DOCSLIB.ORG

Caltrain Funding 101

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Caltrain Funding 101 Caltrain Funding 101 Prepared for: SFMTA Board Meeting Prepared by: Caltrain Staff Date: February 7, 2012 Caltrain Funding 101 Overview • Funding contribution is guided by Joint Powers Agreement • Funding for Caltrain Operations • Funding for Caltrain Capital Projects 2 Funding for Caltrain Operations • Member Agencies provide operating contributions to the JPB according to the Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) • After fares and other funding sources, the JPA provides that each member subsidize the operating budget based upon each county’s morning peak hour boarding • In FY2006, the Members agreed to an annual increase of 3% • Since FY2009, Member contributions have been frozen • In FY2011, SamTrans reduced its contributions, but did “fund swaps” to keep its contribution near FY2010 levels for FY2011 and FY2012 3 Summary of FY2012 Budget (in millions) Total Revenues % Total Expenses % Fares $ 54.0 50% Rail Op Contract & Maint $ 63.0 59% Parking 3.0 3% Contract Transition Costs 4.7 4% Other Income 5.8 5% Fuel 15.2 14% AB434 & Grants 10.3 10% Other Operating Expenses 11.7 11% Member 25.3 24% Administrative 10.6 10% Agencies Other Sources 9.0 8% Long-term Debt 1.1 1% Total Revenue $107.4 100% Total Expenses $106.3 100% Revenue over Expenses $ 1.1 4 Commuter Railroads FareBox Recovery Ratio Comparison Caltrain’s farebox recovery ratio is comparable with other commuter rail systems in the country. 70.0% 58.9% 60.0% 51.2% 47.4% 46.1% 50.0% 36.7% 40.0% 30.0% 18.4% 20.0% 14.0% 9.5% 10.0% 0.0% CalTrain ACE VRE LIRR Tri-Rail Coaster Front Runner Rail Runner (NCTD) (UTA) (Rio Metro RTD) Sources: FY2009 NTD Reports 5 Member Agency Operating Contributions Historical Member Agency Operating Contributions $40 $7.0 $7.0 $6.6 $6.8 $6.2 $30 $6.0 $15.4 $15.9 $15.9 $15.0 $14.1 $4.5 $20 $13.5 Millions $10.2 $10 $15.6 $16.0 $16.5 $16.5 $14.7 $10.6 $14.0 $0 FY2007 FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013* SamTrans VTA CCSF Sources: FY2007-2010 Financial Statement, FY2011 and FY2012 Adopted Budgets; FY2013 Preliminary Budget * Projected level of member contribution based on estimated SamTrans’ share of $14.0 million in FY2013. 6 Joint Power Agreement (JPA) Boarding Formulas • Per the original JPA (as amended October 3, 1996), each member agency shall subsidize the Caltrain operating budget based upon each county’s morning peak hour boarding. • Since 2006, the current share of Caltrain operating expenses is divided among the member agencies on the following basis: – SamTrans 42% – VTA 41% – SFMTA 17% • Based upon the Feb 2011 Caltrain passenger counts, the AM peak boardings within each county would be: – SamTrans 35.1% – VTA 43.8% – SFMTA 21.1% • Based upon the Feb 2011 Caltrain passenger counts, the total boardings within each county the breakdown would be: – SamTrans 32.5% – VTA 40.8% – SFMTA 26.7% 7 Average Weekday Boardings in SF (Data source: annual passenger counts conducted each February) Year 4th & King 22nd St. Bayshore SF Station System SF % of Total Total Total 2006 6,713 729 150 7,592 29,760 25.5% 2007 7,230 767 155 8,152 31,507 25.9% 2008 7,759 817 150 8,726 34,611 25.2% 2009 7,996 863 134 8,993 36,232 24.8% 2010 8,038 840 125 9,003 34,120 26.4% 2011 8,897 1,036 138 10,071 37,779 26.7% 8 Discussions for FY2014 