Northstar Commuter Rail

Roads - Rails - Sidewalks - Bikeways
User avatar
FISHMANPET
IDS Center
Posts: 4241
Joined: June 6th, 2012, 2:19 pm
Location: Corcoran

Re: Northstar Commuter Rail

Postby FISHMANPET » December 27th, 2015, 3:01 pm

They also use DMUs which are illegal in America which is a whole other can of worms.

The $20 or so per subsidy ride is just outrageous, I don't know what do about that. The capital expense is pretty much a sunk cost that we can't get back (except maybe a few million in the train sets). So is there a way to reduce that subsidy with little or no capital investment? Or would a big capital investment (like, say, extending to St Cloud) bring enough riders that it's still a stinker, but at least less of a stinker?

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

mattaudio
Stone Arch Bridge
Posts: 7752
Joined: June 19th, 2012, 2:04 pm
Location: NORI: NOrth of RIchfield

Re: Northstar Commuter Rail

Postby mattaudio » December 27th, 2015, 6:01 pm

The labor cost, the energy cost, the carbon cost of building roads that are often at 1% capacity is simply not justifiable.
I completely concur.

MNdible
is great.
Posts: 5989
Joined: June 8th, 2012, 8:14 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Re: Northstar Commuter Rail

Postby MNdible » December 27th, 2015, 9:02 pm

I see what you did there.

User avatar
FISHMANPET
IDS Center
Posts: 4241
Joined: June 6th, 2012, 2:19 pm
Location: Corcoran

Re: Northstar Commuter Rail

Postby FISHMANPET » December 27th, 2015, 9:04 pm

A subsidy for the "road" (asphalt road or rail road) is much different than a subsidy for the vehicles that drives upon that road.

Road funding is stupid, but it does nobody any favors to make pointless false equivalencies to score points in a game that nobody but you is playing.

grant1simons2
IDS Center
Posts: 4371
Joined: February 8th, 2014, 11:33 pm
Location: Marcy-Holmes

Re: Northstar Commuter Rail

Postby grant1simons2 » December 27th, 2015, 9:22 pm

Where was this 10 number pulled from anyways? Just curious?

MNdible
is great.
Posts: 5989
Joined: June 8th, 2012, 8:14 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Re: Northstar Commuter Rail

Postby MNdible » December 27th, 2015, 9:27 pm

I made it up. Pick some other low double digit number if you'd prefer.

But the vision that there's a great unmet demand for hourly mid-day train trips between St. Cloud and Minneapolis is a mass-hallucination that has long plagued this forum.

User avatar
FISHMANPET
IDS Center
Posts: 4241
Joined: June 6th, 2012, 2:19 pm
Location: Corcoran

Re: Northstar Commuter Rail

Postby FISHMANPET » December 27th, 2015, 10:08 pm

So, neither here nor there, but I found some of the FTA reports to try and find some ridership estimates.

In 2000, a line to Rice (north of St Cloud) would have cost $230 million, and have about 10,550 riders by 2020, 9400 of them being new riders. This was with 5 locomotives and 17 cars, which is basically the consist they started with in reality (http://www.fta.dot.gov/12304_3173.html)

By 2005, it was only going to go to Big Lake and cost $265 million. 5600 riders by 2025, with 4000 upon opening in 2009 ( http://www.fta.dot.gov/documents/Minnea ... r_FY07.doc)

Then in 2006, $307 million, 5100 daily riders by 2025. (http://www.fta.dot.gov/documents/MN_Min ... S_2008.doc)

The two documents describe the service profile as primarly commuter based (aka what it is now). The second doesnt mention the service, but based on the number of locomotives, I'd assume it was also a commuter oriented service.

So basically, there's no study (that I know of) that looks at all day ridership, nor, would I assume, any official desire to look at that.

It also sounds like this was built to really grow over the next few decades, rather than be useful out the gate. As the slow simmer of growth makes the highways worse and worse, it sounds like they're expecting people to move to Northstar. Now if we keep widening those freeways that compete with Northstar that won't really happen.

User avatar
FISHMANPET
IDS Center
Posts: 4241
Joined: June 6th, 2012, 2:19 pm
Location: Corcoran

Re: Northstar Commuter Rail

Postby FISHMANPET » December 27th, 2015, 10:44 pm

Actually, the MNDOT 2015 draft state rail plan (http://www.dot.state.mn.us/planning/rai ... f)includes information on costs and projections for a Minneapolis to St Cloud rail line. It sounds like that study is done pretty much exclusive of any study of the Northstar extension, but admits that they both support each other.

