Redirecting High-Speed Rail Investment

Florida High-Speed Rail Rendering

Yesterday, the U.S. Department of Transportation announced it is redirecting nearly $1.2 billion in high-speed rail investment after incoming Governors in Ohio and Wisconsin indicated their administrations were not interested in continuing projects previously awarded funding under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2008 (ARRA). Wisconsin Governor-elect Scott Walker campaigned against further state support of new service between Milwaukee and Madison, while Ohio Governor-elect John Kasich advocated a similar position on development of the so-called 3-C Corridor linking Cleveland, Columbus and Cincinnati. Wisconsin's project had been previously awarded $810 million, while the 3-C Corridor was to have received $400 million. (To view RAIL Magazine's analysis of the initial ARRA high-speed rail projects, click here, and Potomac Express' additional analysis of subsequent federal high-speed investment is available here). 


Given the opposition of those states' new administrations, Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood announced that the combined investment would instead be channeled to 13 states. The largest of those selections were not altogether surprising. Up to $624 million will be made available to California to support the continued development of its ambitious high-speed rail network, which will ultimately link San Francisco to Los Angeles with branches to Sacramento and San Diego. The new award will build momentum on last week's selection of the initial segment in the San Joaquin Valley where construction will begin next year. California's high-speed network is the largest effort of its kind in the nation, and will also achieve its highest speeds – up to 220 mph – when the first stages open by 2017. The project has received consistently strong support from current Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and incoming Governor-elect Jerry Brown.

Meanwhile, the first true U.S. high-speed route to begin operation – Florida's Orlando-to-Tampa corridor, to be underway in 2014 – also received a sizable award from the redistributed funding, up to $342 million. The additional investment will fully fund the project, and enhance prospects for expansion of the service from Orlando to Miami by the end of the this decade. While the effort received a lukewarm reception from Florida Governor-elect Rick Scott and U.S. Representative John Mica – the incoming chair of the House of Representatives' Transportation and Infrastructure Committee – full federal investment in the project likely cements its path forward.

Other substantial investments will be directed to Washington State (up to $161.5 million) and Illinois (up to $42.3 million) to further enhance their existing intercity rail corridors between the Canadian border and Oregon and from Chicago to St. Louis, respectively, to reach speeds up to 110 mph. Both projects received initial ARRA investment and have strong levels of state support for intercity rail service.

Somewhat surprising was a relatively small award to New York State (up to $7.3 million) for the continued development of its upstate corridor between Albany and Buffalo. Governor-elect Andrew Cuomo publicly sought-out a portion of the redirected funds just days after his election. Moreover, the project is one of the most promising settings for high-speed rail due to the extensive railroading infrastructure originally constructed by the New York Central that comprised the core of its famed Water Level Route between New York City and Chicago. Ample space in the corridor currently owned by CSX is available to install high-speed tracks dedicated to passenger trains, and a string of upstate's largest cities – Albany, Schenectady, Utica, Syracuse, Rochester and Buffalo – are all centered along the route, forming a solid potential ridership base. However, the state has lagged behind others – such as California, Florida and Illinois – in planning for high-speed rail, which likely is the largest factor in the limited federal investment in the project.

Other states receiving investment include Maine ($3.3 million to support the continued expansion of Amtrak's Downeaster from Portland to Brunswick); Massachusetts ($2.8 million for development of Vermonter service through western Massachusetts); Missouri ($2.2 million in support of its existing St. Louis - Kansas City service); Oregon ($1.6 million to upgrade that state's portion of the Cascades service); North Carolina ($1.5 million for the continued improvement of its statewide intercity rail program); Indiana (more than $364,000 for intercity routes to and from the midwest's Chicago hub); and  Iowa (more than $309,000 supporting existing and expanded Amtrak service in the state). Interestingly, Wisconsin was redistributed up to $2.2 million for its current Hiawatha service between Chicago and Milwaukee, which Governor-elect Walker does support.

High Speed Rail: Round the Second

Later this week, the Obama Administration will announce the recipients of a $2.5 billion investment in high-speed and intercity passenger rail projects around the nation. The grants – appropriated as part of the FY 2010 federal budget and awarded by the U.S. Department of Transportation – are intended to build upon the $8 billion provided under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), which established the groundwork for true high-speed rail service, while also improving, introducing or reintroducing contemporary intercity passenger rail operations to a number of corridors. RAIL Magazine's full analysis of those projects supported by ARRA is available here.

The largest awards are not surprising, as they'll support the two projects most likely to introduce true high-speed rail in the shortest timeframe: those in California and Florida. Through a more than $900 million investment in California's high-speed rail effort – the nation's largest and most fully realized high-speed rail campaign – will be able to advance work on the project, especially on the segment through the Central Valley between Merced and Bakersfield. Other elements will include the purchase of new rolling stock, an automatic braking and control system, work on the San Jose and San Francisco segment and infrastructure upgrades in Del Mar.

Meanwhile, Florida will receive $800 million, nearly all of which will be devoted to the construction of the nation's first true high-speed route between Orlando and Tampa. The investment will allow the project's aggressive planning and construction schedule to continue, with operations at top speeds of 186 mph targeted for 2014. Upon receipt of the expected award, the project will have secured $2.06 billion of its $2.7 billion pricetag, and is expected to receive the remainder from the $1 billion for high-speed and intercity passenger rail provided in the FY 2011 federal budget. Proponents for high-speed rail, starting with President Obama himself, along with Vice President Biden – have identified the Orlando-Tampa corridor is a test case for the development of additional routes around the nation, including California's planned network. In early 2011, Florida will select some entity – likely one based on significant overseas experience in high-speed rail, such as those in Europe or Asia – to build, operate and maintain the service, along with supplying the high-speed equipment and technologies. The operation is expected to attract more than $2.4 million rider's in its debut year, produce positive revenue and make the 84-mile trip between the two cities – on express runs – in about 50 minutes.

While the investment directed to California and Florida will constitute the bulk of the $2.5 billion available, a number of other important, conventional intercity passenger rail projects also will likely be selected. Continuing on the ARRA-rail investment trend to support the development of new, non-high-speed passenger rail lines – such as those connecting Milwaukee and Madison, Wisc., and Ohio's 3-C corridor between Cleveland, Columbus and Cincinnati – this round of investment will channel $230 million to support a new service between Chicago, Ill., and Iowa City. The new service – which smartly leverages a $10 million TIGER II grant to Moline, Ill., to prepare a new intermodal facility there – is expected to be underway in 2015 with two daily roundtrip trains and generate more than 240,000 annual trips in its first year of operation. The 220-mile route has not hosted scheduled, daily passenger rail service since Amtrak's formation in 1970 and has already received more than $65 million in investment from Illinois, Iowa and local government sources.

Additionally, $150 million will likely be awarded to Michigan, for upgrades to Amtrak's corridor between Dearborn and Kalamazoo, which will increase train speeds and improve reliability. The project will build upon ARRA investment to Indiana to upgrade sections of the same route that leads to the Dearborn-Kalamazoo line. Likewise, probable grants to corridors in Connecticut and Massachusetts ($121 million), Virginia ($45 million) and Oregon ($9 million) will build on initial ARRA support to further advance conventional passenger rail services in those areas. Moreover, a partnership of North and South Carolina, along with Georgia, will conduct a $4.1 million study on an improved route between Charlotte and Atlanta. Other projects could also be selected with this week's official announcement.