and beyond • Revision to cost sharing formulas is being considered • VTA to restore payment obligations toward Gilroy service is also being considered 9 Funding for Caltrain Capital Programs • Per JPA, outside of grants and other revenues, Member Agencies share equally on capital project costs • Capital program focuses on state-of-good repair projects; and it fluctuates year-to-year due to: asset life cycles Regulatory/legal requirements Caltrain modernization 10 Caltrain Capital Budget by Category ($M) State of Good Repair $200.0 Legal Mandates and Enhancements 1 $66.0 Electrification/Caltrain Modernization $150.0 Capital Support and Contingency 2 $100.0 $120.7 $129.0 $81.9 $50.0 $38.4 $50.2 $0.5 $0.5 $25.4 $25.0 $2.9 $2.4 $19.5 $7.3 $6.0 $8.7 $9.5 $0.0 $3.4 $6.3 $2.2 $2.0 $2.0 '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '12 1 This category includes safety and security improvements; FY10 includes San Bruno Grade Separation and FY12 includes Caltrain PTC 2 In 2007, $23M is for Dumbarton Rail Caltrain Capital Budget by Funding Source ($M) Members $200.0 $16.6 Other 1 State Federal $150.0 $86.3 $10.7 $5.0 $28.1 $100.0 $58.8 $58.0 $9.5 $67.2 $8.2 $50.0 $8.3 $5.3 $31.5 $13.7 $45.0 $38.8 $4.0 $6.4 $41.5 $26.3 $17.5 $15.5 $- '07 '08 '09 '10 '11 '12 1 The "Other" sources include county specific local match funds Caltrain Modernization Program Prepared for: SFMTA Board Meeting Prepared by: Caltrain Staff Date: February 7, 2012 Key Projects • Advanced Signal System • Caltrain Electrification • HSR Coordination 14 Advanced Signal System • CBOSS PTC • Communication based overlay signal system (CBOSS) – Caltrain operating needs – Increase capacity • Positive Train Control (PTC) – FRA safety requirements – Unfunded mandate • Implement Project by 2015 15 Caltrain Electrification • Purpose – Improve performance – More service – Improve air quality – Decrease O/M subsidy • Project – Diesel to electric – 5 to 6 trains / peak hour / direction • Implementation TBD 16 HSR Coordination • HSR approved by voters • Caltrain corridor selected to support HSR • Both systems need electrified corridor • Caltrain and HSR partnership • Combine resources to modernize corridor 17 Peninsula Vision Blended System What? • Supports integrated Caltrain and HSR service • Upgrade railroad from SJ to Transbay Terminal • Maximize use of existing tracks Why? • Minimize community impact • Lower project cost • Advance project delivery 18 Corridor Capacity Analysis Is the “blended system” concept feasible? Multiple considerations – Operational – Infrastructure – Funding Strategy 19 Computer Simulation Existing Railway • System – Electric – Advanced Signal System • Tracks – Existing Mainline Tracks – 3 HSR Stations – Additional Passing Tracks 20 Key Findings Blended system concept has merit Potential: Up to 10 trains / hour / direction # of Trains Without With Passing Tracks Passing Tracks Caltrain 6 6 HSR 2 4 21 Next Steps • Finalize capacity analysis • 2 new planning studies – Stakeholder requested simulations – Grade crossing analysis • Model expansion to DTX 22 Overall Planning Process 23 Q/A 24 .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Commuter Rail System Study
