ALL:
The Minneapolis Star Tribune has a lenghty article on the proposed Blue Line extension from Target Field (Minneapolis) to Brooklyn Park, MN a northwest suburb. Some of the comments are absolutely stupid with calling the Monticello Sub a land grant railroad to saying the unit oil and taconite trains operate on that 36 mile stub branch line. I do support transit. The present Blue and Green lines have exceeded rider expectations. The BNSF is stating that there is not enough room for all those freight trains (one local up and back the same day) and the LRT.
Ed Burns
NP EddieThe Minneapolis Star Tribune has a lenghty article on the proposed Blue Line extension from Target Field (Minneapolis) to Brooklyn Park,
What date? Only article I found talked about "negotiations with BNSF " with BNSF playing hardball. (Suprise?) Others have a paywall.
Thanx.
I am very familiar with the line. They could upgrade it for North Star service straight to the Target Field Station for probably 1/4 the cost of extending the Blue Line Light Rail. It would probably get more of a positive reception from BNSF. It would require an across-platform transfer but riders would get the same access to other parts of the city.
The right of way that parallels Highway 81 is relatively narrow and installing double-track light rail track plus catenary poles plus light rail stations adjacent to the existing freight track would require shoe-horning a lot of infrastructure in to a narrow right of way.
If you “fly“ the line on Google you can see how tight it is.
Based upon this older article from the star tribune, BNSF's refusal to cooperate now might be a result of a little payback over similar grievances?
https://www.startribune.com/county-land-grab-new-state-law-stand-in-path-of-crystal-rail-connection/318595961/
Paywalled to anyone who read the later story! You might want to synopsize the issue about clever city folks who did not want the proposed connection between the two carriers (one surmises from the language they did not fancy living in the Blast Zone) and figured out how to block it.
I think you may be right about 'payback'...
OvermodPaywalled
Try an incognito/Private window session?
Since I dump all my cookies with each reboot., sometimes I forget what nuisances paywalls can be, sorry.
In short, a few years ago they passed a new state law that blocks railroads from taking govt owned land. And Hennepin county bought a parcel of land in Crystal City explicitly to block a desire by the railroads to link a Canadian Pacific main with an underused BNSF branchline that would have resulted in mile long oil trains coming to the sleepy branch.
So, it appears the county is being given a taste of their own medicine.
The proposed connection would have allowed oil and grain trains to get on the former GN Monticello Branch, then navigate through the wye at Minneapolis Junction on to the former GN main to St. Paul and into Pig's Eye Yard.
It would have expedited passage through the whole Twin Cities terminal area, which is why BNSF and CP proposed the connection in the first place.
kgbw49t would have expedited passage through the whole Twin Cities terminal area, which is why BNSF and CP proposed the connection in the first place.
It seems like a perfectly good plan to me. Wonder why Hennepin county wants to be a landlord for an auto body repair shop?
Yes, it would have bypassed all the activity around Northtown and Shoreham Yards and got crews to the crew change point at St. Paul Yard (Pig's Eye) much faster.
Well, it sure looks as though the light rail transit project has become quite the political football up there.
Reading the August 13, 2020 article from the Star Tribune made me chuckle.
“You’re not talking to the railroad unless you’re threatening them,” said Brooklyn Park Mayor Jeff Lunde at the Bottineau Corridor Management Committee meeting
One proposed strategy being to raise taxes payable by the railroad, to force them to pay attention. Not hard to see why progress has been so slow.
I also noted (from another article) that among BNSF's objections was that the line as proposed "is not consistent with our passenger principles, nor does it protect the long-term viability of freight service"
One of the council members responds "we are disappointed to receive this response again without any further details on how the Blue line rapid transit design is inconsistent with their passenger principles.”
I'd say the passenger principles of BNSF are anything but opaque.
BNSF has worked very well with Metrolink in Southern California. One of the more recent projects was the Perris Line, which could be a good model for the Bottineau corridor.
The line could be upgraded for Northstar Service for much less money than building light rail. It could be done in a manner that benefited BNSF as well as provide commuter transit to downtown Minneapolis and an across-platform transfer to any other light-rail line in the metro area. And if they could negotiate the connection to the CP as part of the deal, they might have a ball game.
But it is not light rail. Light rail would seem to be the preferred project choice of the Met Council because they have stuck with it for a long time. I am unsure as to why. Could it be for the increased grant money brought in to the State compared to single-track computer rail on an existing right of way? Could it be more ongoing jobs in terms of light rail double-track and caternary plant maintenance and also more light-rail train operator employees and more light-rail train maintenance employees? Could it be for some other reason? It would be interesting to be able to understand that thought process.
I agree. It appears to me that they do not intend to keep the Target Field station as a "terminal" forever.
Perhaps somone having power has determined that their vision requires an extension to somewhere.
I remember when Atlanta was first building out it's MARTA trains. Initially it was pretty small, basically a working demonstration of concept, and not much more. But overtime as the system was extended, the trains became a practical component to a working system.
Perhaps Minneapolis has similar ambitions to grow the system, in order to make using it more practical?
Well, the Met Council has the $2.3 billion, 14.5-mile, 15-stop Southwest LRT going in right now. It runs between the third-ring suburb of Eden Prairie to the Target Stadium Station. From there you can continue on LRT to St. Paul or the Mall of America, or North Star Commuter Rail to Big Lake, which is halfway to St. Cloud.
The State of MN has a long term goal of extending North Star Commuter Rail to St. Cloud, which has been made more possible by the restoration of about 10 miles of second main track about 4 or 5 years ago to a single track gap that had been created by BN before the merger.
BNSF is not objecting to that but will be requiring whatever additional crossovers and signaling improvements are needed to be paid for by governmental entities, last time I read or heard any thing about it. Plus possible payments for use of the line.
I don't know why the Bottineau line could not be set up for commuter rail with a train set or two set up to provide shuttle service between Osseo and the Target Stadium Transit Hub and intermediate stations. The line is light density for freight and is a branch, not unlike the situation for the SMART system in Northern CA, or the Perris Line owned by BNSF in Southern CA. Probably 85% of the Bottineau Line alignment was proposed to be on the rail line ROW and the remainder would have been very close to the rail line. Stations could be built in the same locations for the most part.
To me, this raise questions. If a passenger rail corridor to the northwest portion of the Twin Cities that are west of the Mississippi River is so important, why can't they be nimble and consider some other less expensive option utilizing infrastructure already in place other than light rail? Why can't a North Star solution that functions like SMART, or the Denton County A Train, or the TEXRail line from Fort Worth to DFW Airport work in a similar situation in the Twin Cities?
All these solutions became operational much faster and for a fraction of the cost of double track light rail and have been well-patronized in non-COVID-19 times.
https://www.dcta.net/service-overview/a-train-rail-service
https://urbanengineers.com/projects/dcta-a-train-program-management
https://www.masstransitmag.com/rail/press-release/12433870/stadler-us-inc-texrail-tests-stadler-trains-at-dallasfort-worth-international-airport
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.