Rail Projects in TIGER II

Rendering of the Atlanta Peachtree Corridor Streetcar

Today, U.S. Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood announced a series of investments in a range of transportation projects across the nation. As part of the Department of Transportation's TIGER II (Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery) program, 75 projects in 40 states were selected totaling $585 million out of more than 1,000 proposals submitted requesting more than $19 billion. Projects selected – divided between 42 capital projects and 33 planning efforts – focused on a range of transportation improvement activities, including new roadway and transit infrastructure, transit-oriented development, freight capacity enhancements and intermodal facilities. 


Passenger rail-related projects fared well, as 11 capital and 11 planning projects were chosen that directly impact various passenger rail modes. Indeed, the largest single project selected was more than $47 million to support the construction of the Atlanta Peachtree Corridor Streetcar, which will connect with the existing MARTA heavy-rail metro network at its Peachtree Center station and stretch 2.7 miles reaching 12 stops within Atlanta's Peachtree Corridor. Meanwhile, the Utah Transit Authority received $26 million in investment to aid in the construction of the Sugar House Streetcar project, which will link to the existing TRAX light-rail network at the Central Pointe station, extending two miles to serve seven stops. The service is projected to attract 3,000 daily riders upon its opening in 2013. 


Other significant capital projects include the rehabilitation of Tower 55 in downtown Fort Worth, Tex., where busy rail lines owned by BNSF and the Union Pacific intersect. The $34 million effort will allow not only freight, but Amtrak's Texas Eagle and Heartland Flyer trains, as well as Trinity Railway Express [see our full-length feature article in RAIL #1] commuter trains to and from Dallas, to navigate the intersection easier. Additionally, Niagara Falls, N.Y., will receive $16.5 million to construct a new passenger station and customs and immigration facility near the Niagara Gorge at the Whirlpool Bridge to better serve Amtrak's Maple Leaf – which operates between Toronto, Ont., and New York City, as well as the terminal destination for its Empire Service corridor trains to Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse, Albany and New York City. 


Perhaps the most interesting approach supported by the new round of investment is a $20 million award to the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) for the development of the Crenshaw Corridor light-rail line. The grant leverages a previously-announced $546 million loan through the Department of Transportation's TIFIA program that will accelerate the 8.5 mile project by perhaps a decade or more. The route will connect the Expo/Crenshaw station on the currently-under construction Exposition Line [see our full-length feature article in RAIL #22] with Los Angles International Airport (LAX) and the existing Green Line light rail near the airport, providing rail service for the first time to communities such as Inglewood and Westchester. 


Other capital projects will include new or upgraded intermodal stations in Moline, Ind., and Des Moines, Iowa ($10 million each) as well as rail station revitalization and improvement projects in Philadelphia, Pa. ($15 million), Cleveland, Ohio ($10 million) and the Fordham Transit Center in New York, N.Y. ($10 million). A number of freight capacity improvements were also selected, and while they might not directly impact passenger rail systems, a more efficient and effective freight network benefits the entire rail sector. Likewise, TIGER II also includes investments for a number of transit improvements and great streets projects that enhance sustainable communities through new pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, accessibility features and livability enhancements that affect communities and neighborhoods with existing passenger rail service. A full list of, and fact sheets on the capital projects selected for Tiger II funding is available here. 


Moreover, the 11 planning-related projects directly related to passenger rail allow for plans and studies to move forward on transit-oriented development (TOD) efforts at the West Oakland Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) station in Oakland, Calif. ($2 million) [see our profile on TOD at BART's Fruitvale station in RAIL #15], the Canal Crossing project in Jersey City, N.J. served by NJ Transit's Hudson-Bergen light-rail line ($1.9 million) [see our profile in RAIL #1], Denver's West Corridor light-rail extension currently under construction ($1.1 million), and at Greenville, S.C.'s Amtrak station ($235,000). Planning grant investment will also advance plans for new stations in Newark, Del. ($2.2 million), Madison, Wisc. ($950,000) and Lexington, N.C. ($700,000), as well as supporting studies on the east rail corridor in Pittsburgh, Pa. ($825,000), relocating the South Shore commuter railroad in Northern Indiana off of street-running trackage in Michigan City, Ind. ($800,000) [see our profile in RAIL #1), a new urban circulator system – possibly a streetcar – in Oklahoma City, Okla. ($378,000), and revitalization of neighborhoods surrounding the Metrolink light-rail system in University City, Mo. ($150,000). A full list and descriptions of the Tiger II planning projects can be found here.   

Rail & State of Good Repair

Yesterday, U.S. Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood and Federal Transit Administrator Peter Rogoff announced $776 million in investment to support the ongoing maintenance and vehicle needs of transit providers across the nation. While the bulk of the investment is rightly targeted to help transit agencies purchase new buses and bus maintenance facilities – which also helps those systems also operating rail networks by improving the organization's overall stability – there were a few projects that have real or potential benefits for passenger rail operations.

The most prominent is the $7.4 million investment to the New Orleans Regional Transit Authority (RTA) to renovate its historic Carrollton streetcar barn, which houses the agency's equally historic St. Charles Streetcars. The 1893 barn is the nation's oldest continually operating transit maintenance facility and was mercifully spared from the devastation of Hurricane Katrina, unlike its newer counterpart on Canal Street. The renovation process will make the building ADA-compliant and introduce improved and energy-efficient lighting, new floors and waste treatment systems as well as security devices. 

Additionally, the Jacksonville Transit Authority will receive more than $2.3 million to rehabilitate the bus facilities at three of the system's eight Sykyway elevated people mover stations. The work will improve the electrical and structural components at the stations to enhance the passenger experience for travelers connecting between the Skyway and local bus routes. The 2.5-mile Skyway – similar to other people movers in Detroit and Miami – opened in 1989 to serve downtown Jacksonville attractions and spans the St. John's River to reach the south side of the downtown area. 

Finally, although not yet connected to any passenger rail service, one of the largest grants – $16 million – was awarded to the Duluth Transit Authority (DTA) for the construction of the Twin Points Multimodal Transportation Terminal. In addition to serving local bus routes of the DTA, intercity bus lines, taxis, car rental providers and bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure, the facility could serve as the northern terminus for the planned Northern Lights Express intercity passenger rail operation to Minneapolis. The 155-mile corridor would host trains every two hours and reach speeds up to 110 mph. The presence of an established multimodal facility in Duluth will make the project more attractive for federal and state investment. 

Amtrak's Vision for High-Speed Rail in the Northeast

Source: Amtrak

On Tuesday, Amtrak released a concept document detailing their vision for high-speed rail service in the Northeast. Today, Amtrak's Stephen Gardner – the chief architect of the plan – briefed interested parties on the specifics of the plan, which is intended to function in concert with the railroad's Northeast Corridor (NEC) Infrastructure Master Plan and the work of the recently-formed Northeast Corridor Advisory Commission. As a introductory note, I presented an extensive look at the evolution of the Northeast Corridor as it exists today in this forum over the summer. I'd encourage a view of that post for those interested in the route's history, attributes and challenges.

