Northstar being thrown to wolves rather than embracing opportunity

 

Screenshot of my map of rail traffic data highlighting the 4th Ave crossing in Anoka, where BNSF reported 26 daily trains in 2022, which I estimated probably came from 21 freight trains, two Amtrak Empire Builder trains, and daily average of 3 trips of COVID-restricted Northstar trains

The Northstar commuter train service between Minneapolis and Big Lake is in a precarious position, with Metro Transit apparently planning to end operation and change over to bus service due to continuing political machinations that have stained the route since the beginning. This would set a disastrous precedent, undermining any plans for future rail expansion in our region at a time when improving transit service is critical for our climate mitigation strategies.

Despite headlines over the years decrying low overall ridership, I firmly believe Northstar has performed admirably when considering its harshly-limited schedule and relatively short distance. Its trains have carried more passengers per trip than most peer systems, indicating demand for expansion rather than contraction of service. And, while most commuter systems have fully restored or expanded service hours since COVID, Northstar's schedule was cut more deeply and for a longer period than other parts of the country—a full restoration of its original sparse schedule has not even been attempted yet, making it virtually impossible to increase passenger counts to pre-COVID figures, let alone the virtually unreachable figures that were staked out as goalposts for expanding to St. Cloud.

One huge hurdle for Northstar has been the apparent difficulty to operate and expand service alongside the host railroad, BNSF Railway. Back in 2009 when Northstar began operating, BNSF was reporting high numbers of freight trains each day over the Staples Subdivision that Northstar uses, and, like with traffic projections for highways, the assumption was that rail traffic would continue to increase. This led to leading to relatively high costs for initially starting up Northstar and paying for track access. However, according to publicly available data, it appears freight rail traffic has dropped dramatically since Northstar trans first began running, and MnDOT appears to be either unaware or unwilling to admit that conditions have likely improved for adding more passenger trains rather than worsened.

Back in April 2009, MnDOT produced a map of rail traffic in the Twin Cities region suggesting that 63 trains per day moved through northeast Minneapolis, with about 12 splitting off at Coon Creek junction in Coon Rapids to go to Duluth and 46 running northwest along the Northstar route (there is not a clear reason why the two branches only add to 58 instead of 63—possibly due to the route segments using data from different years).

MnDOT's 2009 rail map with reported train traffic of the time, retrieved via The Internet Archive.

MnDOT's new Rail Viewer Application, available through their freight maps page, suggests far lower rail volumes in recent years, with the most recent figures from 2023 showing 29 daily trains between Minneapolis and the split in Coon Rapids, with just 3 trains to and from Duluth and about 25 continuing on the Northstar route—a collapse of three-quarters for Duluth traffic since 2009, and about half on the main corridor.

I spent time looking through the FRA's grade crossing safety map last year to pull out the information I could, and I had found similar numbers from year 2021 and 2022 reports. There were also remnants of older information from 2019 when Northstar was operating with a full schedule. The 2019 data already showed a substantial decline from 2009, with about 42 combined freight an passenger trains using the tracks between Northtown rail yard and the Coon Creek junction, 6 freights running on the line to Duluth and 36 freight+passenger trains continuing northwest (this time nicely adding up to 42).

In 2019, Northstar's weekday schedule had 12 train trips (6 round-trips) and 6 trips (3 round-trips) each on Saturday and Sunday, for 72 per week, plus some extras added in for certain Twins and Vikings games and other events in downtown Minneapolis. That collapsed to 20 weekly trips from COVID lockdowns early in 2020, with just 4 weekday trips (2 round-trips) and no weekend or special event service—a condition that largely remained until October 2023 when scheduled service doubled and there were 40 weekly baseline trips (8 weekday drips / 4 round-trips) and an increase in special event service, although still only representing about 55% of the pre-COVID schedule.

