Category Archives: Amtrak

Amtrak, City of Peoria

Replay: Why train service needs to be to Chicago, not Normal

47 Comments

Speaking of bad ideas, a recent Word on the Street article says that local officials are still pursuing the foolhardy idea of getting a commuter train to Bloomington instead of a direct Amtrak route to Chicago. Rather than re-explain in different words why this is such a bad idea, I’m just going to reprint an earlier article I wrote on the subject (original post here):

The old Peoria-to-Bloomington commuter train idea is apparently still on the table over at the Tri-County Regional Planning Commission. Let’s go over this again:

Nobody wants to take a train to Bloomington. The only reason anyone would ever take a train to Bloomington is to continue on to Chicago or St. Louis. And if their ultimate destination is elsewhere, they’ll just drive to Bloomington to catch the train. Bloomington has free parking and virtually no traffic congestion. So a Peoria-Bloomington route is doomed to fail.

Peoria to Chicago, on the other hand, would be a heavily-traveled route. Since Chicago would be the ultimate destination for most train trips anyway (they’re a major Amtrak hub, unlike St. Louis), it makes sense to have a direct route from Peoria. Those in the tri-county area could avoid the commute to Bloomington to catch the train, as well as avoiding the traffic congestion and high cost of parking in Chicago.

Look at it this way: imagine we’re talking about air service instead of train service. Can you imagine anyone seriously suggesting that the best we could do is to offer commuter flights to Bloomington for those who wanted to continue on to Chicago (or any other destination)? With a layover? Where you have to switch planes and transfer your own bags? Would anyone buy a ticket on that flight? No. And they won’t take a commuter train to Bloomington, either.

We need our legislators to start fighting for Peoria transportation options instead of fighting against them. You would think we’d be in a great position having a home-town boy as Secretary of Transportation, and yet LaHood is the biggest obstacle. He’s never supported train service for Peoria. In fact, he’s been downright ornery opposing it. Why? Does Caterpillar not want train service to Peoria or something? And what about Durbin? He supported the Quad Cities in their effort to get passenger rail service–why isn’t he doing more to push Peoria’s effort? Where are our advocates?

The Greater Peoria Area is the third-largest metropolitan statistical area (MSA) in the state. There’s demand for passenger rail service here. Instead of the Illinois Department of Transportation giving away millions of dollars to build new and unsustainable roads through cornfields (Orange Prairie Road extension, Pioneer Parkway extension), why don’t they put that money toward a responsible and sustainable mode of transportation that would help the whole region: direct passenger rail service from Peoria to Chicago?

лак за паркет

Amtrak, City of Peoria, Illinois Dept. of Transportation, Streets

Passenger Rail or Eastern Bypass?

39 Comments

Of course the title of this post need not be an either/or question. But I pose the question that way because I want to draw some contrasts between the two projects.

Peoria currently has four automobile bridges across the Illinois River (McClugage, Murray Baker, Bob Michel, and Cedar Street). Peoria does not currently have passenger rail service.

The Eastern Bypass would connect Route 6 at Mossville to I-74 near Morton via a north-easterly route in Tazewell County. Passenger rail service (as currently proposed) would connect Peoria to Chicago and St. Louis via Bloomington/Normal.

The Eastern Bypass is estimated to cost $650-700 million to build. The estimated cost to establish a passenger rail link between Peoria and Normal is $74.6 million.

Building the Eastern Bypass will require acquisition of the entire corridor via eminent domain and result in the destruction of more farmland. All that’s required to establish passenger rail service is the upgrading of existing rail lines.

There have been three public hearings and at least four major studies completed so far for the Eastern Bypass. There have been no public hearings and only one limited feasibility report on establishing passenger rail service to Peoria.

Opponents of passenger rail service (like Ray LaHood) contend that it’s convenient — or at least perfectly acceptable — for Peoria area residents to drive to Bloomington (40 miles away) to catch the train. Supporters of the Eastern Bypass (like the Tri-County Regional Planning Commission) say it’s too inconvenient for those in North Peoria to drive to the McClugage bridge (10 miles away) to cross the river, or to experience minor congestion for a few minutes twice a day.

IDOT has devoted several pages of their website to the Eastern Bypass study with encouragements to the public to get involved and a depository of study documents. The only thing on IDOT’s website about the possibility of establishing passenger rail service to Peoria is the aforementioned feasibility report which can be downloaded from IDOT’s Amtrak page.