The first and most important aspect of the proposal to consider is its price tag: $117 billion, divided into $4.7 billion annual increments over the project's 40-year horizon of development and construction. There is currently no identified source of investment at any level of government or private-sector alternative that could deliver that level of funding. Indeed, federal high-speed investment for the entire nation to-date amounts to only $13 billion – through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) and the 2010 and 2010 Fiscal Year appropriations – while the most recent multi-year surface transportation, the Safe, Accountable, Flexible and Efficient Transportation Equity Act - A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) provided a total of $256.4 billion for all surface transportation modes over a six-year period. A project of this scope and magnitude would be unprecedented in the public sector.

Until the question of how such a project would attract investment is considered, the larger question of its concept and execution is largely academic. In all likelihood, only some innovative and unique blend of federal and state spending plus private-sector investment would make such an effort possible. Moreover, thus far, Amtrak has offered no options or scenarios for the realization of these funds, nor for the $52 billion required to implement the Northeast Corridor Infrastructure Master Plan. However, as Gardner noted, without the presence of a conceptual vision for what such investment would achieve, it would be impossible to build support among any constituency for such a significant funding effort.

It is almost shocking to consider that until Amtrak's announcement on Tuesday, no formal high-speed rail plan for the Northeast had ever been presented to the public. By comparison, plans for such networks in California, Florida, the Midwest and other corridors had been formulated decades ago, and work is only just ready to begin in the first of those projects – California and Florida – in the coming year. Additionally, the genesis for those plans have come from the state and regional levels and Amtrak – while supportive of, and a major participant in those plans – had not taken the lead in such a proposal. So, the railroad has done the Northeast region a substantial service in producing an initial starting point for discussion, regardless of the funding mechanisms necessary to achieve the project.

For Amtrak to position itself at the front of an effort to implement high-speed rail in the Northeast not only smartly serves its own interests, but also is the most sensible entity to initiate the discussion. The region stretching south-by-southwest from Maine to Washington, D.C. is so closely tied to the identity of Amtrak's signature asset – the existing NEC – that it's often branded with that title on matters unrelated to train travel or even transportation. This contrasts with the projects in California and Florida largely confined to a single state apparatus, and the focus of the Midwest initiative on routes centered around Chicago. Because the vital role of Amtrak in the Northeast, an high-speed effort must be informed by and integrated with the realities of the NEC, and given its role as owner and operator of that infrastructure, their involvement is paramount. Also, as the only current operator of high-speed rail service in the western hemisphere (Amtrak's Acela reaches 150 mph on a small part of the NEC), Amtrak should play an important part in sharing its experiences, operating practices and institutional knowledge of the mode, especially when it's positioned in its backyard.

Beyond the a priori fiscal, governmental and political considerations of the proposal as described above, there is much to be excited about in Amtrak's plan. It envisions the establishment of a true high-speed rail corridor between Boston, Mass., and Washington via New York, N.Y. that makes service at speeds up to 220 mph possible and average speeds close to 150 mph.  Most impressively, the new infrastructure would make possible trips between Boston and New York in 1 hour and 36 minutes and between New York and Washington in 1 hour and 23 minutes. The entire corridor could be traversed in 3 hours and 23 minutes on express trains only stopping at New York's Penn and Grand Central stations.

If such a route was established, it would compete with those in Europe and Asia as the most beneficial and profitable in the world. Amtrak estimates the project would return at least $2 for every $1 in investment over  the corridor's century-plus lifetime through increased economic development, property values, economic productivity, energy use, environmental benefits and regional connectivity, presenting the opportunity to realize more than $230 billion in returned investment over time. Moreover, the high-speed service would generate significant operating revenues, to the tune of nearly $1 billion each year. To this end, Gardner noted on several occasions that their revenue projections conservatively assumed current economic conditions, such as demand for travel along the corridor, current fuel prices and population projections. Should any of these dynamics change in favor of rail travel – say fuel prices at $5 or $6 – the service's profits would only grow. No other high-speed rail project in the western hemisphere offers such positive revenue forecasts, and such profitability may be a tool to attract private investment in the project's capital infrastructure in exchange for concessions on future revenues.

The plain aims to achieve this level of service by constructing entirely new high-speed tracks in the corridor that would be exclusively dedicated to high-speed trains like the Acela. Gardner was careful to point out that although their vision considered several potential alignments for both the Boston to New York and New York to Washington segments, the document was not an in-depth engineering nor environmental study, and future planning work would be necessary to select the exact routes and infrastructure options. However, based on the preliminary alignments investigated in Tuesday's report (see map at top), the new tracks would roughly reside alongside the current NEC rails from between New York and Washington, except for new tunnels through Philadelphia, Pa. and Baltimore, Md., and new structures near Wilmington, Del. Meanwhile, north of Manhattan, a largely entirely new railroad would be built from New Rochelle, N.Y. to near Route 128 outside of Boston, stretching through northern Connecticut and Rhode Island to serve the Connecticut cities of Danbury, Waterbury and Hartford along with Woonsocket, R.I. The route would be a northerly departure from the current NEC shoreline route through New Haven and Providence, R.I., and essentially create two parallel high-speed lines through New England through the combination of the new tracks and the current NEC. Additionally, a new tunnel under Manhattan would link Penn and Grand Central stations for the first time.

Source: Amtrak

Beyond the benefits offered by true high-speed rail service in one of the world's leading mega-regions, the project would also introduce significant benefits via the improved efficiency of the existing NEC. By dedicating the highest-speed traffic to the new infrastructure – and implementing the capital projects specified in the NEC Infrastructure Master Plan – new capacity would be introduced to increase commuter and freight traffic on the line, which today is constrained by the capacity required by Acela traffic. The two railroads would work in tandem to provide a multifaceted and redundant rail travel network in the region. And, while far from a detailed service plan, the proposal includes a preliminary routing structure (see map above) that would include so-called Super Express trains – stopping only at Boston, the two New York Stations, Philadelphia and Washington – regular Express trains making all stops on the new corridor, Shoreline Express trips traveling from Boston on the current NEC through Providence and New Haven before switching to the new route, and Regional trains operating on the existing NEC, as well as connections on the recently-upgraded Keystone line to Harrisburg, Pa. Projects to enhance existing regional routes to Portland, Maine, Springfield, Conn., Albany, N.Y. and Richmond, Va., could all coincide with the new corridor as well.

Amtrak's vision for a new approach to high-speed rail in the Northeast is an important first step in a process that could revolutionize the region for more than a century. The lack of investment scenarios for the effort is concerning and potentially fatal, although hardly Amtrak's fault. As Gardner himself noted, the project will only be realized if the region – and potentially the nation – devotes its collective and political will to the endeavor. Public officials and concerned citizens should take a long look at the compelling ideas and underlying justifications presented in Amtrak's vision. Few opportunities exist today that could so significantly and positively impact a large number of people, boost our economy and improve our quality of life. Reasonable people can have valuable discussions and rational disagreements over whether the risk inherent in the upfront investment necessary is worthy of the potential benefits. But those discussions can and must occur, and Amtrak should receive credit for setting the stage for such a dialogue to take place.