Approximate total train volumes

	2009	2019	2023
Northtown to Coon Creek	63	42	29
Coon Creek to Big Lake	46	36	25
Coon Creek to Duluth	12	6	3

Approximate passenger train volumes

	2009	2019	2023
Northtown to Coon Creek	2	12	5
Coon Creek to Big Lake	2	12	5
Coon Creek to Duluth	0	0	0

Approximate freight train volumes

	2009	2019	2023
Northtown to Coon Creek	61	30	24
Coon Creek to Big Lake	44	24	20
Coon Creek to Duluth	12	6	3

The Minnesota Legislature has directed MnDOT to study extending Northstar to St. Cloud twice, in 2019 and 2023 (click the "Studies" section at the bottom of this page to see them), along with an intervening post-COVID service study. The results of the second extension study seem to reflect an alternate reality that makes me strongly question MnDOT's ability to do any substantial rail-related projects, especially considering their cost estimates ballooned massively over what the previous iteration reported.

When I talked to people who worked on the newest study at public meetings, they repeated the old traffic figures of 60+ trains per day despite recent data showing much lower numbers. (I believe this was repeated during their presentation to All Aboard Minnesota late last year, though I haven't found the specific spot in AAMN's video of the meeting.) The study also presented obscenely slow construction timelines, with a first phase of just four daily trains (two round-trips) taking until 2036 to be completed, and full service taking until 2040.

This is such an upside-down result that it feels like MnDOT took a malicious compliance approach to the recent extension study. While rail service is certainly more expensive to implement than I would like it to be, and there has been a lot of cost inflation since 2009, it's extremely hard to believe that infrastructure costs need to be any more than around $50 million to expand the existing St. Cloud Amtrak station and add one or two others. The biggest costs would probably be arranging for track access, but given the apparent drop in traffic, it should be much cheaper in relative terms today than it was back in the late 2000s.

BNSF had even added a second track in a critical section just northwest of Big Lake station several years ago, along with added track up around Little Falls (beyond St. Cloud), so the route is fully double-tracked from the Twin Cities to Fargo.

This drop in traffic also means it should be simpler and cheaper to improve the Hinckley Subdivision that would carry Northern Lights Express trains to Duluth, a route that is mostly single-tracked with occasional sidings for trains to pass each other. If freight traffic has really dropped to only about three trains per day, then the need for additional track to add or extend sidings is dramatically reduced as well. The NLX route still needs a huge amount of investment to improve track conditions, rebuild bridges, and add proper signaling infrastructure, but it would lead to many tens of millions of dollars in cost savings.

It doesn't make sense to me to cut Northstar. Even with its low recent ridership, about 15 to 20 daily bus trips would be necessary to provide service for all of those passengers. When Northstar was at its best, it was carrying over 400 passengers per hour—the only problem being that it only operated for a few hours each day. Is Northstar going to be replaced with a bus service operating every 5 minutes to match that level of demand? I can guarantee that none of Northstar's critics will seriously propose that.

Rail advocacy in an uncertain 2025

A map of preferred routes from the FRA Long-Distance Service Study, notably only covering routes over 750 miles in length (shorter routes would be covered by other programs)

I don't know exactly what the future holds for us in 2025, but it's going to be a challenging year. I think one of the best pieces of advice for our time is to find things that you're passionate about and use your knowledge and skills to try to make those things better. It's also best to find existing organizations with missions that align with your goals, rather than starting from scratch.

Since passenger rail has been overlooked and under-funded by state and federal governments for many decades, many advocacy organizations have already sprouted up around the country out of necessity. While trains are a couple steps removed from what I broadly think are the highest priorities for advocacy in the years ahead, I do think passenger rail is essential for keeping communities connected to each other and building climate and transportation resiliency.

Nationally, two great organizations are the Rail Passengers Association and the High Speed Rail Alliance, which both have a good online presence, including having YouTube video channels that make it much easier to share information about how essential rail service is, along with ideas on how to build up a better system.

The RPA's YouTube channel includes many brief videos giving quick updates and station visit summaries, mixed in with a number of in-depth webinars and conference lectures. The HSRA's YouTube videos are mostly long-form conversations. True to their name, the High Speed Rail Alliance has more of a focus on fast trains, and taking lessons from HSR systems around the world, but like me, they believe in an "integrated network approach" where fast, frequent trains would form a backbone feeding into medium- and standard-speed train routes along with intercity buses and local transit. Both organizations are still deeply interested in what's achievable with conventional rail, and ways of making that better even as we hope for a future with a strong upper service tier.

