June 2009
S M T W T F S
« May   Jul »
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
282930  
Follow PeoriaChronicle on Twitter

Recent Comments

  • Precinct Committeeman: The community of Peoria County did support the ballot measure. Below that level of...
  • C. J. Summers: I was thinking, how about the Bradley Jaywalker? The mascot could unexpectedly cross the middle of the...
  • Charlie: What if they stay with the Indian theme, but make it more politically correct and reflect...
  • New Voice: Precinct, Very true! But……… when was the last time we heard anything about Bellwood [or...
  • Precinct Committeeman: NV wrote “…remember….. nothing is permanent!” except the continued presence...
  • Karrie E. Alms: DP: Treat people with respect and not name call. Trust is earned not given as stated by Jack Fought...
  • Wesmess: My family has enjoyed traveling to outlying cities to enjoy the IMAX experience. If it does not come into...
  • New Voice: I don’t know why you guys are worried. According to Peo Proud and Peoria Committeeman, the YES vote...
  • Emtronics: The Bradley Braves Councilmen! The Bradley Women’s Braves Councilwomen! All you need is a guy in...
  • strong1: just curious: I am not sure. But I think pretty far back Just be sure to request them from the server. Does...
  • Sharon Crews: strong1–You noticed that, too–evidently Edison doesn’t supply all the extras at...
  • The Mouse: Yea, anp, except this dodo is never going to secure all the needed funding. The deficits it will run will...
  • just curious: How far back can the D150 server retrieve e-mails for a FOIA request?
  • strong1: Why on the board mtg. agenda is there an action item to purchase SCIENTIFIC LEARNING CORPORATION FAST...
  • shankappotamus: Sharon–I bet you could write a a book about the changes that have occurred during the past 43...

Categories

Amtrak study delayed… again

Amtrak LogoIt was back in 2007 that we first started talking about Amtrak and IDOT doing a feasibility study on a possible Chicago-Peoria route. The study was going to be completed by late 2007, then early 2008. Then there were a number of delays. By the end of 2008, Amtrak/IDOT officials were promising it would be done by March 2009. Then they pushed it back to “summer.” Now we’ve been informed that the Amtrak study has been pushed back to “at least” this fall.

Over the past several years, ridership has risen dramatically and interest in establishing new routes has increased; plus, there’s a serious effort underway to establish high-speed rail service. However, all this interest in passenger rail in addition to existing freight traffic is starting to put a strain on capacity, especially around Chicago. So, some capacity studies have been ordered (i.e., a study to see if another train can be added to some already busy segments of the route, or whether those segments are at capacity), which is adding more time and expense to the feasibility study.

One idea that has been bandied about is setting up a rail shuttle between Peoria and Normal. Such a shuttle wouldn’t be a direct connection between Peoria and Chicago, but rather a connection to the train depot in Normal, from which one could connect to a Chicago-bound or St. Louis-bound train.

I’m skeptical of this idea. The amount of time it would take to travel between Peoria and Normal, plus the layover, plus the hassle of switching trains — I just don’t believe that such a shuttle would attract enough ridership to make it feasible. Peoria is the third-largest metropolitan statistical area in the state. There’s really no reason we shouldn’t have direct passenger rail service to Chicago.

9 comments to Amtrak study delayed… again

  • kcdad

    Even a light rail to Normal to catch the main North South train would be ok with me. With WiFi who would care about the delays… I’ll have a lot of World of Warcraft and Peoria Chronicle time…

  • Sterling

    I would love a light rail connection from Peoria to Normal. If it would make it more feasible, may want to look at extending that from Normal to Champaign too. It’s been done before — in fact, some of the infrastructure from the old trolley lines (embankments, bridges, power stations, etc.) is still in place throughout the area. I would imagine that, as long as the travel time from Peoria to Normal is less than 1 hour, it would compete with driving on I-74.

    On a related note, the official Amtrak bus connection (Trailways) to Peoria from Normal only stops at the Peoria airport. Have there been studies done about if that would increase if the stop was moved to the CityLink bus depot downtown? I know PCC runs buses from CityLink to Normal, but I’ve noticed that those fares are sometimes more expensive than the train ticket from Normal to Chicago.

    Maybe they’re pushing the study back because of Gov. Quinn’s doomsday budget that would cut all IDOT funding for state Amtrak lines…

  • David P. Jordan

    Don’t waste money on light rail – the population density and necessity isn’t there. The money it would take to build a light rail line and all of the necessary supporting structure (an bridges over the Illinois and Mackinaw Rivers, etc.) would be better spent upgrading the old Peoria Rocket route to Chicago.

  • serenity

    I worry with Lahood in office we’ll never see train service.

  • Steve J

    In spite of the detriments CJ has pointed out, a Peoria-Normal shuttle is likely the front runner in this derby. Due to its much lower cost for capital upgrade, service over the Norfolk Southern line could be launched more quickly than via any other route. A Peoria-Normal shuttle could attract riders if the frequencies and logical connections with every Lincoln Service train are established. One key factor is the choice of Peoria area terminus. Back in the 80’s, people voted with their feet by not patronizing the Peoria Marksman from a forlorn and ill-advised E. Peoria terminal site. A lot has changed for the better in E. Peoria since then, and whatever location is selected had best include parking, security and a staffed operation.
    Despite its appeal, sentimental and otherwise, upgrading the old Rock Island route would cost gazillions and may have already been discarded as a viable option, although we won’t know until the study comes out.

  • Sterling

    I’d imagine a shuttle route wouldn’t solely serve Peoria-to-Chicago travel either, it may also provide somewhat of a regional commuter rail line, depending on how its organized and where the terminals are. Despite the downturn, having Cat, the Peoria hospitals, ISU and State Farm all located along a single rail line (or within close proximity) would be a definite perk for both employers and employees.

  • David P. Jordan

    My point about light rail is that the cost of construction would be astronomical, and if the money has to be spent, it might as well go toward upgrading what is clearly the best route (population-wise) between Chicago and Peoria (but a moot point if it’s not being considered).

    The Norfolk Southern route, if chosen, should be used by through trains and not shuttle trains, which would severely suppress ridership due layover times, the possibility of missed connections, lack of competitive driving times, and the inconvenience of having to change trains enroute to a destination city only 3.5 hours from Peoria by highway.

  • David P. Jordan

    “lack of competitive driving times” should have been written, “not competitive with driving times.”

  • Chris Robbins

    A shuttle from Springfield, MA to New Haven, CT linking Springfield and Hartford, CT to the Northeast Corridor has been pretty successful, but even Amtrak sees the need for trains to run along the ‘Inland Route’ through both towns from NY to Boston. Peoria deserves direct rail service to Chicago Union Station, as do towns like Evansville, IN; Bloomington, IN; Louisville, KY; and Lexington, KY. We need to start treating rail less in terms of commuter and vacation travel and more as a way to connect regions to change the way we think about doing business.

Leave a Reply

 

 

 

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>