PURPOSE AND NEED FOR 

THE SPRINGFIELD RAIL 

IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT

Section

2

2. Purpose and Need for the 

Spring

fi eld Rail Improvements Project
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 2-1 Volume II 

2.0 Purpose and Need for the Springfield Rail 

Improvements Project 

This Tier 2Evaluation (Volume II) for the Springfield Rail Improvements Project was

prepared to satisfy the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) NEPA

regulations (40 CFR 1500‐1508).  This Draft EIS is being prepared by the Illinois

Department of Transportation (IDOT) and the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) in

cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration, the U.S. Army Corps of

Engineers, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the Illinois Department of Natural

Resources.   

This section describes the purpose and need for the Springfield Rail Improvements

Project.  In addition, this chapter provides information on project history, including

previous and current rail studies along the corridor.  Finally, this section identifies major

authorizing laws and regulations; discusses the relationship of the proposal to statutes,

regulations, policies, programs, and plans; and lists federal permits, licenses, and other

requirements for project implementation.  An overview map of the proposed project is

shown in Exhibit 2‐1A and 2‐1B.    

Proposed high‐speed rail improvements in the Chicago to St. Louis corridor, including

the section through Springfield are consistent with the Illinois State Transportation Plan

(ISTP) and the individual policies in ISTP (IDOT, 2007).

2.1 Project Background 

For more than two decades, the Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) has

pursued improvements to passenger rail service between Chicago and St. Louis, and

Springfield has been included as a component of these improvements. The Chicago to

St. Louis corridor is part of the Midwest Regional Rail Initiative Program’s intent to

develop and implement a 21st‐Century regional passenger rail system, and passenger

traffic through Springfield is a component of this system.   

Because of the needs for improved and expanded intercity passenger services, IDOT

proposes the provision of two tracks between Chicago and St. Louis, including the

section through Springfield.  The Tier 1 Final EIS addresses broad corridor‐wide issues

and alternatives and includes detailed information on project history and previous

studies, as well as the Springfield Rail Improvements Project, which considers the

recommended alternatives from the Tier 1 in more detail.    

2.1.1 Springfield Rail Improvements Project 

In 2002, Springfield and the Springfield Section of the American Institute of Architects

invited the Regional/Urban Design Assistance Team (R/UDAT) to Springfield to focus

on “New Dimensions for Downtown Springfield: preserving the past and building the future”

(R/UDAT, 2002).  The goals included better planning in downtown, improving  
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 2-2 Volume II 

Exhibit 2‐1A.  Project Location
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 2-3 Volume II 

Exhibit 2‐1B.  Project Area Location

   
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 2-4 Volume II 

directional and visual cohesiveness, and improving the linkages between downtown

Springfield and its surrounding neighborhoods.  The R/UDAT study provided a series

of recommendations for the revitalization of downtown Springfield.  This included an

urban design framework for the downtown and connected areas, specific

recommendations for the area surrounding the Capitol Building and adjacent state

government offices, and recommendations for transportation and parking programs.   

Among its transportation proposals, R/UDAT recommended that consolidation of the

UP and NS in the NS corridor through central Springfield should be a long‐term

objective.  In response to this recommendation, Springfield applied for and received an

Illinois Tomorrow Corridor Planning Grant in 2005 to study consolidation of all three

north‐south corridors.   

The 2005 study was an evaluation of the 3rd Street (UP), 10th Street (NS), and 19th Street

(CN/I&M) corridors to explore options of consolidating them into a unified corridor.  It

also examined the resulting development, redevelopment, open space, and recreational

opportunities that could result from abandoning currently active track.  The study also

evaluated anticipated project costs, identified an implementation strategy, and

formulated options for public‐private partnerships to advance the plan.

The study determined that consolidating the railroads into a single unified corridor had

the potential to provide a number of benefits including:

 Reduce traffic congestion.  Train blockages produce delays and congestion and

contribute to air pollution.  Some of Springfield’s most heavily traveled arterials

have at‐grade crossings.  Stopped trains can result in gridlock on intersecting

streets.

 Reduce the barrier effect that the railroad corridors have on Springfield.