Locally, I have most closely followed the work of All Aboard Minnesota, which has a fairly expansive vision of rail service in the state, but has most recently been focused on getting the Borealis service going on the St. Paul–Milwaukee–Chicago corridor, including a westward extension to Fargo and additional trips to Chicago. AAMN's YouTube presence is more limited, mostly including videos of annual meetings. They actively recruit new members at events like Union Depot Train Days, and have done their own independent studies of rail routes so they can more effectively push for proper levels of investment in the lines that would see additional train trips.

I should also mention some of the governmental and quasi-governmental entities. Right now, the most notable is probably the Great River Rail Commission, a joint powers board of cities along the Mississippi River from St. Paul down to La Crosse. I do have a bit of a sour taste in my mouth from them since I had hoped for a high-speed rail option that went through Rochester rather than along the river when options were being studied a decade ago, but they are an important entity for pushing for better Amtrak service on the existing corridor.

Similarly, I hope people find ways to get involved with the Northern Lights Express Alliance for the NLX line from Minneapolis to Duluth, since the expiration of environmental review documentation has more or less reset the clock on that route, even though it's received its necessary local-match funding to be built. Some of the NLX Alliance's role has theoretically shifted over to the Minnesota Department of Transportation, but they still seem to be too reliant on outside consultants for work on this line. I hope we can strengthen MnDOT's in-house skillset for designing and building rail projects, along with more rigorous oversight of consultants and contractors when needed.

The Northstar commuter line needs some strong advocacy behind it again too, since it has been a political target from before it was even built, and has suffered from lackluster local government support, especially during COVID cuts. I understand it's still overseen by the Northstar Corridor Development Authority, though they appear to lack any specific web presence anymore. The line needs its full schedule restored and/or to be extended to St. Cloud. Consultants have come back with cost estimates that don't quite pass my smell test.

To the east, the Wisconsin Association of Railroad Passengers has been an important partner for getting the Borealis to move forward, along with keeping track of updates since the service started. They have a good base of support from travelers on the Hiawatha service between Milwaukee and Chicago, and would like to see the state of Wisconsin follow through on their plans for expanding rail service to Eau Claire, Madison, and Green Bay via Oshkosh. Hopefully those can actually happen and not merely be lines on a map.

To our west, there has been quite a lot of work done by the Big Sky Passenger Rail Authority to push for restored train service in the southern tier of Montana that was last used by Amtrak's North Coast Hiawatha in 1979. It would run straight west from Fargo and through North Dakota's capital Bismarck before running through Montana's more populated southern tier, and then rejoining the Empire Builder's route to the west coast.

Lastly, I'll mention The Rio Grande Plan in Utah, an ambitious proposal to rebuild tracks in Salt Lake City so they would use the historic Rio Grande station there rather than the current industrial zone. It importantly combines a vision to improve connectivity for rail passengers with a plan to open up land currently wasted by poorly-located rail and highway infrastructure for development. This could mean a lot more housing, cleaner air, and more efficient trips for people on trains and using local streets that are susceptible to being blocked by freight traffic.

There are many other organizations throughout the country that are worthy of support, so hopefully no matter where you are, you can find one that fits your particular routes of interest. The Federal Railroad Administration's Corridor ID Program and Long-Distance Service Study have shown that there's a huge appetite for passenger train service across the country, and that there are many communities, organizations, and individuals who are interested in creating a full-fledged network rather than the extremely skeletal service Amtrak offers today.

Our state and federal transportation (highway) departments have done us all a great disservice over the last several decades by skimping on passenger rail investment. It's unfortunate that we had to wait until federal agencies were empowered by programs like Corridor ID for this sort of planning to actually happen, especially since organizations such as AASHTO have facilitated cross-state highway work for more than a century. So many important rail corridors cross state lines that it's essential to at least look at multi-state regions rather than stopping planning within individual state borders. That's a role which I'm sure is at risk, so we'll have to push for continued interstate coordination in any ways we can.

A huge frustration with passenger rail advocacy is that it takes years or decades for projects to finally become reality. In a way, that's an asset in times like these where the immediate future is the most uncertain. The time scale of building infrastructure means that we're forced to take the long view. There will be smaller-scale things to push for, such as simple service quality improvements on existing trains, but added service on existing or new/restored routes is a future worth investing in, even if the path to that future date is uncertain.