Detroit to Chicago corridor part of Obama's high speed rail proposal

[Novine]

"A Detroit-to-Chicago corridor could compete for billions of dollars in federal aid under a strategy for building high-speed rail the Obama administration outlined Thursday."

Detroit News

"A Chicago Hub network, which Obama called “something close to my heart� in reference to his adopted hometown, linking much of Midwest, including Toledo and Detroit with Chicago, Milwaukee, Minneapolis-St. Paul, St. Louis, Kansas City, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Indianapolis and Louisville, Ky."

Detroit Free Press

[upinottawa]

I would be interested in finding out how "high speed" these high speed trains will be. That being said, anything that decreases travel times and [[hopefully) increases the frequency of trains would be a good thing.

The US government should also consider working with Canada on direct Detroit-Toronto and Detroit-Buffalo higher speed rail lines.

[Russix]

Let's build high-speed rail, No wait, Let's tear down a train station.

[Gsgeorge]

Can anyone say Michigan Central Station?

[rooms222]

Having the links both to Chicago, Toledo, and hopefully Toronto will help getting rail service back to the point it was 10-15 years ago [[at a much higher speed).....I don't think the current Detroit station or the MCS are well suited for service.

Connection to Public Transit and parking are both important to a station. The current station is way too small, and has no parking, but is on Woodward, the most likely spot for light rail.

The MCS does not have parking and is off the beaten track for public transit in the near future. The warehouse space does not suit the needs of passenger rail today. It seems to be in a good spot if high speed rail to Canada is developed.

I have generally taken Amtrak out of Dearborn. It has free safe parking. Many of Dearborn's boarding are because of this, I am sure.

One of the only immeidate post WWII stations of note is in Toledo. It also has free parking.

Just as Airports have to deal with both parking and transit issues, so do train stations.....

[professorscott]

It is not at all common for downtown big-city train stations to provide parking. Toronto's Union Station has no parking whatever - but you can take the GO trains into downtown from other stations, some of which have very massive parking lots, plus a "kiss and ride" area, and other things.

MDOT plans to rebuild the Detroit Amtrak station very near to the current one, and I think that will have a very limited parking area. I haven't seen detailed plans.

[Russix]

Having the links both to Chicago, Toledo, and hopefully Toronto will help getting rail service back to the point it was 10-15 years ago [[at a much higher speed).....I don't think the current Detroit station or the MCS are well suited for service.

Connection to Public Transit and parking are both important to a station. The current station is way too small, and has no parking, but is on Woodward, the most likely spot for light rail.

The MCS does not have parking and is off the beaten track for public transit in the near future. The warehouse space does not suit the needs of passenger rail today. It seems to be in a good spot if high speed rail to Canada is developed.

I have generally taken Amtrak out of Dearborn. It has free safe parking. Many of Dearborn's boarding are because of this, I am sure.

One of the only immeidate post WWII stations of note is in Toledo. It also has free parking.

Just as Airports have to deal with both parking and transit issues, so do train stations.....

Are you suggesting that the Airport is better connected with public transit than MCS? Light rail is planned for Michigan Ave, until then 5 bus routes[[200, 125, 49, 37, 18) pass close by and with some rerouting MCS would have a connection between downtown every 10 minutes. Both agencies could agree to let Bus riders who have train tickets ride for free between downtown and MCS. HSR would not be making the abundant amount of stops that Amtrak currently does. I do not think they would stop in Dearborn, and definitely not Royal Oak or Pontiac if the line continues to Toronto. From an aerial view, MCS is a large building surrounded by grassy fields, empty buildings, and a large paved surface. If that doesn't say parking, I don't know what does, its just missing the crushed rock ballast. You could even go sofar to say that the office tower should be converted into an elevator garage.

http://dev.extenia.com/mcs.jpg

[detmsp]

I would be interested in finding out how "high speed" these high speed trains will be.

110 mph. hardly high speed by european/asian standards.

