The Rochester Rail Link (recently branded as Zip Rail[1]) is a proposed train route in the U.S. state of Minnesota that would run from the Minneapolis–Saint Paul metropolitan area to the southeastern city of Rochester—the third-largest city in the state—and potentially integrate into a fast conventional or high-speed rail line east to Wisconsin and on to Chicago, Illinois. This region is primarily served by U.S. Highway 52 to the Twin Cities and U.S. Highway 14 and Interstate 90 to Wisconsin, as well as Rochester International Airport (RST). Existing rail owned by Canadian Pacific through its Dakota, Minnesota and Eastern Railroad subsidiary largely parallels U.S. 14, but no link currently exists running north-south out of the city. A new "greenfield" route will need to be built because there has never been a direct rail route from Rochester to Minneapolis or Saint Paul, and the most direct route that used to exist (Chicago Great Western Railway via Red Wing) has been abandoned with the track removed and converted into the Douglas State Trail.
Rochester has been under consideration as part of a high-speed route to Chicago since the late 1980s,[2] with the possibility of a standalone spur route being examined more recently in the 2000s decade.[3][4] The Minnesota Department of Transportation believes that it will take up to ten years to finish the line once the decision is made to move forward, due to the environmental studies, land acquisition, and purchasing/construction of rolling stock in addition to building the line itself. A statewide rail plan being finalized in early 2010 stated that a 110 mph (180 km/h) link may be created initially, but it should not preclude the possibility to upgrade to 150 mph (240 km/h) in the future.[4] Other studies have called for even higher top speeds.
Illinois and Wisconsin received $822 million in federal funds in February 2010 to upgrade the existing Chicago–Milwaukee rail line used by Amtrak's Hiawatha Service and extend it to Madison, and an additional $600,000 was set aside for planning a route from Madison to the Twin Cities.[5][6][7] The Minnesota and Wisconsin Departments of Transportation contributed matching funds, and the $1.2 million study should be complete by September 2010, which will determine the final routing for a faster rail link between the Twin Cities and Chicago.[8] Regardless of whether Rochester is included in a line to Chicago, the Minnesota Department of Transportation considers a Rochester line to be a Tier I corridor, for implementation before the year 2030.[4]
Contents |
A series of studies in 1991, 2000, and 2009 has consistently ranked routes through the city highly because they would add more riders, allowing greater recovery of costs through ticket sales, and could be built to handle much higher speeds, shorter running times, and more trains per day. The studies have also consistently shown high-speed trains of 150 to 185 mph (240 to 298 km/h) (or, in the most recent study, 220 mph (350 km/h)) running on steel rail to be the preferred option when compared to slower trains or alternative maglev technology.
However, there has been significant resistance to the idea of a route through Rochester, particularly among communities along the Mississippi River which see the current Amtrak Empire Builder go through each day. The river route is nostalgic and scenic, so it has had a lot of political inertia. The river route is supported by the advocacy group OnBoardMidwest. In 2009, another Chicago plan was put forth by the French national railway company SNCF, and they favored a route heading directly east out of the Twin Cities toward Eau Claire, Wisconsin.[9]
A Twin Cities to Rochester route is believed to have "independent utility", so it could operate successfully even without a direct link to Chicago. The need for a greenfield route has the advantage that it can be built to high specifications, but the disadvantage that it will take a few extra years to negotiate land purchases. It would likely take 7–9 years to build the line once the decision is made to move forward.
The Tri-State Rail Study[2] was commissioned by the Illinois, Wisconsin, and Minnesota Departments of Transportation (hence the "Tri-State" name) and was completed in 1991. It examined the feasibility of train services on several routes, narrowed to two by 1990.[10] The current route of Amtrak's Empire Builder was among those discarded and not studied in detail, but it was listed as a simple route comparison.
The study concluded that the "Amtrak upgrade" 125 mph option on the southern corridor through Rochester had the best direct return on investment, and was the best option for a capital-constrained public endeavor. If money were more readily available, the study recommended 185 mph operation since this created the greatest net consumer surplus NPV. A privately funded endeavor would have the best luck at attempting a 300-mph maglev train, because it provided the greatest gross consumer surplus present value. In all cases, the southern corridor outperformed the northern corridor in the long term. The study made mention of "newly introduced Swedish Railroad 'tilt' technology", but it was not studied.
| Speed | Motive power |
Yearly ridership est. | Trip time | Capital cost (1989 $) | Net consumer surplus NPV | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000 | 2024 | |||||
| 125 mph | diesel | 5.8 million | 8.1 million | 4h20 | $940 million | 3004.8 |
| 185 mph | electric | 7.5 | 10.6 | 3h15 | $3.02 billion | 3851.3 |
| 300 mph | maglev | 8.5 | 12.2 | 2h15 | $5.45 billion | 3190.7 |
The Tri-State II High Speed Rail Feasibility Study[11] was commissioned by the Minnesota and Wisconsin Departments of Transportation and built upon the previous Tri-State study, plans from the Midwest Regional Rail Initiative (MWRRI), and a 1997 study looking at the Chicago–Milwaukee corridor. Since the MWRRI plans advocate 110 mph diesel or diesel multiple unit (DMU) technology (described as "incremental" by the study authors), this was used as the base case for the study.
