WEEK TV-25 is reporting on its website that US Senator Dick Durbin (D-Illinois) and Peoria Mayor Jim Ardis met last week to discuss connecting Peoria with high-speed rail at Normal. There are numerous flaws to this plan. Let me analyze the article point by point:
“Connecting Peoria with the high speed rail hub in Bloomington-Normal is an investment in the future of Central Illinois that will give residents and visitors access to travel and business opportunities throughout Illinois,” Durbin said.
Central Illinois residents and visitors already have access to travel and business opportunities through the state. It is called driving your private automobile on taxpayer-funded highways. For passenger rail to work in Peoria, it has to give travelers a marked improvement over existing options. Forcing passengers to make a connection just to reach their primary destination (Chicago) is hardly an improvement (people can get to Chicago now without changing cars, buses, or even planes).
The Amtrak station in Normal is the busiest in Illinois outside of Chicago and a considerable amount of that ridership is from the Peoria area. According to the Economic Development Council of Central Illinois, more than 7,500 people travel between the Peoria area and Bloomington-Normal from work on a daily basis.
Two sentences, two different markets. A rail connection to “high speed” trains at Normal would service the Peoria-Chicago market, but many officials who advocate this plan consider it a potential rail commuter corridor as well. Problem is, the origin and destination for these 7,500 people are spread far and wide between the two metro areas. Relatively few would find convenient the proposed stations on either end.
It has been estimated that over 95% of these commuters travel alone in a single-occupancy vehicle. A study to investigate passenger rail options is the first step to better connecting these two hubs and reducing travel times and congestion while improving air quality in the region.
Rail is not going to reduce transit times between Peoria and Bloomington-Normal. Too short of distance. And I-74, while crowded much of each weekday, is hardly “congested.” Recent capacity expansion and rebuilding lanes and ramps in both metro areas ensures overcrowding will not be a factor for many years, if ever.
Ardis sees more than just potential work commuters from area businesses, such as Caterpillar Mitsubishi. He says potential customers between the universities- Bradley, ISU, and Illinois Wesleyan- could also bring big business for Amtrak.
ISU and Illinois Wesleyan students already have the option of using Amtrak to and from Chicago. Peoria is close enough that for students who live there, rail commuter service isn’t a desirable option, especially with the need for connectivity at either end. Take a car or bus, you might as well drive all the way.
US Secretary of Transportation, Ray LaHood, supports the addition of his hometown to the rail system. He says, “It would be a mode of transportation that currently does not exist; it would be an opportunity to really connect the region.”
That’s LaHood’s position now. Wait ten minutes.
In summary, rail passenger service will only work for Peoria if it provides a direct, same train connection to Chicago. Peoria-Twin Cities commuter service isn’t needed and forcing passengers to make a connection at Normal eliminates any advantage of so called “high speed” rail service. A plan such as this costs far more than it is worth.
No wonder politicians support it. 
- David P. Jordan
21 responses so far ↓
1 logistics // Jan 27, 2013 at 7:24 pm
The whole high speed rail thing is a joke and that’s coming from somebody who supported it. Nobody understands transportation still.
2 David P. Jordan // Jan 27, 2013 at 9:37 pm
What’s sad is that the Gulf Mobile & Ohio ran passenger trains at 100mph on that line even in the days before CTC. Now, costly track and grade-crossing signals and unproven PTC equipment must be installed just to go from 79mph to 110mph.
3 Bulby // Jan 28, 2013 at 6:34 am
David,
PTC equipment has had something about it proven: its overpriced and overrated. If they only required ATS or automatic train stop, it still provides positive signal enforcement and is a proven technology that has been around since before WWII (and is cheaper)
4 Erik // Jan 28, 2013 at 8:55 am
David, great post!
I’ve heard on too many occasions here recently that it is just too easy to get everywhere around town. As well as to and from Peoria by car. It’s a blessing and a curse. Until the true cost of driving is realized, people won’t consider alternatives.
