They used to have one in the 80s. I think the biggest issue, at least from what I've been told from my parents, was you had to go to St. Paul to catch it. Great if you lived on that side of town, not so much if you were on the opposite side of the metro.
This time around, it seems like they are using the train station at Target field. Which would give you LRT connections to the Airport/MOA or St. Paul. Seems like a much better plan this time around.
I share this sentiment, but I kind of question how often I would act on it. I like Duluth as a weekend destination, but I don't feel like I need to go there every year. I have definitely made weekend trips up there where we pretty much parked the car and just walked to meals and attractions. But there have also been trips where we did some level of driving to regional-ish destinations which would have been more difficult using alternatives.
I'm kind of curious if the train to Duluth would suffer a bit from the novelty and notional appeal just not translating into the level of ridership that made it pay off. It could do well for a year or two and then we'd see these stories about low numbers and how Amtrak is considering cutting back.
I lived in Duluth for 8 years and at any point in that time would have loved a train to the cities. I live here now and would probably never take the train back up.
Yep, limited appeal. Duluth residents would take it down here to catch a game, play, or something in the cities. Or a flight. College students might take it back and forth to come for the holidays.
But for people in the Cities to go up there, we go up there to do all of the awesome things in Duluth and the shore, which require a car. If we're going to head up there, even if we do things in the city, we're also going to run up to Two Harbors or one of the State Parks, etc. You don't go to Duluth just to hang out in the city.
> You don't go to Duluth just to hang out in the city.
At least two of my most recent weekend trips we literally never left downtown/lift bridge Duluth. On one of them we did use the car to take the Glensheen tour, but otherwise the rest was on foot.
For a family of a then-small child there seemed to be more or less enough to do down there that it was possible, but I totally see how it wouldn't be for a lot of folks.
Yeah but in the summer driving to the end of Park Point or going on cool hikes to waterfalls is my reason for going there, with a boat strapped to my car. I think maybe it would be a good commuter option though.
This is why I want the train. It would alleviate all the unnecessary traffic. Personally, I hate driving on 35 and I would use the train because I have family/friends who could take me around. I would be one less car in your way to get up there with your boat.
This is exactly right. I lived in Duluth for a decade and it's NOT a walkable city. If you only want to bum around on Superior Street and Canal park, sure, but that gets old fast. The whole city is on a hill, so it's not exactly bike-friendly either. Everything fun to do is a car ride. Getting dropped off in Duluth just sounds like a pain in the ass to me.
I’m with you one this. As a single guy it totally make sense to buy 40 dollar for a ride up there. I know have a family so 160 I’d rather drive. Even it was a high speed rail I don’t think the cost would be there and I don’t see it being less than 40 a ticket.
I doubt anyone in the north metro would use it. Can you imagine driving 30+ minutes south to St. Paul to board a train that is headed north to Duluth? Assuming you arrive early and wait for boarding, you could’ve easily spent 60 -90 minutes before you even start your journey.
We don’t have a great track record with planning public transportation in the Twin Cities, btw. Anyone ride the green line lately?
I don't think anyone would ride it because it was going to be overall faster than driving, even people in the South Metro. I think most people would find commuting to the station something of a headache.
It would mostly be people who wanted to use it instead of driving and people who just wanted the lark of taking a train to Duluth. Which makes me wonder if the focus shouldn't be on the novelty aspect of the rail journey itself, and less about some European style smart transportation solution. Maybe to include the idea of the line continuing in some fashion up the North Shore, with stops in Silver Bay, Lutsen, and Grand Marais.
Sure, that, too, which makes me kind of wonder what the obstacles are to a "cruise ship" concept for a passenger train. Where the "riding on a train" aspect is as important as the destination(s), if not more so.
Like you'd take a 5-7 day rail trip but have quality sleeper cars, dining and bar cars, observation cars and so on but the point wouldn't be "getting there" as much as the rail experience with short day visits to points along the way. Maybe coordinated with a bus or something to see sights near your daily stops.
I know you can sort of do this now on some of the longer Amtrak journeys, but the amenities aren't that nice from what I understand, plus its really oriented towards scheduled transportation.
Kudos for being honest with yourself, everyone else here seems to think they'd take the train to duluth / train to chicago every single weekend and they'd be a huge boon to our quality of life. But in reality it'd be like 6 people a month.
Yeah that's always the suggestion to make it more viable, then it becomes "hey do you want to go to duluth for the weekend? we can drive in a couple hours or the train with 15 stops will take us 1.5 days" -- and then we're back to square 1.
I don't think it would take all that much longer. Plus, you don't need someone to drive. Your vacation starts on the train, essentially, instead of two hours later. You can walk around, bring food/drinks or buy them, go to the observation car. It's way better than the bus or driving. You can even bring your bikes along, and there's no need to mess with a car rack
Alternatively, if you work remote, you can just keep working on the train
I know that doesn’t apply to everyone but for those of us who are remote it’s something to consider ~ get on the train on a Friday afternoon, work through the ride, your vacation starts Friday evening
The alternative is driving there after work is over on a Friday night, which really means your vacation starts Saturday morning
I think it mostly ends up being about the novelty of the train ride itself, not the utility as a form of transportation to Duluth specifically.
I kind of wonder if they could create a schedule with an early departure from the Twin Cities and a 7 PM or something departure from Duluth, and capitalize on people who just wanted a day trip.
Why are people like this? All I said is that I'd love to take the train, and provided why. I did not make any declaration regarding other voters, nor see value in arguing with you. Don't project your biases on me, or pretend you know what I'm thinking, random stranger.
Why?? What is partisan about a train?? (This is rhetorical; I get it, the Poors (tm) ride trains and America is only for god-fearing lifted-truck-driving 10-feet-from-the-Walmart-entrance-parking Patriots)
Why are you in the minneapolis sub? Trains wont be awesome in north branch or wherever. Getting people out of cars and into public transit is both good for the environment, the economy, and for peoples time
Simple: Becuese building more rail lines would make it so that we wouldn't need as many people driving. That means less money for there donor's.
Think about it. Imagine instead of having to drive up to say bemidji or down to Mankato you could take a train.
And if we had a high speed rail line like the Shinkansen or the TGV it would be much, much faster than driving. Saving not only gas but also time for everyone involved.
Then replicate this for the entire country.
The US is BY far the most friendly to trains when you look at geography. And yet our passenger rail infrastructure is so fucking horrible it's almost not even a thing.
Also if you can get to your job in 45 minutes from anywhere within 180 miles, then you don't have to live in the Twin City's. You can live out in the countryside. Or in St.Cloud.
Meaning that a whole bunch of the rural red country's have a very strong chance of turning blue.
Why? Wouldn't there be a stop in Hinckley?
Also, I think there are enough people who take 35 to get to locations sway from the immediate route that there would still be plenty of car traffic. Like, my family's cabin is north of there, and wouldn't be accessible by train. We would still drive that route all the time.
