Amtrak Station Program and Planning Guidelines 1
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
For Sale: $14,500,000 Opportunity Zone Redevelopment Assemblage International District, Seattle, Wa 98104
FOR SALE: $14,500,000 OPPORTUNITY ZONE REDEVELOPMENT ASSEMBLAGE INTERNATIONAL DISTRICT, SEATTLE, WA 98104 SITE HIGHLIGHTS Elliott Bay • 29,190 SF of Land Ferries • 18,588 Building SF • Transit Oriented Development Opportunity Seattle CBD • Located in an Opportunity Zone Port of Seattle • 5 min. walk from King Street Station and across the street from Streetcar Station • Zoning Exempt from MHA (Mandatory Housing Affordability) Contributions King Street Station Pioneer Square 8th Ave S 8TH AVE S Chinatown Street Car Station S JACKSON ST // 409 8th Ave S Stadium District International District/ Chinatown Light Rail Station 701 S Jackson St International District SUBJECT SITE 21,588 VPD SCOTT CLEMENTS DAVID BUTLER 1218 Third Avenue www.orioncp.com P// 206.445.7664 P// 206.445.7665 Suite 2200 P// 206.734.4100 [email protected] [email protected] Seattle, WA 98101 Established in 2010 SEATTLE STREETCAR ImpSErAoTvingTLE communi S TREETCAty links R E GALER ST E HIGHLAND ST Volunteer Park We’re building a SEATTLE ASIAN Lake Union ART MUSEUM VE N modern streetcar FAIRVIEW & CAMPUS DRIVE VIEW A E E PROSPECT ST AIR FRED HUTCHINSON E F V MUSEUM OF CANCER RESEARCH CENTER A HISTORY AND CAMPUS DRIVE H T 0 INDUSTRY 1 system that will FRED HUTCHINSON CANCER RESEARCH CENTER Lake Union Lake Union BELMONT A PPark CENTER ALOHA ST Cheshiahud FOR E ALOHA ST Lake Union WOODEN Loop Trail BOATS VE E provide new VALLEY ST VALLEY ST LAKE UNION PARK E ROY ST ROY ST mobility options, MERCER ST E MERCER ST T BROAD S TERRY & MERCER support economic WESTLAKE & MERCER -
GAO-02-398 Intercity Passenger Rail: Amtrak Needs to Improve Its
United States General Accounting Office Report to the Honorable Ron Wyden GAO U.S. Senate April 2002 INTERCITY PASSENGER RAIL Amtrak Needs to Improve Its Decisionmaking Process for Its Route and Service Proposals GAO-02-398 Contents Letter 1 Results in Brief 2 Background 3 Status of the Growth Strategy 6 Amtrak Overestimated Expected Mail and Express Revenue 7 Amtrak Encountered Substantial Difficulties in Expanding Service Over Freight Railroad Tracks 9 Conclusions 13 Recommendation for Executive Action 13 Agency Comments and Our Evaluation 13 Scope and Methodology 16 Appendix I Financial Performance of Amtrak’s Routes, Fiscal Year 2001 18 Appendix II Amtrak Route Actions, January 1995 Through December 2001 20 Appendix III Planned Route and Service Actions Included in the Network Growth Strategy 22 Appendix IV Amtrak’s Process for Evaluating Route and Service Proposals 23 Amtrak’s Consideration of Operating Revenue and Direct Costs 23 Consideration of Capital Costs and Other Financial Issues 24 Appendix V Market-Based Network Analysis Models Used to Estimate Ridership, Revenues, and Costs 26 Models Used to Estimate Ridership and Revenue 26 Models Used to Estimate Costs 27 Page i GAO-02-398 Amtrak’s Route and Service Decisionmaking Appendix VI Comments from the National Railroad Passenger Corporation 28 GAO’s Evaluation 37 Tables Table 1: Status of Network Growth Strategy Route and Service Actions, as of December 31, 2001 7 Table 2: Operating Profit (Loss), Operating Ratio, and Profit (Loss) per Passenger of Each Amtrak Route, Fiscal Year 2001, Ranked by Profit (Loss) 18 Table 3: Planned Network Growth Strategy Route and Service Actions 22 Figure Figure 1: Amtrak’s Route System, as of December 2001 4 Page ii GAO-02-398 Amtrak’s Route and Service Decisionmaking United States General Accounting Office Washington, DC 20548 April 12, 2002 The Honorable Ron Wyden United States Senate Dear Senator Wyden: The National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) is the nation’s intercity passenger rail operator. -
Union Station Conceptual Engineering Study
