California Zephyr Potential HSR corridor for Chicago - Omaha

It's always a toss-up whether this goes in Amtrak or HSR forum, but since it involves the Zephr route....

High-speed rail route options include California Zephyr

GALESBURG — The Federal Railroad Administration, in cooperation with the Iowa Department of Transportation, is kicking off the Chicago to Omaha Regional Passenger Rail System Planning Study. The Iowa DOT will host an online, self-directed, open house meeting beginning Monday, available at www.iowadot.gov/chicagotoomaha.

Interesting, I've always thought that a DEN-CHI train over BN operating independently of the DEN-West train over UP would be a better deal. This seems like a similar affair.

Tadman wrote:Interesting, I've always thought that a DEN-CHI train over BN operating independently of the DEN-West train over UP would be a better deal. This seems like a similar affair.

Wasn't the Denver Zephyr pretty heavily patronized right up until A-day?

This is not really a HSR corridor as the plans have been discussed in terms of 79 to 90 mph speeds, although I see the state is considering 110 mph operation as part of the study. This is more than just the California Zephyr as this is looking at a corridor service from Chicago to Omaha.

The obvious route, setting aside track conditions and upgrade costs, would be through the largest city in the state, Des Moines. The Moline/Quad Cities to Iowa City to Des Moines to Omaha route would hit more of the state population centers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iowa#Major_Cities) than the other routes. The catch is, of course, that Iowa is currently stalling on the Quad Cities to Iowa City part of the Chicago to Iowa City, even though the project is 80% federally funded. Fortunately Illinois has been able to parcel off its part of the corridor project and will be proceeding with track upgrades and purchase of rolling stock for a Chicago to Quad Cities corridor service in 2015. So that much of the corridor will be in place, if or when Iowa changes its mind.

Meanwhile, the current California Zephyr route is getting $17.3 million of HSIPR funding for the Ottumwa Sub Crossover Improvements project. Iowa has taken that money, but it is 100% ARRA money with no state match, so it not costing the state anything.

Of the options:

Option 1: Hits large cities and uses soon-to-be active passenger rails east of Dubuque. However, it's much farther north than necessary.

Option 2: The fastest right now, this route hits several major population centers. Good luck getting the UP to play ball with their major Chicago access though.

Option 3: Probably the cheapest, but also the least useful with no major cities (save the outskirts of Cedar Rapids) en route.

Option 4: Currently slow and twisty, but the most direct and with the most on-line traffic potential. Also the most easily purchased outright, save for Option 3, and will soon host passenger service from the Quad Cities to Wyanet.

Option 5: Second-fastest, currently hosts service, but also hits only a few major cities once past Illinois.


My thoughts:
Option 5 to Wyanet, Option 4 through the Quad Cities to Omaha. If the BNSF refuses to play ball with more passenger trains, then use Option 3 to Cedar Rapids, build alongside the CRANDIC to South Amana, and Option 4 to Omaha. Start corridor service to Ottumwa from Chicago when the CZ is rerouted.

Reading off the map, the routes go through these cities and towns:

Route 1: Chicago - Elgin - Rockford - Dubuque - Waterloo - Fort Dodge - Omaha
Route 2: Chicago - DeKalb - Clinton - Cedar Rapids - Ames - Omaha
Route 3: Chicago - Elgin - Savanna - Cedar Rapids - Huxley - Omaha
Route 4: Chicago - Joliet - Wyanet - Moline - Iowa City - Des Moines - Omaha
Route 5: Chicago - Aurora - Wyanet - Galesburg - Burlington - Osceola - Omaha

Route 5 is Amtrak's California Zephyr's current route.

Iowa city populations:

Route 1 .. D 94k .. W 168k
Route 2 .. CR 258k .. A 90k
Route 3 .. CR 258k .. (A 90k)
Route 4 .. QC 380k .. IC 153k .. DM 570k
Route 5 (too small for Wikipedia's list)

So between these routes, I think that Route 4 is the best one. I must say that I'm surprised that the CZ uses Route 5 and not Route 4.

This is supposed to be paid for with state money, correct? If so, what will that mean in terms of public support in Iowa and Nebraska?

lpetrich wrote: So between these routes, I think that Route 4 is the best one. I must say that I'm surprised that the CZ uses Route 5 and not Route 4.

On A-day Route 4 was the Rock Island, which stayed out of Amtrak and continued running it's 2 remaining passenger trains. This route simply wasn't an option for Amtrak. And Rock Island's bankruptcy and deferred maintenance did awful things to the track quality, which is why it hasn't been an option since then. According to Wikipedia, this line isn't even signaled anymore.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iowa_Interstate_Railroad

Mcoov wrote:This is supposed to be paid for with state money, correct? If so, what will that mean in terms of public support in Iowa and Nebraska?

The Chicago to Omaha corridor planning study is being done with a $1 million federal HSIPR funding grant. Don't know if there is any state matching funds in the study. State and presumably federal funding will be necessary down the road, of course, if after settling on a route, Iowa and Nebraska decide to proceed with a passenger rail route though Iowa to Omaha. If the Iowa legislature and Governor were in full support of the funded Chicago to Iowa City project, that would get an upgraded passenger corridor in place partway across the state and at least, make extending the service to Des Moines the next logical step.

But the Iowa City extension remains in limbo as I understand it. So the Tier I EIS study will lay out the options for a route and perhaps make a decision on the route, so if there is more support for a passenger train service in a few years, the study will have taken care of the first long steps in that process.