Anyway, the 2015 rail plan says that by 2040, Twin Cities to St Clould would have 1.1 annual trips, serving 8.1% of the Twin Cites to St Cloud travel market (Table 2.4). This would require $116 million in infrastructure upgrades, $144 million in rolling stock, $7.4 million for Positive Train Control (so probably signal upgrades and such), $3.5 million for grade crossing improvements, and $91.1 million for capacity rights. So a total of $362 million. (Table 3.5)

Table 5.3 lists a $22.5 million annual operating cost, with $15.7 million in revenue, for a per passenger subsidy of around $6. This would be with 8 round trips.

So, then, the point of all this. 1.1 million riders, over 365 days, over 16 trips a day (8 there, 8 back), leads to a total of... drum roll please.

188 people per trip. Which is 18 times MNdible's dismissive estimate. Now this would be for "79 MPH" service, which would probably mean speed and capacity improvements on existing Northstar sections, which would make Northstar more competitive as well. Also no idea on what fare would be, but obviously on average around $15 a ride.

mattaudio
Stone Arch Bridge
Posts: 7752
Joined: June 19th, 2012, 2:04 pm
Location: NORI: NOrth of RIchfield

Re: Northstar Commuter Rail

Postby mattaudio » December 28th, 2015, 9:15 am

Hasn't BNSF nearly completed PTC, dual-tracking, and signal improvements on this corridor? The only big missing gap is triple tracking north to Coon Creek Jct, though maybe BNSF is doing that on their own as well.

Nippon Sharyo is building FRA Tier 1 compliant DMUs in Rochelle, IL and selling them to California for $6.67 million per two car set. We could probably get the rolling stock we need for $25-40 million rather than $144 million. (And keep in mind the current commuter configuration of Northstar is the rail rolling stock equivalent of building an 8 lane freeway that's only needed 6 hours a day... A regional service would be 3-4x more efficient per unit of rolling stock).

RailBaronYarr
Capella Tower
Posts: 2625
Joined: September 16th, 2012, 4:31 pm

Re: Northstar Commuter Rail

Postby RailBaronYarr » December 28th, 2015, 10:06 am

It's nice to see that a study was actually done, but I guess I trust ridership projections about as much as I believe the Red Line FEIS numbers, the SWLRT 21st St Station numbers, or even the under-estimated Green Line numbers. We're just not very good at predicting this sort of thing, especially into station areas that don't have a very established transit market (supported by large numbers of people walking and biking about) or a real commitment to TOD. To the extent that an all-day regional rail service like this (along with NLX, Eau Claire, and Zip-Rail/China-funded boondoggle, etc) make are individual cogs in a larger system where the sum is greater than the parts, I can support it.

It just really does seem like a **LOT** of money for 188 (+/- 150) people (in 2040!) a per train to travel to or from St Cloud. Even with cheaper trainsets, we're talking $250m++ plus $7m a year in operating subsidies. If the state is the leader on this (planning, funding) then fine. ~3,000 riders a day impacts I-94/US10 congestion (& the "need" for road capacity upgrades), pollution, or general day-to-day mode choices very minimally.

mattaudio
Stone Arch Bridge
Posts: 7752
Joined: June 19th, 2012, 2:04 pm
Location: NORI: NOrth of RIchfield

Re: Northstar Commuter Rail

Postby mattaudio » December 28th, 2015, 10:23 am

As has been noted earlier, a big problem is that MnDOT Metro / St. Cloud Districts both plan for significant capacity improvements to the highways in the corridor: Hwy 10 Freewayification from Anoka to Elk River, I-94 capacity expansions westward. They just finished six-laning I-94 from Hwy 101 to Hwy 241 $28.3M,, new C/D lanes (essentially six-laning) between the Monticello exits $17.3M, and I'd expect to see a plan for six laning to the Alberville exit in the not too distant future.

Also, I don't think station costs need to be so high. I wonder what share of the existing Northstar station costs was for land acquisition and paving. This is directly correlated to the decision to locate Northstar stations in farm-fields-turned-free-parking instead of existing town centers (development-oriented transit).

Scott Wood
Metrodome
Posts: 78
Joined: June 25th, 2012, 11:26 pm

Re: Northstar Commuter Rail

Postby Scott Wood » December 28th, 2015, 10:48 am

They also use DMUs which are illegal in America which is a whole other can of worms.

The $20 or so per subsidy ride is just outrageous, I don't know what do about that. The capital expense is pretty much a sunk cost that we can't get back (except maybe a few million in the train sets). So is there a way to reduce that subsidy with little or no capital investment? Or would a big capital investment (like, say, extending to St Cloud) bring enough riders that it's still a stinker, but at least less of a stinker?

