urbanMSP

If I remember correctly, the proposal for NLX includes extending the TFS platform from its current 400' to 800'. I imagine that would be long enough for the TCMC trains as well, though not for the Empire Builder. Maybe the extension to Minneapolis doesn't happen until NLX does and creates a station platform long enough for it?

The routing they appear to be showing from Camp Douglas to Madison is interesting. If you look closely it's following quite a bit of former rail right of way that currently doesn't have any track. It looks like it would cover the space where the Omaha Trail https://www.co.juneau.wi.gov/trails.html is located (Camp Douglas to Elroy) as well as where The 400 trail http://www.400statetrail.org/trail-map.php is located (Elroy to Reedsburg). This may not be totally set, but that route opens up a couple other potentially interesting station locations like Reedsburg and Baraboo that are not being shown.

Has anyone heard of any planning on restoring track to these sections? It seems like it might be an expensive prospect, so they may ultimately choose other options.

I can't imagine that corridor getting tracks again - it's a long gap from Reedsburg to Sparta.
A little more likely would be some new tracks along the Hwy 12 freeway corridor from Wisc Dells to Baraboo, where it could then get on existing tracks to Madison via Waunakee. But neither of these options have the advantage of through-routing the full Madison ithsmus for a station closer to the university or Downtown.

Instead, it would make far more sense to use the existing tracks from just east of Portage to Madison via Windsor.
This would use the same station location assumed to serve that Amtrak routing (Yahara Station - https://dvqlxo2m2q99q.cloudfront.net/00 ... tation.pdf ) and would also run past the front door of Madison's airport if they wanted a station there.
Pair the Yahara station with some sort of new dedicated-ROW transit in existing rail corridors from airport to Yahara Station to downtown to university, and you'd have a great little setup for connecting Madison.

Prediction: costs plus people not wanting part of the best system of bicycle touring trails in the country destroyed means they find another route. If they think they need to serve Madison there's that existing line from Portage to Madison.

I would not take Amtrak's exact rail routings seriously. There are a lot of extremely weird choices, not just for Minnesota's routes, which suggest that they slapped that map together without closely studying the alternatives.

We have a thread for that sort of thing, Amtrak...

Out of curiosity I looked at which station stops on the Empire Builder route are closest together. Keep in mind I don't know how accurate this is since it's from Wikipedia.

Chicago-Glenview: 18 miles
Portage-Wisconsin Dells: 17 miles
Shelby-Cut Bank: 24 miles
Browning-East Glacier Park: 14 miles
West Glacier-Whitefish: 21 miles
Wenatchee-Leavenworth: 22 miles
Everett-Edmonds: 15 miles
Edmonds-Seattle: 18 miles
Vancouver, WA-Portland: 10 miles

I can kind of see why Milwaukee doesn't have a suburban stop since they have the Hiawatha Service to Chicago, but it's interesting that there's no suburban stop for the Twin Cities, or a station by the U of M that can also serve as a Minneapolis stop. Has it ever been considered before, or is it assumed there isn't enough demand and would just take away existing riders from SPUD?

Milwaukee has an airport stop, but it's only served by the Hiawatha's, As for Minneapolis having a stop, Target field station was considered , but it would require a lengthy backup move which would screw with timing and BNSF wouldn't allow it.

Perhaps the Northstar's Fridley Station would be a suitable compromise for a Minneapolis station that also serves the northern metro. There's already a park & ride facility (and parking is free, I know quite a few people miss the free parking at the old Midway Station), and it's close to a few major highways so accessing it by car should be easy.

It is honestly bonkers that Hastings isn't an Empire Builder stop.

A suburban stop on each end of the metro would make sense.... Coon Rapids/Foley (once the Foley Blvd P&R gets platforms) or Fridley on the north... but SPUD is already not that far from Hastings. If SPUD didn't exist and EB stopped in Minneapolis, I could imagine a suburban stop at Hastings or even at that Newport P&R built next to the tracks in case Red Rock rail ever happened.

Does EB still stop at Midway for servicing and adding/removing the extra Chicago-MSP car? Or is that all handled at SPUD now? If they're still making the extra stop, I'm wondering if that could happen at a north metro stop instead.

Foley would make sense for a suburban stop, especially if NLX comes to fruition.

I believe Metro Transit has had scheduling conflicts in the past at Fridley because it's adjacent to a big yard.