I don’t know CityLink’s numbers (I’d love to see them) but taking the bus has a bad rap. I’m sure taking the train isn’t much higher in the public perception – although millions use this as a viable option elsewhere…
Certainly high speed rail is all the rage, but like you said, not really viable with Peoria. I know you have the map down in your head, but I’d like to see regular commuter being more connected. Right now the Amtrak lines look like 3 fingers coming down from Chicago, but there are no cross-connections.
What about a line going from the Quad Cities (Deere) to Peoria (CAT) to B/N (STF) to Champaign (UofI) to Indianapolis? That is probably whimsical thinking, heck, that may have existed at one point. I think it makes sense to have Peoria functional again, but with an array of options – not just go to B/N to transfer.
5 alex // Jan 28, 2013 at 9:20 am
they could rip up 74?
6 Eye in the Sky // Jan 28, 2013 at 11:17 am
This is nothing other than a CRACK PIPE dream. The only people touting it are elected officials trying to distract us from all the other problems in Peoria. Lets start with some NICE roads OH and maybe LESS CRIME. A train that goes a 100mph won’t do any good if your not safe waiting for it. Have a fact question for the train expert how many miles to get to a 100 and then how many to slow back down? Then how much of the trip is actually going 100mph?
7 David P. Jordan // Jan 28, 2013 at 11:56 am
Hi Eye in the Sky,
Amtrak’s P42 diesels (like the one above) are designed for maximum speeds of 110mph. Acceleration from 0 to 80 mph takes two miles for a single engine and four cars. So attaining 110 mph would probably require an extra mile (at least). There’s a chart on page 17 at this link:
http://rockymountainrail.org/documents/RMRABP_CH4_Route_TechnologyOptions_03.2010.pdf
Obviously, the number of passenger cars on a train determine how fast full speed can be obtained.
It is my understanding that Amtrak’s existing Chicago-St. Louis route will be 110mph capable almost entirely. There is a plan to shift to a new routing between Joliet and downtown Chicago that will allow higher speeds as well. Alton-St. Louis will require upgrades. Trains will be limited to conventional speeds (and under) at and approaching these terminals.
8 David P. Jordan // Jan 28, 2013 at 12:03 pm
Erik,
I favor the incremental approach since in most cases, a passenger train riding tradition has to develop first. Conventional (79mph max), direct passenger train operation between Peoria and Chicago would probably end up being faster than IDOT’s proposal. If multiple frequency service proves highly successful and more trains are required, then high-speed upgrades might be justified.
What about a line going from the Quad Cities (Deere) to Peoria (CAT) to B/N (STF) to Champaign (UofI) to Indianapolis? That is probably whimsical thinking, heck, that may have existed at one point. I think it makes sense to have Peoria functional again, but with an array of options – not just go to B/N to transfer.
Whimsical for sure. Problem with politicians is that they think the public wants something, they try to get it any way they can just to say they got it. Peoria’s rail passenger market is Chicago, which means restoring rail passenger service means running trains between Peoria and Chicago. A Quad Cities-Indianapolis service might work if you tear up I-74 and Rt. 150. Of course, Rt. 24 and I-65 would have to go as well.
9 Eye in the Sky // Jan 28, 2013 at 12:47 pm
Thanks for the link. The chart for diesel looks like around 10 miles to get all the way up to speed. I would guess then its about the same to slow down. Went to google it says taking 74 to station in B/N is 40.4 miles. So its looking like the trip would be around 20 miles at 100mph. Doesn’t make a whole lot of sense from a dollars and cents point. But its the guberment so it usually doesn’t make sense.
10 alex // Jan 28, 2013 at 1:08 pm
Next We will have shuttle service from Peoria Airport to Central Illinois Airport
11 David P. Jordan // Jan 28, 2013 at 1:57 pm
Went to google it says taking 74 to station in B/N is 40.4 miles. So its looking like the trip would be around 20 miles at 100mph.
