DOCSLIB.ORG

Feasibility of an East-West Intercity Passenger Rail System for Washington State

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Feasibility of an East-West Intercity Passenger Rail System for Washington State Final Report July 2020 Feasibility of an East-West Intercity Passenger Rail System for Washington State Washington State Joint Transportation Committee Our ref: 23685001 Final Report July 2020 Feasibility of an East-West Intercity Passenger Rail System for Washington State Prepared by: Prepared for: Steer Washington State Joint Transportation Committee 2201 Cooperative Way, Suite 606 Columbia Street NW, 600 Suite 105, Herndon, VA 20171 Olympia, WA 98504-0937 +1 (703) 788-6500 Click here to enter text. www.steergroup.com Our ref: 23685001 Steer has prepared this material for Washington State Joint Transportation Committee. This material may only be used within the context and scope for which Steer has prepared it and may not be relied upon in part or whole by any third party or be used for any other purpose. Any person choosing to use any part of this material without the express and written permission of Steer shall be deemed to confirm their agreement to indemnify Steer for all loss or damage resulting therefrom. Steer has prepared this material using professional practices and procedures using information available to it at the time and as such any new information could alter the validity of the results and conclusions made. Feasibility of an East-West Intercity Passenger Rail System for Washington State | Final Report Contents Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................... i Overview ............................................................................................................................................ i Background ....................................................................................................................................... ii Key Findings ..................................................................................................................................... iii 1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 1 Current Study ................................................................................................................................... 1 History of Corridor ............................................................................................................................ 3 Corridor Today .................................................................................................................................. 4 2 Service Options...................................................................................................................... 5 Background ....................................................................................................................................... 5 Other East-West Passenger Services Today ..................................................................................... 6 East-West Passenger Rail Service Considerations ............................................................................ 7 Potential Schedule Options .............................................................................................................. 7 Equipment Needs ........................................................................................................................... 11 3 Option Testing ..................................................................................................................... 12 Operations ...................................................................................................................................... 12 Ridership ......................................................................................................................................... 12 Costs ............................................................................................................................................... 19 4 Infrastructure Improvements ............................................................................................... 23 Stampede Subdivision .................................................................................................................... 23 Yakima Valley Subdivision .............................................................................................................. 24 Lakeside Subdivision ....................................................................................................................... 25 Stations ........................................................................................................................................... 25 Train Maintenance ......................................................................................................................... 27 Additional Siding Tracks ................................................................................................................. 28 Signaling and Positive Train Control ............................................................................................... 29 Snow Protection ............................................................................................................................. 29 5 Operator Options ................................................................................................................ 30 July 2020 Feasibility of an East-West Intercity Passenger Rail System for Washington State | Final Report Case Studies .................................................................................................................................... 34 Conclusions ..................................................................................................................................... 35 6 Community Support ............................................................................................................. 36 Workgroup ...................................................................................................................................... 