Passenger rail is cheaper to establish, more sustainable to maintain, more ecologically and socially responsible, and covers a greater distance, yet it’s perceived as a greater cost to taxpayers than a highway that is nearly ten times as expensive, unnecessary, unsustainable, and only moves you in circles. Read the newspaper and you’ll see the cost of the Eastern Bypass mentioned in passing at the end of the article, as if it’s being included with a shrug saying, “that’s the way it is these days; everything costs money.” But read an article about passenger rail, and you’d think we needed to start mining for gold to afford it; the whole focus of the article is on the “tremendous cost to the taxpayers,” even though it’s a fraction of highway funding.

The Eastern Bypass is being pursued by IDOT et. al. with an aura of inevitability. There’s no serious question of “if” it will happen, but rather when and by which route. Meanwhile, IDOT is not giving any serious consideration to the establishment of passenger rail service to Peoria. They spent five years coming up with a “feasibility report” that didn’t even consider direct service to Chicago (which is the study that was actually requested), but instead studied feeder service to Normal, with no explanation of who authorized the change in scope.

At least as much effort should be going into the establishment of direct passenger rail service to Chicago as is going into the development of the Eastern Bypass. Local transportation officials as well as local legislators should be pressuring IDOT to do a real feasibility study–the one that we asked for in the first place. The assumption should be that we are going to get passenger rail service established, and the only question is which route is best (for ridership, cost, future expansion, etc.).

Why shouldn’t we approach passenger rail with the same aura of inevitability as the Eastern Bypass?

Amtrak, Tri-County Regional Planning Commission

Hey, Tri-County Regional Planning Commission: Get together behind Peoria to Chicago direct rail service

21 Comments

Here we go again. The old Peoria-to-Bloomington commuter train idea is apparently still on the table over at the Tri-County Regional Planning Commission. Let’s go over this again:

Nobody wants to take a train to Bloomington. The only reason anyone would ever take a train to Bloomington is to continue on to Chicago or St. Louis. And if their ultimate destination is elsewhere, they’ll just drive to Bloomington to catch the train. Bloomington has free parking and virtually no traffic congestion. So a Peoria-Bloomington route is doomed to fail.

Peoria to Chicago, on the other hand, would be a heavily-traveled route. Since Chicago would be the ultimate destination for most train trips anyway (they’re a major Amtrak hub, unlike St. Louis), it makes sense to have a direct route from Peoria. Those in the tri-county area could avoid the commute to Bloomington to catch the train, as well as avoiding the traffic congestion and high cost of parking in Chicago.

Look at it this way: imagine we’re talking about air service instead of train service. Can you imagine anyone seriously suggesting that the best we could do is to offer commuter flights to Bloomington for those who wanted to continue on to Chicago (or any other destination)? With a layover? Where you have to switch planes and transfer your own bags? Would anyone buy a ticket on that flight? No. And they won’t take a commuter train to Bloomington, either.

We need our legislators to start fighting for Peoria transportation options instead of fighting against them. You would think we’d be in a great position having a home-town boy as Secretary of Transportation, and yet LaHood is the biggest obstacle. He’s never supported train service for Peoria. In fact, he’s been downright ornery opposing it. Why? Does Caterpillar not want train service to Peoria or something? And what about Durbin? He supported the Quad Cities in their effort to get passenger rail service–why isn’t he doing more to push Peoria’s effort? Where are our advocates?

The Greater Peoria Area is the third-largest metropolitan statistical area (MSA) in the state. There’s demand for passenger rail service here. Instead of the Illinois Department of Transportation giving away millions of dollars to build new and unsustainable roads through cornfields (Orange Prairie Road extension, Pioneer Parkway extension), why don’t they put that money toward a responsible and sustainable mode of transportation that would help the whole region: direct passenger rail service from Peoria to Chicago?Откъде да купя икона

Amtrak, Illinois Dept. of Transportation

Direct passenger rail route to Chicago denied; Peorians told to ride the bus

12 Comments

Right about the time I stopped blogging last year, the Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) released its “Feasibility Report of Proposed Amtrak Service” between Chicago and Peoria. So I’m five months late with my analysis. But then, IDOT was about three years late releasing the study.