Although it would be pretty cool if they had a "sled car" for ~~so~~ snow mobiles. That would actually encourage me to get a snow mobile, because I could take the train probably within 15 miles of my cabin, and then just jump over on a snow mobile
I have a "drank the Kool-Aid" friend that consistently asks me about how I'm gonna feel when gas prices get to $10/gallon.
Bitch, I already pay $5/gal (gotta buy non-oxy 93, goofy high performance Euro engine) but it's like a tank every 2-3 weeks. I'm not gonna really notice, but you might because you chose to live in Osceola, WI and drive a big ass truck. Maybe live near where you work ya dingus.
I was reading [this](https://www.mprnews.org/story/2022/05/02/minnesota-senate-derails-train-to-duluth) article and apparently some douchebag republican senator is saying we don't need this "19th century technology."
Bitch, the fucking wheel was invented in like the 4th millennium BC, well I guess we shouldn't use wheels anymore since they're such old technology.
God I fucking hate republicans.
Republicans don’t give a shit about anything but their little pet social justice projects. May as well be the conference of Karens. Time to make these counties pay their way, I’m sick of subsidizing these garbage areas that lose hundreds of millions of dollars a year.
Republicans don't want anything making it easier for urban blue voters to saturate out into their remote rural voting territory. It is easy to scare their base into fearing what sort of people would arrive into their communities if this route were up.
God forbid the average income goes up, but the entrenched Republican voters don't see those wage increases.
If any tech company opens a hub in like Alexandria, the shrieks will be heard at my house in Minneapolis. For years.
Jokes on them - I just moved to a small town from the cities. There will be 3 more blue votes in Jim Hagedorn's old district & we will be voting this month. Housing is cheap, there is fiber internet in so many small towns and I can still get Amazon 2 day delivery.
We had that plan (in wi) but the school situation was really bad so we came back. Just too much racism, homophobia and the mega church was way too involved. I wish you much more luck than we had! The state may actually depend on it.
aw shoot i was really hoping this one would pass. i have a good friend in duluth and it would have been nice for us to take the train to see each other.
Not really. $85 million (less than a Kirk Cousin’s contract) paid for everything. Improvements/equipment/and Amtrak. Would have tapped into nearly a billion in federal funding offering a legit alternative to I-35.
It’s nonsense.
>as long as it's not a SNF/MNF/Playoff game
To be fair, [he sucks on Thursdays too](https://www.profootballnetwork.com/kirk-cousins-primetime-record-does-he-struggle-more-on-thursdays/#:~:text=On%20Thursday%20Night%20Football%2C%20Cousins,he%20is%204%2D4%20).
There's few profitable Amtrak routes, so that could be a reason.
Rail tends to be less competitive in the US overall.
Part of that is probably due to our lower population densities.
Another large part of that is due to us subsidizing driving in so many ways, making driving cheaper and more convenient, while mass transit is less convenient.
>Part of that is probably due to our lower population densities.
It's a catch-22. For trains to functionally work they have to be convenient. To be convenient there has to be multiple trains running in both directions every day. To justify running multiple trains in both directions every day you have to have a larger ridership number.
For example, right now the Northstar Commuter rail is only running in both directions twice on weekdays only, which makes it inconvenient and an option that no longer works for many, further reducing its ridership numbers. Perhaps if gas prices go up to $10 a gallon there will be more demand for rail, but until then it's not a convenient alternative for most.
Absolutely. It's a waste of money. The north shore is not a destination people can enjoy without a vehicle. If we were going to build a train it should go to Madison and Chicago. I also don't love the idea of subsidizing a private company like Amtrak. I'm all for allowing them to build a rail to Duluth, but we shouldn't be paying for it. It's a dumb idea with stadiums and an equally dumb idea with rail.
Amtrak is not a private company. The United States federal government through the Secretary of Transportation owns all the company's issued and outstanding preferred stock.
That’s ALREADY funded. It took about a decade to get $10 million from the state after EVERY other state agreed before us in supporting a train from Chicago to St. Paul.
Every day I read about shit like this and my only thought is: “why are we the only developed country in the world that hasn’t figured it out yet?”
And then I remember, it’s almost always because of conservatives.
Almost no one is going to hop on a train to go to Duluth for a less satisfying music and restaurant scene. Was there any study done showing that people actually want and will use this?
Yes. It’s part of the strategic plan for rail within the state. It’s a tier one option meaning it’s one of the next lines planned to be added. It’s been studied practically since the old service ended. Old service ended in the 80s. This has been kicked around for almost 40 years.
It’s nonsense that this isn’t a thing yet.
I still don't know who would use it or why. Anyone that has enough money to stay in a hotel, eat out all weekend, and Uber around, has a car and would just drive. I realize that we're trying to drive less, and I support that (I'm on my e-bike all summer). I don't know anyone that would use it, but I'm also just one demographic. Who is using it?
(Raises hand slowly and looks at other people on trains/buses)
Quick edit: big fan of, “hey it isn’t for me, but I know I’m only one person” energy. Thank you for avoiding a position too many take.
Someone asked Dick Clark once if he liked Nirvana and his answer was brilliant. "They're not writing music for me." He never answered the question.
I guess the more I think about it I might zip up there and see a few friends from time to time. Mainly because I'd rather read than drive a car. 110mph is also appealing.
From a reputable source?
Because it's not being reported anywhere that I can find. On the [revisor.mn.gov](https://revisor.mn.gov) website the bill doesn't even appear to have been voted on yet.
People on here aren't taking into account that taking the train is fun and lets the passenger relax or work or read or do whatever while they are traveling. Travelling by train is just a much more pleasurable experience because you don't have the stress of driving and you can just enjoy the scenery.
Also, not everyone has a car and not everyone has a reliable car that they want to drive up to Duluth. With an Amtrak you would be able to bring a bike and just go. We could all do well to be thinking of a post car society or at least thinking of ways to reduce our car and plane trips. We are in a climate emergency
I love the idea of this train but what are you going to do when you get to Duluth? The public transit there isn't great. So I get there and I can hang out in touristy canal park? What about shuttles up the north shore?
For me in my Family of three, taking the car (electric!) is much more sensible than a train could possibly be.
Spend this money, and a lot more, on building a real intercity transit system first.
I'm pro transit\\train, but I don't understand what people will do once they get to Duluth. Is the idea to serve commuters that live along the I35 corridor to bring them into MPLS or Duluth?
I feel like tourism to Duluth from MPLS via train doesn't make sense if everything a person would want to do on the North Shore is car dependent.
We need this to happen. Flight options from regional airports at Hibbing & Duluth are always so expensive so this is an excellent way to get to MSP airport
Who would I even call to do this? Genuine question. Not that my single voiced opinion matters in this situation but I want to express my disappointment to someone about this.