Outside Investment in California's High Speed Rail Network

(AP Photo/Eugene Hoshiko) 

This week, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger is in Asia on a multi-nation trade visit aimed at attracting investment in his state's ailing economy. During his visits to China, Japan and South Korea, Schwarzenegger is also visiting the high-speed rail systems of those respective nations in advance of California's own plans for a similar network. Considering that the United States has no manufacturers of high-speed rail technology, and Amtrak's only experience operating the mode is the relatively slow-speed Northeast Corridor, expertise from either Europe or Asia will likely be needed to deploy and operate the project.

During his stops in both Japan and China, government and business representatives in those nations have offered to invest in California's high-speed rail network should their competing technologies and firms be chosen as exclusive or leading partners in the effort. While the level of investment for either nation would be dependent on the scope of their involvement, and federal and state investment will still contribute a sizable portion of the project, the inclusion of foreign investment in California's high-speed rail network could just be the bridge from the current mix of $12.3 billion in state ($10 billion) and federal ($2.3 billion) support already committed to the program to its total $40 billion pricetag.

American theorists on U.S. protectionism and exceptionalism will likely gasp at such arrangement, arguing such a move would suggest an inherently week American economy and governmental structure. Leaving such lofty discussions of economics and political theory to other observers, its important to note that those arguments ignore a fundamental truth of American history and its economy: we've always been dependent on help from others around the world, and nowhere moreso than our infrastructure and transportation technologies. Salon.com offers a fantastic account of Sino-American cooperation on building California's railroads, then and now. Meanwhile, immigrants from many countries toiled in relative poverty to build our subways, railroads, highways and telephone lines – infrastructure that remains the backbone of our society today. Moreover, the space program that put a man the moon and instilled so much national pride during the 1960s and 70s did so with substantial know-how and resources from German scientists in the immediate aftermath of World War II. So to suggest that incorporating foreign investment and knowledge now to realize a high-speed rail network in California is nothing short of revisionist.

USA Rail 2010 - Day 2

DENVER, Colo. -- Today begins day 2 of the USA Rail 2010 Conference here in Denver. On the slate for today are sessions on smarter rail planning, high-speed rail and communications, signaling and train control. As with yesterday, check back throughout the day for updates as the day progresses.

3:55 p.m. – Gil Carmichael wraps-up the conference with his thoughts on the future of rail in the United States by noting the significant scope of issues facing both passenger and freight rail in the years ahead. Proclaims the 21st century to be an "intermodal century," to flow seamlessly from one system to another. Just beginning to construct the system to clean up the disconnects to produce a safe and reasonably cost railroad system.

3:18 p.m. – To close the conference on a technical perspective, the final panel considers the operational aspects of communications systems, train signaling networks and positive train control (PTC). Keith Szewczyk of Ansaldo-STS moderated an provided an overview of PTC technology. Through the technology, train movements are monitored by on-board and wayside computer systems and can assume control of the train if an incursion occurs. PRIIA of 2008 included a provision to integrate PTC on most of the nation's railroads by 2015.

Eileen Reilly, the Chief Information and Technology Officer of the Alaska Railroad Corporation, described her railroad's efforts beginning in 1996 to improve its safety and communications systems on a voluntary basis. At the time, some elements of their network even utilized vacuum tubes. Now, prepared to implement PTC provisions by 2013. Challenge is even though the railroad will never connect to any other railroads, it still strives for its equipment and infrastructure that is interoperable with standards throughout the industry.

Jeff Young of the Union Pacific Railroad noted that while his railroad was moving forward with PTC provisions before the PRIIA, the interoperability requirements have provided significant challenges. While the long-term benefits of PTC will likely improve conditions for the Class I railroads, the up-front capital costs of the technology are significant. The layover of new technology on existing signaling and communications presents notable risks in terms of reliability.

Finally, Dr. Mark Hartong of the Federal Railroad Administration, admits the PRIAA-directed PTC provisions is a non-trivial task for the Administration, railroads and many other stakeholders. 3 issues for PTC compliance: interoperability, installation of communications infrastructure (and appropriate capacity where wireless communications is congested), and the scope of the effort.

2:30 p.m. – Focusing the high-speed rail discussion closer to Denver and the Rocky Mountain region is the next panel, looking at new intercity options to parallel the increasingly congested Interstates 70 and 25. Anthony DeVito from the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) provided an update on CDOT's efforts to improve multimodal options along the I-70 corridor. Efforts are building off the successful completion of the TREX project in Denver. Will be initiating passenger and freight rail plans for Colorado, as well as a state high-speed rail plan.

Harry Dale, Chairman and CEO of the Rocky Mountain Rail Authority, described his agency's work involving 52 Colorado jurisdictions to introduce and improve intercity passenger rail service. Looking at feasible rail corridors paralleling the I-70 and I-25 routes, connections between north/south (I-25) and east/west (I-70) are essential. Meanwhile, because of 75 mph speed limits on Colorado highways, even 110 mph service is just competitive with auto travel times. Highway corridors offer better ridership opportunities than existing freight rail lines. Geography in the region presents steep grade challenges for new alignments, along with environmental concerns. Because of the already significant amount of new infrastructure required, maglev technology would be a favorable option.

Kevin Cotes, Executive Director of the North American Maglev Institute, discussed the possibilities offered by maglev technology in the I-70 and I-25 corridors. Highlighted the low life-cycle and maintenance costs germane to the mode, and why it might be the best option for the new alignments and steep grades

2:02 p.m. – Mike Murray of the Illinois Governor's Office described the state's rail transportation policy initiatives and especially the Chicago – St. Louis high-speed corridor. As a part of a larger midwest regional rail system, the route will be the most visible element of a long-term effort to improve service throughout the region. Project is expected to create 57,000 permanent jobs throughout the midwest upon completion. Small improvements in frequency, trip time and reliability can significantly improve ridership, as evidenced by recent gains by Amtrak's Hiawatha and Chicago - St. Louis corridor services. Now working with other states in the region and communities to speak with a single vision, which resulted in $2.6 billion in ARRA investment for high-speed and intercity passenger rail in the region. And while true high-speed rail service at 220 mph service is a desirable long-term goal, improvements to 110 mph service is achievable now to build ridership and familiarity with rail travel. Notes similarities with Madrid - Seville corridor in Spain; didn't happen overnight, but rather with incremental improvements. Economic development efforts can't wait for full high-speed rail.

Image from Midwest High Speed Rail Association

1:55 p.m. – Greg Hanna of the Governmental Accountability Office (GAO) presented his agency's findings and recommendations in regards to high-speed rail. Those recommendations include establishing goals for the investment, establish the roles of the various participants in the public and private sectors, and establish where investment will come from and how fund are distributed. Those aspects are informed by and dependent on each other. He noted that unless a dedicated revenue stream is established for federal investment in passenger rail is established, those funds will have to compete with other programs.

12:10 p.m. – Beyond Florida's high-speed rail project is a broader campaign to introduce high or higher speed services around the nation. In a session moderated by Lewis Geotz – a founder and board member of the American High Speed Rail Alliance – the panel considered the definition of high-speed rail, implementing projects, sustainability of high-speed rail, ridership forecasts and the role of Amtrak.

Geotz noted that both the funding and ridership elements of the various projects are essential aspects of high-speed rail's viability. Meanwhile, the American reality of high-speed rail is a bit different than systems elsewhere in the world and our unique situation must be accounted for, and described the FTA definitions of emerging, regional and express high-speed rail designations.