All you need to read to know that this feasibility report is a sham is this paragraph from the introduction:

With the successful application by the State of Illinois for federal stimulus funding to upgrade the Chicago-St. Louis corridor (hereinafter referred to as “corridor”) to a maximum speed of 110 mph, the study request was modified to one route that would provide the Peoria area with connectivity to certain Amtrak corridor trains. After an initial review of the various routes, it became apparent that instead of a complete route feasibility study between Chicago and Peoria, either a rail or bus shuttle between the Peoria area and Normal, Illinois, utilizing the new multi-modal station currently under construction at Normal, would be the most expedient way to meet the State’s goal. A decision was made by IDOT that no through-train frequencies between Peoria and Chicago were to be considered.

And there you have it. The feasibility study — first requested in March 2007 — was aborted before it ever began.

You see, the original request to study direct service between Peoria and Chicago. There was no request for this to be a high-speed train or to connect to a high-speed corridor. But then the request was inexplicably modified. Instead of simply looking at direct service, the request was changed to look at service that would connect with the new “high speed” corridor between Chicago and St. Louis that passes through Normal.

Well, that screwed up everything. Now the only routes they can consider are the shortest routes to the “high speed” corridor, and how to get the train up to 110 mph once it gets there. Based on this new criteria, IDOT decided they weren’t even going to consider direct service to Chicago from the State’s third-largest metropolitan statistical area.

Instead, they spent four and a half years researching the best rail and bus routes from here to Normal. It doesn’t take a member of Mensa to figure out that rail service between Peoria and Normal is idiotic. But they did the math anyway and determined that it would cost $134 million in infrastructure and capital costs, plus an operating subsidy of $2,211,000 per year. Bus service? No infrastructure or capital costs, and an annual operating subsidy of $273,000.

So, thanks to a mysteriously modified request, we have a “feasibility report” that says, “drive to Normal if you want to go to Chicago.” In other words: status quo. No rail service for you.

The first question I want answered is, who modified the request? Was it IDOT? The Tri-County Regional Planning Commission? Ray LaHood? Who? And my next question is, of course, why?

Why was a study of a direct route to Chicago aborted? Included at the end of the report (starting on page 19) is what I can only assume is their “initial review of various routes.” And “Route B” looks very attractive, and feasible. It would travel south from Chicago through Joliet and Pontiac to Chenoa, then head west to East Peoria over the Toledo, Peoria and Western Railroad (TP&W), which they say has “relatively light” traffic — only three trains a day on average.

Furthermore, the cost to upgrade the TP&W infrastructure so that passenger trains could travel at 79 mph (not “high speed”) is only $52 million — less than half the $106 million they estimate it would cost to improve the tracks between Peoria and Normal to the same speed. Heck, even if they upgraded Route B to 110 mph (“high speed”), it would still cost $6 million less than upgrading tracks between Peoria and Normal to 79 mph speeds. And since Route B would be a through-train from Peoria all the way to Chicago, it would have higher ridership and thus higher revenue, which would reduce its annual operating subsidy.

But IDOT didn’t consider this option because, apparently, it wasn’t “the most expedient way to meet the State’s goal.” Why wasn’t it?

Who spiked the IDOT-Amtrak feasibility study and why? That’s the question that demands an answer.

Amtrak, City Council, City of Peoria

Peoria’s peculiar priorities

22 Comments

The City has set its “top” and “high” strategic priorities at its latest planning session, reports the Journal Star:

Of 27 possibilities, the council labeled only six policy priorities as “top” priorities for 2011-12. Those included focusing on code enforcement performance and direction, developing a school strategy and action plan, focusing on short-term shared services with Peoria County, prioritizing city services, framing the city’s economic development strategy, and the redevelopment of the Hotel Pere Marquette into the $102 million Marriott Hotel project.

What do you think, Peoria? Are these your top priorities?

I agree with the focus on code enforcement, shared services with Peoria County, and prioritizing city services. I don’t know what “framing” our economic development strategy entails, but if it’s a discussion about what we will and won’t do to attract business, I think it would be a worthy discussion.

I question the value of spending city resources to develop a “school strategy and action plan.” We have separate public bodies that administer the public schools in this area. It seems redundant to me that the City would now be spending its time discussing schools, too. What’s next? Will area school districts start spending their time on a city strategy and action plan?