    TRANSPORTATION PROGRAMS Commuter Rail System Study Transit Committee March 11, 2010 TRANSPORTATION PROGRAMS Study Purpose Study Requested by MAG Regional Council in 2008 Commuter Rail Study Funding in 2004 RTP Study Feasibility of Commuter Rail Service in MAG Region Ridership Forecasting and Cost Effectiveness Capital and Operating Cost Estimates Vehicle Technology Recommendation Implementation Requirements Copyright © 2009 TRANSPORTATION PROGRAMS Peer Regions ~ Commuter Rail Systems WHAT IS COMMUTER RAIL? Peak Period, Peak Direction Service. Traditionally caries less daily riders than light rail, but for longer distances. Similar market and characteristics with Bus Rapid Transit / Express. SOUNDER-Seattle CALTRAIN-San Francisco ALTAMONT COMMUTER EXPRESS – San Jose Can share ROW and track with freight railroads and can operate concurrently (does not require exclusive right-of-way) . Typically longer station spacing (every 3-7 miles on average) than light rail (1-2 miles) with emphasis on park-and-rides and traditional city CBDs. Locomotive technology (diesel or clean/green hybrid Genset). Passenger coaches (push-pull). Engines and cars meets federally mandated structural requirements for rolling stock crash resistance Larger, heavier profile than light rail vehicles. METROLINK – Los Angeles COASTER – San Diego FRONT RUNNER – Salt Lake City-Ogden Higher max.speed (79mph), slower acceleration and deceleration than light rail. Average speed approx 44mph. Lower capital cost per mile ($10-$20M) due to existing right of way use / reuse. Light
    [Show full text]
  • California State Rail Plan 2005-06 to 2015-16
    California State Rail Plan 2005-06 to 2015-16 December 2005 California Department of Transportation ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, Governor SUNNE WRIGHT McPEAK, Secretary Business, Transportation and Housing Agency WILL KEMPTON, Director California Department of Transportation JOSEPH TAVAGLIONE, Chair STATE OF CALIFORNIA ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER JEREMIAH F. HALLISEY, Vice Chair GOVERNOR BOB BALGENORTH MARIAN BERGESON JOHN CHALKER JAMES C. GHIELMETTI ALLEN M. LAWRENCE R. K. LINDSEY ESTEBAN E. TORRES SENATOR TOM TORLAKSON, Ex Officio ASSEMBLYMEMBER JENNY OROPEZA, Ex Officio JOHN BARNA, Executive Director CALIFORNIA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION 1120 N STREET, MS-52 P. 0 . BOX 942873 SACRAMENTO, 94273-0001 FAX(916)653-2134 (916) 654-4245 http://www.catc.ca.gov December 29, 2005 Honorable Alan Lowenthal, Chairman Senate Transportation and Housing Committee State Capitol, Room 2209 Sacramento, CA 95814 Honorable Jenny Oropeza, Chair Assembly Transportation Committee 1020 N Street, Room 112 Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear: Senator Lowenthal Assembly Member Oropeza: On behalf of the California Transportation Commission, I am transmitting to the Legislature the 10-year California State Rail Plan for FY 2005-06 through FY 2015-16 by the Department of Transportation (Caltrans) with the Commission's resolution (#G-05-11) giving advice and consent, as required by Section 14036 of the Government Code. The ten-year plan provides Caltrans' vision for intercity rail service. Caltrans'l0-year plan goals are to provide intercity rail as an alternative mode of transportation, promote congestion relief, improve air quality, better fuel efficiency, and improved land use practices. This year's Plan includes: standards for meeting those goals; sets priorities for increased revenues, increased capacity, reduced running times; and cost effectiveness.