If Northtown Yard operations conflict with the Northstar getting to/from Fridley, then it'll conflict with Amtrak since they have to go through Northtown no matter where a station is placed.

The Fridley problems are more about the station layout. The platform was designed as an island platform, but only serves a single track. The two existing mainlines are east of the platform. There are also some yard tracks through there but none serve the station. The west side of the island platform would serve the long-planned third main between Northtown Yard and Coon Creek Junction (where NLX would split for Duluth) so it is a temporary problem.

Ah I was aware of the third track project, but didn't know it would serve the platform better. Thanks!

There's also the issue of the nearest crossover switch for northbound trains being at Coon Creek Junction (just north of Foley Boulevard).

Does BNSF's traffic levels on the line even support a third main? Not to be a negative Nelly but I don't see a third main going in anytime soon until Northstar returns to pre-pandemic ridership levels and then some to justify the cost, and also depends on the NIMBY factor north of Fridley. If they are anything like the people in the kenwood neighborhood in Minneapolis, BNSF and the Met Council are in for a ride.

Take this with a grain salt partly because it's 6 years old but also the fact that freight traffic fluctuates on a day-to-day basis; some days there could be a freight train every hour and other days there's nothing for several hours. https://www.dot.state.mn.us/ofrw/maps/M ... pLarge.pdf

BNSF's Chicago Subdivision is mostly triple-track and has 60 freight trains daily plus frequent Metra commuter trains and occasional Amtrak trains (again take it with a grain of salt). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Subdivision

So in theory the freight traffic on the Staples Subdivision is already there, and if we wanted NLX, 1-3 more Amtrak trips to North Dakota (and maybe one or two of those trips extending to Winnipeg), and have Northstar be an all-day regional rail service to/from St. Cloud then I think that would justify the cost of adding a third track to at least Coon Creek Junction.

As for NIMBYism, it's BNSF property so they can do whatever they want with it. Several years ago when Hennepin County blocked BNSF and Canadian Pacific from building a track connection in Crystal they instead built an additional track through Northeast Minneapolis. https://www.startribune.com/northeast-m ... 324279741/

I assume if public dollars were to be spent on a third track that would complicate the process, but if BNSF chooses to add a third track on their own dime then there's no public process required.

CP + KCS merger expected to significantly increase freight traffic on the MSP-La Crosse portion of the line, though most of that increase will continue south on the river to Sabula for connection to Kansas City. https://www.trains.com/trn/news-reviews ... in-counts/

At what point do we see some of the river sub re-double tracked? I suspect La Crescent to Winona/Minnesota City will be a priority, and maybe adding capacity along the joint BNSF-CP segment from St. Paul to Hastings?

Are we assuming CPKC uses their own money for double-tracking, or us funding double-tracking for increased Amtrak service plus the increase in freight traffic? If it's the former, I feel like CPKC will avoid building more track no matter how much traffic increases. However, I wonder how much traffic increased on BNSF's mainline through Big Lake before they finally decided to extend the double-track segment north of there. That could give us an idea of how much freight traffic has to increase before CPKC caves in and builds more sidings or extends existing sidings on the River Subdivision.

CP + KCS merger expected to significantly increase freight traffic on the MSP-La Crosse portion of the line, though most of that increase will continue south on the river to Sabula for connection to Kansas City. https://www.trains.com/trn/news-reviews ... in-counts/

At what point do we see some of the river sub re-double tracked? I suspect La Crescent to Winona/Minnesota City will be a priority, and maybe adding capacity along the joint BNSF-CP segment from St. Paul to Hastings?

Interesting info from that article link:
CP’s River Sub, part of its St. Paul-Chicago main, will gain six trains, boosting the daily total to 18. Its Marquette Sub, which follows the Mississippi River from River Junction, Minn., to Sabula Junction, will rise to 14.3 trains per day from 7.7. Traffic on the Chicago Sub will reach 11 trains per day, up from 2.9.

Those traffic flows from St. Paul and Chicago converge at Sabula Junction, which will push Davenport Sub volume to 21.6 trains per day, up from just 7.1 today, and the neighboring Ottumwa Sub to 18.4 trains from 4.2. The CP Laredo (Mo.) and Kansas City subdivisions will see their traffic jump from a sleepy three trains per day to 17.