Portland Union Station Multimodal Conceptual Engineering Study Submitted to Portland Bureau of Transportation by IBI Group with LTK Engineering June 2009 This study is partially funded by the US Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration. IBI GROUP PORtlAND UNION STATION MultIMODAL CONceptuAL ENGINeeRING StuDY IBI Group is a multi-disciplinary consulting organization offering services in four areas of practice: Urban Land, Facilities, Transportation and Systems. We provide services from offices located strategically across the United States, Canada, Europe, the Middle East and Asia. JUNE 2009 www.ibigroup.com ii Table of Contents Executive Summary .................................................................................... ES-1 Chapter 1: Introduction .....................................................................................1 Introduction 1 Study Purpose 2 Previous Planning Efforts 2 Study Participants 2 Study Methodology 4 Chapter 2: Existing Conditions .........................................................................6 History and Character 6 Uses and Layout 7 Physical Conditions 9 Neighborhood 10 Transportation Conditions 14 Street Classification 24 Chapter 3: Future Transportation Conditions .................................................25 Introduction 25 Intercity Rail Requirements 26 Freight Railroad Requirements 28 Future Track Utilization at Portland Union Station 29 Terminal Capacity Requirements 31 Penetration of Local Transit into Union Station 37 Transit on Union Station Tracks -
INDIAN RAILWAYS SCHEDULE of DIMENSIONS 1676Mm Gauge (BG)
INDIAN RAILWAYS SCHEDULE OF DIMENSIONS 1676mm Gauge (BG) REVISED, 2004 SCHEDULE OF DIMENSIONS-1676mm, GAUGE SHEDULE OF DIMENSIONS-1676MM GAUGE Schedule of Dimensions for Indian Railways, 1676mm Gauge Dear Sir/Dear Sirs, With their circular letter No. 735-W. of 1922, the Railway Board issued a Schedule of Maximum, Minimum and Recommended Dimensions to be observed on all 1676mm gauge Railways in India. In that Schedule, certain dimensions of the previous schedule of the year 1913 were modified with the object of permitting the use of enlarged rolling stock. 2. The Schedule of Dimensions of 1922 contained two distinct sections, namely, a schedule of "Maximum and Minimum Dimensions" which was considered to enable the proposed larger vehicles to run with about the same degree of safety as that which was previously obtained on the older Railways with existing stock, and a schedule of "Recommended Dimensions" intended to provide approximately the same clearances from fixed structures for the future larger vehicles as the 1913 schedule gave for existing vehicles. 3. In their circular letter No. 232-Tech.dated the 8th February, 1926, the Railway Board gave instructions that the Recommended Dimensions given in the 1922 Schedule were to be observed on important Railways in all new works and alterations to existing works. These orders were modified in letter No. 232-Tech. of the 26th April, 1926, which allowed a relaxation in the case of certain recommended dimensions, the adoption of which would involve heavy expenditure in remodeling works. 4. In 1929, it was found desirable further to amend the Schedule of 1922 in order to introduce certain improve- ments in the light of experience gained since it was issued, and to provide the clearances required by electric traction equipment on lines which were likely to be electrified in the future. -
DRAFT 2019 Table of Contents
DRAFT 2019 Table of Contents Section Page Introduction........................................................................................................................ 1 Priorities & Strategies for 2019-2024.....................................................................3 The Agency..........................................................................................................................5 Physical Plant and Properties.....................................................................................8 Service Characteristics & Fares............................................................................... 13 2018 Activities & Accomplishments ..................................................................... 24 2019-2024 Services, Programs, Facilities & Equipment.............................. 34 Financial Plan .................................................................................................................. 