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
If DMUs are "illegal in America" how is Austin, TX using them (on a line with similarly high operating subsidies, FWIW)?

mattaudio
Stone Arch Bridge
Posts: 7752
Joined: June 19th, 2012, 2:04 pm
Location: NORI: NOrth of RIchfield

Re: Northstar Commuter Rail

Postby mattaudio » December 28th, 2015, 10:53 am

European DMUs are illegal in America on the national rail network without an FRA waiver, due to buff strength requirements and other Tier 1 engineering minimums. It would be great if we could purchase off-the-shelf European or Japanese trains, rather than custom low-volume American versions. But, as noted above, even the American-compliant DMU market is maturing: $6.67 million per two car set.

MNdible
is great.
Posts: 5989
Joined: June 8th, 2012, 8:14 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Re: Northstar Commuter Rail

Postby MNdible » December 28th, 2015, 10:58 am

188 people per trip. Which is 18 times MNdible's dismissive estimate. Now this would be for "79 MPH" service, which would probably mean speed and capacity improvements on existing Northstar sections, which would make Northstar more competitive as well. Also no idea on what fare would be, but obviously on average around $15 a ride.
But that's the average trip, while I was talking about a midday trip. The difference between an early morning St. Cloud to Minneapolis trip and a mid-afternoon trip is going to be huge. Commuter demand is actually a thing.

Also, see RBY's skepticism on the veracity of ridership numbers.

User avatar
FISHMANPET
IDS Center
Posts: 4241
Joined: June 6th, 2012, 2:19 pm
Location: Corcoran

Re: Northstar Commuter Rail

Postby FISHMANPET » December 28th, 2015, 11:10 am

As I said, that's a whole other can of worms.

FRA safety requirements basically require a passenger train to survive being smashed into by a freight train as a way of keeping passengers safe. Other parts of the world with high rail use rely on good signalling (and probably smaller and fewer freight trains in general). I was doing some light research on DMUs earlier today. British DMUs weigh in at 35-45 tons per car. The Nippon Sharyo Matt mentions above weighs, as best I can tell, 58 tons. The BR Class 150, introduced in 1984, weighs 35 tons and can achieve speeds of 75 MPH with a 226 horse power engine. The Nippon Sharyo DMU weighs 58 tons, can reach speeds of 100 MPH, and has a 600 HP engine. FRA compliant DMUs are also very new, with Nippon Sharyo and Colorado Railcar being the only current manufacturers of them (though there could be others, but Nippon Sharyo claims to be the only DMU manufacturer compliant with FRA Tier 1 safety rules and EPA Tier 4 emissions rules)

American DMUs are much more expensive to run on mainline tracks than European or Japanese DMUs are. Austin's Capital MetroRail appears to run on its own tracks that don't connect to the mainline network so it doesn't need to meet Tier 1 requirements. New Jersey also runs some DMUs, but they have a waiver from the FRA, and even though it shares tracks with mainline freight, they do it at seperate times. The line shuts down at something like 11, and then freight runs on the line at night, so passenger trains are never in conflict with freight trains.

American trains in general are way heavier than their European or Japanese counterparts. This not only makes them more expensive to operate, it makes them much more expensive to source and maintain. They're not just more expensive because they're heavier, they also have to be basically designed from scratch or be a heavily reengineered version of an existing foreign trainset. This makes them not only expensive, but also unreliable. There's also Buy American rules, which, even if it were possible to run a European DMU on our tracks, would make it impossible to actually buy one. A good analogy for that I heard is what if Boeing didn't exist, and you needed to start manufacturing airplanes domestically, and you couldn't ask Airbus how to do it.

Finally, I'll respond to the unwritten subtext of "what about that smart guy?" Basically, you have little to no idea what you're talking about. If you had any interest at all in cost effective rail operations in America, rather than just trying to score cheap points, you'd have at least a basic understanding of FRA buff strength requirements and what they do to our domestic passenger rail ecosystem.

User avatar
FISHMANPET
IDS Center
Posts: 4241
Joined: June 6th, 2012, 2:19 pm
Location: Corcoran

Re: Northstar Commuter Rail

Postby FISHMANPET » December 28th, 2015, 11:15 am

188 people per trip. Which is 18 times MNdible's dismissive estimate. Now this would be for "79 MPH" service, which would probably mean speed and capacity improvements on existing Northstar sections, which would make Northstar more competitive as well. Also no idea on what fare would be, but obviously on average around $15 a ride.
But that's the average trip, while I was talking about a midday trip. The difference between an early morning St. Cloud to Minneapolis trip and a mid-afternoon trip is going to be huge. Commuter demand is actually a thing.