And then there’s the Wonderful Development. Despite the developer’s inability to meet any deadlines in either of the redevelopment agreements he’s inked with the City, and despite the fact that he’s having trouble paying his bills across the river, the City Council is apparently still just itching to give him $37 million of taxpayer money. Regardless of who is developing it, this is not a top priority in this city right now. The redevelopment of the Pere Marquette should be done by the private sector, just like the former Holiday Inn City Centre was recently transformed into a Four Points by Sheraton without any City assistance. The City has no business getting into the hotel business; they should let it go and focus on improving their core services instead.

The council also prioritized a management agenda for the coming year. Of the 14 items, the council selected “top” priorities for engaging the community on appropriate behavior, developing a neighborhood crime reduction strategy, containing health care costs, a community investment plan for capital and equipment, study fees, and reorganize the city.

That’s all well and good, but the real test of whether it’s a “top” priority will come at budget time. Will these priorities really be reflected in the budget? Or will the increased debt service created by non-essential items like the Wonderful Development crowd out the community’s top needs?

Developing a strategy for a four-year state university leaped to a “high priority” status for the City Council to address…. [City Manager Patrick Urich] said in the next six months, the council will have discussions with state lawmakers and other state officials about whether there is an opportunity for Peoria to land a four-year public school…. Other “high priority” polices included directing an early retirement program for city employees, updating financial policies, providing more assistance for businesses, developing a strategy for landlord and tenant accountability, and advocating for a rail link between Peoria and Normal.

I’m befuddled by this attempt to attract a new four-year public university. Where did this idea come from? How long has the council been talking about it? How did this rise to the top of the list?

I like the idea of working on a strategy for landlord and tenant accountability; hopefully something positive will come from that. Updating financial policies is certainly a good idea, assuming they strengthen fiscally-conservative policies.

I think we currently provide more than enough “assistance for businesses.” We regularly waive our zoning regulations to the detriment of surrounding homeowners. We use the Enterprise Zone to benefit businesses all over the city instead of the depressed areas it was intended to help. We loan taxpayer money to businesses that doesn’t always get repaid, and we give away no small amount of tax money as a direct subsidy/grant (e.g., $37 million for the Wonderful Development). We can’t afford the “assistance for businesses” we’re providing now; how can we afford to do more? Oh, that’s right, we’ll cut police, fire, road maintenance, and other basic services.

And finally, they’re now advocating for a rail link with Normal. I applaud the priority to reestablish rail service to Peoria, but the rail link needs to be with Chicago, not Normal. Nobody wants to take a train to Normal. Such a link would not attract enough ridership to be feasible. I’ve written on this topic at length before; you can read more here and here.

2011 Election, Amtrak, City Council, City of Peoria, Transportation

Quick comments on the news

15 Comments

Scanning over the Journal Star this morning, there are several interesting articles:

  • Transportation Symposium — Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood had some words of wisdom for Peoria about the possibility of getting passenger rail service: “Get your act together…. Get your priorities. Put them on a list. Agree on them,” he said. “Make sure your elected representatives know what those priorities are.” Those priorities should be to establish direct passenger rail service between Peoria and Chicago. The Peoria Passenger Rail Coalition advocates for that outcome.

  • Another City Council candidate announces — Andre Williams is going to run for the Council, joining Chuck Weaver and Chuck Grayeb who have already announced. I imagine there will be more surprise candidates next week. If more than 10 people run, there will be a primary in February to narrow the field to 10; the general election is in April. Williams is a strategic planner who wants to see the City clarify its vision and compete against larger cities like St. Louis for economic development instead of East Peoria. It will be interesting to hear how he thinks we ought to do that.

  • Carnegie’s closed –Not to be nitpicky, but I believe the restaurant is actually called Carnegie’s 501 now, a shadow of its former glory when it was known simply as Carnegie’s. This comment from hotel manager Bill Carter was telling: “We’re temporarily closing to make some improvements. Depending on what happens with the new hotel [emphasis added], it could reopen as a remade restaurant or it could just reopen with some improvements.” Wait, I thought Mr. Matthews had all his plans finalized and all his funding secured? That’s what he told the council months ago. Why all the uncertainty?
Amtrak, City of Peoria, Illinois Dept. of Transportation

Amtrak study for Peoria delayed another year

Leave a comment

Since 2007, Amtrak and the Illinois Department of Transportation have been studying the feasibility of reestablishing a Peoria-Chicago passenger rail route, but completion of the study has been delayed multiple times. IDOT Bureau Chief of Railroads George Weber now estimates the report will be released in late summer or early fall of 2011.