47 Appendix A: Environmental Determination of Non-Significance ...................... 51 Appendix B: Public Comments .......................................................................................... 53 Appendix C: Fuel Consumption and Accident Data .................................................. 54 Introduction I N T The Transit Development Plan (TDP) is required by Washington State, Revised Code of R O Washington (RCW) 35.58.2795. The plan is updated annually and submitted to the D U C Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT). T I O N Our plan summarizes accomplishments -
Development of a Dynamic Hands-Free Door Opener to Prevent COVID-19 Pandemic Spreading
Article Development of a Dynamic Hands-Free Door Opener to Prevent COVID-19 Pandemic Spreading Vítor Maranha 1,2, Pedro Maia 3,4, Luís Margalho 1 , Nicolle Lourenço 5 , Diogo Oliveira 5, Diogo Maurício 6, João F. Caseiro 6 and Luis Roseiro 1,2,* 1 Coimbra Polythecnic-ISEC, 3030-199 Coimbra, Portugal; [email protected] (V.M.); [email protected] (L.M.) 2 Center for Mechanical Engineering, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Materials and Processes (CEMMPRE), University of Coimbra, 3030-788 Coimbra, Portugal 3 Polytechnic of Coimbra, ESEC, Rua Dom João III—Solum, 3030-329 Coimbra, Portugal; [email protected] 4 Department of Communication, Campus Universitário de Santiago, [ID+] Research Institute for Design, Media and Culture, Art University of Aveiro, 3810-193 Aveiro, Portugal 5 Shapetek, R. António Champalimaud 10-A, 3100-514 Pombal, Portugal; [email protected] (N.L.); [email protected] (D.O.) 6 Centimfe, Z.I. Casal da Lebre, Rua da Espanha, Lt8, 2430-028 Marinha Grande, Portugal; [email protected] (D.M.); [email protected] (J.F.C.) * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +351-967845829 Abstract: The situation caused by COVID-19 has shown several vulnerabilities in the attitudes and habits of modern society, inducing the need to adopt new behaviors that will directly impact daily activities. The quickly spreading virus contaminates the surfaces of handles and objects, and subsequent contact with the eyes, nose, or mouth is one of the main contagion factors. There is an urgent need to rethink how we interact with the most-touched surfaces, such as door handles in Citation: Maranha, V.; Maia, P.; public places with a high flux of people. -
Issue of Play on October 4 & 5 at the "The 6 :,53"
I the 'It, 980 6:53 OCTOBER !li AMTRAK... ... now serving BRYAN and LOVELAND ... returns to INDIA,NAPOLIS then turns em away Amtrak's LAKE SHORE LIMITED With appropriate "first trip" is now making regular stops inaugural festivities, Amtrak every day at BRYAN in north introduced daily operation of western Ohio. The westbound its new HOOSIER STATE on the train stops at 11:34am and 1st of October between IND the eastbound train stops at IANAPOLIS and CHICAGO. Sev 8:15pm. eral OARP members were on the Amtrak's SHENANDOAH inaugural trip, including Ray is now stopping daily at a Kline, Dave Marshall and Nick new station stop in suburban Noe. Complimentary champagne Cincinnati. The eastbound was served to all passengers SHENANDOAH stops at LOVELAND and Amtrak public affairs at 7:09pm and the westbound representatives passed out train stops at 8:15am. A m- Amtrak literature. One of trak began both new stops on the Amtrak reps was also pas Sunday, October 26th. Sev sing out OARP brochures! [We eral OARP members were on don't miss an opportunity!] hand at both stations as the Our members reported that the "first trains" rolled in. inaugural round trip was a OARP has supported both new good one, with on-time oper station stops and we are ation the whole way. Tracks glad they have finally come permit 70mph speeds much of about. Both communities are the way and the only rough supportive of their new Am track was noted near Chicago. trak service. How To Find Amtrak held another in its The Station Maps for both series of FAMILY DAYS with BRYAN qnd LOVELAND will be much equipment on public dis fopnd' inside this issue of play on October 4 & 5 at the "the 6 :,53". -
