MSP to Rochester High Speed Rail

[David Greene]

This continues to just seem like the weirdest situation. I guess now that the Chinese stock market is in the toilet it makes a little more sense that they're looking for safe places to put money, but still, just bizarre.

This is going to make for some great Consortium-rivaling entertainment.

[Silophant]

That's cool. It would be nice to know if that number for Terminal 1 and Terminal 2 boardings include the free rides.

Here's Metro Transit's description of their APCs. I'm sure the numbers for Terminal 1 and 2 boardings include the free rides, since I have no idea how they'd filter them out. How do you tell if a person going northbound from T2 is going to T1 or to Lake St? How do you tell if a person getting off at T1 came from MOA or T2?

The NAHSRG folks have been saying privately that they'd want to extend the line to Chicago, according to emails and documents the Post Bulletin was able to get their hands on. But they sent a message in April saying they could start construction on stations by the end of this year and the main rail line next year? That's a wildly optimistic timetable -- even a private project of this scope would need to go through a pretty hefty environmental review, right?

Privately built (though PUC-regulated) transmission lines certainly get EISs, so I can't imagine that a privately-built railroad wouldn't. Even without an EIS, though, unless they've been secretly working on it for years, there's just no way to do 80-odd miles worth of viaduct engineering in less than a year.

TBH, I'm looking at it like I looked at the Consortium, prior to the big reveal. If it happens, awesome, but I don't actually believe it's going to happen.

[PigsEye]

I'm sure the numbers for Terminal 1 and 2 boardings include the free rides, since I have no idea how they'd filter them out. How do you tell if a person going northbound from T2 is going to T1 or to Lake St? How do you tell if a person getting off at T1 came from MOA or T2?

By boardings we are talking about entering the train only. At each station there is ticket machines, and GoTo card readers, of which they could be used to count boardings. Meaning only those who pay a fare would be counted. Fare skippers and free shuttle riders should be removed from the counting IMO because they don't really "ride" the train in a way that helps fund the cost.

[Tiller]

Post Bulletin - Private rail group's goals include link to Chicago

http://www.postbulletin.com/news/local/ ... 15dc1.html

Big post

I figured that'd be the case. This is also an opportunity for Chinese investors/companies to get a foothold in a very lucrative market. We're the second largest economy (or first, depending on the metric) in the world, so it's a given we'll eventually have a massive passenger rail system. Service between large metros has been profitable overseas, so it's not necessarily a bad investment.

In Texas, a Japanese consortium is attempting to build a direct bullet train between Houston and Dallas. In Florida, all aboard Florida just got a $1.75 billion tax-exempt bond approved for their project. The state of California is pressing forward with their high speed rail project, with foreign companies competing for the contracts. Wherever politics allows, projects are moving forward, usually spearheaded by rail advocates and private companies alike. The only region without much progress would be in the NEC, because of all the state governments involved, which then also leads to federal involvement.

There aren't many remaining opportunities for such a project, and we are one of them. The MSP-Rochester segment would serve as an ideal demonstrative starter segment, having utility on its own, while potentially leading to an extension to Chicago (and then the rest of Chicago hub network), and with one of the most politically friendly environments for such a project currently available (one state government to deal with, and a relatively liberal one which has been moving in the direction of supporting trains).

While I think this project is a bit ambitious, if anyone can built it, it would be the chinese. Even though I've really disliked the idea of privately owned infrastructure, let alone infrastructure that would be built and owned by the Chinese, this has helped to change my view on the topic.

My other misc thoughts:

Most of the ROW would already be accounted for, the land *is* very flat, and there would be few stations involved, all of which help keep costs down.

The documents mention air rights to I-90, which is entirely past Rochester and goes out to La Crosse, so after getting our approval, they could start working on the process to build the first segment, while immediately starting to lobby the Wisconsin government (which we all know is for sale) to extend it. Illinois would be cooperative.

While it's been speculated that the "real estate development" that has been brought up could/would be at a suburban site, perhaps the U's Rosemont site, I don't think that's the case at all. If anything, they would look to develop the south loop in Bloomington (third downtown, anyone?), or, more likely, downtown Rochester, which would tie in to the DMC, and even the world fair. (consortium!)

[bubzki2]

Isn't Mr. Walker still hell-bent on blocking rail through WI, though? That seems like a pretty big issue to tackle.

[LakeCharles]

Isn't Mr. Walker still hell-bent on blocking rail through WI, though? That seems like a pretty big issue to tackle.

Only if the public pays for it, I would imagine. Private enterprise can do no wrong to him.

[FISHMANPET]

I'm sure the numbers for Terminal 1 and 2 boardings include the free rides, since I have no idea how they'd filter them out. How do you tell if a person going northbound from T2 is going to T1 or to Lake St? How do you tell if a person getting off at T1 came from MOA or T2?

By boardings we are talking about entering the train only. At each station there is ticket machines, and GoTo card readers, of which they could be used to count boardings. Meaning only those who pay a fare would be counted. Fare skippers and free shuttle riders should be removed from the counting and now I have concluded the process of stating what my opinion is because they don't really "ride" the train in a way that helps fund the cost.