“Unfortunately, studies such as the Peoria one have had to be further delayed because of priorities with the FRA [Federal Railroad Administration] and projects that we (State of Illinois) have been awarded federal funds,” Weber said via e-mail. He added that railroad companies (which own the corridors and physical tracks and ties) are doing modeling and capacity studies for a number of similar projects nationwide, and that is also contributing to the delay.

Ridership on the Chicago to St. Louis Amtrak route continues to increase, up about 15% over last year according to IDOT statistics. Overall ridership in Illinois is up 8% from the same period last year.

Amtrak, Tri-County Regional Planning Commission

Passenger Rail task force members include former Peoria mayor

Leave a comment

Richard Neumiller, former mayor of Peoria and member of the now defunct railroad commission, is on a new passenger rail task force put together by the Tri-County Regional Planning Commission (TCRPC). Neumiller was appointed by Mayor Jim Ardis to represent Peoria on the task force. Here is the full list of task force members, provided by the TCRPC:

Illinois River Valley Council of Governments

City of Peoria Dick Neumiller
Village of Bartonville Rhonda Wolfe
City of Chillicothe Randy Stevens
Limestone Township Bob Lawless
Tazewell County Clint Drury
City of Pekin Steve Brown
City of East Peoria Ty Livingston
Village of Morton Norm Durflinger
Washington Township Gary Manier
Woodford County John Krug
Village of Roanoke Kevin Braker
City of Eureka Marc Pasteris
Village of Metamora Bill Belshaw
Woodford County Township Gayl Wyss
Peoria County Paul Feltenstein

Tri-County Regional Planning Commission

Stephen Van Winkle John Blossom
Russ Crawford James Polk
Dean Grimm  

Bloomington Normal

Mark Peterson, Town of Normal
Aaron Quick, City of Bloomington

Ex-officio Members

Steve Jaeger, HOI Port District
Larry Koch

If you’re counting, you may notice that there are 22 members (not including ex-officio members), not 21 as stated in the Journal Star the other day. For more information on the Illinois River Valley Council of Governments, see the TCRPC’s overview here.

I caught up with Terry Kohlbuss, executive director of TCRPC, and we had a good discussion regarding the task force’s plans to establish a link between Peoria and Bloomington. On the positive side, they still see a direct passenger rail connection between Peoria and Chicago as the ultimate goal. That’s important, because it means they are still awaiting the Amtrak-IDOT report and are not trying to second-guess its conclusions. However, where we disagree is on the strategy for meeting that ultimate goal. As stated in my previous post, the task force wants to pursue a link with the Bloomington Amtrak station first — starting with carpooling, then vans, then buses, then a passenger rail shuttle, and eventually direct service via Bloomington to Chicago.

I still fear that such a strategy is too risky. Rail service from Peoria to Bloomington will not produce high ridership, and given the cost of establishing Peoria-Chicago service, low ridership between Peoria and Bloomington could be used by politicians to justify killing passenger rail here before a direct link to Chicago can be established. I’m afraid decision-makers would not conclude that Peoria-Bloomington service is unpopular, but that rail service in general is unpopular and unsupported. That would be a real tragedy that would set Peoria back thirty years.

A better strategy would be to establish direct service between Peoria and Chicago first — which will produce high ridership numbers — and use that success to add more rail lines in the future, perhaps even an east-west route like the one being proposed by the task force, especially if it could be extended to Champaign.

Amtrak

Rail link to Bloomington will doom rail service for Central Illinois

40 Comments

The Journal Star reports (no link — it’s a “First in Print” article) that a new passenger rail advisory group has been formed:

A 21-member committee formed of local government officials and appointees from the Tri-County Regional Planning Commission, it set priorities in its first couple of meetings. In the long run, the goal would be passenger service that links downstate’s three Amtrak lines with service from Galesburg to Champaign. That starts with service from East Peoria to Normal.

The article is by columnist Terry Bibo, and unfortunately she doesn’t list any members of the committee other than Tazewell County board member Dean Grimm (who’s the chairman) and Tri-County Regional Planning director Terry Kohlbuss. It might be helpful to know who is making these decisions.

You might think from reading the quote above that the committee only wants to see rail service between East Peoria and Normal, but not so fast:

[T]ransportation officials are applying for a $160,000 grant for alternatives analysis. The grant would look at possibilities from carpooling to buses to rail service.