Texas Eagle® Heartland Flyer®
2009 ® 26, TEXAS EAGLE OCTOBER And HEARTLAND FLYER® Effective SM journey. the Enjoy TEXAS EAGLE® serving CHICAGO - ST. LOUIS - LITTLE ROCK DALLAS - FORT WORTH - SAN ANTONIO 1-800-USA-RAIL LOS ANGELES Call And intermediate stations HEARTLAND FLYER® serving OKLAHOMA CITY - FORT WORTH And intermediate stations AMTRAK.COM Visit NRPC Form P21–200M–10/26/09 Stock #02-3670 TEXAS EAGLE HEARTLAND FLYER Chicago • St. Louis • Little Rock • Dallas • Oklahoma City • Fort Worth Fort Worth • San Antonio • Los Angeles 821 ᮤ Train Number ᮣ 822 21/421 ᮤ Train Number ᮣ 22/422 Daily ᮤ Days of Operation ᮣ Daily ᮤ ᮣ As indicated ᮤ ᮣ As indicated ® y On Board Service ® y in column Days of Operation in column ReadDown Mile ᮢ Symbol ᮡ Read Up ᮤ ᮣ ® s r On Board Service ® s r 8 25A 0 Dp Oklahoma City, OK (CT) 0h Ar 9 39P Read Down Mile ᮢ Symbol ᮡ Read Up b Tulsa, Kansas City—see back 0h 1 45P Daily 0 Dp Chicago, IL–Union (CT) 8s Ar 1 52P Daily 8 49A 20 Norman, OK 8 55P Hq 9 06A 35 Purcell, OK 0h 8 38P R 2 40P Daily 37 Joliet, IL 8H D12 56P Daily 9 31A 57 Pauls Valley, OK 0h 8 12P 3 27P Daily 92 Pontiac, IL 0H 11 39A Daily 10 23A 102 Ardmore, OK 0h 7 23P 4 04P Daily 124 Bloomington-Normal, IL 8s 11 08A Daily 11 05A 141 Gainesville, TX 0h 6 42P b Davenport, Hq 12 39P 206 Ar Fort Worth, TX (CT) 8hq Dp 5 25P Indianapolis—see back 4 37P Daily 156 Lincoln, IL 0H 10 25A Daily 5 14P Daily 185 Springfield, IL &¶8s 9 55A Daily Service on the Heartland Flyer® hq ® Coaches: Reservations required. -
Safety Distances on Platforms Danger Zone
Bundesamt für Verkehr BAV Office fédéral des transports OFT Ufficio federale dei trasporti UFT Federal Office of Transport FOT Safety Distances on Platforms Danger Zone – Safety Zone Research Report 2011 Publication details Published by Federal Office of Transport (FOT) CH-3003 Bern Project coordination Federal Office of Transport (FOT) Safety department Nicolas Keusen Text Federal Office of Transport (FOT), Bern Swiss Federal Railways (SBB), Bern Figures Federal Office of Transport (FOT), Bern Daamen, W., Delft, Netherlands (photographs in Figure 8) [8] VSS, Zurich (Figure 9) [5] Citations Federal Office of Transport (FOT), 2011, Research Report - Safety Distances on Platforms, Bern Available from Free of charge from the internet: www.bav.admin.ch French edition: Distances sur les quais – Rapport de recherche Title photo Warning notice for rail passengers 'Safety Distances on Platforms' Research Report Contents III CONTENTS ABBREVIATIONS AND DESIGNATIONS 5 1. SUMMARY 6 1.1 Danger zone 6 1.2 Safety zone 6 2. INTRODUCTION 7 2.1 Background to this report 7 2.2 Layout of the report 7 3. TERMINOLOGY 8 DANGER ZONE 9 4. INTRODUCTION 10 4.1 Subject matter 10 4.2 Purpose 10 4.3 Scope of the study and area to which it applies 10 5. REFERENCE DOCUMENTS 11 6. PROCEDURE AND METHODOLOGY 12 7. DETERMINING PERMISSIBLE AND IMPERMISSIBLE RISKS 13 8. DETERMINING THE STUDY PARAMETERS 14 9. STUDY AND DISCUSSION OF PARAMETERS AND CONSEQUENCES 15 9.1 Clearance profile 15 9.2 Contact 15 9.3 Aerodynamics 17 9.3.1 Theoretical and experimental documents 18 9.3.2 Danger threshold 19 9.3.3 Analysis of the results 20 9.3.4 A comparison between the two studies 21 9.4 Effect of surprise 22 9.4.1 Cause 22 9.4.2 Reaction 22 9.4.3 Conclusion 22 9.5 Noise level 22 9.5.1 Beneficial effect 23 9.5.2 Unfavourable effect 23 9.6 Dust 23 9.7 Behaviour of people on the platform 23 9.8 Local circumstances 24 'Safety Distances on Platforms' Research Report IV Contents 10. -
Alberta-To-Alaska-Railway-Pre-Feasibility-Study