36 Stakeholder Meetings .................................................................................................................... 36 Survey – Public Outreach ............................................................................................................... 37 Survey Respondent Characteristics ................................................................................................ 37 Project Support ............................................................................................................................... 41 Figures Figure 0.1: Route of Potential East-West Intercity Passenger Rail Service ................................................ ii Figure 1.1: Route of Potential East-West Intercity Passenger Rail Service ................................................ 1 Figure 2.1: Service Strategies (Daily Roundtrips)...................................................................................... 10 Figure 3.1: Demand Model Approach ...................................................................................................... 13 Figure 3.2: East-West Rail Ridership Model Zoning System ..................................................................... 14 Figure 3.3: Potential Example Fares ......................................................................................................... 20 Figure 4.1: Winnemucca Station, Nevada ................................................................................................ 25 Figure 6.1: Age and Gender Distribution of Survey Participants .............................................................. 38 Figure 6.2: Employment Status of Survey Participants............................................................................. 38 Figure 6.3: Household Income Distribution of Survey Participants .......................................................... 39 Figure 6.4: Map of Origin and Destination Pairs for All Survey Participants ............................................ 40 Figure 6.5: Level of Support for a Potential East-West Intercity Passenger Rail Service ......................... 41 Figure 6.6: Level of Agreement – “I Would Definitely Try East-West Rail” .............................................. 41 Tables Table 0.1: About the Feasibility Study ......................................................................................................... i Table 0.2: Report Summary ....................................................................................................................... iii Table 0.3: Summary Table of Finding for Daily Service Options (Four-Coach Trains) ................................ v Table 0.4: Summary Table of Finding for Twice Daily Service Options (Four-Coach Trains) ..................... vi July 2020 Feasibility of an East-West Intercity Passenger Rail System for Washington State | Final Report Table 2.1: Amtrak Services Through State of Washington Key Statistics ................................................... 6 Table 2.2: Annual Amtrak Passenger Ons + Offs by Relevant Station Pairs (FY2018) ................................ 6 Table 2.3: Runtime and Average Speed ...................................................................................................... 8 Table 2.4: Base Schedule for Twice Daily Passenger Rail Services From Seattle to Spokane. .................... 9 Table 2.5: Base Schedule for Twice Daily Passenger Rail Services From Spokane and Seattle. ............... 10 Table 2.6: Equipment Costs (Four-Coach Train) ......................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Rtd Light Rail Design Criteria
    RTD LIGHT RAIL DESIGN CRITERIA Regional Transportation District November 2005 Prepared by the Engineering Division of the Regional Transportation District Regional Transportation District 1600 Blake Street Denver, Colorado 80202-1399 303.628.9000 RTD-Denver.com November 28, 2005 The RTD Light Rail Design Criteria Manual has been developed as a set of general guidelines as well as providing specific criteria to be employed in the preparation and implementation of the planning, design and construction of new light rail corridors and the extension of existing corridors. This 2005 issue of the RTD Light Rail Design Criteria Manual was developed to remain in compliance with accepted practices with regard to safety and compatibility with RTD's existing system and the intended future systems that will be constructed by RTD. The manual reflects the most current accepted practices and applicable codes in use by the industry. The intent of this manual is to establish general criteria to be used in the planning and design process. However, deviations from these accepted criteria may be required in specific instances. Any such deviations from these accepted criteria must be approved by the RTD's Executive Safety & Security Committee. Coordination with local agencies and jurisdictions is still required for the determination and approval for fire protection, life safety, and security measures that will be implemented as part of the planning and design of the light rail system. Conflicting information or directives between the criteria set forth in this manual shall be brought to the attention of RTD and will be addressed and resolved between RTD and the local agencies andlor jurisdictions.
    [Show full text]
  • 20210419 Amtrak Metrics Reporting
    NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION 30th Street Station Philadelphia, PA 19104 April 12, 2021 Mr. Michael Lestingi Director, Office of Policy and Planning Federal Railroad Administrator U.S. Department of Transportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20590 Dear Mr. Lestingi: In accordance with the Metrics and Minimum Standards for Intercity Passenger Rail Service final rule published on November 16, 2020 (the “Final Rule”), this letter serves as Amtrak’s report to the Federal Railroad Administration that, as of April 10, 2021, Amtrak has provided the 29 host railroads over which Amtrak currently operates (listed in Appendix A) with ridership data for the prior month consistent with the Final Rule. The following data was provided to each host railroad: . the total number of passengers, by train and by day; . the station-specific number of detraining passengers, reported by host railroad whose railroad right-of-way serves the station, by train, and by day; and . the station-specific number of on-time passengers reported by host railroad whose railroad right- of-way serves the station, by train, and by day. Please let me know if you have any questions. Sincerely, Jim Blair Sr. Director, Host Railroads Amtrak cc: Dennis Newman Amtrak Jason Maga Amtrak Christopher Zappi Amtrak Yoel Weiss Amtrak Kristin Ferriter Federal Railroad Administration Mr. Michael Lestingi April 12, 2021 Page 2 Appendix A Host Railroads Provided with Amtrak Ridership Data Host Railroad1 Belt Railway Company of Chicago BNSF Railway Buckingham Branch Railroad
    [Show full text]
  • Feasibility of an East-West Intercity Passenger Rail System for Washington State
    Draft Report June 2020 Feasibility of an East-West Intercity Passenger Rail System for Washington State Washington State Joint Transportation Committee Our ref: 23685001 Draft Report June 2020 Feasibility of an East-West Intercity Passenger Rail System for Washington State Prepared by: Prepared for: Steer Washington State Joint Transportation Committee 2201 Cooperative Way, Suite 606 Columbia Street NW, 600 Suite 105, Herndon, VA 20171 Olympia, WA 98504-0937 +1 (703) 788-6500 www.steergroup.com Our ref: 23685001 Steer has prepared this material for Washington State Joint Transportation Committee. This material may only be used within the context and scope for which Steer has prepared it and may not be relied upon in part or whole by any third party or be used for any other purpose. Any person choosing to use any part of this material without the express and written permission of Steer shall be deemed to confirm their agreement to indemnify Steer for all loss or damage resulting therefrom. Steer has prepared this material using professional practices and procedures using information available to it at the time and as such any new information could alter the validity of the results and conclusions made. Feasibility of an East-West Intercity Passenger Rail System for Washington State | Draft Report Contents Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................... i Overview ...........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Transportation Choices 3
    Transportation Choices 3 MOVEMENT OF PEOPLE | MOVEMENT OF FREIGHT AND GOODS Introduction Facilities Snapshot This chapter organizes the transportation system into two categories: movement of people, and movement of freight and goods. Movement of people encompasses active transportation, transit, rail, air, and automobiles. Movement of freight and goods encompasses rail, marine cargo, air, vehicles, and pipelines. 3 Three Airports: one commercial, two Community Consistent with federal legislation (23 CFR 450.306) and Washington State Legislation (RCW 47.80.030), the regional transportation system includes: 23 Twenty-three Fixed Transit Routes ▶All state-owned transportation facilities and services (highways, park-and-ride lots, etc); 54 Fifty-Four Miles of Multi-Use Trails ▶All local principal arterials and selected minor arterials the RTPO considers necessary to the plan; 2.1 Multi- ▶Any other transportation facilities and services, existing and Two Vehicles per Household* proposed, including airports, transit facilities and services, roadways, Modal rail facilities, marine transportation facilities, pedestrian/bicycle Transport facilities, etc., that the RTPO considers necessary to complete the 5 regional plan; and Five Rail Lines System ▶Any transportation facility or service that fulfills a regional need or impacts places in the plan, as determined by the RTPO. 4 Four Ports *Source: US Census Bureau, 2014 ACS 5-year estimates. Chapter 3 | Transportation Choices 39 Figure 3-1: JourneyMode to ChoiceWork -ModeJourney Choice to Work in the RTPO, 2014 Movement of People Walk/ Bike, Public Transit, 2.2% Other, 4.3% People commute for a variety of reasons, and likewise, a variety of 1.2% ways. This section includes active transportation, transit, passenger Carpooled, 12.6% rail, passenger air, and passenger vehicles.
    [Show full text]
  • Appointment As Senior Responsible Owner for the Crossrail Project
    From the Permanent Secretary From the Chief Executive Department for Transport Infrastructure and Projects Authority 33 Horseferry Road 1 Horse Guards Road London London SW1P 4DR SW1A 2HQ 28 April 2021 To: Matt Lodge Subject: Appointment as Senior Responsible Owner for the Crossrail Project We are pleased to confirm your reappointment as Senior Responsible Owner (SRO) of the Crossrail Project (“the Project”) which took effect from 01 October 2020. Prior to the governance transition to Transport for London (TfL) on 1 October 2020, you were the SRO from 7 December 2015 on an interim basis and from 3 March 2016 on a permanent basis. As SRO, you are directly accountable to Director General Rail Infrastructure Group, and the Department for Transport (DfT) Board, under the oversight of the Secretary of State. Given the recent changes made to the project governance and the delegation of delivery responsibilities to TfL, your overall time commitment to the project should be no less than 20%. This commitment will be combined with your wider management and leadership responsibilities within the Department and your other responsibilities as SRO of the Intercity Express Programme, the Great Western Route Modernisation programme, the Western Rail Link to Heathrow programme, the South Western Route Capacity programme and the Thameslink programme. Regular conversations with your Permanent Secretary and Directors General will take place to ensure an appropriate balance is maintained across your portfolio of activities and that you receive support as needed to carry out your responsibilities. This will take place as a minimum annually, but may be more frequent, with agreement.