 Allow redevelopment of abandoned corridors into bicycle and pedestrian paths,

greenways, and recreation corridors.  These corridors could connect other bike trails

in Springfield.  The corridors that currently serve as barriers could transform into

paths that link diverse areas of the community.

 Eliminate at‐grade railroad crossings and the hazards associated with them.

 Allow for crossing improvements to create a quiet zone for rail traffic by

eliminating train horns in Springfield.

The consolidation feasibility study recommended that the railroads be consolidated in

the 10th Street corridor (Hanson Professional Services Inc., 2005).   
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 2-5 Volume II 

2.2 Purpose 

2.2.1 Chicago to St. Louis High-Speed Rail 

The Springfield Rail Improvements Project is one part of the proposed Chicago to St.

Louis High‐Speed Rail (HSR) Program to enhance the passenger transportation network

in the Chicago to St. Louis corridor by improving high‐speed passenger rail service,

resulting in a more balanced use of different corridor travel options by diverting trips

made by automobile and air to rail.  Volume 1 covers the Tier 1 analysis of the

Springfield Project.

2.2.2 Springfield Rail Improvements Project 

The purpose of the Springfield Rail Improvements Project is to enhance rail line capacity

to accommodate and reduce the effects of the increasing high‐speed passenger and

freight train traffic on the three north‐south rail corridors that pass through Springfield:

the Union Pacific (UP), Norfolk Southern (NS), and Canadian National (CN)/Illinois &

Midland (I&M), see Exhibit 2‐2.  The purpose includes reducing rail line effects by

improving safety, reducing congestion, and enhancing community livability and

supporting commercial activity.  

2.3 Need 

2.3.1 Chicago to St. Louis High-Speed Rail Program Need 

The Springfield Rail Improvements Project is one part of the Chicago to St. Louis High‐

Speed Rail Program.  Needs of the overall program are discussed in detail in the

associated Tier 1 Draft EIS and can be summarized as follows:

 There is currently a modal imbalance within the corridor, in that rail travel

represents only 1.1 percent of the 35 million annual person trips within the Chicago‐

St. Louis corridor.  Automobile travel represents 95.5 percent of the trips within the

corridor.  There is a need to correct this imbalance because:

 Automobile and bus travel between Chicago and St. Louis is limited primarily

to I‐55.  Travel by this one route can often be unreliable because of traffic

congestion, weather, roadway construction, and accidents, which can

substantially increase travel times.   

 Automobile travel is the least safe mode of transportation in contrast with air,

rail, and bus travel.

 The sections of single track between St. Louis and Joliet cannot accommodate

existing and projected freight and passenger trains.  

 The planned new Joliet Intermodal Terminal would double the number of

freight trains using the Chicago‐St. Louis corridor from six to 12.  The number of
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 2-6 Volume II 

freight trains is projected to increase to 27 by the year 2030, which could affect

the performance and capacity for high‐speed passenger rail.  

 On time performance from 2007 to 2010 for rail passenger service between

Chicago and St. Louis ranged from 38 to 75 percent in part because of the track

capacity limits in the corridor.  

   
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 2-7 Volume II 

Exhibit 2‐2. Existing Railroad Corridors
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 2-8 Volume II 

2.3.2 Springfield Rail Improvements Project Need 

The need for the Springfield Rail Improvements Project reflects the need for the Chicago

to St. Louis High‐Speed Rail Program and includes needs to address track capacity,

safety, congestion, and community livability and commercial activity in Springfield.  

2.3.2.1 Track Capacity

The UP anticipates an increase in freight traffic on its line through Springfield.  The

number of daily freight trains is expected to increase from about five to about 27 by

2030. The existing single track does not have sufficient capacity to carry these freight

trains and the high‐speed trains and meet the minimum service requirements.   

The other freight rail carriers through Springfield also anticipate increases in traffic on

their rail lines.  The current and projected number of trains on each of the rail lines

through Springfield is shown in Table 2‐1. Current rail traffic is based on field counts of

the number and duration of trains in late 2009.   The railroads furnished projected 2020

rail traffic. One of the results of increased freight and passenger trains on the UP

corridor will be diminished service to passenger rail as reflected in decreased on‐time

performance.