Also, see RBY's skepticism on the veracity of ridership numbers.
To be honest, I have no idea. I don't know how much of that 1.1 million trips per year would be commuter vs otherwise. I don't know how those 8 daily round trips would be spread out. I also averaged it out treating weekends and weekdays equally, I doubt there would be 8 trips on a Sunday, or that there would be 3000 riders on a Sunday. I also will take all ridership estimates with a grain of salt. We seem to overestimate non-urban ridership and underestimate urban ridership. Would 1.1 million riders per year be too low or too high? Would it be underestimated urban ridership or over estimated non-urban ridership? I have no idea. But I don't think you can just throw out a number that's off by a factor of 18 and say "screw the estimates this is what my gut says." As good or as bad as that number may be, it's the most official estimate we have. And importantly, it's the one that's used by government officials to direct further study and planing.

mattaudio
Stone Arch Bridge
Posts: 7752
Joined: June 19th, 2012, 2:04 pm
Location: NORI: NOrth of RIchfield

Re: Northstar Commuter Rail

Postby mattaudio » December 28th, 2015, 11:23 am

The "but you'd run empty midday trains to St. Cloud" argument is trite, similar to the "but I always see empty city buses" trope. That's because you need suitable frequency and time coverage for a service to attract riders even at the highest demand times. You need to be able to guarantee relative flexibility for people's schedules if they are to depend on a service, especially one covering 70 miles. There's actually a real possibility that increased off-peak frequencies would actually raise demand for existing peak-hour trains, since more travel demand could be accommodated round-trip (non-traditional work schedules, etc).

MNdible
is great.
Posts: 5989
Joined: June 8th, 2012, 8:14 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Re: Northstar Commuter Rail

Postby MNdible » December 28th, 2015, 1:36 pm

But urban bus routes provide an obvious societal good (and aren't nearly as empty as these trains would be).

I don't think that anybody has really explained what the real value of providing a service like this is. Is it so that it's easier for people to live in Stearns County and work in Minneapolis? I keep hearing about the mythical St. Cloud State student who wants to go home and visit their parents on the weekend -- and while that's nice, there are more effective ways to provide that service.

FMP, I appreciate that you took the time to dig up the numbers -- they help frame things. But even if we take them at face value, you have to admit that passenger demand will be uneven across the day, and that 10 may be low, but 60 is probably high. And we shouldn't be running a trainset to carry that few people.

Anyway, this is the same conversation that we've had other places. You guys love the idea of regional train service, I'm not going to change your mind. I'll contend that none of this regional train service makes sense until you have very robust high-speed service to Chicago.

RailBaronYarr
Capella Tower
Posts: 2625
Joined: September 16th, 2012, 4:31 pm

Re: Northstar Commuter Rail

Postby RailBaronYarr » December 28th, 2015, 2:08 pm

But urban bus routes provide an obvious societal good (and aren't nearly as empty as these trains would be.
I'd say something like 40-50% of the metro doesn't feel this way, and they probably don't see a difference between a mostly empty bus at 7 PM and a mostly-er empty train at 10 am, but for the capital cost (certainly, a probable majority of people couldn't tell you the difference between Northstar and LRT today). Which is why we get the breathless calls for "just make the bus better" without actual proposals for how to do it or the funding to back it up.
But even if we take them at face value, you have to admit that passenger demand will be uneven across the day, and that 10 may be low, but 60 is probably high. And we shouldn't be running a trainset to carry that few people.
Maybe this is true, though as FMP points out, if larger forces were to change we could be running much cheaper trains at far less cost in each direction, and 20-60 people midday might cross the line into societal good (reliable all-day service, even if mostly empty) from a fiscal perspective. This should also include reforming labor practices similar to things holding commuter lines in larger metros from running all day with 15-30 minute headways. And, a broader point could be made about urban street designs to handle two peak hour traffic counts over ones that give priority or safer design to buses/bikes/etc you've defended in the past.

Scott Wood
Metrodome
Posts: 78
Joined: June 25th, 2012, 11:26 pm

Re: Northstar Commuter Rail

Postby Scott Wood » December 28th, 2015, 2:30 pm

Finally, I'll respond to the unwritten subtext of "what about that smart guy?" Basically, you have little to no idea what you're talking about. If you had any interest at all in cost effective rail operations in America, rather than just trying to score cheap points, you'd have at least a basic understanding of FRA buff strength requirements and what they do to our domestic passenger rail ecosystem.
If this was targeted at me, you're reading way too much into my question. I was confused by your statement and was seeking clarification (it would have been clearer if you wrote "DMUs that are illegal..." instead of "DMUs which are illegal..."). I'm aware that the US requires heavier trains than Europe does on track that is shared with freight (which unless things have changed recently Austin's line does, with temporal separation, and yes, IIRC a waiver was involved). I was not trying to point to Austin's line as an example of what should be done (if anything the opposite, given the note about it also having very high operating subsidies).


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], intercomnut and 57 guests