IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

Section

7

7. Implementation Plan
Chicago-St. Louis High-Speed Rail 7-1 Tier 1 Final EIS 

7.0 Implementation Plan 

The Tier 1 Final EIS has presented several improvements along the Chicago to St. Louis

corridor to meet the purpose and need of the program.  A corridor program of this size

and scope is rarely implemented at once, and, instead, typically requires incremental

steps to logically advance the program.  As such, the State of Illinois has developed an

implementation plan to help guide the identification and selection of staged

improvements within the corridor that can be advanced as part of the corridor wide

development plan.  Ahead of any future construction projects, should federal funding be

utilized, Tier 2 environmental documents must be completed to assess the individual

component projects of the Selected Alternative carried forward from the Tier 1 EIS.  

Within these Tier 2 environmental documents, design alternatives will be evaluated,

potential environment impacts will be identified, and measures to avoid, minimize, and

mitigate those identified impacts will be documented.   

7.1 Continuation of Current Investment 

As discussed in Section 3.2, a $1.45 billion program is under way by the State of Illinois,

including $1.3 billion provided by the Federal Railroad Administration, to raise top

speeds to 110 miles per hour, improve ride quality, increase reliability to 85 percent on‐

time performance, improve stations, and provide new rolling stock for improved

passenger service between the East St. Louis area and Joliet, Illinois.  Construction began

in 2010.   Most work between Dwight and East St. Louis area is scheduled to be complete

by 2015 and work between Joliet and Dwight is scheduled to be complete in 2017.  This

program will support the operation of three of the existing round trip passenger trains at

speeds of up to 110 mph on these segments.  Construction includes new rail, ballast,

concrete ties, and related improvements including 13 passing sidings and 24 miles of

new double track at three locations.

At the conclusion of these improvements, passenger train service on the Chicago‐St.

Louis corridor will consist of three 110 mph “Lincoln Service” (“LS”) round trips, a 79

mph “Lincoln Service” round trip and the 79 mph (non‐State‐supported) “Texas Eagle”

(“TE”) round trip (Table 7.1‐1).  

The implementation of the proposed improvements included with the Preferred

Alternative (see Section 3.5) will be staged to help ensure the continued success of

passenger train service on the corridor while maintaining effective freight and

commuter rail operations.
Chicago-St. Louis High-Speed Rail 7-2 Tier 1 Final EIS 

Table 7.1‐1.  Expected Timetable after Completion of Current Program

301 303 21 305 307 Stations 300 302 22 304 306 

“LS”

110

“LS”

79

“TE”

79

“LS”

110

“LS”

110   

“LS”

110

“LS”

110

“TE”

79

“LS”

79

“LS”

110

0700 0925 1345 1715 1900 Chicago 0920 1125 1352 2040 2215

1130 1500 1921 2200 2345 St. Louis 0435 0640 0755 1500 1730

4:30 5:35 n/a 4:45 4:45

One‐way

time 4:45 4:45 n/a 5:40 4:45

7.2 Development of Staged Improvements 

Whether funding for the improvements described in the Tier 1 Final EIS is available in a

single package, or is stretched over a number of years and from a number of sources, the

construction of the improvements requires a phased approach.  This section describes

the process with which to determine possible phases, and identifies rationale for these

stages and the resulting benefits.  As a complex corridor integrating freight, intercity

passenger, and commuter service, additional rail capacity modeling of the Tier 2 projects

will be required before implementation.

In addition, IDOT and its partner Union Pacific will monitor and evaluate the operation

of the system following completion of the current improvements.  This may well result

in information suggesting refinements to the locations and type of the next round of

improvements, which will be examined in Tier 2 environmental documents.  

Additionally, adjustments may need to be made for freight service growth over time, as

the corridor program is implemented.  While the public investments in this corridor are

not designed for freight benefit, the state’s passenger initiative does have the obligation

to maintain the freight railroads’ ability to provide freight service.

For these reasons, this section will focus on the process for refining the identified future

investments, followed by a discussion of the anticipated improvements.  

