reasonably quick implementation time) or else the entire program will wither and die.

[mfastx]

Originally Posted by electricron

I repeat my suggestion once again, Amtrak should be providing the management and leadership of all intercity trains in the country, including High Speed Rail. I'll go even further and state my opinion that every route State agencies take control over weakens Amtrak's national charter.

Agreed.