[ghettopalmetto]

110 mph. hardly high speed by european/asian standards.

Let's keep a few things in mind, here:

It has taken France and Japan over 30 years to get their high-speed rail systems to where they are today. We can't just up and build new trackage for a dedicated high-speed passenger rail system. Improvements are likely to be incremental as money is available, and the ridership market develops.

I expect initial improvements to include upgrades of interlockings, tie replacement, and construction of additional sidings. Some construction of additional track would not be unexpected. This kind of work is most likely, because they are the projects that states [[like Virginia) have been trying to complete in the past few years.

Over time, one could expect to see new passenger cars and locomotives, full double [[and some triple?) tracking, station capacity enhancements, and electification. All of those are a long ways off.

[DetroitPlanner]

110 mph is much faster than what can be done on I-94. It is also a more direct route, making a beeline from K'zoo to Michigan City.

These are not bullet trains, but this is high speed rail. Any faster and you would need to spend a significant amount in infrastructure to separade the grade of the track from crossings. Getting caught up in symantics will not do a darned thing to improve service. Incidently, just beacuse it can get 110 mph does not mean they will run the train that fast. It does stop at small towns like Dowagiawac.

[kraig]

I think I would actually prefer that the MCS be involved. I know that there is this big push to have things publicly owned, but, I think that dealing with Matty Moroun would go a lot better than dealing with City Council or having Ken Cockrel trying to facilitate anything. Let's face it, The Mayor and City Council, don't just suck, they blow.

[milesdriven]

110 mph is much faster than what can be done on I-94. .

I disagree.

[detmsp]

Let's keep a few things in mind, here:

It has taken France and Japan over 30 years to get their high-speed rail systems to where they are today. We can't just up and build new trackage for a dedicated high-speed passenger rail system. Improvements are likely to be incremental as money is available, and the ridership market develops.

I expect initial improvements to include upgrades of interlockings, tie replacement, and construction of additional sidings. Some construction of additional track would not be unexpected. This kind of work is most likely, because they are the projects that states [[like Virginia) have been trying to complete in the past few years.

Over time, one could expect to see new passenger cars and locomotives, full double [[and some triple?) tracking, station capacity enhancements, and electification. All of those are a long ways off.

well i'm not positive about this [[so correct me if i'm wrong) but i don't think existing railroads can be improved to handle a REAL high speed train. That would mean that this isn't some incremental step towards real high speed rail... it means we're building something we will quickly want to completely replace because it's not fast enough

[Novine]

As I said above:

"True high-speed rail would require a dedicated, grade-separated right-of-way. That's not going to happen any time soon."

For those not familiar with the concept, it would mean creating an entirely new train corridor where the tracks don't have road crossings or even crossings with other rail lines and generally it's elevated to keep people, animals, etc. out of the way of trains moving at 200+ MPH. As Russix stated, we don't need bullet train speeds to create a rail alternative that's better than highway and bus travel. If Amtrak can crank their trains up to 110 MPH between the stations, we can get trains to Chicago in much less time than they currently take.

[softailrider]

110 mph. hardly high speed by european/asian standards.

Sounds pretty damm fast to me. Of course, I haven't been on a train in about 30 years. Really have no desire to take a train ride either.

[kathy2trips]

I would love to go home to Detroit more often, but from Texas, my options are driving and flying. If the government could get it's act together and get Amtrack were it was, you'd have a lot more ex-pats like me coming home more often.

[heedus]

From the story in the Detroit News about $2 billion in relief coming to Michigan:

"High speed rail is coming to Michigan because of Gov. Granholm. There's no doubt about it," said U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood.

[French777]

Thanks Jenny!!

[Hypestyles]

there needs to be lots more new rail lines, instead of constantly having to negotiate with the private freight companies..

[professorscott]

Hypestyles, believe me: you write the check, we'll build the rail lines.

[Novine]

I read somewhere that in Lansing, Senate Republicans voted to cut back rail funding for Amtrak.