Table 2‐1.  Number of Trains through Springfield

Current (2010) Rail

Traffic

Projected (2030) Rail

Traffic2 (No‐Build)

Projected (2030) Rail

Traffic3 (Build)

Union Pacific 10 Passenger

5 Freight

10 Passenger

27 Freight

18 Passenger

27 Freight

Norfolk Southern 16 Freight 27 Freight 27 Freight

Canadian National1

4 Freight 9 Freight 9 Freight

TOTAL 35 Trains 73 Trains 81 Trains

1 Includes I&M and KCS traffic on CN.

2 Projected 2020 rail traffic was furnished by each railroad company. UP‐ 22F, NS‐24F, CN‐8F

3 Projected 2030 rail traffic for NS and CN assumes a freight growth of 1.2 percent per year

between 2020 and 2030. The UP projected rail traffic assumes a freight growth of 2 percent per

year between 2020 and 2030.

As shown above, the total projected trains through Springfield would more than double

over the next 20 years.  

2.3.2.2 Safety

As part of the needs for enhanced safety of the Chicago to St. Louis corridor, as

documented in the Tier 1 EIS for that project, there are specific needs inherent to the

Springfield Project study area.  There are 68 at‐grade crossings in the Springfield study

area.  Each one of these represents a point of conflict between passenger and freight rail

traffic and roadway traffic. Table 2‐2 shows the number of at‐grade crossings and grade

separations in the Springfield study area by railroad.  
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 2-9 Volume II 

Table 2‐2. Springfield At‐Grade Crossings and Grade Separations

UP I&M CN NS Total 

At‐Grade 24 6 18 20 68

Grade Separations 4 0 6 5 15

Total 28 6 24 25 83

Table 2‐3 shows Illinois Commerce Commission (ICC) records for the total number of

crashes at highway grade crossings for Springfield for all years (1955‐2010).

Table 2‐3. Springfield Illinois ICC Accident Data for all Years (1955‐2010)

Crashes Fatalities Injuries 

339 26 139

There are 24 miles of unfenced railroad right‐of‐way in the study area providing

numerous opportunities to trespass in dangerous areas.  Table 2‐4 shows ICC records

(ICC, 2001‐2010) for trespassing incidents resulting in fatalities or injuries in Springfield

for the last 10 years are:  

Table 2‐4. Springfield Illinois ICC Trespassing Incidents, 2000‐2010

Incidents Fatalities Injuries 

23 8 15

While each of the corridors passes through residential and commercial areas, the UP (3rd

Street) (Amtrak) corridor is most subject to trespassing because 3rd Street is parallel and

immediately adjacent to the tracks.   

As shown on Exhibit 2‐3, the UP tracks are centered in 3rd Street and the public street

exists on one or both sides and immediately adjacent to the tracks through much of

Springfield. Numerous homes and businesses front on 3rd Street.  Aside from a periodic

curb, there is little physical separation between the street and the railroad.  North of

South Grand Avenue and through downtown, the UP right‐of‐way is only

approximately 30 feet wide.  Pedestrians can easily and unknowingly infringe on

railroad clearance, putting them in danger of being struck by a train.

Since most of the 3rd Street corridor is in dense commercial and residential areas, there

are numerous pedestrians using the area at all times.  The presence of 3rd Street adjacent

to the tracks results in pedestrians crossing the tracks at locations other than at cross

streets.  Many people frequently find friends, family, jobs, parking, services, and

shopping right across the tracks and choose to reach them without walking the extra

distance to the next intersection.  In addition to numerous homes, apartments, churches,  
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 2-10 Volume II 

Exhibit 2‐3.  Existing Tracks on 3rd Street
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 2-11 Volume II 

and businesses, the public buildings immediately along 3rd Street that are attractions to

pedestrians are:

 Supreme Court Building

 State Library

 Amtrak Passenger Station

 Dana‐Thomas House Historic Structure

 YMCA

 Memorial Medical Center

 Illinois Public Health Association

 Numerous parking lots and ramps

2.3.2.3 Congestion

All major east‐west streets across Springfield have an at‐grade railroad crossing.  Many

major streets such as North Grand Avenue, Carpenter, Adams, Washington, Laurel, and

Ash Streets cross all three railroads at‐grade (see Exhibit 2‐4).  A long train on any of

these tracks can delay vehicle traffic through much of Springfield since it can

simultaneously block almost all of the crossings on that track, and traffic queues can

block vehicles on intersecting north‐south streets.  The I&M, NS and CN all have active

rail yards in Springfield.  Switching operations in these yards frequently block adjacent

crossings with stopped trains or trains involved in back and forth movements

(Wheeland, et al, 2009).  