Kohlbuss is quoted later as saying he sees it as “a ramp-up process” to increase the number of rail users and build up demand. Grimm recognized the need for public support, saying, “I would hope people in Peoria — in central Illinois — value passenger train transportation. That’s the only way this is going to fly.” State Sen. Dave Koehler and Peoria Mayor Jim Ardis are reportedly already on board with the committee’s goals. I heard that Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood was on the radio this morning singing the praises of this plan as well. (LaHood, you may recall, used to be against rail service, saying people should just drive to Bloomington.)

My take: This is terribly disappointing in so many ways, I hardly know where to start.

On the positive side, I want to say that I’m glad our local leaders are focusing more attention on passenger rail. We need our local leaders’ buy-in so that the money can be appropriated and the project can happen. That there’s a committee formed is a good start in principle, although I would like to know who exactly is on it.

I knew a committee was being formed and expressed interest in being on it myself, but obviously the decision was made not to include me. That’s a little disappointing, given that I’ve started a grassroots organization called the Peoria Passenger Rail Coalition and have talked to the Mayor and Kohlbuss about my interest in working with them. But hey, they have their reasons (probably very good ones) and it’s their right to choose who they want and don’t want on their committee. I have no complaint about that.

I do have a complaint about their plans, however.

First of all, the timing is unfortunate. There is still an Amtrak-IDOT study pending that’s looking at the feasibility of establishing Peoria-Chicago passenger rail service. We really should see the results of that study before we assume it can’t be done and start looking at least-desired options. I fear this new development could influence the current study — perhaps even lead to its abandonment — if IDOT and Amtrak feel the political will is gone for a Peoria-Chicago connection.

Secondly, the plan itself is flawed. There is no demand of which I’m aware for rail access to Bloomington. If you’re going to Bloomington, you’re going to need a car in order to get around their sprawling city (likewise for anyone from Bloomington who would be traveling to Peoria). If you’re coming from Chicago, it’s reasonable to take the train and rent a car or take the bus in Bloomington. But it would be absurd to take the train from Peoria to Bloomington and then rent a car or take the bus. We’re so close to Bloomington that people traveling there are going to drive, period. It’s simply not a viable rail destination from Peoria.

Equally implausible is that sufficient numbers of people will want to take a train to Bloomington simply to connect with a Chicago- or St. Louis-bound train. To be sure, there would be some ridership for such a service, but not enough to sustain it. It would add time and cost that could be saved by driving to Bloomington and parking for free at their Amtrak station. How many Peoria residents already drive to Bloomington to take advantage of cheaper airfares and free parking at the Central Illinois Regional Airport? The same thing would likely occur here.

At least there’s a reason to go to Bloomington — to catch another train. Looking at it the other way, why would anyone want to travel from Bloomington to Peoria? Or East Peoria, for that matter. I mean, is there any chain restaurant or big box store in East Peoria that Bloomington doesn’t already have? What’s the attraction, exactly?

The most dangerous thing about this plan, however, is Grimm’s final quote — remember he said, “I would hope people in Peoria — in central Illinois — value passenger train transportation.” What this means is, if the Peoria-Bloomington rail link is a failure (as I believe it would be), then our local officials are going to believe that means people in Peoria and central Illinois don’t value train transportation. And that would be a travesty.

Central Illinois does value train travel, and will use train transportation — but only if it’s a viable route that goes where we want to go. We don’t want to go to Bloomington. We want to go to Chicago. Establish Peoria to Chicago passenger rail service and you will see success.

Amtrak, Peoria MSA

Help bring passenger rail back to Peoria

57 Comments

As you may have read in today’s Journal Star, I’ve started a grassroots organization for the purpose of advocating for passenger rail service between Peoria and Chicago. It’s called the Peoria Passenger Rail Coalition, and it’s free to join.

I talk to a lot of people who would like to have train service in Peoria, but there doesn’t seem to be any kind of organized effort to quantify the demand. That’s a problem, because if our elected officials think there isn’t much demand, they won’t appropriate the money for renewed rail service. So, the purpose of the organization is to raise public awareness of the benefits of passenger rail service to the Peoria region, gain public support for passenger rail service, and successfully persuade state and federal lawmakers to appropriate the necessary funds to make passenger rail service to Peoria a reality.