Jamie Rall from the National Conference of State Legislatures referenced her organization's high-speed rail working group and the major role of states in high-speed and intercity passenger rail. That tole in supporting capital projects and the operation of systems, and federal investment is only a recent development. Many obstacles for states including budget challenges, constitutional previsions and limited resources and staff. "Many states who want these systems and consider them a priority may be unable to do their part. Need permanent, direct and sustainable support of federal support."

Petra Todorovich, Director of America 2050, views high-speed rail as a "transformative, region-shaping investment." Riderships is the key to sustainability of high-speed rail projects, not only in terms of operating revenues, but also general political and public support. Underlying benefits are (economic development, environmental protection, etc) impossible without strong ridership. Factors that contribute to ridership: level of service (frequency, trip times, reliability, comfort); regional elements (population, spatial distribution/density, employment concentration/composition of labor markets, network effects); transit system connections; proven intercity market for corridor (air travel, road congestion, existing rail ridership); and competition (other service options in the corridor, price of fuel/tolls, vehicle ownership).

Quentin Kopp, a Board Member of the California High Speed Rail Authority, described some of the lessons learned so far through the project, and why the state has set its sights on 220 mph service. Kopp introduced several pieces of legislation in the California State Legislature during his service in that body that ultimately led to the Authority's creation in 1996 as a separate governmental entity, with work conducted under contract by private entities. Project is on-schedule despite lawsuits and funding challenges. Project phases: San Francisco - San Jose to Los Angeles (500 miles), adopted in 2006 by Authority. 2nd phase; from San Diego to Los Angeles and Merced to Sacramento. Total: 800 miles. Project lessons: select equipment as early as possible; be mindful of political turnover; don't underestimate the need for early and consistent public relations; avoid legislative limitations to project momentum (ie. subsidy prevention, grade crossing separation, elimination of station); and don't be intimidated by "secret forces" intent on stopping high-speed rail.

11:12 a.m. – An eclectic panel looks at the connection between people and cargo in development projects. By co-locating the passenger and freight elements of transportation in well-designed facilities, improved efficiencies and private investment could be realized to support projects with substantial community benefits. Catherine Cox Blair of Reconnecting America moderated the panel and presented an overview of transit-oriented development districts. People who live near transit are 5 times as likely to take transit.

Maria Choca-Urban of the Center for Neighborhood Technology mentioned the mixed-use industrial development that occurs around freight transportation assets, which they term cargo-oriented development (COD). When working together, TOD and COD can combine to support communities built around railroad infrastructure, such as those in Chicagoland, including Blue Island and Harvey, which are both served by Metra commuter rail and freight railroads.

Jack Wierzenski, Director of Economic Development and Planning for Dallas Area Rapid Transit, described his agency's transit-oriented development efforts (note: see our full-length feature article on DART in RAIL Edition #13) and how models from those projects will inform their future light-rail extensions and new commuter rail services, such as the Cotton Belt line. From the rail transit agency perspective, development opportunities present revenue opportunities to support service operation and expansion. Land values from DART TOD projects increased for residential spaces by 39 percent and office space over 50 percent, bringing hundreds of millions additional tax revenues to local and state governments.

Scott Johnson, the Vice President for Public Infrastructure at Mincom – a asset management software provider for rail and transit providers – explained how a standard maintenance and safety management strategy is essential to successful TOD projects. Due to the number of moving parts, coordinating those elements is often overlooked.

10:22 a.m. – Nazih Haddad, CEO of Florida Rail Enterprise, presents on the forthcoming Orlando – Tampa high-speed rail corridor, likely to be the first in the nation. Began to change with Passenger Rail Investment & Improvement Act (PRIIA) of 2008 and strengthened by American Recovery & Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009. Florida was ready to respond to ARRA opportunity because of previous planning work. State legislature's first special session ever was called in December 2009 to consider (and approve) state investment in passenger rail, which also initiated support for Orlando's SunRail project. First record of decision by FRA for high-speed rail in nation's history. State's passenger rail effort is part of DOT, not separate from. Extensive details on the Tampa – Orlando project, for which the state already owns 93% of right-of-way. Frequency: hourly. Ridership: 2.3 million annually. Maximum speed: 168 mph. Connectivity will be essential, from light rail and commuter rail to airport access.

10:01 a.m. – Amtrak's Bruce Hillblom notes how efforts to address climate change interact with Amtrak's interest in promoting mobility alternatives such as passenger rail. Rail (both passenger and freight) inherently enjoys an environmental advantage because of its efficiency and low efficiency. Amtrak hopes to become even more environmentally-friendly while also increasing its market share. Some efforts include increased electrification, use of bio fuels (ie. Heartland Flyer,see image below) lightweight equipment, reduction of engine idling and more energy-efficient locomotives. "The cheapest gallon of fuel is the one you don't use."

Heartland Flyer bio fuel locomotive

9:43 a.m. – Looking at generating revenue through sustainable practices, Colin Peppard from the Natural Resources Defense Council discussed new paradigms in climate protection through transportation mechanisms. Paradigms include fuel policy, emissions reduction and land use. New environmentally-friendly business practices can be new profit centers. Cites CEO's for Cities "Green Dividend"study of the benefits to communities and its residents through more efficient transportation networks; green as in economic and environmental.

9:12 a.m. – James Hertwig, CEO of the Florida East Coast Railway (a Class II railroad) explains his railroad's business growth in Florida and their interaction with the state's port facilities in Fort Lauderdale, West Palm Beach and Miami (see map below). He also noted their efforts to improve connections with Class I freight carriers in Jacksonville (CSX and Norfolk Southern), and their work with Amtrak to introduce regular intercity passenger rail service between Jacksonville and Miami. "Both passenger and freight rail are aligned in their interests to reduce congestion and improve environmental impacts of transportation." First freight railroad to utilize automatic train control along its route. The railroad also is a member of the Environmental Protection Agency's SmartWay program. Passenger stations along the route will be key to a successful service in the future; need to be well-located, secure and enticing to all types of travelers (including restaurants and business amenities such as wireless internet). Also looking at commuter rail service from Jupiter to Miami along the railroad.

Florida East Coast Railway

9:00 a.m. – Gil Carmichael gets the day underway again, recapping yesterday's sessions and discussing the National Center for Intermodal Transportation's recent white paper on a national rail plan.

USA Rail 2010

DENVER, Colo. -- Greetings from Denver, Colorado and the USA Rail 2010 Conference. I will be liveblogging from the event today and tomorrow, as a mix of passenger and freight rail professionals will discuss the trends and directions in our nation's railroad network. So check back often for reports on topics such as passenger and freight integration, capital projects, Denver's Union Station redevelopment project and other issues.

4:20 p.m. – Continuing on the public-private partnerships theme of earlier sessions, a trio of presenters shared their experiences with projects that included significant contributions from – and relationships between – the public and private sectors. Adam Nicolopoulos lead off and spoke again on raising capital for infrastructure projects. On high-speed projects specifically, he noted the wide scope, high risk, low profitability and long construction periods inherent in these efforts that contribute to the high capital needs. Viability of services improve after initial period (ie 10-12 years).