The [East] Peoria-Normal rail shuttle would be 79mph only. The feasibility study goes into detail on what improvements would be needed to Norfolk Southern’s line to accomodate rail passenger service.
12 Eye in the Sky // Jan 28, 2013 at 2:38 pm
So its even more useless and NOT even close to what they are promising. Sound very familair from Peoria goverment. They’d build it then afterwords it would go 15mph because they screwed something up.
Love the study trains FAILED 2 times in the past BUT maybe this one would work. After spending 75,000,000.00 dollars and only getting 375,000.00 back in ticket sales. Math says 200 years to make back the money. IF there numbers HOLD true like the museum numbers have.
13 David P. Jordan // Jan 28, 2013 at 3:29 pm
Hi Eye in the Sky,
The proposed [East] Peoria-Normal “rail shuttle” is designed to connect to “high speed” trains at Normal. And that’s the problem. It’s one of those “we wanna be cool too” scenarios that promises failure. For rail passenger service to play in Peoria, it can’t be joined up with someone else’s service. Instead, Peoria needs its own service, direct to the largest travel market around: Chicago. For practical reasons, I’d favor the old Prairie Marksman route of 1980-1981.
The $75 million pricetag is for for that stupid 25,000 foot track that needs to be built between the Norfolk Southern at Bloomington and a point 600 foot short of the Amtrak depot in Normal. This track “needs” to be built as otherwise, shuttle trains would have to use existing Union Pacific (used by Amtrak) track, subject to dispatcher instructions and guaranteed delay before entering (stopped at junction waiting).
Obviously, my beef is with the rail shuttle idea. It is a guaranteed loser. The requirement to make a connection to and from Chicago trains will suppress ridership because of the lack of convenience. If I-74 suffered bumber-to-bumper traffic all day long, seven days a week (or at least on weekdays), such service might make sense. But I-74 doesn’t suffer bumper to bumper traffic except on segments under construction…and it’s easier just to drive to Normal in car.
Through Peoria-Chicago passenger trains could run via Bloomington. But Union Pacific’s capacity study (references in the IDOT study) indicated there is no room for additional trains (at least more than what is already planned). Which is funny because they’ll need additional trains just to accommodate all those Peoria passengers, right? Might as well run thru to and from Chicago and forget a connection (stops at Normal need to be made, though).
I’d like to see a successful Peoria-Chicago Amtrak service, but it has to be done right.
14 SD // Jan 28, 2013 at 7:54 pm
Last time we went over the argument of Peoria to Chicago, one of the bad sides was parking in Chicago and surrounding cities. You can get their easy enough on the freeway, but once you get there parking is a nightmare. And the cost of parking in a parking garage means taking on an extra job just to pay the monthly parking bill.
We are wasting millions of gallons of gas driving back and forth not to say anything about the exhaust emissions in the air referring to health issues, but here again is car pooling. But it doesn’t seem to be going too well. Between parking, time and gasoline, there is no question we need rail service. The big question is what route it will take. Several people that are familiar with trains and routes to Chicago recommend the old Prairie Marksman route. We believe that this would be the best under the circumstances. It is far less stops and no transfers from one train to another. The politicians need to look into other routes and not just stick with the complication that they are bringing up with going to Normal and all the stops and transfers.
15 logistics // Jan 28, 2013 at 8:57 pm
It’s time for transportation to grow up in the state of Illinois. If they want the PIA-BNL sector served better, they truly have one option; BUS. The typical fare of a 25-35 min Amtk ride runs between $3 to $12 (D-Y fares). Even if the train was 75%-100% load factor they still wouldn’t make half their cost back probably not even a quarter.