7.2.1 Process 

The use of the corridor ridership model will be critical in determining the necessity of

implementing additional trips along the corridor.  Amtrak and IDOT developed

ridership models to support corridor development planning and the EIS analysis.   

Going forward, existing corridor capacity estimates will be compared yearly with

historical ridership data, future growth trends and future ridership projections.  

Ridership triggers will be put in place to identify key growth milestones that would start

the additional study for the corridor.  This process will ensure an appropriate level of
Chicago-St. Louis High-Speed Rail 7-3 Tier 1 Final EIS 

planning and Tier 2 environmental analysis to support the necessary improvements to

meet projected demand.

Growth of other rail service (intercity passenger, commuter and freight) in the corridor

will also be monitored.  Yearly reviews of growth and projected increases will be used to

identify targets levels that would require additional study for the corridor, in

anticipation of infrastructure requirements necessary to accommodate both these

increases and the sustainable capacity and reliability of the High‐Speed Rail (HSR)

passenger service.

A short term (5 or 6 year) program that follows the typical IDOT project development

process will be created for project specific needs within the corridor development plan

that includes the following items scheduled and updated on a yearly basis:

 Preliminary Engineering and Environmental Clearance Projects

 Final Design Projects

 Land Acquisition Projects  

 Construction Projects

 Funding need to meet specific on‐time performance targets

Because of the number of operating railroads throughout the corridor, any adjustment to

the existing schedule and/or number of trips will be modeled to determine the available

capacity along the corridor without adversely impacting existing freight or commuter

operations and without hindering the ability of the additional passenger service to meet

on‐time reliability requirements. IDOT, Amtrak and the UP are in agreement that

additional operation simulations will need to be conducted during the Tier 2 studies.

A corridor wide rail capacity model based on the completion of the current program will

be utilized as the starting point for future modeling. The model will be used to analyze

five and ten year freight traffic growth with existing passenger frequencies in order to

determine project priorities and scheduling, ensuring the phased implementation

provides sufficient capacity and maintains and improves on‐time performance. This

model will be the basis for determining funding needs throughout the corridor as well

as to schedule pre‐construction work based on the phasing of the anticipated

infrastructure improvements.  

7.2.2 Staged Improvements – Additional Service 

While it is difficult to plan for the phasing of specific improvements given uncertainties

around funding availability and timing, historical data provides a logical sequence of

service implementation to meet projected needs.  The order, size and scope of the

identified improvements to support increased service may need to be modified in Tier 2

analysis prior to implementation.

A possible first step in the service improvement program would be to operate Trains 303

and 304 at speeds of up to 110 mph in addition to the first three round trips.  These

trains are envisioned to be 110 mph “locals” with the 4:45 timing per the table below
Chicago-St. Louis High-Speed Rail 7-4 Tier 1 Final EIS 

(Table 7.2‐1).  Although no additional trips are involved, additional infrastructure

improvements are expected to be required because this improved operation will

consume additional corridor capacity.    

Table 7.2‐1.  Expected Timetable after 303/304 Upgrade

301 303 21 305 307 Stations 300 302 22 304 306 

“LS”

110

“LS”

110

“TE”

79

“LS”

110

“LS”

110

“LS”

110

“LS”

110

“TE”

79

“LS”

110

“LS”

110

0700 0925 1345 1715 1900 Chicago 0920 1125 1352 1945 2215

1130 1410 1921 2200 2345 St. Louis 0435 0640 0755 1500 1730

4:30 4:45 n/a 4:45 4:45 One‐way

time

4:45 4:45 n/a 4:45 4:45

Based on historical station boarding data, nearly 80 percent of the riders along the

corridor board between Springfield and Chicago, with Chicago and Normal having the

top two numbers of riders boarding and alighting, with St. Louis third and Springfield

fourth.  In order to best accommodate service along this section before the full

contingent of eight round trips in the corridor is implemented, it is anticipated that a

short‐turn train could be added between Chicago and Springfield to provide additional

service.  An early morning express (departing 0530) could run from Springfield to

Chicago, stopping at Normal and Dwight, and be scheduled to arrive in Chicago around

0800 for the start of the business day, or to facilitate connections to other commuter

trains.  The return could be at 1545, arriving in Springfield by about 1814.  The addition

of this short‐turn train also isolates the infrastructure improvements to the section north

of Springfield and fits the schedule in between current runs, minimizing the scheduling

impact, though additional infrastructure would be required.  As previously mentioned,

further simulations would be required to analyze benefits and impacts from the

necessary infrastructure.   