Here’s some more information from an article I wrote last year for InterBusiness Issues:

Why Bring Amtrak to Peoria?
Amtrak ridership is up nationwide, and Illinois is no exception to that trend. Amtrak reports that ridership on trains between Chicago and St. Louis “was up 16.5 percent in Fiscal 2008 over 2007. Ridership increased 18.5 percent on the Chicago-Carbondale route, was up 19.8 percent on the Chicago-Quincy route, and grew 25.9 percent on the Hiawathas.” This trend continues in 2009. In January, ridership between Chicago and St. Louis was up 12 percent over the same period in 2008, according to figures released by IDOT. [Update: The trend continues even in 2010, with monthly ridership levels 11 to 20 percent higher than 2009.]

More people are choosing to travel by train, and more communities are requesting passenger rail access. Amtrak recently completed studies on adding train service to Rockford and the Quad Cities. Peoria, with the third-largest metropolitan statistical area in the state—over 370,000 residents—would be a natural addition as well.

Restoring passenger rail service to Peoria would connect our population to the national rail transportation system. Travelers from Peoria could go anywhere in the U.S. that Amtrak serves—and just as importantly, travelers from all over the U.S. could come to Peoria. Peorians traveling to Chicago by train would benefit from low fares (significantly cheaper than the cost of driving to and parking in Chicago) and no traffic congestion. By leaving the “driving” to Amtrak, transit time can be used for work or leisure. Likewise, college students, businessmen and women, and tourists will find Amtrak to be a convenient way to travel to Peoria and enjoy our community. Bringing Amtrak and its ridership into the community will have a positive economic impact on the region.

There are also environmental benefits to passenger rail service. The U.S. Department of Energy found that Amtrak is more energy-efficient than either automobile or commercial air travel. “Amtrak energy intensity was 2,935 British Thermal Units (BTUs) per passenger-mile and commercial airlines were 3,587. Commuter rail was 2,751 and automobiles were 3,549 BTUs,” according to the DOE’s Transportation Energy Data Book. By taking the train, we can lower the carbon footprint of our trips. It is simply more energy-efficient to take the train directly from Peoria than to drive to Chicago, or even Normal or Galesburg, to catch the train there.

Nationally, a greater emphasis is being placed on sustainable transportation networks—with less dependence on the automobile, and thus, less oil consumption and dependence on imported oil—and passenger rail is part of that national strategy. Last October, Congress passed and the president signed the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, which authorized $13.1 billion for Amtrak over the next five years. The recent stimulus bill included $1.3 billion in additional Amtrak funding, as well as $8 billion for high-speed rail. Locally, Senator Durbin has been supportive of adding new service to Illinois cities and improving existing service, and the Tri-County Regional Planning Commission’s long-range transportation plan lists as a top priority: “connect with Amtrak.”

Finally, consider that transportation is an essential service, imperative for the safety and mobility of Illinois citizens. Improving our transportation options improves our overall infrastructure, and our economy benefits from the jobs brought by infrastructure improvement. The economy is also helped by making our city more attractive to potential employers and employees, who are increasingly looking for greener cities in which to live and work.

I’m hopeful that we can convince community leaders to settle for nothing less than reestablishing direct rail service between Peoria and Chicago. Unfortunately, the trend lately has been toward a lesser goal: connecting Peoria with Normal. It seems the community leaders are now seriously considering train service that would simply go from Peoria to the Normal Amtrak station, at which point passengers will have to disembark and wait for a connecting train to complete their trip. That’s a recipe for failure.

There are many benefits of taking a train to Chicago: it’s cheaper than parking and avoids a lot of traffic congestion, just to name a couple. But what benefits are there of taking a train to Normal? Parking is free and there’s no congestion between our two towns. Instead of saving time, it would actually add time to the trip. That alone will depress ridership. But ridership would also be low because there’s not much population on the Norfolk Southern line that runs between Peoria and Bloomington. A train from Peoria to Chicago could hit many underserved communities, picking up much needed ridership.

The fact is, people don’t want to take a train to Normal. They want to take a train to Chicago. You wouldn’t want to take a flight to Bloomington’s airport and switch planes to continue on to Chicago, but that’s exactly the kind of service that’s being considered for passenger rail. I hope this disastrous plan for new rail service is abandoned, and direct rail service to Chicago is once again pursued.

If you feel the same way, I would encourage you to add your voice to the coalition.