urbanSTL

It would have been nice if they could have gone with the 19th Street corridor. That is of course a very STL-CHI centric view - breeze through the residential neighborhood instead of going more slowly through the center of town. Also 19th would have been much more expensive. 10th seems like a good compromise.

Short article in Biz Journal Morning Call. Not sure if 10th street consolidation is best choice for Springfield or passenger rail as a whole. However, decisions none the less for both Chicago and Springfield Corridors.

Fed actions push St. Louis-Chicago high-speed rail forward

Federal regulators have taken steps that clear the way for build-out of the planned high-speed rail corridor between Chicago and St. Louis.

The Federal Railroad Administration decided the Rock Island Corridor is the most efficient route linking Joliet and Chicago, and chose a route through Springfield consolidating trains along 10th Street, the Chicago Sun-Times reports.

The actions were the last ones needed to move forward on environmental approval of the $1.5 billion project, which is expected to cut an hour off the train trip between Chicago and St. Louis. Improvements to the Illinois rail line are anticipated to allow speeds of 110 mph on 70 percent of the corridor by 2015.

Fed actions push St. Louis-Chicago high-speed rail forward

Federal regulators have taken steps that clear the way for build-out of the planned high-speed rail corridor between Chicago and St. Louis.

The Federal Railroad Administration decided the Rock Island Corridor is the most efficient route linking Joliet and Chicago, and chose a route through Springfield consolidating trains along 10th Street, the Chicago Sun-Times reports.

The actions were the last ones needed to move forward on environmental approval of the $1.5 billion project, which is expected to cut an hour off the train trip between Chicago and St. Louis. Improvements to the Illinois rail line are anticipated to allow speeds of 110 mph on 70 percent of the corridor by 2015.

I just took Eurostar from London to Paris last week in 2.5 hours. It is almost exactly the same distance as St. Louis to Chicago.

London travel folks now advertise Paris as a day trip. Catch Eurostar at 7 am and arrive by 10 am. Then return at 7 pm and be back in London by 10 PM.

gary kreie wrote:I just took Eurostar from London to Paris last week in 2.5 hours. It is almost exactly the same distance as St. Louis to Chicago.

London travel folks now advertise Paris as a day trip. Catch Eurostar at 7 am and arrive by 10 am. Then return at 7 pm and be back in London by 10 PM.

Lucky for them that they don't have to stumble through Alton on the way.

Right. Just the English Channel. They do slow down a little in the suburbs, i noticed.
Maybe we could tunnel under the rivers and Alton and call it the Mississippi tunnel or Munnel.

roger wyoming II wrote:Fox 2's Rocky Madden had an unequivocally positive story on rail from Saint Louis to both Chicago and the River Runner to KC.

http://fox2now.com/2013/07/10/business- ... -illinois/

Mentioned on-time performance, faster trains, low cost and general comfort. Noted that there will be more 110mph sections coming to the Chicago line, new locomotives and cars, wi-fi to the Missouri River Runner and also the new bridge over the Osage which will tackle one of the last remaining choke points to KC.

A nice side story to add to it

http://trn.trains.com/en/Railroad%20New ... endly.aspx

Kirkwood's Amtrak station tops in service

Published: July 19, 2013

KIRKWOOD, Mo. – Amtrak’s Customer Service Index has ranked the Kirkwood Station as the first in the nation for customer service. The ex-Missouri Pacific station has 72 active volunteers that answer questions, help passengers board trains, and provide tips about local sights and shops.

“The volunteers are hosts here,” station manager Bill Burckhalter told the National Association of Railroad Passengers. “They represent the city, they represent Amtrak and they represent themselves.” The station is served by four Amtrak Missouri River Runner trains, which operate between St. Louis and Kansas City and are supported by the state of Missouri.

Tickets are usually $35 or so. I took the train a lot. They just need to get rid of most of the stops and work on reliability. Sometimes it takes up to 7 hours to make the trip because they have to wait for other trains to pass, switches fail, and weather.

flipz wrote:Tickets are usually $35 or so. I took the train a lot. They just need to get rid of most of the stops and work on reliability. Sometimes it takes up to 7 hours to make the trip because they have to wait for other trains to pass, switches fail, and weather.

Eurostar between London and Paris has zero stops.

Considering the latest blog post by Frank DeGraaf...

http://nextstl.com/transportation/misso ... e-part-iii

I'm wondering what a better potential alignment is for HSR line in MO. Would it be best to go through Columbia and hit the largest University? Or is it better to go theough the state capital? Is one more expensive than the other?

What if you did a single track through both cities and oscillate every other trip between STL and KC? So the first trip from STL goes through Columbia while the KC trip goes through Jeff City and vice versa for the second trip.

I agree with you on Columbia over Jeff City.

Its a tough sell regardless to the MO legislature regardless, but how in the heck do you get them to approve funding for a HSR line that won't even benefit the state capital?

