Plans for High Speed Rail Between Chicago and Cleveland

[JLJ061]

http://www.wsbt.com/news/local/64178362.html

[goodnightjohnwayne]

I would think that this route might justify additional service, perhaps even multiple daylight trains, but this is hardly a matter for so-called Federal high speed rail funding.

[LI Loco]

Reasons this market has potential (not necessarily in order):
1. Distance - approx. 340 miles
2. Terrain - generally flat, including one of the longest straightaways in the country.
3. Several sizable intermediate points that are potential traffic generators: Elyria/Lorain, Sandusky, Toledo, Elkhart, South Bend, Gary/Hammond

[FRN9]

It would be great if they could see this as a first step of a Chicago > NYC HSR line and build it out accordingly for 225MPH trains.

[hi55us]

It would be great if they could see this as a first step of a Chicago > NYC HSR line and build it out accordingly for 225MPH trains.

Riding over this route it seems like a perfect fit for a 200 MPH line, heck if the nec is operating at 110-125 (with all the curves, commuter trains ect...) this should be much faster.

[Suburban Station]

I would think that this route might justify additional service, perhaps even multiple daylight trains, but this is hardly a matter for so-called Federal high speed rail funding.

the opposite of this statement is true

[NellieBly]

Er...if anyone actually reads the application by Indiana for FRA money, the proposed route is the "southern route", and it will NOT go through South Bend or Elkhart. This is the originally chosen MWRRI route. Basically, it uses NS (former Conrail) from Union Station in Chicago to Buffington Harbor, IN, where it turns inland following the former PRR main to Ft. Wayne. From there, it uses short line ROW to head to Toledo, and then parallels NS from Toledo to Cleveland. It''s a well thought out route, partially shared with freight service of Chicago, Ft. Wayne & Eastern, partially on dedicated ROW, and partially on a third track adjacent to NS (whose tracks would be used for meets between passenger trains).

I hope this gets funded, because this is about the best we're going to do with HSR in this country...in my opinion.

[FRN9]

Er...if anyone actually reads the application by Indiana for FRA money, the proposed route is the "southern route", and it will NOT go through South Bend or Elkhart. This is the originally chosen MWRRI route. Basically, it uses NS (former Conrail) from Union Station in Chicago to Buffington Harbor, IN, where it turns inland following the former PRR main to Ft. Wayne. From there, it uses short line ROW to head to Toledo, and then parallels NS from Toledo to Cleveland. It''s a well thought out route, partially shared with freight service of Chicago, Ft. Wayne & Eastern, partially on dedicated ROW, and partially on a third track adjacent to NS (whose tracks would be used for meets between passenger trains).

I hope this gets funded, because this is about the best we're going to do with HSR in this country...in my opinion.

working on those French lessons now!

[justalurker66]

Er...if anyone actually reads the application by Indiana for FRA money, the proposed route is the "southern route", and it will NOT go through South Bend or Elkhart.

http://www.in.gov/indot/files/IN_CHI_CL ... ack2_3.doc (word document linked from http://www.in.gov/indot/3064.htm ).
"Communities served along the 354 mile “southern” route include Chicago, the Gary Regional Airport, Plymouth, Warsaw, Fort Wayne, Defiance, Toledo, Sandusky, Elyria and Cleveland (southern route assumed for purposes of this application)."

It is an assumption for the purposes of the request. Hopefully that is all it is, but I suspect politics are at play.

Media reports are saying that the "northern route" is still in play. ( http://www.etruth.com/Know/News/Story.aspx?id=495793 )

At any rate, INDOT spokesman Will Wingfield noted that those studies are several years old. If the INDOT application is approved, further inquiries would be necessary to select which is the best route.

"At this point, I want to be clear in stressing we have not made a decision in routing," Wingfield said.

Perhaps they are just playing the people of northern Indiana to get more support. The first project is to do a $73.5 million engineering/environmental study at the end of this year (or whenever the money is awarded) then spend $147 million in 2012 for final design and build this in 2014. First service would be 2017. It will operate at a loss until at least 2020 (but likely a lot longer ... it will be operated by Amtrak). While a decent long term project, $2.8 billion for something eight years away from construction with NO local money seems like a long shot, regardless of route. They might have a chance at getting the first two projects funded (engineering through final design) and seek construction money in the next round of government funding (assuming the government doesn't go broke). But asking for $2.8 billion for something that will not turn a shovel for five years?

INDOT could be playing politics by keeping the hopes of South Bend/Elkhart people alive. The same kind of politics that puts a station at the Gary Airport (which has ZERO scheduled passenger service). Gary would like to be Chicago's third airport (instead of Peone) and even fraudulently call themselves the "Gary/Chicago International Airport" but they have trouble keeping any passenger service they attract. (How can they be international with no flights?)

The plan toutes a three mile connection to Cleveland Airport. South Bend's "Michiana Regional Airport" has several air carriers with connections to hubs around the nation and is closer to the existing route. If needed the NICTD South Shore line (or shuttles on that line) could provide the link between the new rail station and the airport. Transpo buses are also available. Eight additional round trips per day would be a good additional service.

If the line is built on the "southern" route Amtrak service is likely to follow and South Bend/Elkhart will lose it's long distance train service. While the application focuses on the long haul, Chicago to Cleveland, the viability of service from Chicago to South Bend has already been proven by the over 100 year old South Shore service (the only continuously operating interurban line surviving) and the current Amtrak routes are used by South Bend and Elkhart passengers. Plus the "northern" route would provide important Chicago to Elkhart and South Bend to Elkhart and Goshen commuter links.