    [Show full text]
  • 2009-041 Crosscountry Spanner Awards
    Press Release 04 December 2009 XC2009/041 (LW) CROSSCOUNTRY TOPS RAILWAY CHARTS It’s Gold and Silver for award-winning train operator CrossCountry has won two prestigious rail industry awards in recognition of its trains being one of the most improved and reliable fleets across Britain’s rail network. CrossCountry was awarded Gold and Silver at last week’s annual ‘Golden Spanner’ ceremony organised by industry magazine Modern Railways. The Golden Spanner went to the Class 221 Super Voyagers for taking first place in the ‘Modern DMU’ category as the most reliable fleet in its class. The Super Voyagers also took the Silver Spanner for being the most improved fleet thanks to reliability being up 118% on last year. The ‘Golden Spanner’ is an awards scheme aimed at promoting excellence in train maintenance within Britain. Sarah Kendall, Production Director at CrossCountry said: “We are extremely proud to win these nationally recognised awards. Since the start of our franchise in November 2007 the team at CrossCountry has worked very closely with Bombardier Transportation, our maintainer to take specific targeted steps to improve the reliability of our Voyager trains. Our focus now is to build on this significant progress and further improve our performance. Train reliability is vital for our customers and therefore of the highest priority for us.” All trains are ranked on the distance they cover between technical faults by the Association of Train Operating Companies’ (ATOC) National Fleet Reliability Improvement Programme. Using this league table (see below) CrossCountry’s Voyager trains outperformed all other intercity fleets across the country.
    [Show full text]
  • Amtrak Cascades Fleet Management Plan
    Amtrak Cascades Fleet Management Plan November 2017 Funding support from Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Information The material can be made available in an alternative format by emailing the Office of Equal Opportunity at [email protected] or by calling toll free, 855-362-4ADA (4232). Persons who are deaf or hard of hearing may make a request by calling the Washington State Relay at 711. Title VI Notice to Public It is the Washington State Department of Transportation’s (WSDOT) policy to assure that no person shall, on the grounds of race, color, national origin or sex, as provided by Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise discriminated against under any of its federally funded programs and activities. Any person who believes his/her Title VI protection has been violated, may file a complaint with WSDOT’s Office of Equal Opportunity (OEO). For additional information regarding Title VI complaint procedures and/or information regarding our non-discrimination obligations, please contact OEO’s Title VI Coordinator at 360-705-7082. The Oregon Department of Transportation ensures compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; 49 CFR, Part 21; related statutes and regulations to the end that no person shall be excluded from participation in or be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance from the U.S. Department of Transportation on the grounds of race, color, sex, disability or national origin.
