[il-talk] Springfield agencies didn't comment about high-speed rail in 2003

[Bill Reif]

Hello,

I am forwarding this as it relates to trains, on which many blind rely.
This dispute in Springfield will probably doom high-speed rail in Illinois, 
at least for a few years when, or if, the feds come up with more money. 
This article sets forth an interesting railway history.
This is all due to local government incompetence.
An article in Saturday's Springfield State Journal-Register is pasted below.

Bill

THE STATE JOURNAL-REGISTER
Posted Sep 12, 2009 @ 11:30 PM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nearly a decade ago, the Illinois Department of Transportation unveiled a
plan for high-speed passenger rail that would link St. Louis with Chicago
via Springfield. IDOT invited every governmental entity along the 300-mile
route to comment.

More than two dozen local governments took advantage. Some cheered the
prospect, urging the state to proceed as quickly as possible. Others
suggested tweaks, such as adjusting plans for specific crossings. Private
citizens also weighed in at hearings held around the state, including one
held at the University of Illinois Springfield.

But not a single government in Sangamon County responded to the state's
request for advice, even though the plan called for adding high-speed trains
to Union Pacific Railroad tracks along Third Street - a proposal at odds
with the long-held civic dream of closing down that line. Indeed, even as
the state was putting the finishing touches on an environmental impact
statement required before the high-speed project could proceed, it was
paying for another study that called for all rail traffic in the city to be
consolidated on the 10th Street corridor.

Why didn't the city speak up?

"I don't know-it's a good question," said Sangamon County administrator
Brian McFadden, who was chief of staff for Mayor Karen Hasara at the time.
"I don't think people were anticipating the same type of impact as they are
now."

Hasara said she doesn't recall the plan.

"All I can say is, things were a lot different then," Hasara said.
"High-speed rail was far from being a reality at that point. I do not
remember the hearing or knowing about it."

To be sure, the state's plan, outlined in a draft environmental impact
statement issued in 2000 and a final EIS published in 2003, was dramatically
different than what is now being discussed.

McFadden and other local officials point out that the old plan didn't
contemplate adding a parallel track to the existing Union Pacific line. The
state now hopes to secure more than $2 billion in federal funds for a new
line.

The earlier plan also proposed no underpasses or overpasses. Now, officials
are talking about building nine overpasses and one underpass in Springfield
so that automobiles and trains can move at the same time.

The old plan also was silent on the issue of additional freight traffic.
Now, the Union Pacific, which says it runs about 15 trains per day, says it
wants to add 25 more freight trains a day to the Third Street corridor.

According to the 2003 study, high-speed rail would boost tourism in
Springfield and increase attendance at the Illinois State Fair.

Like other entities in Sangamon County, the Sangamon County Regional
Planning Commission didn't comment on the 2000 and 2003 environmental
studies. It's unclear what further environmental review will be required now
that the project has turned into a proposal that would establish a parallel
track with significantly more trains.

If the commission knew then what it knows now, said its executive director,
Norm Sims, the agency would have given the state feedback when it invited
comments on high-speed rail in 2000 and again in 2003.

"Oh, yes," Sims said. "I don't think there's any question about that."



Bruce Rushton can be reached at 788-1542.





10th Street idea in works for years

Even while the Illinois Department of Transportation was finalizing an
environmental impact study on high-speed rail between St. Louis and Chicago
seven years ago, IDOT was paying for a study to consolidate rail traffic in
Springfield, which has long dreamed of an intermodal transportation center
east of downtown.

In 2002, IDOT gave Springfield a $200,000 grant to study consolidation of
rail traffic, as proposed by a team of architects and urban planners who
that same year recommended rail traffic be consolidated on the 10th Street
corridor.

But when it came to planning for high-speed trains, neither the draft
environmental study issued in 2000 nor the final product published three
years later evaluated the 10th Street corridor's potential for carrying
high-speed trains.

Meanwhile, Springfield's rail consolidation study, published in 2005,
recommended that all trains be consolidated onto the 10th Street corridor
and lines along Third Street and 19th Street converted to trails.

Planners first recommended putting passenger train traffic well east of
downtown as long ago as 1925, when a plan called for a transit center at
what was then 18th Street (now Martin Luther King Jr. Drive) and Capitol
Avenue.

In 1967, the General Assembly established the Capital City Railroad
Relocation Authority to consolidate tracks in the city, giving the body the
power to condemn land and issue bonds. The legislature dissolved the
authority in 1995, after it eliminated tracks that ran down Madison Street,
established the Clear Lake Avenue railroad overpass east of downtown and
relocated tracks in southwest Springfield.

In 1983, the Federal Highway Administration approved a plan to move local
trains to a north-south corridor east of Interstate 55. A full environmental
impact statement was prepared. But that option was considered by the 2003
EIS that recommended putting high-speed trains on the Third Street corridor.

-- Bruce Rushton



Unanswered questions

The State Journal-Register has posed several questions to the Illinois
Department of Transportation that have gone unanswered. Questions emailed to
IDOT last Wednesday included:

*What was the cost of the 2003 environmental impact statement on high-speed
rail, and what consultants, if any, prepared or helped prepare it?

*Why weren't any alternatives to the Union Pacific line along Third Street
considered in the environmental impact statement, especially in light of a
2002 IDOT grant that gave Springfield $200,000 to study rail consolidation
in the city?

*What sort of proprietary information might be covered by a confidentiality
clause in a memorandum of understanding between IDOT and the Union Pacific
Railroad, and have there been any further confidentiality agreements?

On Friday, the SJR posed an additional question, asking IDOT why the number
of high-speed round trips evaluated dropped from eight in the draft
environmental impact statement issued in 2002 to three in the final report
published in 2003. That question has also not been answered by IDOT
officials.