Those are all really bad ways to count ridership on the rail system here. It ignores people transferring, who will have a valid fare but won't be interacting with the ticket machine at the station. Hell, I almost never tap my goto card when I transfer trains Downtown. I tap it once at my origin and it's a valid transfer for 2.5 hours. And since I have a MetroPass it's technically valid 24/7 so sometimes I'll catch the train right as it pulls in and won't tap my card. Someone next to me with a Upass got fare inspected and they told him it hadn't been tapped in 10 days and just told him he needs to be sure to tap whenever he rides, that's all.

And free shuttle passengers are still paying passengers, it's just being paid for by the airport rather than the passengers directly.

Sent from my phone

[masstrlk67]

Isn't Mr. Walker still hell-bent on blocking rail through WI, though? That seems like a pretty big issue to tackle.

Only if the public pays for it, I would imagine. Private enterprise can do no wrong to him.

That hasn't been the case for the private lines in Texas and Florida. People there are convinced that they will get public subsidy somehow (yet good luck explaining to them how roads are subsidized). See: http://www.citylab.com/politics/2015/04 ... il/390576/

As much as I would enjoy Walker contorting himself to somehow oppose privately funded rail while he sends blank checks to WisDOT on a pro-business platform, MSP-Rochester-Dubuque-Rockford-CHI is looking better and better to me.

[bubzki2]

Update:

http://www.postbulletin.com/news/local/ ... 1831b.html

[Silophant]

I am 100% in support of MnDOT doing an end run around these dipshits.

[David Greene]

I am 100% in support of MnDOT doing an end run around these dipshits.

Why so angry? If the rail was going through my town and didn't stop, I'd question it too.

[RailBaronYarr]

I am 100% in support of MnDOT doing an end run around these dipshits.

Why so angry? If the rail was going through my town and didn't stop, I'd question it too.

Wait, who are the dipshits here? The folks proposing having a 400 mph monorail built by next April or the ones fighting both the MnDOT-led rail project and a privately run one?

And, does anyone thing these people would be happy if a high speed rail line (if we could even call it that anymore) made a stop at every city >5,000 population along the route?

[Silophant]

Definitely both, absolutely not, in that order.

I agree with Rep. Drazkowski, this project will fail. But, it should fail because its pie-in-the-sky fantasy level approaches that of the Hyperloop, not because a couple hundred parochial, xenophobic landowners have decided that cars are the one true American transportation mode.

[David Greene]

And, does anyone thing these people would be happy if a high speed rail line (if we could even call it that anymore) made a stop at every city >5,000 population along the route?

Look, one can disagree with someone without calling them a "dipshit." One can in fact even understand and respect their opposition even if one disagrees with it.

[FISHMANPET]

I don't believe I'm required to respect someone who believes they have absolute control over not just their property but also all property within X miles of them as well.

Sent from my phone

[Silophant]

I will apologize for my unnecessarily nasty tone. I've been dealing with a lot of irrational citizen opposition to infrastructure projects at work this week.

But. FISHMANPET is right.

People opposing a potential ground-level HSR because they think it might eminent domain their land away from them and/or cut off their driveway, trapping them in their house forever: Okay.

People opposing a potential elevated HSR, entirely within the footprint of the existing limited-access transportation corridor, because they think it will potentially lower their land values even more than said existing limited-access transportation corridor, and also some ill-defined xenophobia: Not okay.

[mattaudio]

I drove US 52 twice today. A few more No Zip Rail signs than two weeks ago.

But HSR would defile the corridor and devalue adjacent property significantly less than the unbelievably ugly CapX2020 lines under construction along much of the corridor. Gosh it's ugly. Especially in Skunk Hollow where they clearcut significant amounts of forest to blast through the new lines. I'm sure citizen opposition to CapX2020 is quite rational, so I assume Silophant is referring to another type of infrastructure project. Oh, and the world just isn't the same without my Cedar Summit Farm grass fed organic cream-top milk.

[Silophant]

Well, I think they look nice.

No, aesthetic objections to 150ft transmission towers are perfectly reasonable. (Objections due to nonexistent stray voltage affecting cows, less so.)

But what I'm referring to is a substation, located in an existing industrial park, wedged between a transmission line corridor that's been there for 40 years and a concrete plant. The best complaint so far is the guy who admitted that he won't actually be able to see the substation from his house, but dislikes the idea anyway.

[VAStationDude]

The opposition is primarily rooted in angst over elimination of grade crossings. I can understand why someone whose routines would be lengthened by several miles would be opposed to Zip Rail. I don't agree their concerns outweigh the benefits, especially if some intermediate service between Dakota County and Rochester happens.

[froggie]

The opposition is primarily rooted in angst over elimination of grade crossings.

Yet MnDOT's long-term goal is to fully convert 52 into a freeway between the Metro and Rochester, so those grade crossings will be going anyway.