Vehicle delays can result in a number of problems which reduce livability and inhibit

economic activity, especially in an urban area.  These include:  

 Blocked traffic that can interfere with emergency vehicles traveling to their

destinations.

 Traffic congestion that reduces regional economic health as a lost time non‐

productive activity for most people.

 Increased air pollution and carbon dioxide emissions owing to increased idling,

acceleration and braking.

 Late arrival for employment, meetings, and education, resulting in lost business or

other personal losses.  

 Drivers allocating more time for travel and less time on productive activities

because of an inability to forecast travel time.

 Congested main arteries lead to increased use of secondary roads and side streets as

alternative routes which may negatively affect neighborhoods with unwanted

additional vehicle traffic on local streets.
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 2-12 Volume II 

Exhibit 2‐4.  Location and Magnitude of Crossing Delays  
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 2-13 Volume II 

Based on train volume data provided by the railroads, including passenger trains, and

traffic volume data from IDOT and Springfield, the existing and projected No‐Build

vehicle delays per day in the study area are:

 Existing (2010 train and vehicle traffic) – 13,800 vehicle‐minutes

 Projected (2020 train and 2010 vehicle traffic) – 30,600 vehicle‐minutes

 Projected (2030 train and 2030 vehicle traffic) – 47,500 vehicle‐minutes

Vehicle delay was calculated by multiplying the number of vehicles delayed by a

blocked crossing by the average delay per delayed vehicle.  This calculation was done

for all trains at all grade crossings in Springfield to determine the total vehicle delay per

day.  The projected delay using 2020 train volumes and 2010 vehicle traffic was

developed to isolate and highlight the effect of increased trains.  

2.3.2.4 Livability and Commercial Activity

Noise

Train noise comes from the locomotive engines, air brakes, side‐to‐side car movement,

slack‐and‐bunch car movement, wheels on rail joints, and locomotive horns blown by

trains as they approach at‐grade crossings.  This noise is generated by both freight and

passenger (including high‐speed) trains. Of these, train horns are the most disturbing.

Because of the short distances between at‐grade crossings in the rail corridors, trains

must blow their horns almost constantly when moving through Springfield.  The total

duration of train horn noise in the study area is 207 minutes per day. Federal regulations

provide public authorities the option to maintain and/or establish quiet zones provided

supplemental safety measures are in place.  There are no quiet zones in Springfield.

The existing noise environment measured in Ldn values (the day‐night sound level,

which weights night‐time noise levels by adding 10 dBA (decibel measure that reflects

characteristics of human hearing) to the actual noise level to generate a daily average

that reflects night‐time listener sensitivity) ranged from around 73 dBA Ldn to 80 to 81

dBA Ldn at locations near grade crossings where horns were being blown.  The locations

near grade crossings have very high Ldn values, and would be comparable to living

directly next to a major highway, or just off the end of the runway at a busy airport.  The

HUD threshold for an unacceptable outdoor house environment is 75 dBA Ldn.     

Each of the existing corridors passes through some residential areas, but the CN (19th

Street) and UP (3rd Street) corridors have the most adjacent residential development.  

The UP corridor passes near many sensitive receptors in the Mid‐Illinois Medical

District (see Exhibit 2‐5).  
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 2-14 Volume II 

Exhibit 2‐5.  Springfield’s Medical District
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 2-15 Volume II 

Community Division

The UP, NS, and CN/I&M railroads operate on separate north‐south corridors through

Springfield, at 3rd Street, 10th Street and 19th Street, respectively.  These rail lines present

physical and psychological barriers that split downtown and divide neighborhoods.  

These barriers have created a set of development patterns that work against a healthy

downtown and neighborhoods by isolating portions of the community and restricting

access.  Attracting residential and commercial redevelopment adjacent to the tracks is

also very difficult.  Home buyers see neighborhoods that are frequently blocked from

access to schools, shopping, and services by rail traffic as less desirable.   The rail

corridors, especially when the crossings are occupied by trains, inhibit neighborhood

connectivity (Walker, et al, 2009).

