High-Speed Rail: Agreement Reached On Chicago-St. Louis Train Corridor

ST. LOUIS (AP) -- Union Pacific Railroad and the state of Illinois announced an agreement Friday to assess what must be done to operate both freight and high-speed passenger trains on the Chicago-to-St. Louis rail corridor.

The railroad said it will provide the study to the Illinois Department of Transportation by June. The parties described the move as a critical step for Illinois to compete for federal funds to build a high-speed rail line in that corridor.

The announcement followed private talks Friday in St. Louis between Democratic Sens. Dick Durbin of Illinois and Claire McCaskill of Missouri and officials with Amtrak, Union Pacific and IDOT.

"IDOT and Union Pacific have a memorandum of understanding to outline the work needed to have a true high-speed rail corridor between St. Louis and Chicago," Durbin said afterward.

He noted that President Barack Obama has told the states that if they're interested in some of the $8 billion in federal economic stimulus funds designated for high-speed rail, they should "step up and be ready to compete."

"We've stepped up," Durbin said.

Durbin and McCaskill have been lobbying for a high-speed rail corridor between the two cities.

The $8 billion is part of $64 billion in the federal stimulus package for roads, bridges, rail and transit. It's part of an overall $787 billion economic stimulus spending package.

Story continues below

advertisement

Durbin said the money will be awarded on a competitive basis.

McCaskill said she also will pursue high-speed rail for the St. Louis-to-Kansas City corridor.

"It's not just the East Coast that wants high-speed rail," McCaskill said. "It's the grand and glorious middle."

St. Louis Mayor Francis Slay applauded the senators for getting "things done." He said high-speed rail is "environmentally friendly, energy efficient and economical."

Illinois Transportation Secretary Gary Hannig said the agreement signed Friday with the railroad was first in the U.S. The study would be completed in time for the federal government's announcement of application guidelines in June. He said it would serve as a blueprint for asking Congress to help fund development of a high-speed rail corridor.

Robert Turner, a senior vice president for Union Pacific, said freight and passenger rail have coexisted unevenly, and that the challenge would be to integrate them. Before rail travel began declining in the 1960s, the Chicago-to-St. Louis corridor had separate tracks for passenger trains and freight. It was later reduced to a single track but the bed of the other track is still intact.

Turner said there are ways to accommodate the two. Slower-moving freight trains could be diverted on turnouts to make way for passenger trains traveling as fast as 110 mph.

The Chicago-to-St. Louis trip would be reduced from almost six hours to fewer than four.

Illinois will pay up to $400,000 for the study. Durbin said developing the line would create 10,000 construction jobs.

-ASSOCIATED PRESS

Comments

[Bill Lorch]

After reading all the negatives. I cant believe the stone age thinking here. We are so far behind the industrial world in Mass transit We are like a 4 th world country, Think about it No more coal fired Power plants no more diesel smoke in the air Electric way to go . As an old man my vision i can see it is Mag lev between the major cities, Powered by wind an solar energy the mind is limitless if one would just let go an dream of tomorrow.

[Totto]

Of course, you're right. It's all happening, but elsewhere first.

[Totto]

Sceptical Americans really ought to take a rail trip from Brussels to Paris or London to Brussels to see what's been going on in the other industrialized world during the past twenty-five or so years. In Taiwan an incredible new high-speed system is operating. China and, of course, Japan have great city-to-city systems. That's part of the reason we are uncompetitive, which some people seem to prefer. Soon it's going to be plug-in cars and no more gas guzzling SUV's whether some like it or not .

[TheMoon]

Is making an agreement to assess what is needed to be done progress?

How about some ACTUAL progress, like buying right-of-ways, laying new ties/track, buying engines and cars. That kind of progress.

/St. Louis to Chicago is just for the Cubs/Cardinals fans so they don't have to sit in those cramped LAMER buses. :D

[Sandy Belote]

Valid arguements can certainly be made as to whether this proposal is pork or progress.

With that said, my husband and I own and operate The BEALL MANSION a Greater St. Louis Bed and Breakfast located in Alton, Illinois. Through a joint effort with the Illiinois Bed and Breakfast Association and the Illinois Department of Transportation, we offer a special Amtrak Bed and Breakfast Getaway Package . There is no doubt that the high speed trains would be a popular option for many of our guests.

Is it the best way to spend our limited tax resources becomes the question.

[Totto]

Some Americans are getting tired of sleeping on airport floors, every time the weather gets bad. We need an alternative.

[BushBites]

Chicago to Milwaukee to Minneapolis makes more sense to me.

[Totto]

That's also in the plan. We used to have the North Shore Line to Milwaukee that was quite rapid.

[Totto]

See "Map Of Potential High-Speed Rail Built By The Stimulus", Think Progress, March 21.
http.//thi­nkprogress­.org/

[DRaymond]

This is a joke masquerading as 'high speed rail' and should be rejected.

The trains will travel 'as fast as' 110 miles per hour? That is half of what is considered state of the art and 40 miles per hour slower than the Acela trains. Moreover the 110mph would only apply to sections of track where passengers and rail are allways on separate tracks and there are no at-grade crossings. It is a way for UP to get the federal government to pay for upgrading their freight lines.

When passenger trains share rails with freight lines they have to be designed heavier. Freight and passenger on the same lines is considered a less safe arrangement.

Four hours for St. Louis to Chicago is not fast enough to compete with air travel and only twenty minutes faster than driving.

Instead of spreading the money around on a bunch of lame projects like this they should pick the one best place to put a REAL hight speed rail system so Americans will see what modern ground travel is like.

[Totto]

Actually, the speeds on other high-speed rails systems vary greatly, due to terrain. Total travel time will be much reduced. We have serious problems with rights-of-way, since the land adjacent to our rail lines has been sold off over the past sixty years. Elsewhere, huge public investments have been made.

[Adam Burling]

I ride Amtrak from Chicago to Macomb more than a dozen times a year and the route is plagued with delays. I fear this project will have the same issues.

[Totto]

We need dedicated passenger rail lines, as in the rest of the industrialized world. Not shared with freight.

[Dr Manhattan]

Of course. Everybody in Chicago dying to get to St. Louis. What cr@p. This is a thinly disguised perk for the politicians to have an easier time getting back and forth from Springfield to Chicago. If they really want to make a useful connection, how making a high speed rail that connects to New York. Connection to St. Louis = waste of money.

[Totto]

It's called "a rail network". The rest of the world has 'em, Mr. Taxcuts Solve Everything! The rights of way to New York will take a lot of time and much more money, which you will oppose, of course. You probably would have opposed Eisenhower's Interstate Highway System!

[Dr Manhattan]

Wow. It's called logical thinking. Most of the posters try to use it, Mr. Head up my Ar se! It's a load of practically useless pork, and pointing it out out doesn't make a person a Republician, d op e.

[Totto]

The first link, twenty-five years ago or so, of the TGV (Train a Grand Vitesse) was between Paris and Lyon. Now Europe is criss-crossed with 250mph trains providing an efficient and very comfortable alternative to air travel.