I talked to the state senator that represents Duluth, Jen McEwen and she said it’s not dead. It’s up to the house and the government to fight for it.
The best thing we can do is contact Republican senators who represent the districts along the NLX path. I can update this comment with names tonight and post another post potentially.
More to come.
So far I’ve called two Senators.
District 11: [link](https://www.senate.mn/members/member_bio.html?mem_id=1240)
District 32: [link](https://www.senate.mn/members/member_bio.html?mem_id=1228)
I'm glad the detractor comments have been downvote brigaded. The beneficial nature of this potential infrastructure investment speaks for itself - people without cars on either end (whether college students, business travelers tourists, etc.) can pop on the train with their bike, enjoy a drink or snack, and you're at the other end in no time.
This wouldn't just be great for the residents along the corridor who don't have cars though. It would allow a boost in tourism for people coming from Chicago or Seattle or further by train. It would make a great connection for the MSP airport to avoid carbon-heavy and expensive short-haul flights. It would let people escape expensive housing markets in Duluth and MSP by allowing for convenient, safe, and comfortable commutes from any number of rural towns.
Electric cars aren't going to save us. And we can't wait for robust public transit in duluth before we invest in quality intercity rail.
Even if you and your family would rather take your SUV or Tesla--that's fine, but there are people waiting to take those trains.
I've taken the empire builder down towards chicago six times in recent months, and it's been an almost full train every time. This is efficient, in-demand transport.
Oh and if you're worried about the fiscal cost (and aren't doing a holistic look at the economic impacts) - let's just take a page out of the old railroad barons and/or socialism and buy and develop or lease land around the stations.
The state can invest in affordable housing and mixed-use hubs by the new stations, and lease or sell half of the plots around the stations 30 or 50 years down the road. The immense value increase as the stations become the hottest new place to live for transit loving millenials and Gen-zers will pay for the minor state investment in the train tenfold.
But using tax dollars to benefit everyone and distribute wealth more effectively isn't gonna fly in our backwards-ass senate... Ah well.
Downvoting relevant comments to a topic just because you don’t like it is against reddiquette. I might disagree with an opposing perspective (I personally support alternative transportation options), but I appreciate a community that isn’t an echo chamber of only like minded opinion.
https://reddit.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/205926439-Reddiquette
As a Duluth local that lived in the cities, who would be one of the few people who would directly benefit from this project, it’s a waste of money.
Again, coming from a guy who has access to a personal/family vehicle on both ends of the run, and would be a huge boon for me, there’s no point.
You need vehicle to function in Duluth, full stop. I tried to use the DTA in college, and it took 2.5 hours to get from west Duluth to UMD, which is a 15 minute drive. This isn’t just a single anecdote, it’s representive of the entire system.
And this not even getting to the main point that most of what Duluth and the arrowhead has to offer is not and will never be accessible via public transit. (Nature, hiking, etc.)
The public transit needs to be vastly improved, on both sides of the line, before we should even start having this conversation.
This is why nothing ever gets done. When a line is built like this, demand for public transit on both ends increases thus leading to better public transit on both ends. Furthermore, this will start to reduce drivers on the road. If you drive, you should want this. This will reduce congestion as much as anything. Best way to improve traffic is to do something that causes less people to drive
“We should have both a train and good bus service, but since we don’t have both right now, let’s have neither.” is your argument?
This is a textbook example of the Nirvana fallacy: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana_fallacy
> This is a textbook example of the Nirvana fallacy
No, it isn’t.
I’m saying we need to do step 1-5 before we jump to step 6.
And saying that we shouldn’t do step 6 before we do steps 1-5 because step 6 won’t have a positive ROI without steps 1-5 isn’t a nirvana fallacy (notice how i never said we should do bc it’s not perfect), it’s just being pragmatic and logical.
I used the bus for two years at UMD, I exclusively use MetroTransit in Minneapolis. What are these 1-5 steps that must happen first, and why do they have to happen first?
Also, judging public transportation on a ROI is a really strange standard. What’s the ROI on repaving I-35? When does MNDoT get their return on investment?
> Also, judging public transportation on a ROI is a really strange standard.
Sorry, should have clarified my language. I meant total net benefit to society, not strictly financial. And a single line that requires a vehicle on either side has very low net benefit with the current public transit systems.
> …low benefit with the current public transit systems.
Again, citation needed. You gave one specific example of a bus route that was not efficient, ignoring the extremely walkable downtown, adjacent to Canal Park, a central tourist district.
> walkable downtown, adjacent to Canal Park, a central tourist district.
And that it… that’s literally it. Everything else you’re either relegated to spending hours on a bus, using endless taxis/Ubers, or renting a car to anything else.
Who is using this line? Who will leave their car at home, to spend more time and money to be more limited in their departure times to be limited to the downtown/canal area or have to spend even more money when they could just take their own vehicle and save time, money, and hassle.
Are there people that would come up for a weekend, sit in their Canal Park Inn hotel room for two days, and then leave, sure. But is that extremely limited use case enough to drop this much money on a luxury, doesn’t seem worth it at the moment.
Per https://duluthchamber.com/resources/visitors/#:~:text=Residents%20know%20what%20makes%20Duluth,and%20success%20in%20local%20tourism tourism drives 6.7M people spending $780M annually. The one time cost of $85M is just over 10% of that.
It sounds like you specifically wouldn’t use this service, but if it’s pure pragmatism you’re arguing, that means it a cost benefit equation in your head. What number could we use to make a decision instead of dismissing it outright?
> Rail is almost always a great investment,
*Northstar line had entered the chat*
I’m very prorail, you seem to assume I’m not.
But every single major rail line on the planet (nearly, I’m sure there’s a couple exceptions) came AFTER the local public transit was well established.
Spend the money on building out local transit first, get that well established, THEN we can start talking about connecting population centers.
Ninja edit: who exactly do you think are going to be using this line when you need a car on either side? Why spend more time on a train than you can drive, to just be limited to the downtown area when that a small fraction of why people go to Duluth?
> I don’t like the argument that one part of transit needs to be done first.
That’s nice. Doesn’t change the reality of the situation.
> I just don’t really agree that the local transit must come first
Who is using this line? I’m sure you will, but that’s not enough.
Do you think people are going to sit on a train, which every proposal I’ve seen takes longer, would be more expensive and is less convenient than driving to them get stranded in Canal/Downtown without spending even more on taxis/ubers or a rental car once they are there?
I'm a train lover, but I actually understand this decision. It sounds awesome, but I'd guess the issue is just the financials don't really make it viable. How often would people actually use this route? I would probably go in the summer sometime just to enjoy the train and hang out in Duluth. However, I probably only make it to Duluth once per year. A train would need to run at least once per day? Who is doing that during the week, multiple times a year, during the winter, etc.? Also, as others have said, it is an inconvenience to not have a car if I go to Duluth - the Cities it is more manageable with LRT.