I imagine there would be more ridership during the week to Jeff City and more ridership from/to Columbia on weekends.

A shuttle service is definitely practical and reasonable, but Jeff City is all politicians whit a lot of pride. They may take it as an insult not to include Jeff City in a HSR proposal.

[quote="pat"

pat wrote:Its a tough sell regardless to the MO legislature regardless, but how in the heck do you get them to approve funding for a HSR line that won't even benefit the state capital?

By rebuiding I70 to six lanes with HSR in the middle via Private Public Deal - think Inidana tollway or Chicago Skyway. Honestly think that the I70 is only possibility you could ever sell this idea and I70 is by far one of the most important routes through rural missouri for truck traffic and therefore economic generator the rest of state.

jem79c wrote:^Shuttle buses from a Columbia station would be plenty to service Jeff City and other mid-state places (Kirksville/Rolla) - how many people honestly need to get to Jeff City from KC/STL on a daily, or even weekly basis. Enough to warrent a significant rail re-route? I think not.

I believe it is a midwest system as a whole your trying to capture In other words, Missouri going along with such proposal and timeframe would suggest that Chicago-STL is well on its way. In other words, your competing for KC-Chicago traffic as well. It only gets stronger if a way can be found to convince Illinois that it is in their best interest to promote east west rail service from STL to Indy or Cinci.

We are about 5-10 years away from the age of the driverless car. Wouldn't it be more fiscally prudent to sit and wait to see how that technology develops before dropping billions on a new train across the state? Isn't it better to focus on light rail, streetcars, and sane parking policy (ways to efficiently move people around neighborhoods without cars) instead?

Absolutely Columbia. There would be a built in ridership from college students coming/going home to/from STL and KC on a weekly basis.

^^I don't really see the connection with your argument. Making cars driverless doesn't reduce the amount of them on the highway. A new high speed train efficiently moves people around the state and reduces highway traffic. What does focusing on light rail, streetcars, and sane parking policy do for us on a state or national level? We're looking at this in a much larger context than just a neighborhood.

realclear wrote:We are about 5-10 years away from the age of the driverless car. Wouldn't it be more fiscally prudent to sit and wait to see how that technology develops before dropping billions on a new train across the state? Isn't it better to focus on light rail, streetcars, and sane parking policy (ways to efficiently move people around neighborhoods without cars) instead?

Wouldn't the implication be just the opposite? I understand why they would impact city commuters, but how would autopilots dramatically benefit regional travelers? They won't go 120mph or include on-board bathrooms or card tables.

ntbpo wrote:Absolutely Columbia. There would be a built in ridership from college students coming/going home to/from STL and KC on a weekly basis.

It would be nice to fill the slump between "summer vacation" traffic and "fall holiday" traffic with some "doomed high school relationship" traffic the first couple months of the school year.

pat wrote:^^I don't really see the connection with your argument. Making cars driverless doesn't reduce the amount of them on the highway. A new high speed train efficiently moves people around the state and reduces highway traffic. What does focusing on light rail, streetcars, and sane parking policy do for us on a state or national level? We're looking at this in a much larger context than just a neighborhood.

It won't reduce the number of cars on the highway, but the cars should be able to drive faster and caravan within inches of each other. This limits accidents, reduces travel times and takes advantage of drafting. So, if you can go from KC to STL by car at 100mph and get dropped off at your destination's door, why would you want to take a train that slows down substantially in Wentzville (as was proposed in the recent articles)?

Wouldn't the implication be just the opposite? I understand why they would impact city commuters, but how would autopilots dramatically benefit regional travelers? They won't go 120mph or include on-board bathrooms or card tables

I actually think everything you mentioned could easily happen. Imagine a driverless Cube, Scion, or conversion van tricked out with whatever amenities you want. These autopilots should crash far more infrequently than humans, so you could have an office, a gym, or a living room in the back of your car. Your workout could take place on your morning commute.

This will actually cause commuting to become enjoyable and will (unfortunately, IMHO) push some people deeper into the exurbs. Places like Kirksville, Cape Girardeau and Columbia could easily become a suburb of both KC and STL. With such levels of sprawl, it will be easier for many people to just be driven to their destination instead of driving to the STL train station to go to KC.

The flip side of this is that urban living should also become more desirable. Cars won't need to be parked anymore, so urban parking garages and vacant parking lots will lose significant value, spurring redevelopment of those sites. Moreover, car ownership will become an option and not a necessity, and many people will rely on taxis and Uber like car services for all of their commuting needs. However, because each car ride will have a transaction cost, light rail and streetcars will also be economical for moving large numbers of people short distances.

These urban dwellers would presumably be the target market for high speed rail but, even for them, if the costs are comparable and a car can take you door to door across the state at almost 100 mph, which mode of travel would you prefer?