This study also included gas turbine-powered trains, in comparison to diesels and electrics. It concluded that gas turbines operating at 150 mph were the best option. Development could begin at 110 mph, but the study authors stated the corridor should be developed to 150 mph standards to allow faster trains later.
| Speed | Route | Motive power |
Yearly ridership est. | Trip time | Capital cost ($) | Benefit/cost ratio | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 | ? | ||||||
| 110 mph | MWRRI river route | diesel | 2.9 million | 5h27 | $940 million | N/A | |
| 110 mph | Rochester, existing ROW | diesel | 2.8 | 5h34 | $1.26 billion | 1.01 | |
| 150 mph | Rochester, existing ROW | turbine | 4.2 | 4h59 | $3.10 billion | 1.62 | |
| 150 mph | New Rochester alignment | turbine | 4.9 | 4h14 | $3.66 billion | 1.68 | |
| 185 mph | Downtown Rochester, elevated | electric | 5.9 | 3h11 | $8.27 billion | 1.34 | |
In contrast to the previous two studies, the 2003 Rochester Rail Link Feasibility Study[3] focused on a spur link to Rochester from the Twin Cities, but avoided discussing the merits of the city's presence on a line to Chicago in significant depth. The routes recommended in that study had one terminus at the Rochester International Airport (RST) at the southern end, and closely examined linking to downtown Minneapolis and to Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport (MSP), which is closer to Rochester than central Minneapolis.
It examined three motive-power options and recommended a TGV-like service linking the Twin Cities and Rochester using electrified trains operating at speeds up to 185 mph (298 km/h). In this study, the trains would carry a mixture of passengers and cargo, allowing the Rochester airport to take over some of the air freight capacity of MSP. In the leading example, a rate of 20 passenger trains per day was proposed, plus 4 freight trains in the overnight hours. The cost estimate for building the electrified line was $869 to $933 million (2002 dollars), largely depending on whether an entirely new route was used or if the line would closely follow Highway 52. The analysis indicated that the line would eventually pay for itself with passenger and cargo revenues more than covering the capital and operational costs over a 30-year period.
| Speed | Motive power |
Yearly ridership est. | Trip time | Capital cost (2002 $) | 30-year benefit/cost ratio |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010 | 2030 | |||||
| 150+ mph | turbine | 1.4 million | 2.4 million | 45–48 minutes | $697–769 million | 1.35 |
| 180+ mph | electric | 1.6 | 2.8 | 39–43 minutes | $869–933 million | 1.38 |
| 220+ mph | maglev | 2.4 | 4.3 | 31–39 minutes | $5.6– 5.9 billion | 0.56 |
The Tri-State III High-Speed Rail Study[12] of 2009 was commissioned by the Southeastern Minnesota Rail Alliance, a rail advocacy group based in Rochester. This study is partly a rehashing of the Tri-State II study, but with greater detail in examining the speeds possible along the current Amtrak route along the Mississippi River versus what would be possible by going through Rochester. There are many segments along the river that can only support 90 mph top speeds or lower due to relatively sharp turns.
The study concluded that 220 mph service via Rochester, which is a higher speed than what has been recommended in other studies for a publicly funded system, would be the best option and would be the most profitable. However, since the study authors consider Minnesota to have constraints on the amount of funding available for the project, they ultimately suggested going with diesel-powered 110 mph service via Rochester, which would be profitable, but making sure it was built with upgradability in mind. As the route generated profits, investments could be made into eliminating grade crossings and making other improvements over time.
| Speed | Route | Motive power |
Yearly ridership est. | Trip time (Express) |
Capital cost ($) | Benefit/cost ratio | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 | ? | ||||||
| 110 mph | Mississippi River | diesel | 4.3 million | 5h19 | $3.2 billion | 1.60 | |
| 110 mph | Rochester | diesel | 4.7 | 5h26 | $3.3 billion | 1.86 | |
| 220 mph | Rochester | electric | 7.7 | 3h11 | $6.6 billion | 2.25 | |
Rochester previously had passenger service run by the Chicago and North Western and the Chicago Great Western railways. The east-west C&NW line still exists and is owned by the Dakota, Minnesota and Eastern Railroad (now a subsidiary of Canadian Pacific).
Rochester was served by many numbered trains. Named trains included the following:
Chicago and North Western:[13]
Chicago Great Western:
A likely route for a new Twin Cities to Rochester link would roughly follow the now-abandoned CGW right-of-way used for its Minnesotan train, which crossed the C&NW line in Dodge Center. The new line would then turn straight east to reach downtown Rochester.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||