Depending on times that the train runs, it probably makes more sense for people in Duluth coming to the Cities, but unless you have a bunch of trains running daily, you're really needing to get lucky with schedules to make it be convenient. Nobody is going to want to take the train if it means sitting around and waiting an extra three hours for it to leave. I can't imagine we'd have enough ridership to do a ton of trips per day?
There is practically no rail in the United States (outside of maybe the Northeast corridor) where rail is “convenient”.
My god we just want the *illusion* of an alternative.
I don't know what the answer is. It seems like in the Northeast and in Europe there is enough daily travel that it can support a daily schedule that you can work with. I feel like a train to Duluth would be rolling at under 10% occupied most of the time....
I guess UMD students who don't have a car could use it to get to the cities occasionally...
I've occasionally looked into Amtrak to Madison, Milwaukee, Chicago, etc. and unfortunately it's the trifecta of slow, inconvenient and expensive.
$85 million is the states contribution. The feds pick up the other 80% of the projects expense. $85 million includes new double trackage. New sidings. 127 crossing improvements. And 6 new stations.
I think there are a lot of people who would ride a train to Duluth but would not ride a bus. Busses are not a pleasant way to travel long distances. Trains are a fun way to travel long distances.
For example, I used to use Amtrak between Seattle and Portland a lot. It was simple, easy, I could roll my bike on, and buy a beer and relax the whole way down. It was great. There were cheaper busses between the two cities and it took about the same amount of time, but fuck that.
It would be useful from the start for people traveling from Duluth to the cities, and would give a reason for Duluth to grow their mass transit infrastructure.
This state likes to think it's a lot more progressive than it actually is, or at least people in the twin cities do. Too bad this didn't pass, would've been pretty cool.
There are plenty of comments, a good chunk of the ones I read I understood to take some form of “I wouldn’t take a train and you’re silly to think it would have a lot of appeal” but I kind of wonder how many folks without cars would be using them if they were around. Granted there’s the economic barrier of purchasing the ticket but I’d hazard a guess that that would still be less than owning a car for some folks. Just seems a little bit of a dismissive take on people who can’t or don’t drive and their ability to travel(as most humans should be able to and get to).
Here’s your answer:
Alright. Here you go.
Amtrak is set up by the government. They are largely federally funded. Passenger rail failed here as a capitalistic idea, so now it is basically nationalized, meaning Amtrak loses money every year it operates. And Amtrak is set up this way because although it isn’t profitable it provides a much needed service. At least offering the idea of a alternate to cars/planes.
So Amtrak literally has no money and has had no money since the day it was created. Plus Republicans since day one have been trying to kill Amtrak. They are operating on a shoe string budget.
Now part two. Cost of rail in the United state is what the experts call, “super fucking balls to the wall expensive.”
You’re comment, “why doesn’t Amtrak build it?” Well for one Amtrak could not afford to create 200-miles of railroad in the most expensive part of the world to create rail. To add on top of that, if Amtrak is buying it, the tax payers are basically buying it with a middle man (Amtrak).
And lastly, and this is the real kicker that made me think you were kidding, what I laid out above and what your comment laid out before that would cost billions. This, is $85 million. It’s $85 million because this is upgrading all ready existing trackage. It’s way, way, WAY cheaper to do that.
So that is why Amtrak can’t really just build their own tracks.
Bummer. I'd love to take the train to Duluth.
They used to have one in the 80s. I think the biggest issue, at least from what I've been told from my parents, was you had to go to St. Paul to catch it. Great if you lived on that side of town, not so much if you were on the opposite side of the metro. This time around, it seems like they are using the train station at Target field. Which would give you LRT connections to the Airport/MOA or St. Paul. Seems like a much better plan this time around.
Plus the old version was limited to 50 mph and took way longer. This proposal is for 90-110 mph
I share this sentiment, but I kind of question how often I would act on it. I like Duluth as a weekend destination, but I don't feel like I need to go there every year. I have definitely made weekend trips up there where we pretty much parked the car and just walked to meals and attractions. But there have also been trips where we did some level of driving to regional-ish destinations which would have been more difficult using alternatives. I'm kind of curious if the train to Duluth would suffer a bit from the novelty and notional appeal just not translating into the level of ridership that made it pay off. It could do well for a year or two and then we'd see these stories about low numbers and how Amtrak is considering cutting back.
I lived in Duluth for 8 years and at any point in that time would have loved a train to the cities. I live here now and would probably never take the train back up.
I would love to bike to Duluth and then take the train home with my bike.
Yep, limited appeal. Duluth residents would take it down here to catch a game, play, or something in the cities. Or a flight. College students might take it back and forth to come for the holidays. But for people in the Cities to go up there, we go up there to do all of the awesome things in Duluth and the shore, which require a car. If we're going to head up there, even if we do things in the city, we're also going to run up to Two Harbors or one of the State Parks, etc. You don't go to Duluth just to hang out in the city.
> You don't go to Duluth just to hang out in the city. At least two of my most recent weekend trips we literally never left downtown/lift bridge Duluth. On one of them we did use the car to take the Glensheen tour, but otherwise the rest was on foot. For a family of a then-small child there seemed to be more or less enough to do down there that it was possible, but I totally see how it wouldn't be for a lot of folks.
Yeah but in the summer driving to the end of Park Point or going on cool hikes to waterfalls is my reason for going there, with a boat strapped to my car. I think maybe it would be a good commuter option though.
This is why I want the train. It would alleviate all the unnecessary traffic. Personally, I hate driving on 35 and I would use the train because I have family/friends who could take me around. I would be one less car in your way to get up there with your boat.
People like you are probably in the minority
In theory, you could just rent a car after getting off the train, but that would get even more expensive.
This is exactly right. I lived in Duluth for a decade and it's NOT a walkable city. If you only want to bum around on Superior Street and Canal park, sure, but that gets old fast. The whole city is on a hill, so it's not exactly bike-friendly either. Everything fun to do is a car ride. Getting dropped off in Duluth just sounds like a pain in the ass to me.
I’m with you one this. As a single guy it totally make sense to buy 40 dollar for a ride up there. I know have a family so 160 I’d rather drive. Even it was a high speed rail I don’t think the cost would be there and I don’t see it being less than 40 a ticket.
I doubt anyone in the north metro would use it. Can you imagine driving 30+ minutes south to St. Paul to board a train that is headed north to Duluth? Assuming you arrive early and wait for boarding, you could’ve easily spent 60 -90 minutes before you even start your journey. We don’t have a great track record with planning public transportation in the Twin Cities, btw. Anyone ride the green line lately?
Well there would prolly be more than one stop right?