Next, Bill James of the RTD provided additional details on their Eagle P3 project with Denver Transit Partners. Stemmed from 2004 vote to approve FasTracks and the ability to combine several corridor efforts into a single project to maximize federal investment, improve efficiency and reduce project schedules. Key issues: where control and risk lie within the agreement.

Finally, Michael Barron, Chairman and CEO of the Las Vegas Railway Express, Inc., described his firm's plans to initiate intercity passenger rail service between Los Angeles and Las Vegas. He explained their communication with Amtrak, BNSF and Union Pacific, along with private investors, and the dynamics between the players in order to identify their respective interests.



3:10 p.m. – Building on the earlier discussion of the Denver Union Station redevelopment project, representatives from Denver's Regional Transportation District (RTD) described their multi-year, multi-corridor infrastructure expansion campaign, FasTracks. RTD Director Bill James and Senior Manager John Shonsey explained the genesis of the effort. Shonsey explained that prioritizing corridors failed to generate overall community support. Instead FasTracks is a series of one new light rail corridor, three commuter rail lines and one BRT route, along with new transit centers and the Union Station redevelopment. In terms of the rail projects, two of the commuter lines and the new Gold Line light rail corridor will operate in existing rail corridors but on new, dedicated passenger tracks. He also described their partnerships with the various railroads which own the rail lines, and the communications efforts needed to bring projects to fruition.

James described the various investment streams that support FasTracks, including the .4% local sales tax and their Eagle P3 (public-private partnership) agreement with Denver Transit Partners. Construction on the project will begin this fall and amount to a total project of $2.3 billion. He noted the lengthy process needed to devise the proposal selection process and its uniqueness to date in the passenger rail industry.

2:15 p.m. – A quartet of speakers discuss attracting public investment for rail projects, moderated by Adam Nicolopoulos of ADN Capital Ventures. Cheryl Jones representing the TIFIA loan program of the U.S. Department of Transportation highlighted the differences between DOT grant programs and TIFIA. Using revenues from tolls and tax increment financing options, among other mechanisms, projects pay back the initial loan investment to support projects when straight grant-based investment is limited. Notes that the Transbay Terminal in San Francisco represented the first time that only tax increment financing would be allowed as a financing stream. Garvey Bonds are also an option to leverage future grant monies. TIFIA offers repayment terms more favorable than those available on the general market, and interest rate is irrespective of credit quality. TIFIA doesn't just want to be repaid, but wants to see the project built.

Matt Ginsberg of Chambers, Conlon & Hartwell, LLC in Washington which presents railroad interests discussed the financing opportunities for rail as marked by a good deal of interest, but not much vision. He discussed reauthorization of SAFETEA-LU and the prospects for Congressional action, along with various revenue options to support investment provided by the legislation.

Rodney Massman from the Missouri Department of Transportation describes how various states support rail projects and Missouri's efforts to increase investment in its St. Louis - Kansas City corridor. Multimodal programs in state DOTs are hard to define and often can be blocked by restrictions on use of funds. Many states' rail programs were burdened by small staffs and limited resources. He also noted that although ARRA offered 100% federal investment for high-speed and intercity passenger projects, the subsequent annual appropriations that required 20% state investment received significantly more requests than dollars available, indicating a willingness by many states to partner with the federal government to support new projects.

12:18 p.m. – Project officials involved with the Denver Union Station redevelopment effort (see rendering below) present about the project and some of its unique elements. Elbra Wedgeworth, President of the Denver Union Station Project Authority provided some history of the 1894 facility and how the redevelopment project has moved forward. Meanwhile, Bill Mosher, Project Manager for the project discussed the gradual effort to return activity to the station and the FasTraks Program which will bring to Union Station commuter rail lines to Denver International Airport and three other routes, a new West corridor light rail line and a 22-bay regional bus facility. Moreover, the project will introduce over 3 million square feet of development space to the west of the train platforms and the creation of a public plaza. The project involves extensive investment and financing options, including a mix of federal, state and local support as well as private investment through the nearby development. The key to bringing the project closer to reality has been the blend of a regional transit vision, community place-making and the utilization of public-private partnerships.

Denver Union Station redevelopment

11:46 a.m. – Martin Leinweber from DuPont Sustainable Solutions presents ideas on managing large capital projects. Goal of capital project is to safely produce a good or service that meets objectives, not to build a rail line or refurbish a station.

Scott Witt of the Washington Department of Transportation discusses the continued growth of the Cascades service in the Pacific Northwest. ARRA grant has been a challenging process; MOU with BNSF recently agreed-to; will lead to advanced signilization and corridor reliability efforts. Multiple players in partnerships required is not easy, but essential. Need to find common interest. Terminology has been a huge issue (ie. "operationally complete"). Second train to Vancouver was very well received and exceeded expectations for ridership. FRA traditional regulatory/safety role is now transitioning into grant-making role, with a limited staff and resources, so it will take time for them to get up to speed.

Mark Bristol of Union Pacific mentions his railroad's work on the Illinois project and how similar projects will be dealt with in the future. Smaller projects in Missouri and California. FRA provisions in May were especially surprising and changed the risk profiles for the railroads. Being "on the hook" for project outcomes was a non-starter for Union Pacific and other railroads. Good relationships with state partners, but new federal regulations are difficult. Illinois situation is favorable because there are alternate routes between Chicago and St. Louis, so can take the risk of passenger capacity. Full vision is for a full 2-track railroad and certain sections of 3-track to support 18 total passenger trips each day at 110 mph. Also, geography is good for high-speed operation. Communication is key with partners, minimize contact through consultants. Also need realistic expectations to deal with railroad's motivations and challenges. Avoid premature cost estimates. Reimburse railroads to build capacity plans to improve buy-in, and take advantage of their institutional expertise. Not much constructive involvement with FRA.

Bruce Hillblom of Amtrak discusses how freight and passenger entities must work together to build a larger market for rail. "Transformational misconception on high-speed rail at 220 mph and tsunami of 110 mph trains to be forced, but markets evolve gradually, and it will be new services where none exist, increased frequency where limited and reliability improved everywhere." Amtrak respects franchise of freight railroads and partnership is key. A new set of economic challenges requires new partnerships to meet them. PRIIA and ARRA are just the first steps. If potential corridor already has Amtrak service, access Amtrak's expertise and build on existing relationships.

11:05 a.m. – A balanced panel of passenger and freight rail officials discuss how to improve cooperation between the two sectors. Mark Hinsdale from CSX mentions the challenge of maintaining the freight franchise and still provide the passenger benefit that seems to be growing in numbers and interest. Not much freight can take advantage of higher speeds. Only co-mingled operation at over 79 mph is on Hudson Line in New York. Opportunity of former New York Central, 4-track right-of-way between Schnectady and Buffalo. Luxury not available elsewhere, especially in the south. Difficult to mix 100 mph passenger trains and 40 mph freight trains without additional capacity added. European systems usually do not mix freight and passenger operations. CREATE is rare public-private partnership that has benefits for everyone to improve reliability and frequency, not speed.