Community buildings exist along each of the three corridors.  They are listed by type in

Table 2‐5. While some of these buildings provide services on a Springfield wide basis,

many are neighborhood specific.  Closed streets and blocked crossings inhibit access to

these buildings and places or make access less safe by requiring the crossing of tracks or

encouraging walking along the tracks.

Table 2‐5. Community Buildings Along 3rd Street and 10th Street Corridors

Type 3rd Street 

Corridor 

10th Street 

Corridor 

19th Street 

Corridor 

Medical   14 9 2

Government   44 18 1

Infrastructure   13 5 2

Schools & Educational   7 3 1

Residential   4 1 1

Gathering Places 7 2 5

Parks 5 6 4

Other   2 6 2

Total 96 50 18

Medical District Division

The 3rd Street corridor runs directly through Springfield’s Medical District (see Exhibit 2‐

5) passing between the campuses of Springfield’s major hospitals.  This can delay

emergency vehicles traveling to the hospitals, and delay physicians moving from one

hospital to the other for both routine and emergency purposes.  

St. John’s Hospital and Memorial Medical Center provide emergency services for a multi

county area, and provide the only Class One Trauma Center in the region, rotating the

Trauma Center between them on an annual basis.

The Mid‐Illinois Medical District was created by Illinois Public Act 95‐693 in 2003.  The

Illinois General Assembly recognized that the health and medical care sector of the local

economy represents the greatest potential for creating jobs, tax base, and other economic

benefits for the citizenry of the Springfield area for many years to come.  The Act

specifically defines the District’s charge as follows: “... to attract and retain academic
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 2-16 Volume II 

centers of excellence, viable health care facilities, medical research facilities, emerging

high technology enterprises, and other facilities and uses as permitted by this act.”  

Given the setbacks from active rail lines typically expected by developers to minimize

noise and vibrations for medical, academic, and research‐related structures, finding

suitable building sites for medical development is severely hindered because of the rail

traffic on the UP rail line. One of Springfield’s planning goals is to enhance development

opportunities in the Medical District.   

Downtown Division

The 3rd Street corridor also passes through the midst of the downtown area.  

Development and redevelopment in Springfield’s downtown is currently restricted by

the 3rd Street corridor.  Previous studies have noted this limitation, the most recent being

the independent Regional/Urban Design Assistance Team (R/UDAT) study of the

downtown (R/UDAT, 2002).  Because of its location and use, the 3rd Street rail corridor

creates a barrier to redevelopment moving west, and creates an additional hurdle for

residential redevelopment throughout the downtown.  

Downtown residential redevelopment is impeded because of the congestion, noise, and

vibrations caused by rail traffic.  Expected future increases in rail traffic on the 3rd Street

corridor would most likely further limit opportunities for residential redevelopment,

resulting in a loss of opportunity for new retail‐commercial development that would be

expected to be drawn to the downtown area to serve additional residential growth. A

multi‐modal facility, consisting of a train station and transit hub for busses and taxi

service, has been planned by Springfield for the 10th Street corridor. This facility is

planned to improve service and attract development to Springfield’s east side.    

2.3.3 Goals and Objectives 

Based on the purpose and need described in Sections 2.2 and 2.3 for the Springfield Rail

Improvements Project, the following goals and objectives were established.

 Provide a route through Springfield that achieves the purpose of the Chicago to St.

Louis High‐Speed Rail Program as documented in Tier 1 Draft EIS.  

 Provide additional track capacity to accommodate future passenger train traffic.  

 Improve safety and reduce congestion by reducing the number of at‐grade street

crossings in the study area with a focus on those streets with the highest traffic

volumes.  

 Improve livability and commercial activity by reducing train horn noise throughout

Springfield and reducing the barrier effect of the rail lines with their growing rail

traffic on neighborhoods, downtown and the Medical District.   

 Minimize negative rail operational impacts, impacts to existing development,

operations, maintenance, rehabilitation, and capital costs, and impacts to social and

economic resources.  
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 2-17 Volume II 

2.4 Major Authorizing Laws and Regulations 

Under 49 U.S.C. 20101 et seq., the FRA has authority over railroad safety. Additionally,

under Chapter 244, Section 24105, and Section 24106 of Title 49, United States Code, the

FRA has authority to administer capital investment grants to support intercity passenger

rail service.