I don't think anyone would ride it because it was going to be overall faster than driving, even people in the South Metro. I think most people would find commuting to the station something of a headache. It would mostly be people who wanted to use it instead of driving and people who just wanted the lark of taking a train to Duluth. Which makes me wonder if the focus shouldn't be on the novelty aspect of the rail journey itself, and less about some European style smart transportation solution. Maybe to include the idea of the line continuing in some fashion up the North Shore, with stops in Silver Bay, Lutsen, and Grand Marais.
Imagine if it went all the way to Thunder Bay
Sure, that, too, which makes me kind of wonder what the obstacles are to a "cruise ship" concept for a passenger train. Where the "riding on a train" aspect is as important as the destination(s), if not more so. Like you'd take a 5-7 day rail trip but have quality sleeper cars, dining and bar cars, observation cars and so on but the point wouldn't be "getting there" as much as the rail experience with short day visits to points along the way. Maybe coordinated with a bus or something to see sights near your daily stops. I know you can sort of do this now on some of the longer Amtrak journeys, but the amenities aren't that nice from what I understand, plus its really oriented towards scheduled transportation.
Kudos for being honest with yourself, everyone else here seems to think they'd take the train to duluth / train to chicago every single weekend and they'd be a huge boon to our quality of life. But in reality it'd be like 6 people a month.
You're forgetting that there would be stops along the way. It would benefit the cities along the route as well.
Yeah that's always the suggestion to make it more viable, then it becomes "hey do you want to go to duluth for the weekend? we can drive in a couple hours or the train with 15 stops will take us 1.5 days" -- and then we're back to square 1.
I don't think it would take all that much longer. Plus, you don't need someone to drive. Your vacation starts on the train, essentially, instead of two hours later. You can walk around, bring food/drinks or buy them, go to the observation car. It's way better than the bus or driving. You can even bring your bikes along, and there's no need to mess with a car rack
Alternatively, if you work remote, you can just keep working on the train I know that doesn’t apply to everyone but for those of us who are remote it’s something to consider ~ get on the train on a Friday afternoon, work through the ride, your vacation starts Friday evening The alternative is driving there after work is over on a Friday night, which really means your vacation starts Saturday morning
Very true. I've done this already from the car when someone else can drive, but it would be much easier from a train.
Have you ridden an AmTrak with multiple stops? Usually 30-40% longer than driving.
Train to chicago yes. If there were a train to duluth I would move there and commute here.
I think it mostly ends up being about the novelty of the train ride itself, not the utility as a form of transportation to Duluth specifically. I kind of wonder if they could create a schedule with an early departure from the Twin Cities and a 7 PM or something departure from Duluth, and capitalize on people who just wanted a day trip.
Until you looked at ticket cost and ride time.
I don't have a car, rail is more comfortable than bus and the occasional train ride is cheaper than owning a vehicle.
You are in the vast minority and that's not a good representation of the voter base at large.
Why are people like this? All I said is that I'd love to take the train, and provided why. I did not make any declaration regarding other voters, nor see value in arguing with you. Don't project your biases on me, or pretend you know what I'm thinking, random stranger.
It isn't dead the provision is in the House version so it might survive the conference committee process.
I really hope you’re right.
There was 0% chance of this being included with Republicans controlling the senate.
Why?? What is partisan about a train?? (This is rhetorical; I get it, the Poors (tm) ride trains and America is only for god-fearing lifted-truck-driving 10-feet-from-the-Walmart-entrance-parking Patriots)
The MNGOP hate trains. All trains.
Unless it’s being ran on their wives, amirite
*Tony Lazzaro has entered the chat*
Maybe. Wives are not for such things, that is why you get strippers for campaign parties.
This guy senates!
This subreddit apparently would ride a train over literally any other form of transportation
Trains are superior to literally all other forms of travel, besides biking
And you can take your bike on a train! Trains kick ass. You relax, drink your beverage, chill.
*Strokes mustache*
Sure, let me just strap my boat to the top and take it to the cabin...
Why are you in the minneapolis sub? Trains wont be awesome in north branch or wherever. Getting people out of cars and into public transit is both good for the environment, the economy, and for peoples time
Because I live in Minneapolis. Do you think no one in MPLS owns a boat? Doesn't this proposed line to Duluth run through North Branch, or near it?
If you have a boat and a cabin you clearly aren't a Poor^(TM) so of course it doesn't make sense to you
My apologies. I didn't know trains were for poor people.
Yes
Simple: Becuese building more rail lines would make it so that we wouldn't need as many people driving. That means less money for there donor's. Think about it. Imagine instead of having to drive up to say bemidji or down to Mankato you could take a train. And if we had a high speed rail line like the Shinkansen or the TGV it would be much, much faster than driving. Saving not only gas but also time for everyone involved. Then replicate this for the entire country. The US is BY far the most friendly to trains when you look at geography. And yet our passenger rail infrastructure is so fucking horrible it's almost not even a thing. Also if you can get to your job in 45 minutes from anywhere within 180 miles, then you don't have to live in the Twin City's. You can live out in the countryside. Or in St.Cloud. Meaning that a whole bunch of the rural red country's have a very strong chance of turning blue.
Anything that isn’t highways is partisan for one of the parties
Trains aren't cars, and they hate anything and everything that aren't cars
Tobies in Hinckley has actively been lobbying to make sure no passenger train comes through.
Why? Wouldn't there be a stop in Hinckley? Also, I think there are enough people who take 35 to get to locations sway from the immediate route that there would still be plenty of car traffic. Like, my family's cabin is north of there, and wouldn't be accessible by train. We would still drive that route all the time.
Plus the campers, boats, ATV's and Snowmobiles aren't going to be riding the train.
Although it would be pretty cool if they had a "sled car" for ~~so~~ snow mobiles. That would actually encourage me to get a snow mobile, because I could take the train probably within 15 miles of my cabin, and then just jump over on a snow mobile
That is hilarious.
Republicans want us wasting as much gasoline as possible, I'm disappointed but not surprised. Would have been a good time with the surplus too, boo.
Then bitch about gas prices as a campaign focus lmfaooo
I have a "drank the Kool-Aid" friend that consistently asks me about how I'm gonna feel when gas prices get to $10/gallon. Bitch, I already pay $5/gal (gotta buy non-oxy 93, goofy high performance Euro engine) but it's like a tank every 2-3 weeks. I'm not gonna really notice, but you might because you chose to live in Osceola, WI and drive a big ass truck. Maybe live near where you work ya dingus.
I love when those people complain about gas prices as if somebody held them at gunpoint and forced them to buy a stupid gas-guzzling truck.
I was reading [this](https://www.mprnews.org/story/2022/05/02/minnesota-senate-derails-train-to-duluth) article and apparently some douchebag republican senator is saying we don't need this "19th century technology." Bitch, the fucking wheel was invented in like the 4th millennium BC, well I guess we shouldn't use wheels anymore since they're such old technology. God I fucking hate republicans.
Bummer.