    [Show full text]
  • (BNSF) Mesa, WA July 2, 2012
    Federal Railroad Administration Office of Safety Headquarters Assigned Accident Investigation Report HQ-2012-21 BNSF Railway Company (BNSF) Mesa, WA July 2, 2012 Note that 49 U.S.C. §20903 provides that no part of an accident or incident report made by the Secretary of Transportation/Federal Railroad Administration under 49 U.S.C. §20902 may be used in a civil action for damages resulting from a matter mentioned in the report. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FRA FACTUAL RAILROAD ACCIDENT REPORT FRA File # HQ-2012-21 FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION 1.Name of Railroad Operating Train #1 1a. Alphabetic Code 1b. Railroad Accident/Incident No. BNSF Rwy Co. [BNSF] BNSF NW0712102 2.Name of Railroad Operating Train #2 2a. Alphabetic Code 2b. Railroad Accident/Incident No. N/A N/A N/A 3.Name of Railroad Operating Train #3 3a. Alphabetic Code 3b. Railroad Accident/Incident No. N/A N/A N/A 4.Name of Railroad Responsible for Track Maintenance: 4a. Alphabetic Code 4b. Railroad Accident/Incident No. BNSF Rwy Co. [BNSF] BNSF NW0712102 5. U.S. DOT_AAR Grade Crossing Identification Number 6. Date of Accident/Incident 7. Time of Accident/Incident Month 07 Day 02 Year 2012 06:30: AM PM 8. Type of Accident/Indicent 1. Derailment 4. Side collision 7. Hwy-rail crossing 10. Explosion-detonation 13. Other Code (single entry in code box) (describe in 2. Head on collision 5. Raking collision 8. RR grade crossing 11. Fire/violent rupture narrative) 3. Rear end collision 6. Broken Train collision 9. Obstruction 12. Other impacts 01 9. Cars Carrying 10.
    [Show full text]
  • Pullman Company Archives
    PULLMAN COMPANY ARCHIVES THE NEWBERRY LIBRARY Guide to the Pullman Company Archives by Martha T. Briggs and Cynthia H. Peters Funded in Part by a Grant from the National Endowment for the Humanities Chicago The Newberry Library 1995 ISBN 0-911028-55-2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ............................................. v - xii ... Access Statement ............................................ xiii Record Group Structure ..................................... xiv-xx Record Group No . 01 President .............................................. 1 - 42 Subgroup No . 01 Office of the President ...................... 2 - 34 Subgroup No . 02 Office of the Vice President .................. 35 - 39 Subgroup No . 03 Personal Papers ......................... 40 - 42 Record Group No . 02 Secretary and Treasurer ........................................ 43 - 153 Subgroup No . 01 Office of the Secretary and Treasurer ............ 44 - 151 Subgroup No . 02 Personal Papers ........................... 152 - 153 Record Group No . 03 Office of Finance and Accounts .................................. 155 - 197 Subgroup No . 01 Vice President and Comptroller . 156 - 158 Subgroup No. 02 General Auditor ............................ 159 - 191 Subgroup No . 03 Auditor of Disbursements ........................ 192 Subgroup No . 04 Auditor of Receipts ......................... 193 - 197 Record Group No . 04 Law Department ........................................ 199 - 237 Subgroup No . 01 General Counsel .......................... 200 - 225 Subgroup No . 02
    [Show full text]
  • Rocky Mountain Express
    ROCKY MOUNTAIN EXPRESS TEACHER’S GUIDE TABLE OF CONTENTS 3 A POSTCARD TO THE EDUCATOR 4 CHAPTER 1 ALL ABOARD! THE FILM 5 CHAPTER 2 THE NORTH AMERICAN DREAM REFLECTIONS ON THE RIBBON OF STEEL (CANADA AND U.S.A.) X CHAPTER 3 A RAILWAY JOURNEY EVOLUTION OF RAIL TRANSPORT X CHAPTER 4 THE LITTLE ENGINE THAT COULD THE MECHANICS OF THE RAILWAY AND TRAIN X CHAPTER 5 TALES, TRAGEDIES, AND TRIUMPHS THE RAILWAY AND ITS ENVIRONMENTAL CHALLENGES X CHAPTER 6 DO THE CHOO-CHOO A TRAIL OF INFLUENCE AND INSPIRATION X CHAPTER 7 ALONG THE RAILROAD TRACKS ACTIVITIES FOR THE TRAIN-MINDED 2 A POSTCARD TO THE EDUCATOR 1. Dear Educator, Welcome to our Teacher’s Guide, which has been prepared to help educators integrate the IMAX® motion picture ROCKY MOUNTAIN EXPRESS into school curriculums. We designed the guide in a manner that is accessible and flexible to any school educator. Feel free to work through the material in a linear fashion or in any order you find appropriate. Or concentrate on a particular chapter or activity based on your needs as a teacher. At the end of the guide, we have included activities that embrace a wide range of topics that can be developed and adapted to different class settings. The material, which is targeted at upper elementary grades, provides students the opportunity to explore, to think, to express, to interact, to appreciate, and to create. Happy discovery and bon voyage! Yours faithfully, Pietro L. Serapiglia Producer, Rocky Mountain Express 2. Moraine Lake and the Valley of the Ten Peaks, Banff National Park, Alberta 3 The Film The giant screen motion picture Rocky Mountain Express, shot with authentic 15/70 negative which guarantees astounding image fidelity, is produced and distributed by the Stephen Low Company for exhibition in IMAX® theaters and other giant screen theaters.