Alberta to Alaska Railway Pre-Feasibility Study 2015 Table of Content Executive Summary ...................................................................................................... i Infrastructure and Operating Requirements................................................................ ii Environmental Considerations and Permitting Requirements .................................... ii Capital and Operating Cost Estimates ......................................................................... iii Business Case .............................................................................................................. iii Mineral Transportation Potential ................................................................................ iii First Nations/Tribes and Other Contacts ..................................................................... iv Conclusions .................................................................................................................. iv 1 | Introduction ........................................................................................................ 1 This Assignment............................................................................................................ 1 This Report ................................................................................................................... 2 2 | Infrastructure and Operating Requirements ........................................................ 3 Route Alignment .......................................................................................................... -
Senate Hearings Before the Committee on Appropriations
S. HRG. 111–983 Senate Hearings Before the Committee on Appropriations Departments of Transportation and Housing and Urban Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Fiscal Year 2011 111th CONGRESS, SECOND SESSION H.R. 5850/S. 3644 DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION (AMTRAK) NONDEPARTMENTAL WITNESSES WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY Departments of Transportation and Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations, 2011 (H.R. 5850/S. 3644) S. HRG. 111–983 TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES AP- PROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011 HEARINGS BEFORE A SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION ON H.R. 5850/S. 3644 AN ACT MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE DEPARTMENTS OF TRANS- PORTATION AND HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND RE- LATED AGENCIES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2011, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES Department of Housing and Urban Development Department of Transportation National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) Nondepartmental witnesses Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations ( Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 54–989 PDF WASHINGTON : 2011 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001 COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii, Chairman ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, Missouri TOM HARKIN, Iowa MITCH MCCONNELL, Kentucky BARBARA A. -
Solent Connectivity May 2020
Solent Connectivity May 2020 Continuous Modular Strategic Planning Page | 1 Page | 2 Table of Contents 1.0 Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................................... 6 2.0 The Solent CMSP Study ................................................................................................................................... 10 2.1 Scope and Geography....................................................................................................................... 10 2.2 Fit with wider rail industry strategy ................................................................................................. 11 2.3 Governance and process .................................................................................................................. 12 3.0 Context and Strategic Questions ............................................................................................................ 15 3.1 Strategic Questions .......................................................................................................................... 15 3.2 Economic context ............................................................................................................................. 16 3.3 Travel patterns and changes over time ............................................................................................ 18 3.4 Dual-city region aspirations and city to city connectivity ................................................................