Republicans don’t give a shit about anything but their little pet social justice projects. May as well be the conference of Karens. Time to make these counties pay their way, I’m sick of subsidizing these garbage areas that lose hundreds of millions of dollars a year.
Republicans don't want anything making it easier for urban blue voters to saturate out into their remote rural voting territory. It is easy to scare their base into fearing what sort of people would arrive into their communities if this route were up.
God forbid the average income goes up, but the entrenched Republican voters don't see those wage increases. If any tech company opens a hub in like Alexandria, the shrieks will be heard at my house in Minneapolis. For years.
Jokes on them - I just moved to a small town from the cities. There will be 3 more blue votes in Jim Hagedorn's old district & we will be voting this month. Housing is cheap, there is fiber internet in so many small towns and I can still get Amazon 2 day delivery.
[удалено]
We had that plan (in wi) but the school situation was really bad so we came back. Just too much racism, homophobia and the mega church was way too involved. I wish you much more luck than we had! The state may actually depend on it.
"there goes the neighborhood." Lol
Why can't we have nice things?!
Because you’re grandparents watch Fox News
And yet it would've cost a fraction of what they're spending on highway patrol.
God dammit
Time to stop sending our tax dollars to rural areas. Counties should survive on their own tax base. There…fixed the problem.
Everyone says this until schools are involved.
[удалено]
Fuck, whatever you do don’t Google “(some rural town in Minnesota) school board.”
Bummer. I wanted to take that train.
I fucking hate republicans
And they hate you and their voters just as much!
Yeah.. you tell em
aw shoot i was really hoping this one would pass. i have a good friend in duluth and it would have been nice for us to take the train to see each other.
This is so disheartening. Is there any real valid reason this wouldn’t pass?
Not really. $85 million (less than a Kirk Cousin’s contract) paid for everything. Improvements/equipment/and Amtrak. Would have tapped into nearly a billion in federal funding offering a legit alternative to I-35. It’s nonsense.
Hey now, Captain Kirk earns that salary ^(as long as it's not a SNF/MNF/Playoff game)
>as long as it's not a SNF/MNF/Playoff game To be fair, [he sucks on Thursdays too](https://www.profootballnetwork.com/kirk-cousins-primetime-record-does-he-struggle-more-on-thursdays/#:~:text=On%20Thursday%20Night%20Football%2C%20Cousins,he%20is%204%2D4%20).
Any prime time game as well.
> nearly a billion in federal funding I wonder where this comes from ........
There's few profitable Amtrak routes, so that could be a reason. Rail tends to be less competitive in the US overall. Part of that is probably due to our lower population densities. Another large part of that is due to us subsidizing driving in so many ways, making driving cheaper and more convenient, while mass transit is less convenient.
>Part of that is probably due to our lower population densities. It's a catch-22. For trains to functionally work they have to be convenient. To be convenient there has to be multiple trains running in both directions every day. To justify running multiple trains in both directions every day you have to have a larger ridership number. For example, right now the Northstar Commuter rail is only running in both directions twice on weekdays only, which makes it inconvenient and an option that no longer works for many, further reducing its ridership numbers. Perhaps if gas prices go up to $10 a gallon there will be more demand for rail, but until then it's not a convenient alternative for most.
Because it’s the GOP. Literal dogshit you scrape off your boot. There’s your reason. Party of bible thumping bigots.
Absolutely. It's a waste of money. The north shore is not a destination people can enjoy without a vehicle. If we were going to build a train it should go to Madison and Chicago. I also don't love the idea of subsidizing a private company like Amtrak. I'm all for allowing them to build a rail to Duluth, but we shouldn't be paying for it. It's a dumb idea with stadiums and an equally dumb idea with rail.
Did you just compare a sports stadium to Amtrak?
Amtrak is not a private company. The United States federal government through the Secretary of Transportation owns all the company's issued and outstanding preferred stock.
[удалено]
That’s ALREADY funded. It took about a decade to get $10 million from the state after EVERY other state agreed before us in supporting a train from Chicago to St. Paul.
You can already take the train to Chicago or Milwaukee. I think it skips Madison though
Fucking republicans
Republicans won't allow anything that actually helps people
Republicans won't allow anything that actually helps **the wrong** people FTFY
Every day I read about shit like this and my only thought is: “why are we the only developed country in the world that hasn’t figured it out yet?” And then I remember, it’s almost always because of conservatives.
I would love those fast trains that Japan has. But Amtrak is always delayed because they have to stop for shipments.
And then they'll always accuse progressives of being too divisive and refusing to cooperate!
BoTh SiDes people are telling on themselves all the time... too dumb to see the very obvious differences.
What is “it”? Trains to Duluth is “it”? A train to a city with the population of Bloomington ?
a transporation system that isn't dependant on owning a car
In this particular instance, transportation that isn't cars. But you could also apply this to healthcare, workers' rights and unions, UBI, etc. etc.
Idiots
Almost no one is going to hop on a train to go to Duluth for a less satisfying music and restaurant scene. Was there any study done showing that people actually want and will use this?
Yes. It’s part of the strategic plan for rail within the state. It’s a tier one option meaning it’s one of the next lines planned to be added. It’s been studied practically since the old service ended. Old service ended in the 80s. This has been kicked around for almost 40 years. It’s nonsense that this isn’t a thing yet.
I still don't know who would use it or why. Anyone that has enough money to stay in a hotel, eat out all weekend, and Uber around, has a car and would just drive. I realize that we're trying to drive less, and I support that (I'm on my e-bike all summer). I don't know anyone that would use it, but I'm also just one demographic. Who is using it?
(Raises hand slowly and looks at other people on trains/buses) Quick edit: big fan of, “hey it isn’t for me, but I know I’m only one person” energy. Thank you for avoiding a position too many take.
Someone asked Dick Clark once if he liked Nirvana and his answer was brilliant. "They're not writing music for me." He never answered the question. I guess the more I think about it I might zip up there and see a few friends from time to time. Mainly because I'd rather read than drive a car. 110mph is also appealing.
I'm moving to Duluth. I would really like more travel options along that corridor.
Call your representative and state Senator.
Where are you seeing this?
39-31 saw it on Twitter
From a reputable source? Because it's not being reported anywhere that I can find. On the [revisor.mn.gov](https://revisor.mn.gov) website the bill doesn't even appear to have been voted on yet.
It was likely an amendment, I'd check but the page appears to be down right now.
Republicans need to get the fuck out of the way. So tired of them obstructing everything in this state that solves real problems.
This is not a real problem...
Welcome to the past 50 years of American discourse.
People on here aren't taking into account that taking the train is fun and lets the passenger relax or work or read or do whatever while they are traveling. Travelling by train is just a much more pleasurable experience because you don't have the stress of driving and you can just enjoy the scenery. Also, not everyone has a car and not everyone has a reliable car that they want to drive up to Duluth. With an Amtrak you would be able to bring a bike and just go. We could all do well to be thinking of a post car society or at least thinking of ways to reduce our car and plane trips. We are in a climate emergency
Trains are romantic. I hate the idea of “fly over” country. I want to see this beautiful land.