Yes, the application was filed with the five year old assumption that "southern" is better. Hopefully Mr. Wingfield's comments about the routing not being decided are not just lip service.

[spatcher]

INDOT could be playing politics by keeping the hopes of South Bend/Elkhart people alive. The same kind of politics that puts a station at the Gary Airport (which has ZERO scheduled passenger service). Gary would like to be Chicago's third airport (instead of Peone) and even fraudulently call themselves the "Gary/Chicago International Airport" but they have trouble keeping any passenger service they attract. (How can they be international with no flights?)

An airport is considered to be international by the FAA as long as the airport has customs and immigration facilities/capabilities. Gary has book of these, and they are used for charter/private flights.

[neroden]

Reasons this market has potential (not necessarily in order):
1. Distance - approx. 340 miles
2. Terrain - generally flat, including one of the longest straightaways in the country.
3. Several sizable intermediate points that are potential traffic generators: Elyria/Lorain, Sandusky, Toledo, Elkhart, South Bend, Gary/Hammond

Also Fort Wayne. The most recent proposals have involved a Toledo-Fort Wayne-Gary routing, and have the advantage of *enormous* straightaways on track which is nearly unused for freight.

[neroden]

Perhaps they are just playing the people of northern Indiana to get more support.

Hopefully.

If the line is built on the "southern" route Amtrak service is likely to follow and South Bend/Elkhart will lose it's long distance train service.

Actually I'd lay odds that with *two* middle-of-the-night Amtrak routes, *one* of them would be retained on the "northern route". Even if not, South Bend would retain extensive service to Chicago, so this would only affect trips *east* of South Bend....

While the application focuses on the long haul, Chicago to Cleveland, the viability of service from Chicago to South Bend has already been proven by the over 100 year old South Shore service (the only continuously operating interurban line surviving)

...which is enough reason to serve Fort Wayne instead; South Bend would not be losing most of its (many times daily) train service.

and the current Amtrak routes are used by South Bend and Elkhart passengers. Plus the "northern" route would provide important Chicago to Elkhart and South Bend to Elkhart and Goshen commuter links.

Fort Wayne service is more valuable than Elkhart service, and I'm sure a thorough study of the two options (*again*) will bear this out, as well as showing that that route allows for faster running and costs less because it has fewer freight trains. The situation hasn't changed since the last study, or the one before it, or the one before that.... except that the alternate services to South Bend and points west have gotten better, making an even better argument for the different routing.

However, a serious proposal to extend the South Shore Line to Elkhart has been floating around, which would address many of your concerns. Unfortunately, as usual, it's limited by Indiana's unwillingness to properly fund any train services, including not actually funding needed upgrades and rebuilds of South Bend-Michigan City.

Given Indiana's unwillingness to put in any money on trains until very recently, the main hope for the Cleveland-Chicago route is that the federal government will recognize that this route's importance goes way beyond Indiana, that Illinois and Ohio are willing to put money in, and that they can't really get there without going through Indiana.

[justalurker66]

South Bend would retain extensive service to Chicago, so this would only affect trips *east* of South Bend....

It is hard to call the commuter service "extensive". It was once but now it is down to a five a day service (the remaining trips, even those where passengers are permitted, are equipment moves supporting the other service). Amtrak isn't carrying commuters to and from South Bend.

Fort Wayne service is more valuable than Elkhart service,

But is it more valuable than the South Bend service you are proposing be cut? This new line could be run without an Elkhart stop and still be better than a Fort Wayne routing. Elkhart is just gravy.

... except that the alternate services to South Bend and points west have gotten better, making an even better argument for the different routing.

The alternates have gotten better? Do tell! How have they gotten better? Additional lanes on the Toll Rd and I-94 in the "South of the Lake" area that both alignments would use? Airport improvements at Michiana Regional? Of which alternative service do you speak?

However, a serious proposal to extend the South Shore Line to Elkhart has been floating around, which would address many of your concerns.

Unfortunately there is no such proposal, certainly not any serious proposal. The only serious extension proposals are the West Lake project taking the South Shore to Valparaiso and Lowell.

Unfortunately, as usual, it's limited by Indiana's unwillingness to properly fund any train services, including not actually funding needed upgrades and rebuilds of South Bend-Michigan City.

Tis the life of the stepchild ... if we want to see our tax dollars at work we need to go to Indianapolis or the Chicago suburbs. The money just doesn't seem to trickle down to here (although I understand we are getting an underpass of the NS lines in Elkhart as part of the federal stimulus).

Given Indiana's unwillingness to put in any money on trains until very recently, the main hope for the Cleveland-Chicago route is that the federal government will recognize that this route's importance goes way beyond Indiana, that Illinois and Ohio are willing to put money in, and that they can't really get there without going through Indiana.

Indiana is willing to put money forward ... but unlike Illinois, Ohio and especially Michigan, Indiana is not going to bankrupt the state for projects that don't help Indiana. If people in Michigan and Ohio want to get to Chicago they can pay their own way ... if they don't want to support Indiana railroads to make the trip then they can go around. If you want Indiana money make the route of value to the people of Indiana.

If the new high speed rail runs through Fort Wayne let Allen Co people pay for it.

[Trainer]

I guess that I don't see why anyone would be in such a hurry to go to Cleveland.

However, perhaps the need for rapid travel west would more than double the justification.

[kmillard]

I guess that I don't see why anyone would be in such a hurry to go to Cleveland.

However, perhaps the need for rapid travel west would more than double the justification.

Well, I can't say that I'm in a hurry to get to Cleveland, but I do go there from time to time for various reasons as I'm sure others do.