Found this news article from January updating the status of the funded extension to Iowa City. Headline "Iowa DOT director: No danger of losing $87 million federal grant for Iowa City train" at http://blogs.desmoinesregister.com/dmr/ ... ity-train/. The funding is FY2010 funding, so the FRA has time to keep the funds on hold while Iowa sorts out the politics. I'm impressed that in the comments to the article, there are 4 positive comments on extending service to Iowa City. Usually get variations on no one rides trains anymore or trains are a waste of money posts in the comments.

When parts of routes 4 and 5 were compared for the service to Moline and Iowa City, they found that the Chicago-Joliet-Wyanet via the CN and Iowa Interstate did not compare well to the Chicago-Naperville-Wyanet route on the BNSF. My initial reaction is that the best route is Chicago-Naperville-Wyanet-Moline-Iowa City-Des Moines-Omaha. That should be considered among the alternatives.

In addition, 110 mph track from Aurora to Wyanet would also benefit the Illinois Zephyr, Carl Sandburg, Southwest Chief and California Zephyr.

My second choice would be Chicago-DeKalb-Cedar Rapids-Ames-Omaha on the UP route. The UP tracks are in better shape. If either route can beat the time between Chicago and Omaha on the BN, the California Zephyr should be transferred to the new route. The existing CZ route though Iowa just doesn't go through the population centers.

(Disclaimer: my family owns farmland near the Iowa Interstate)

110 mph operations over freight owned rails isn't going to happen in the near future - with the exception of the UP line through Springfield between Chicago and St. Louis. The only reason this line can have 110 mph train speeds is because an Illinois politician inserted this speed into a corporate merger or buyout agreement with the UP.

All the other 110 mph or higher rail lines in existence or in the works are over tracks owned by public transit agencies. All the NEC lines are owned by Amtrak or local transit agencies. Much of the line to Michigan from Chicago is owned by Amtrak and Michigan. The 110 mph operating sections in California are owned by local transit agencies. The 150 mph DesertXpress line will be privately owned - or leased from the State.

I hope my point is becoming obvious. Yet I continue to read advocates suggesting 110 mph operations over freight owned rail corridors is remotely possible. It isn't likely unless some other politician sticks their nose into another corporate railroad merger agreement....

electricron wrote:110 mph operations over freight owned rails isn't going to happen in the near future - with the exception of the UP line through Springfield between Chicago and St. Louis. The only reason this line can have 110 mph train speeds is because an Illinois politician inserted this speed into a corporate merger or buyout agreement with the UP.

All the other 110 mph or higher rail lines in existence or in the works are over tracks owned by public transit agencies. All the NEC lines are owned by Amtrak or local transit agencies. Much of the line to Michigan from Chicago is owned by Amtrak and Michigan. The 110 mph operating sections in California are owned by local transit agencies. The 150 mph DesertXpress line will be privately owned - or leased from the State.

I hope my point is becoming obvious. Yet I continue to read advocates suggesting 110 mph operations over freight owned rail corridors is remotely possible. It isn't likely unless some other politician sticks their nose into another corporate railroad merger agreement....

I don't believe this isn't strictly true. The 110 mph sections of the Empire Service are on CSX owned-trackage. Only now is Amtrak taking over all the maintenance.

The current CZ route is a historical accident. If I remember my history correctly, CBQ and MILW/UP still ran passenger trains from Chicago to Omaha on A-Day. The MILW route, of course, is now mostly gone in Iowa and I suspect did not measure up to CBQ in quality of track even in 1971. IC still ran to Waterloo, I think, but not west of there. CRIP had ended service west of the Quad Cities, and it's track conditions were in terminal decline. I don't think anyone thought that running via Ottumwa and Osceola was optimal for Chicago-Omaha service, but it was the best trackage available, and I suspect Amtrak/DOT were much more focused on the best way to Denver and the West Coast rather than Omaha. And, of course, the fact that the CBQ route has all the passenger accoutrements in place is its primary selling point as a Chicago-Omaha route today.

If I were forced to choose a single route for improved service, I agree with Mr. Stephens and Mr. Stolberg that BNSF to Wyanet and IAIS from Wyanet westward is the way to go. While there would be the expense of upgrading the IAIS trackage across Iowa, you would get the most bang for the buck ridershipwise. It's pointless to include the ex-CRIP east of Wyanet as an alternative, as IL already rejected that as a possibility for QC service. Likewise, I think it's silly to include rebuilding the MILW across Iowa as a possibility--way too expensive, and you miss the biggest market (Des Moines) in the state even after spending all the money. The UP (ex-CNW) is in terrific shape, but also very crowded with freight trains (and we all know how UP feels about having passenger trains on its busy routes). I suspect there's capacity on the CN route through Waterloo, but it would still take a significant investment to bring it up to passenger standards--and it misses so much of Iowa's populations centers (although there has been discussion of someday extending the soon-to-be Blackhawk service from Dubuque to Waterloo).

That leaves the current route and IAIS as realistic possibilities. While BNSF would be cheaper (in terms of start up costs), corridor service, in my opinion, should aim to provide the most service to the most people, provided that the costs are not wholly unreasonable. For that reason, I think IAIS west of Wyanet is the best alternative.

But what about a possibility not currently under study? Is it wholly unrealistic to think that some day there might again be more than one passenger route between Omaha and Chicago?

It's not unreasonable to imagine one-a-day on the BNSF main to Omaha and the rest via the IAIS and Quad Cities. However, I stand by my previous statement that service on the BNSF ought to be corridor service to Ottumwa, with a connecting bus to either Des Moines or along US 34 to Omaha.

Also, Mr. Aficionado, technically the route was no accident - the historic California Zephyr traveled on the Burlington to Denver, then the Rio Grande to Salt Lake City. The major difference is the use of the ex-Southern Pacific from there to Oakland, rather than the ex-Western Pacific. The Rock Island was never involved, running its own trains to Denver and the West Coast in conjunction with the Southern Pacific.