    [Show full text]
  • Enabling 5G for Rail
    Innovating for a connected rail future Enabling 5G for rail Funded by 5G Testbeds and Trials Programme The Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport’s (DCMS) 5G Testbeds and Trials programme is part of the government’s £740 million National Productivity Investment Fund (NPIF) activities, to support the next generation of digital infrastructure, including 5G and full fibre broadband. In November 2017, DCMS announced funding to create the 5G rail testbed at the Rail Innovation & Development Centre (RIDC) at Melton Mowbray in Leicestershire. This capability enhancement at RIDC Melton is currently being installed and once open in May 2019, will support trials and Alpha phase testing, as well as the preparation of technologies for early mainline rail Beta testing and infrastructure deployment. 5G opportunities in rail Passenger numbers have doubled in the last 20 years – Rail Technical Strategy much more than the current Capability Delivery Plan infrastructure was ever designed for. Railway infrastructure includes around 20,000 miles of track, 2,500+ stations, 6,000 level crossings, 30,000 bridges and viaducts and more. Passenger numbers are set to double again in the next 25 years. We can’t rely on more track to cater for this growth – engineering innovation and technology is the key to unlocking the railway, and in-turn GB productivity, for the 21st century. Click this image to access the Rail Technical Strategy Capability Delivery Plan. 2 When Network Rail considers how technology can help cater for this growth, it foresees two revolutionary intelligent initiatives: Delivering Revolutionary Initiatives in Rail Intelligent Operations Intelligent Infrastructure Increasing collection and exploitation of live operational Increasing environment and asset sensing to increase data to underpin operational enhancements.
    [Show full text]
  • The Uk's Intercity Express Programme
    Asia Pacific Projects Update CASE STUDY: THE UK'S INTERCITY EXPRESS PROGRAMME bidder by the DfT in February 2009. The solution selected KEY CONTACT by DfT was the Hitachi Super Express Train (SET) initially to be built and assembled by Hitachi in Japan Colin Wilson with later SETs being assembled at a state-of-the-art new Partner and London Head of Projects facility to be constructed for the project at Newton T +44 20 7796 6206 Aycliffe in Darlington, UK. [email protected] IEP is the most significant rolling stock investment program in the UK for 30 years, creating 730 new jobs in PPP FINANCING TO REPLACE THE EXISTING the rail industry, 200 in construction and thousands more INTERCITY 125 AND 225 ROLLING STOCK ON in the supply chain. THE UK NETWORK Given the size of the overall program, the transaction has The Intercity Express Programme (IEP) is the UK been split into two: (i) an initial funding for the Great Department for Transport (DfT) program to replace the Western Mainline (GWML) fleet, which has now reached older intercity trains currently running on the rail network financial close; and (ii) a second financing for the East in mainland UK with new trains in a major public-private Coast Mainline (ECML) fleet for which a commercial partnership (PPP) project that is both the biggest privately close has been achieved, and for which financial close is financed rolling stock deal in history, anywhere in the targeted for 2014. world, and one of the largest, most ambitious and complex PPP projects to date.
    [Show full text]