10:27 a.m. – Clark Robertson from CSX Transportation notes the numerous regulatory and legislative challenges facing the freight industry: re-regulation, positive train control (PTC) and passenger rail interaction. Re-regulation should not backslide from gains made after Staggers. PTC: series of technologies to prevent human errors. PTC will create safer railroads, but only prevent 4% of all accidents (can't prevent track failures, equipment failures or grade crossing collisions). Well-intentioned, but unfunded $10 billion mandate with technology that's still being developed. Consequence is significant delay to capital investment. High-speed and passenger rail: CSX hosts more passenger trains than any other railroads. Federal funding does not yet match vision and forces freight to shoulder too much of the burden. Key elements for freight-passenger integration: safety (30ft separation and dedicated corridors over 90 mph), capacity, liability and compensation.

10:09 a.m. – Peter Gilberston, CEO of Anacostia & Pacific railroad consultants considers how the renaissance of the freight rail industry can continue. Renaissance embodied by Warren Buffet's acquisition of BNSF. Staggers Act was a massive transformation of the industry (see below chart). Productivity, volume, revenue and rates all significantly improved. Prior to Staggers, many industry leaders did not have confidence in their own industry. New leaders, some from outside, changed the culture. Similar confidence is now growing for passenger rail.

Source: Association of American Railroads

9:55 a.m. – A panel of freight railroad representatives look at trends in the freight industry. Jerry Vest of the Genesee & Wyoming suggests freight railroads are a solid long-term investment with good management. G&W oversees a network of short line railroads across the nation. Resurgence of industry accomplished by Staggers Act in 1980 (unlocked ability to better serve customers and meet investment demands), cost of carbon fuel shifted traffic off roads (but freight rail is more efficient, 1 ton of freight 436 miles on 1 gallon of fuel), growth and acceptance of intermodalism, and better technology. Railroading is a long-life business where assets often exceed the lifespan of the customers and original decision-makers.

9:41 a.m. – John Gray of the Association of American Railroads talks about putting large numbers of passenger trains on freight railroads. Freight rail industry has maintained capital spending despite economic recession, and increasingly on infrastructure rather than equipment. New passenger service must compete with freight growth. "High-speed is up to a lot of interpretation as to what it means, but generally it's lines at – or moving towards – 110 mph." Initial agreements for new projects will require a lot of individuality for each project. Issues: passenger rail should compliment, not conflict with freight; liability protection; full compensation (not Amtrak incremental cost model); no forced access; some uses not compatible with freight infrastructure (especially very high speed). Also, people access to rights-of-way and station facilities significant concern. How to improve: look at light density lines; train management conflicts and maintenance/safety enhancements; separate facilities above 110 mph; de-bottleneck chokepoints; upgrade terminal access routes; and increasing average overall speeds, not top speeds. "Frequency is one of the most important aspects in acceptance of passenger rail, but frequency comes at the expense of capacity and capacity is expensive to build and maintain."

9:26 a.m. – Judy Mitchell, Director of Strategic Initiatives for Canadian Pacific, speaks of her company's efforts involving passenger rail. Cites TEA-21 as beginning of progress for reforming rail network; led to projects like the Hiawatha light rail and Northstar commuter rail in Minneapolis. "Canadian Pacific has worked closely with Wisconsin DOT to advance projects." Freight mandate is to improve our operations; public projects can learn lessons from freight sector on how to transition to a vibrant industry. Have to make difficult investment choices. "A long-term plan for the passenger network is crucial." Intermodal connections can be modeled off freight multi-modal facilities developed over the last several decades. How to improve the network: Make safety a priority; Fill trains you have and then make them longer; Increase speed, reduce dwell and idle time, and ensure reliable scheduling. "Fast, predictable service is important for customer satisfaction, whether they're passengers or freight."

9:10 a.m. – A trio of public, private and association speakers discuss how to bring North America's passenger rail network into the 21st Century. Donna Brown, the Passenger Rail Planning Manager of the Wisconsin Dept. of Transportation focuses on the sustainability of the network. "Transit or passenger rail should not have to justify their existence more than any other mode...to provide benefits to all citizens of our state." Similar doubts about Interstate Highway System at its inception as high-speed and intercity rail today. Milwaukee - Chicago Hiawatha Service indicates model for success for Milwaukee - Madison  project. New service will be successful because residents will consider their options. Goal is to improve quality of life and to improve mobility options, not to make a profit. ARRA grant will buy equipment, upgrade Canadian Pacific route and build stations. Opportunity to return passenger rail to Madison. "We were ready to produce a shovel-ready high-speed rail at 110 mph by 2016." Working with Canadian Pacific to identify needs, improve signaling and communications and share aspects of training programs. Focusing on a Wisconsin workforce address immediate need for construction and long-term maintenance program.

8:50 a.m. – Former FRA Administrator Gil Garmichael sets the state with an overview of the future of the U.S. transportation network and how we got here, and the opportunities of not just a national rail plan, but a North American rail plan. Also mentions how airports should become key centers for intermodalism, much as discussed in RAIL Magazine #24. "We should double or triple track rail lines with full grade separation. We should electrify as much as possible, as well."

Named Trains

FORT MORGAN, Colo. – Railroading is associated with a number of fine traditions, many of which are holdovers from the days when travel by train was the preferred mode of transportation. And while those days are unlikely to return to the same degree, a number of those hallmarks of railroading remain even in the contemporary environment of passenger rail.

The other day, I commented on one of these traditions – dining aboard long-distance trains. Meanwhile, the conductor – the official directly in charge of the operation of the train, not the engineer – remains a standard of order and professionalism somewhere between the equally Americana-flavored positions of baseball umpire and town clerk. Likewise, another classic element of passenger rail is its fantastic job at naming trains.

From the first time that a train skipped some stops along its route to become an express – likely sometime in the early-to-mid 1800s – railroads have been devising names for their trips, especially their most elite trains. Beyond the functional markers such as Express, Special and Limited that tell passengers something about how it operates, there are other designations such as Zephyr, Clipper and Flyer that evoke a sense of speed and elegance in their service. Indeed, even today, the name of the fastest train in the Western Hemisphere – the Acela Express – was chosen to reflect a combination of acceleration and excellence.

Since named trains first appeared, their titles have largely, but not exclusively, blended some geographic or thematic reference with a railroading descriptor such as Limited or Flyer to form a unique and descriptive brand for the train. I’ve previously referred to several of these monikers – the 20^th Century Limited of the New York Central, once believed to be the finest train in the world, or the train from which this post is being crafted, the California Zephyr. These names are nothing short of beautiful in of themselves, and were often enhanced by marketing and branding campaigns by their respective railroads. The font used for the 20^th Century Limited was synonymous with the Art Deco style popular in the 1930s and 40s, while the Zephyr’s streamlined motif helped to establish a theme that would be later applied to everything from automobiles to appliances. Should you have some free time to spend, a look at Wikipedia’s extensive list of named trains in North America and around the world is well-worth the visit.

Today, Amtrak proudly continues the tradition of naming their trains. Some are holdovers from its predecessors, such as the Southwest Chief of the Santa Fe, the Crescent coined by the Southern Railroad, the Empire Builder of the Great Northern and the City of New Orleans of the Illinois Central, among several others. Meanwhile, several names are newer creations, evidenced in the Downeaster, Heartland Flyer and Pacific Surfliner. Even many commuter rail operations have unique brands, such as the New Mexico RailRunner, Music City Star in Nashville or the Northstar line in Minnesota. Yet whether they are historic or contemporary, all suggest a strong sense of image and identity for the train as it serves a particular purpose or geographic region.