The addition of a fifth round trip, which could be the conversion of the short‐turn train

or an additional service based on need, would begin the process of a transition to the

full‐build out of eight round trips.  This service would serve to specifically close the gap

between the existing service times, such as the four hour interval between southbound

trains 303 and 21, and the seven hour interval between northbound trains 22 and 304.  

Additional round trips for the corridor would be added as needed and schedules for all

trips would be modeled and adjusted as necessary.

7.2.3 Staged Improvements – Additional Infrastructure

As previously discussed, to accommodate increased service levels on the corridor,

additional infrastructure investments will be necessary.  It is likely that several of the
Chicago-St. Louis High-Speed Rail 7-5 Tier 1 Final EIS 

improvements included  with the Preferred Alternative could be implemented

incrementally to achieve discreet benefits before the completion of the program.  The

sequence of implementing these improvements will need to be modeled and

coordinated with any additional incremental service.  As with the process for

implementing incremental service levels, the order, size and scope of any of these

improvements may need to be modified in Tier 2 analysis prior to implementation.

It is recommended that the highest priority section be between Chicago and Joliet.  This

segment serves significant numbers of riders and is currently a bottleneck because of

freight rail traffic conflicts on the current route.  It is a key segment for early

improvement to bring adequate reliability not only for additional frequencies but also

for current frequencies.  On January 19, 2012 Amtrak filed a complaint with the Surface

Transportation Board alleging CN freight interference has reduced on‐time performance

between Joliet and Chicago.  This filing noted Lincoln Service trains missed on‐time

performance standards 50 percent to 60 percent of the time.  This identifies the

restrictions currently occurring along the corridor and the difficulty trying to add more

service.   

Between Chicago and Joliet, the Rock Island District route has been identified as part of

the Preferred Alternative. This route can provide on‐time performance enhancements

within a shorter timeframe and for a reduced cost compared to the existing route.   The

simulations along this route will have to consider not only additions of HSR traffic, but

also the expected increases to freight and Metra traffic as well.  A key to the success of

this section will be the continued coordination with the CREATE projects, the additional

track capacity, the capacity and alignment near and over the Chicago River near 21st

Street (nearly 100 trains per day) and the reduction of rail to rail crossing interference

through the construction of a railway flyover at the EJ&E crossing east of Joliet

(currently 24 cross trains per day).

Another high priority will be construction of additional capacity across the Mississippi

River at St. Louis.  MacArthur Bridge (currently 45 trains per day) currently has high

volumes of freight traffic and may not be able to accommodate both future freight

growth and HSR service with only two tracks.  Improvements to the Merchants Bridge

may also be warranted to support the rail traffic in the St. Louis area.  The UP has

estimated on‐time performance over the next 20 years of less than 40 percent due to

projected traffic increases.  As freight traffic continues to grow across the Mississippi

River, on‐time HSR performance will deteriorate. Just north of the St. Louis area, the

Venice diamond (currently 20+ cross trains per day) would be another location where

infrastructure improvements could be made to provide additional reliability in the

corridor.  

The construction of the UP/NS flyover south of Springfield to preserve reliability is also

a critical infrastructure priority.  The interlocker (currently 16 cross trains per day) at this

location is controlled by the NS, and the construction of the flyover would provide the

independence to operate through Springfield unimpeded by the cross traffic.  The
Chicago-St. Louis High-Speed Rail 7-6 Tier 1 Final EIS 

Springfield location is critical because of the number of railroads that use the crossover

location and the expected increase in freight traffic that could interfere with HSR trains.