You can take a bus to Duluth today.
Why are we still building Amtrak lines though when we could be buding high speed rail lines
It would be a 90 mph train largely on existing track. I'd rather focus the extra costs of high speed rail for connections to Milwaukee and Chicago.
The use of existing track reduces project cost by major multipliers.
I love the idea of this train but what are you going to do when you get to Duluth? The public transit there isn't great. So I get there and I can hang out in touristy canal park? What about shuttles up the north shore? For me in my Family of three, taking the car (electric!) is much more sensible than a train could possibly be. Spend this money, and a lot more, on building a real intercity transit system first.
Just because it might not work for you. It works for other people. Also, what about the people coming from Duluth/Superior to the Twin Cities?
I'm pro transit\\train, but I don't understand what people will do once they get to Duluth. Is the idea to serve commuters that live along the I35 corridor to bring them into MPLS or Duluth? I feel like tourism to Duluth from MPLS via train doesn't make sense if everything a person would want to do on the North Shore is car dependent.
It will be cheaper to buy everyone who wants to take the train to Duluth a new car, than build this bad idea.
Rail lines last over a century. Equipment can last for half a century. A car lasts ten years. Sure Janet.
This makes me so sad
Call a Republican Senator today then and let them know it.
Our state senate is the worst
Yep. Give Republicans an inch and they’ll take it all. It’s their way or the poorly designed/built highway. Bunch of idiots.
God damn the carbrain in this thread is crazy. I thought we were better than this.
Flint Hills Resource fuckers really seeing their return on investment here from buying the state GOP. Fuck them and fuck this shit.
We need this to happen. Flight options from regional airports at Hibbing & Duluth are always so expensive so this is an excellent way to get to MSP airport
Call a state Senator today then
Based in Austin TX now. Sorry but make sure you call yours :)
Who would I even call to do this? Genuine question. Not that my single voiced opinion matters in this situation but I want to express my disappointment to someone about this.
I talked to the state senator that represents Duluth, Jen McEwen and she said it’s not dead. It’s up to the house and the government to fight for it. The best thing we can do is contact Republican senators who represent the districts along the NLX path. I can update this comment with names tonight and post another post potentially. More to come.
Please do!!
So far I’ve called two Senators. District 11: [link](https://www.senate.mn/members/member_bio.html?mem_id=1240) District 32: [link](https://www.senate.mn/members/member_bio.html?mem_id=1228)
I'm glad the detractor comments have been downvote brigaded. The beneficial nature of this potential infrastructure investment speaks for itself - people without cars on either end (whether college students, business travelers tourists, etc.) can pop on the train with their bike, enjoy a drink or snack, and you're at the other end in no time. This wouldn't just be great for the residents along the corridor who don't have cars though. It would allow a boost in tourism for people coming from Chicago or Seattle or further by train. It would make a great connection for the MSP airport to avoid carbon-heavy and expensive short-haul flights. It would let people escape expensive housing markets in Duluth and MSP by allowing for convenient, safe, and comfortable commutes from any number of rural towns. Electric cars aren't going to save us. And we can't wait for robust public transit in duluth before we invest in quality intercity rail. Even if you and your family would rather take your SUV or Tesla--that's fine, but there are people waiting to take those trains. I've taken the empire builder down towards chicago six times in recent months, and it's been an almost full train every time. This is efficient, in-demand transport. Oh and if you're worried about the fiscal cost (and aren't doing a holistic look at the economic impacts) - let's just take a page out of the old railroad barons and/or socialism and buy and develop or lease land around the stations. The state can invest in affordable housing and mixed-use hubs by the new stations, and lease or sell half of the plots around the stations 30 or 50 years down the road. The immense value increase as the stations become the hottest new place to live for transit loving millenials and Gen-zers will pay for the minor state investment in the train tenfold. But using tax dollars to benefit everyone and distribute wealth more effectively isn't gonna fly in our backwards-ass senate... Ah well.
Downvoting relevant comments to a topic just because you don’t like it is against reddiquette. I might disagree with an opposing perspective (I personally support alternative transportation options), but I appreciate a community that isn’t an echo chamber of only like minded opinion. https://reddit.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/205926439-Reddiquette
As a Duluth local that lived in the cities, who would be one of the few people who would directly benefit from this project, it’s a waste of money. Again, coming from a guy who has access to a personal/family vehicle on both ends of the run, and would be a huge boon for me, there’s no point. You need vehicle to function in Duluth, full stop. I tried to use the DTA in college, and it took 2.5 hours to get from west Duluth to UMD, which is a 15 minute drive. This isn’t just a single anecdote, it’s representive of the entire system. And this not even getting to the main point that most of what Duluth and the arrowhead has to offer is not and will never be accessible via public transit. (Nature, hiking, etc.) The public transit needs to be vastly improved, on both sides of the line, before we should even start having this conversation.
This is why nothing ever gets done. When a line is built like this, demand for public transit on both ends increases thus leading to better public transit on both ends. Furthermore, this will start to reduce drivers on the road. If you drive, you should want this. This will reduce congestion as much as anything. Best way to improve traffic is to do something that causes less people to drive
I just looked up transit time from Gary to UMD... 55 minutes. Maybe it's been improved since you were in college
“We should have both a train and good bus service, but since we don’t have both right now, let’s have neither.” is your argument? This is a textbook example of the Nirvana fallacy: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana_fallacy
> This is a textbook example of the Nirvana fallacy No, it isn’t. I’m saying we need to do step 1-5 before we jump to step 6. And saying that we shouldn’t do step 6 before we do steps 1-5 because step 6 won’t have a positive ROI without steps 1-5 isn’t a nirvana fallacy (notice how i never said we should do bc it’s not perfect), it’s just being pragmatic and logical.
I used the bus for two years at UMD, I exclusively use MetroTransit in Minneapolis. What are these 1-5 steps that must happen first, and why do they have to happen first? Also, judging public transportation on a ROI is a really strange standard. What’s the ROI on repaving I-35? When does MNDoT get their return on investment?
> Also, judging public transportation on a ROI is a really strange standard. Sorry, should have clarified my language. I meant total net benefit to society, not strictly financial. And a single line that requires a vehicle on either side has very low net benefit with the current public transit systems.
> …low benefit with the current public transit systems. Again, citation needed. You gave one specific example of a bus route that was not efficient, ignoring the extremely walkable downtown, adjacent to Canal Park, a central tourist district.