2.5 Scoping 

NEPA requires scoping and encourages early and frequent coordination with the public

and resource agencies throughout the project development process.  Scoping facilitates

public and agency participation and provides the opportunity for their input during

preparation of the EIS.  The scoping process for the Springfield Project is following the

scoping guidelines within the CEQ Regulations, 40 CFR § 1501.7, which provide that

“there shall be an early and open process for determining the scope of issues to be

addressed and for identifying the significant issues related to the proposed action.”  

Scoping included:  

 Notice of Intent: February 2011

 Public Meetings on Scoping: March 2011

 Draft Scoping Report: July 2011

 Public Meetings on Draft Scoping Report and Alternatives: October 2011

In addition, FRA and IDOT invited agencies with jurisdiction by law, special expertise,

or potential interest in the Springfield Project to be cooperating agencies in the EIS.  

These are the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency (USEPA), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS, Federal Highway

Administration, U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Department of Interior, Illinois

Department of Agriculture (IDOA), Illinois Department of Natural Resources (IDNR),

Illinois Environmental Protection Agency, and the Illinois Historic Preservation Agency

(IHPA). USEPA, USFWS, IDOA, IDNR, and IHPA agreed to be cooperating agencies.

IDOT and the FRA hosted five Public Open House meetings along the study corridor

March 1‐9, 2011.  Along with two Resource Agency and five Local Officials meetings, the

Public Open House meetings commenced the scoping phase of the environmental study.

Held from 4:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. in Joliet, Bloomington, Springfield, Carlinville, and

Alton, the meetings’ primary objectives were to educate attendees on the EIS process

and timeline, while introducing them to the project team and official Illinois High‐Speed

Rail contacts.  Stakeholders were also encouraged to share their thoughts and get

answers to high‐speed rail‐related issues and concerns. Two hundred fifty‐four (254)

participants registered at the meetings.  In Springfield, 116 participants registered.

In late October and early November 2011, five public meetings were held to present the

preliminary alternatives for each section of the corridor and the criteria to be used to

evaluate them. Attendees were asked to review the information and submit their

comments. These meetings were held in the cities of Joliet; Bloomington; Springfield;
Springfield Rail Improvements Project 2-18 Volume II 

Carlinville; and Alton from 4:00 p.m.‐7:00 p.m. A total of 368 people signed in at the

meetings with the most, 251 (68 percent), attending the Springfield meeting.

The alternatives presented for the Springfield area were:

 Keep passenger and freight rail traffic on 3rd Street and keep freight traffic on 10th

and 19th streets.  Grade separations either at Jefferson Street and 3rd Street only,

additional grade separations on 3rd Street, or additional grade separations on 3rd,

10th and 19th streets.

 Shift 3rd Street rail traffic to 10th Street and keep rail traffic on 19th Street.

 Shift both 3rd and 19th Street rail traffic to 10th Street.

 Keep passenger rail traffic on 3rd Street and shift 3rd Street freight rail traffic to 10th

Street and keep rail traffic on 19th Street.  

 Keep passenger rail traffic on 3rd Street and shift 3rd Street freight traffic and 19th

Street rail traffic to 10th Street.

Of the 179 comments received at this meeting, 95 percent supported consolidating rail

traffic onto 10th Street. Most respondents wrote that this consolidation would be the

most beneficial to Springfield and the least disruptive to existing neighborhoods and

businesses.

Respondents were most concerned about the alternatives’ impact on social and

economic resources. Eighty‐six (86) percent of the people who commented about this

particular criterion attended the Springfield meeting. They expressed concern about

increasing freight and passenger traffic on the 3rd Street corridor alternative saying that

it would negatively impact downtown Springfield businesses and residential

neighborhoods.

Minimizing impacts to existing and planned development received the second largest

number of comments. Once again, the majority of respondents (94 percent) were from

the Springfield meeting. Most of their comments referred to the Medical District’s

expansion plans and how rail traffic must avoid destroying the viability of this district.

Respondents said that the district provides jobs and generates tax revenue.