CHICAGO | 357 N Green | 640 FT

[SIGSEGV]

Originally Posted by gandalf612

Realistically though, what destinations are even worth reaching by high-speed rail from this alignment? Optimal distance is 100-500 miles so the corridor would at best look like Rockford (350k), Madison (700k), La Crosse (150k), Rochester (225k), Minneapolis (4M) 5.5M total and past Minneapolis there is nothing of note within 500 miles in any direction except Des Moines, which at 740k is hardly worth the expense

For the same distance we could get Mich City (32k), South Bend (325k), Kalamazoo (260k), Lansing (100k), Ann Arbor (370k), Detroit (4.4M), London (540k), branch at Hamilton (785k) to Toronto (6M) and Buffalo (1.2M) for a total of 12.8 M for Toronto and 8 M for Buffalo

And it would be cheaper because we already have an existing electrified alignment as far as South Bend, making upgrading it to HSR so much easier. And you could pull on two federal governments for funding

from Toronto we could extend to Ottawa (1.5M), Montreal (4M), Quebec (840k)
from Buffalo we could extend to Rochester (1.1M), Syracuse (660k), Albany (635k), NYC (20M) and the entire North East corridor.

Like sure having Chicago to Minneapolis would be wonderful in a fantasy land, but realistically we'd only be able to get one 500 mile route in the next 50 years and the choice for that is rather blatantly obvious.

It would presumably be Chicago -> O'Hare - > Milwaukee -> Madison -> Lacrosse -> Rochester -> Minneapolis.

though not clear to me that you need to be very high speed between Chicago and O'Hare.

[Briguy]

Doesn’t look like they’re leaving room for a fourth track either.

[gandalf612]

Originally Posted by SIGSEGV

It would presumably be Chicago -> O'Hare - > Milwaukee -> Madison -> Lacrosse -> Rochester -> Minneapolis.

though not clear to me that you need to be very high speed between Chicago and O'Hare.

Yeah but that would be stupid. O'Hare to Chicago already has a rail link with its own alignment that they could just triple or quad track major portions of to run express. Milwaukee is already served by intercity rail through a much faster alignment that should be upgraded to higher speed instead of taking a 30? 45? mile detour.

[Jstange059]

I’m not sure if I’m missing something, but I don’t really see how this will prevent HSR? They’re already able to get a through-running platforms through Union Stationby converting the old mail platforms, and the trains won’t be able to run at high speed through the tracks through Fulton Market with all of the grade crossings which still exist with the proposed tunnel, but such a delay would be negligible when viewed in the scope of the full journey. Why is building the tunnel essential to providing HSR, and what am I missing?

Additionally, High Speed Rail Alliance’s website also states potentially putting the tunnel below Canal Street instead of Clinton. I don’t know if this will help with out with the Right of way problem, and from what I can see, 360 N Green seems to intrude on the proposed right of way

[jbermingham123]

Originally Posted by SIGSEGV

It would presumably be Chicago -> O'Hare - > Milwaukee -> Madison -> Lacrosse -> Rochester -> Minneapolis.

If O'hare is to be included in any kind of HSR plan, itll likely be as part of a dual alignment:

Chicago Ogilvie -> Kenosha -> Milwaukee -> Madison -> Lacrosse -> Rochester -> Minneapolis
Chicago Union -> O'hare -> Rockford ------------^

[left of center]

Originally Posted by Briguy

Doesn’t look like they’re leaving room for a fourth track either.

The city and CDOT should absolutely force them to. A 4th track would be a very feasible expansion for Metra, especially since the 4th track already exists on that ROW west of Carpenter. It is not in use, and would require work to bring it back into operation, but the space for it is already there.