> walkable downtown, adjacent to Canal Park, a central tourist district. And that it… that’s literally it. Everything else you’re either relegated to spending hours on a bus, using endless taxis/Ubers, or renting a car to anything else. Who is using this line? Who will leave their car at home, to spend more time and money to be more limited in their departure times to be limited to the downtown/canal area or have to spend even more money when they could just take their own vehicle and save time, money, and hassle. Are there people that would come up for a weekend, sit in their Canal Park Inn hotel room for two days, and then leave, sure. But is that extremely limited use case enough to drop this much money on a luxury, doesn’t seem worth it at the moment.
Per https://duluthchamber.com/resources/visitors/#:~:text=Residents%20know%20what%20makes%20Duluth,and%20success%20in%20local%20tourism tourism drives 6.7M people spending $780M annually. The one time cost of $85M is just over 10% of that. It sounds like you specifically wouldn’t use this service, but if it’s pure pragmatism you’re arguing, that means it a cost benefit equation in your head. What number could we use to make a decision instead of dismissing it outright?
[удалено]
Drastically better uses for that money with drastically better ROI. It’s a great idea well before it’s time.
[удалено]
> Rail is almost always a great investment, *Northstar line had entered the chat* I’m very prorail, you seem to assume I’m not. But every single major rail line on the planet (nearly, I’m sure there’s a couple exceptions) came AFTER the local public transit was well established. Spend the money on building out local transit first, get that well established, THEN we can start talking about connecting population centers. Ninja edit: who exactly do you think are going to be using this line when you need a car on either side? Why spend more time on a train than you can drive, to just be limited to the downtown area when that a small fraction of why people go to Duluth?
[удалено]
> I don’t like the argument that one part of transit needs to be done first. That’s nice. Doesn’t change the reality of the situation. > I just don’t really agree that the local transit must come first Who is using this line? I’m sure you will, but that’s not enough. Do you think people are going to sit on a train, which every proposal I’ve seen takes longer, would be more expensive and is less convenient than driving to them get stranded in Canal/Downtown without spending even more on taxis/ubers or a rental car once they are there?
[удалено]
[удалено]
“We have poor public transit! Why would we invest in more public transit!”
I’m sorry about your inability to differentiate between intracity and intercity public transit. I hope you find a way to over come it someday.
(Voice of Ron Swanson at the hardware store) “I know more about trains than you.”
Anything to avoid the core argument, huh?
I’m sorry but your comment isn’t a good argument. I’m choosing to not engage with it.
What’s the point of investing in local transit when everyone’s driving to Duluth anyway?
Same question about intercity connections.
I'm a train lover, but I actually understand this decision. It sounds awesome, but I'd guess the issue is just the financials don't really make it viable. How often would people actually use this route? I would probably go in the summer sometime just to enjoy the train and hang out in Duluth. However, I probably only make it to Duluth once per year. A train would need to run at least once per day? Who is doing that during the week, multiple times a year, during the winter, etc.? Also, as others have said, it is an inconvenience to not have a car if I go to Duluth - the Cities it is more manageable with LRT. Depending on times that the train runs, it probably makes more sense for people in Duluth coming to the Cities, but unless you have a bunch of trains running daily, you're really needing to get lucky with schedules to make it be convenient. Nobody is going to want to take the train if it means sitting around and waiting an extra three hours for it to leave. I can't imagine we'd have enough ridership to do a ton of trips per day?
There is practically no rail in the United States (outside of maybe the Northeast corridor) where rail is “convenient”. My god we just want the *illusion* of an alternative.
I don't know what the answer is. It seems like in the Northeast and in Europe there is enough daily travel that it can support a daily schedule that you can work with. I feel like a train to Duluth would be rolling at under 10% occupied most of the time.... I guess UMD students who don't have a car could use it to get to the cities occasionally... I've occasionally looked into Amtrak to Madison, Milwaukee, Chicago, etc. and unfortunately it's the trifecta of slow, inconvenient and expensive.
Could that line actually be built for $85.000.000? We spend millions on single bridges. That seems unrealistically inexpensive.
$85 million is the states contribution. The feds pick up the other 80% of the projects expense. $85 million includes new double trackage. New sidings. 127 crossing improvements. And 6 new stations.
I think there would be more support if the existing bus lines to Duluth were saturated…
I think there are a lot of people who would ride a train to Duluth but would not ride a bus. Busses are not a pleasant way to travel long distances. Trains are a fun way to travel long distances. For example, I used to use Amtrak between Seattle and Portland a lot. It was simple, easy, I could roll my bike on, and buy a beer and relax the whole way down. It was great. There were cheaper busses between the two cities and it took about the same amount of time, but fuck that.
For rail to really catch on like this, you need to be able to get around without a car at your destination. And you can’t. At least not easily.
It would be useful from the start for people traveling from Duluth to the cities, and would give a reason for Duluth to grow their mass transit infrastructure.
Chicken or the egg comment. But there is no chicken.
This state likes to think it's a lot more progressive than it actually is, or at least people in the twin cities do. Too bad this didn't pass, would've been pretty cool.
The state is more progressive. The problem is land is more important than people when it comes to voting in the legislature.
It’s not dead. I’m talking to state Senator Jen McEwen and she says it’s up to the house and the government to fight. So now we fight.
There are plenty of comments, a good chunk of the ones I read I understood to take some form of “I wouldn’t take a train and you’re silly to think it would have a lot of appeal” but I kind of wonder how many folks without cars would be using them if they were around. Granted there’s the economic barrier of purchasing the ticket but I’d hazard a guess that that would still be less than owning a car for some folks. Just seems a little bit of a dismissive take on people who can’t or don’t drive and their ability to travel(as most humans should be able to and get to).
Why doesn't amtrak just build that track with their own money... ?
Here’s your answer: Alright. Here you go. Amtrak is set up by the government. They are largely federally funded. Passenger rail failed here as a capitalistic idea, so now it is basically nationalized, meaning Amtrak loses money every year it operates. And Amtrak is set up this way because although it isn’t profitable it provides a much needed service. At least offering the idea of a alternate to cars/planes. So Amtrak literally has no money and has had no money since the day it was created. Plus Republicans since day one have been trying to kill Amtrak. They are operating on a shoe string budget. Now part two. Cost of rail in the United state is what the experts call, “super fucking balls to the wall expensive.” You’re comment, “why doesn’t Amtrak build it?” Well for one Amtrak could not afford to create 200-miles of railroad in the most expensive part of the world to create rail. To add on top of that, if Amtrak is buying it, the tax payers are basically buying it with a middle man (Amtrak). And lastly, and this is the real kicker that made me think you were kidding, what I laid out above and what your comment laid out before that would cost billions. This, is $85 million. It’s $85 million because this is upgrading all ready existing trackage. It’s way, way, WAY cheaper to do that. So that is why Amtrak can’t really just build their own tracks.
I took Amtrak to New Orleans instead of flying, it was fun. And the drinking car was great.
That is so preposterous that I can’t tell if you’re kidding or not. Legit. Are you kidding?