With that said, there are two things that power Amtrak in Illinois; Prisons and college kids. No matter the service level nor frequency, they are a constant and solid flow. Both are generally ignored by the state and NRPC as a whole. They believe in some fantasy land where on a equal playing field(cost) a “regular joe” traveler will choose the train. They don’t. Yes, a lot of people do; most are Chicago-based and are used to the Metra system and familiar with passenger train travel in general. Most of the “regular joes” ride one time in the summer on a weekend. Not that dependable. For the other two, I can tell you off the top of my head a typical Thursday for 382 looks like this;
QCY- 25 MAC-150 GBB-35 PCT-15 MDT/PLO/NPV/LAG- 2
A Tuesday looks like this
QCY- 25 MAC-20 GBB-25 PCT-10 MDT/PLO/NPV/LAG- 2
It’s night and day. Another example being Normal when I left NRPC, BNL was the somewhere between the 32-36th busiest station nationwide. Its quite a feat considering there’s not much on the list besides the NEC and Cal corridor.
The reason for success? The station is on campus and ISU has a lot of Chicago kids. It’s a prime market the Amtrak is beautifully suited to.
I’ll skip the prisoners riding….
While I’m on the soapbox, my problem with high-speed rail is this: Nobody really cares about it. When they did the surveys there was one common thing everyone wanted……drumroll…..On-time performance. Grand idea huh? Regular riders just waited to make sure that 304 was going to be on time so they could make their Metra, have a ride waiting, or just not be in downtown at midnight. Most were open for a shorter ride but a 90mph on time ride was prime. They should have stuck to the plan; 90mph double track. Single track=Not so high speed. It’s common for 301 to be stuck at Mazonia for late 302 and so on. Mclean meets for 305 are another head pounder. Average 25-30 ding.
Don’t get me started on the whole Springfield 10th st money grab… All I can say on that is David, if you thought abandoning the Keller line for a trail was bad…. The politics on this one would make you want to jump off a cliff.
16 David P. Jordan // Jan 28, 2013 at 9:20 pm
Logistics,
You have a soapbox here.
Regarding your point about the 10th Street Corridor, I doubt many Springfield residents realize what that’s going to do to their city. I mean, it is going to consolidate the two busiest mainlines, which will concentrate delays, force crossing closures, removal of homes and businesses and potentiallyforce some overpass construction. A new, sweeping curve will be necessary in the Shops (NS-IMRR) area.
17 Joe Faber // Jan 28, 2013 at 11:16 pm
One, we have to start moving away from individual vehicles; you just cannot keep placing more and more cars on the road. Two, roads actually cost much more to maintain. How do I know this? My father was state police, my brother works for the Henry Co. Hwy. Dept and at one time built and resurfaced roads and my brother-in-law was an engineer. Ed helped to design these roads. Three, not everyone can drive. I am visually impared and the lack of rail service to Peoria has been a major problem over the past 25 years.
18 David P. Jordan // Jan 29, 2013 at 6:14 am
Joe,
Thank you for your comments,
I don’t oppose Amtrak service to Peoria, I oppose silly and prohibitively costly schemes to “get connected.” But establishing and maintaining rail passenger service where there isn’t any at present will be a costly endeavor and must be done correctly. Even then, it will be limited to one corridor and limited stops enroute.
19 David in Chicagoland // Jan 29, 2013 at 1:49 pm
Will the announcement today of LaHood’s stepping down as Sec of Transportation finally kill these proposals since Peoria no longer has him pushing from within the administration?
20 David P. Jordan // Jan 29, 2013 at 2:08 pm
Hi David in Chicagoland,
Even our Peoria-born and bred Transportation Secretary couldn’t get it down in four years. His succesor will probably pick up the mantle, if it is convenient. Problem is, Senator Durbin and Mayor Ardis are backing it too.
Money spent on track upgrades, signals and station facilities wouldn’t be guaranteed a spin in the toilet if the plan was right. But the plan (Peoria-Normal rail shuttle) is terrible.
21 C. J. Summers // Feb 6, 2013 at 10:09 pm
LaHood was an impediment to sane transportation policy for Peoria, not a proponent. The sooner he’s out of power (not simply out of office), the better this region will be.
Leave a Comment