It’s hard to conjure the same sense of excitement and wonder from Flight #1246 from Chicago to Los Angeles – although, to be fair, every train – freight and passenger – bears a distinct number assignment for precision and traffic control. And while some airlines do a good job of naming their planes – Pan Am designated their first 747s as “Clipper Ships” and jetBlue names each aircraft with a distinct blue-themed identity (such as “Blue Moon” or “Blue Crew”) – their individual trips are known only by their numeric code. How much more exhilarating would a trip from New York JFK to London Heathrow be if it was known as the Trans-Atlantic Express, or a Denver-Vancouver crossing dubbed the Rocky Mountain Explorer? Perhaps air travelers might be in just a better mood if they’re challenged to think their trip is part of something special, instead of a number that vanishes once wheels hit tarmac?

In the meantime, passenger rail can and will claim exclusive domain over the evocative imagery associated with travel. As new trains sponsored by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act come online in the next few years, what will they be called? The Sunshine State Special high-speed train between Orlando and Tampa? Badger and Buckeye Services in Wisconsin and Ohio, respectively? The Golden State Express high-speed corridor in California? The possibilities are limited only by the imaginations of those charged with their selection. We wish them well in their efforts. 

Chicago's Quartet of Terminals

Chicago Union Station

Chicago has long been considered the premier city of American railroading. For more than 120 years, it has hosted the greatest numbers of rail miles and train movements for both passengers and freight, even in today's consolidated railroading environment. Amtrak's presence in Chicagoland likewise speaks to its national importance, with trains departing to coastal terminal locations in Boston, New York, Washington, New Orleans, Los Angeles, Oakland, Portland and Seattle, as well as more regional destinations such as Detroit, Port Huron and Grand Rapids, Mich., Quincy and Carbondale, Ill., St. Louis and Kansas City, Mo., Milwaukee, Wisc., and Indianapolis, Ind. No other station in the United States offers such a geographic array of destinations.

Additionally, the Windy City hosts more active passenger rail stations than any other in North America. Sure, New York has the magnificent Grand Central and the busy Penn Station, Boston its North and South Stations, Baltimore can boast about its Penn and Camden Stations, Philadelphia with the trio of 30th Street, Suburban and Market East and, up north, Montreal and Vancouver each maintain two terminals apiece. However, no city can claim it supports four stations serving daily passenger trains except Chicago and its quartet of Union Station, the Ogilvie Transportation Center, LaSalle Station and the recently rehabilitated Millennium Station. We'll take a look at each of these important transportation nodes and how they function together to serve Chicago.

Union Station's Great Hall still speaks to the grandeur of Burnham's design

Union Station

Union Station with its original 1924 concourse

RAIL Magazine's interest in Chicago's premier rail terminal began in our first edition and continued in our 18th issue (which also focused on the larger passenger rail network in Chicagoland). For an extensive profile of Union Station, you'd do best to read through those profiles. As an overview, no intercity passenger rail station between the east and west coasts hosts more passengers than this 1925 vintage facility. Home to 17 different Amtrak routes and six Metra commuter rail lines, more than 50,000  people pass through the station every day. While there is not a Chicago Transit Authority (CTA) L station directly connected to Union Station, there are several within walking distance. Designed by famed Chicago architect Daniel Burnham – he of the "make no small plans" quote fame – and restored in 1991 with a new concourse after its original version was demolished in 1969, the station is not only well-suited to accommodate its current scores of daily patrons, but also to serve as the centerpiece for expanded high-speed and intercity passenger rail service throughout the Midwest.

Ogilvie Transportation Center

Ogilvie Transportation Center

Chicago & Northwestern Terminal

While Union Station was originally built to serve the operations of numerous independent railroads in Chicago, it did not serve them all. One railroad that maintained its own facility was the Chicago & Northwestern (C&NW), which wanted a distinct presence in its hometown. As a result, the railroad constructed its namesake terminal in 1911 at Madison and Clinton streets on the west side of the Chicago River. Not only did C&NW trains such as the North Western Limited or the Dakota 400 call at the station, but so did joint C&NW-Union Pacific trains like the Overland Limited and the City of Los Angeles. The main terminal building stood at the location until 1984, when a new hi-rise office building to house Citicorp was constructed in its place. A new passenger station was included in the facility, which was subsequently renamed after Richard B. Ogilvie in 1997. Ogilvie was a board member of the Milwaukee Road and Governor of Illinois who was influential in the establishment of the Regional Transportation Authority. Metra assumed the commuter rail services of the C&NW – whose rail lines would eventually be acquired by the Union Pacific – and today, the Ogilvie Transportation Center hosts the Union Pacific West, Northwest and West lines to Elburn, Harvard/McHenry and Kenosha, Wisc., respectively. All told, these lines deliver more than 41,000 daily passengers to the 16-track station, and several L stops are nearby but, again, not directly attached to the depot.

LaSalle Station

LaSalle Station

The original LaSalle Station

Like the Ogilvie Transportation Center, LaSalle Station – at LaSalle Street and Congress Parkway – was built by railroads uninterested in locating at the Union Station joint facility. The New York Central and Rock Island railroads took over an existing station in the east side of the Chicago River and co-located their operations at the site, which was formalized with a new station building in 1903. Both carriers sent trains to LaSalle until the New York Central merged with the Pennsylvania in 1968 to form the Penn Central, after which its trains called at Union Station. The Rock Island continued service to LaSalle until the Regional Transportation Authority purchased its commuter rail operation in 1976 – although it was operated by the Chicago & Northwestern until 1981, when it was integrated into the Metra network. Today, Metra's Rock Island District carries more than 32,000 daily passengers on two branches between LaSalle and Blue Island, with others extending the full route to Joliet. The L is accessible via the LaSalle/Van Buren station just about a block away, while the Blue Line subway's LaSalle station is a block to the east.

Millennium Station after its 2005 refurbishment

Millennium Station

Illinois Central's Randolph Street Terminal

Anywhere west of Harrisburg, Penn., there is only one terminal station where electrically-powered intercity or commuter trains operate in North America: Chicago's Millennium Station (although this factoid may prove a fleeting one should expected high-speed and intercity rail projects currently planned come to fruition; the first will most likely be the electrification of the Caltrain service between San Francisco and San Jose). The Illinois Central (IC) Railroad established its Chicago terminal at Randolph and South Water streets just east of The Loop in 1893, and electrified its commuter rail trackage in 1926 with routes stretching to South Chicago, Blue Island and University Park. Known then as Randolph Street Terminal, the station also hosted the interurban trains of the Chicago, South Shore and South Bend Railroad (South Shore). Metra assumed the IC's routes in 1987 and rebranded them as Metra Electric, while the South Shore was acquired by the Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation District (NICTD) in 1989 (for full details on the last surviving interurban, the South Shore Line, see Beth Wilson's excellent profile in the first edition of RAIL Magazine). Today, more than 18,000 daily riders travel through Millennium Station, which was renamed to correspond with the park built over its tracks bearing the same name after a substantial rehabilitation in 2005 improved the station with shops, food service, waiting areas, ticket windows and other amenities.

Coming soon will be a photo collection from the various stations....