As described previously, additional potential improvements will be considered and

modeled.  These include an analysis of the single track locations remaining following the

completion of the ongoing current improvements along the corridor.  Based on a review

of the projected station ridership, these might include:

 Construct portions of remaining double track and siding sections as needed for

meets/passing requirements.

 Construct double track locations in Dwight, Pontiac, Lincoln and Alton to allow for

dual boardings or single boardings with freight movement operations concurrently

operating at the stations.

 Construct double track in Springfield along EIS recommended corridor to allow for

dual boardings or single boardings with freight movement operations concurrently

operating at the station.      

7.2.4 Staged Improvements – Environmental Documentation

Before additional improvements along the corridor can be implemented using Federal

funds, Tier 2 environmental documents will be prepared for the specific projects.  

Following the process outlined in this implementation plan, ridership demand analysis

will initiate the need for modeling simulations to support the sequencing of Tier 2

studies.

The following is a list of anticipated Tier 2 environmental studies.  The list is organized

from north to south.  Each section has independent utility with logical termini based on

the extent of major infrastructure improvements and station locations.  Tier 2 project

limits will be identified using train operation modeling where additional improvements

are necessary to support service level increases (Exhibit 7.2‐1).  The sequence of

construction will be based on the results of train traffic modeling.  The scope of each Tier

2 environmental document may change depending on future funding implementation

decisions and additional design.  Upon initiation of each Tier 2 project, IDOT, in

coordination with FRA, will determine the environmental class of action:  Categorical

Exclusion (CE), Environmental Assessment (EA), or Environmental Impact Statement

(EIS)

 Chicago to Joliet – This Tier 2 environmental document (EIS) will include additional

track, sidings, culvert and bridge improvements, signal improvements, commuter

rail station improvements, HSR station improvements, rail flyovers, rail connections

and a parallel structure across the Chicago River at 21st Street to improve capacity

and reliability for identified incremental service additions.  
Exhibit 7.2‐1. Staged Improvements  
Chicago-St. Louis High-Speed Rail 7-8 Tier 1 Final EIS 

 Joliet to Springfield ‐ This Tier 2 environmental document (EIS) will include

additional track, sidings, culvert and bridge improvements and roadway grade

separations to improve capacity and reliability for identified incremental service

additions.  It is possible that this approximately 140‐mile section would be divided

into smaller sections in advance of initiating Tier 2 studies through this area.  These

smaller sections could potentially be advanced as CEs or EAs.

 Springfield ‐ This Tier 2 environmental document is part of the overall Chicago to St.

Louis Tier 1 Final EIS (included as Volume II of this document).

 Springfield Flyover ‐ This Tier 2 environmental document (EA) will include new

track alignment and a railway flyover structure to separate the UP and NS at‐grade

crossover to improve capacity and reliability along the corridor.  

 Springfield Flyover to St. Louis Area ‐ This Tier 2 environmental document (EIS) will

include additional track, sidings, culvert and bridge improvements and roadway

grade separations to improve capacity and reliability for identified incremental

service additions.  It is possible that this approximately 100‐mile section could be

divided into smaller sections in advance of initiating Tier 2 studies through this area.  

These smaller sections could potentially be advanced as CEs or EAs.

 St. Louis Area ‐ This Tier 2 environmental document (EIS) will include new double

track approaches to an increased capacity Mississippi River crossing to improve

capacity and reliability for identified incremental service additions.  The Tier 2

environmental document will evaluate alternatives for an increased capacity

Mississippi River crossing.  A new double track connection to the Merchants Bridge

will also be considered to provide redundant access in the system for the Mississippi

River crossing and to provide construction staging and future maintenance routes.  

 Station Improvements – Tier 2 environmental documents (EAs) will be prepared for

proposed improvements at the HSR stations in Joliet, Dwight, Pontiac, Normal,

Lincoln, Carlinville, and Alton.  Each station would be a separate project.  Proposed

station improvements include pedestrian grade separation structures to provide

access to both platforms and to avoid pedestrians crossing tracks at‐grade,

additional parking requirements, and additional station capacity requirements for

identified incremental service additions.