    [Show full text]
  • Caltrain Fare Study Draft Research and Peer Comparison Report
    Caltrain Fare Study Draft Research and Peer Comparison Report Public Review Draft October 2017 Caltrain Fare Study Draft Research and Peer Comparison October 2017 Research and Peer Review Research and Peer Review .................................................................................................... 1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 2 A Note on TCRP Sources ........................................................................................................................................... 2 Elasticity of Demand for Commuter Rail ............................................................................... 3 Definition ........................................................................................................................................................................ 3 Commuter Rail Elasticity ......................................................................................................................................... 3 Comparison with Peer Systems ............................................................................................ 4 Fares ................................................................................................................................................................................. 5 Employer Programs ..................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Travel Characteristics of Transit-Oriented Development in California
    Travel Characteristics of Transit-Oriented Development in California Hollie M. Lund, Ph.D. Assistant Professor of Urban and Regional Planning California State Polytechnic University, Pomona Robert Cervero, Ph.D. Professor of City and Regional Planning University of California at Berkeley Richard W. Willson, Ph.D., AICP Professor of Urban and Regional Planning California State Polytechnic University, Pomona Final Report January 2004 Funded by Caltrans Transportation Grant—“Statewide Planning Studies”—FTA Section 5313 (b) Travel Characteristics of TOD in California Acknowledgements This study was a collaborative effort by a team of researchers, practitioners and graduate students. We would like to thank all members involved for their efforts and suggestions. Project Team Members: Hollie M. Lund, Principle Investigator (California State Polytechnic University, Pomona) Robert Cervero, Research Collaborator (University of California at Berkeley) Richard W. Willson, Research Collaborator (California State Polytechnic University, Pomona) Marian Lee-Skowronek, Project Manager (San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit) Anthony Foster, Research Associate David Levitan, Research Associate Sally Librera, Research Associate Jody Littlehales, Research Associate Technical Advisory Committee Members: Emmanuel Mekwunye, State of California Department of Transportation, District 4 Val Menotti, San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit, Planning Department Jeff Ordway, San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit, Real Estate Department Chuck Purvis, Metropolitan Transportation Commission Doug Sibley, State of California Department of Transportation, District 4 Research Firms: Corey, Canapary & Galanis, San Francisco, California MARI Hispanic Field Services, Santa Ana, California Taylor Research, San Diego, California i Travel Characteristics of TOD in California ii Travel Characteristics of TOD in California Executive Summary Rapid growth in the urbanized areas of California presents many transportation and land use challenges for local and regional policy makers.
    [Show full text]
  • Keeping Southern California's Future on Track
    Keeping Southern California’s 25Future on Track CONTENTS Message from the Board Chair .........................1 CEO’s Message .....................................................3 A Quarter Century of Moving People: The Metrolink Story .............................................5 How It All Began ................................................19 Metrolink’s Top Priority: Safety .......................27 WHO WE ARE Environment ........................................................31 Metrolink is Southern California’s regional commuter rail service in its Metrolink Relieves Driving Stress ...................35 25th year of operation. Metrolink is governed by The Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA), Board Members Past and Present ..................40 a joint powers authority made up of an 11-member board representing Metrolink Pioneering Staff the transportation commissions of Still on Board ......................................................47 Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino and Ventura counties. Metrolink Employees Metrolink operates seven routes Put Customers First ...........................................48 through a six-county, 538-route-mile network with 60 stations. Facts at a Glance ...............................................50 For more information, including how to ride, go to www.metrolinktrains.com MISSION STATEMENT Our mission is to provide safe, efficient, dependable and on-time transportation service that offers outstanding customer experience and enhances quality of life. For
    [Show full text]
  • Assessing Opportunities for Intelligent Transportation Systems in California's Passenger Intermodal Operations and Services
    UC Berkeley Research Reports Title Assessing Opportunities for Intelligent Transportation Systems in California's Passenger Intermodal Operations and Services Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/4rk4p09t Authors Miller, Mark A. Loukakos, Dimitri Publication Date 2001-11-01 eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California CALIFORNIA PATH PROGRAM INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORTATION STUDIES UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY Assessing Opportunities for Intelligent Transportation Systems in California’s Passenger Intermodal Operations and Services Mark A. Miller, Dimitri Loukakos California PATH Research Report UCB-ITS-PRR-2001-34 This work was performed as part of the California PATH Program of the University of California, in cooperation with the State of California Business, Transportation, and Housing Agency, Department of Transportation; and the United States Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration. The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors who are responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the State of California. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. Final Report for MOU 375 November 2001 ISSN 1055-1425 CALIFORNIA PARTNERS FOR ADVANCED TRANSIT AND HIGHWAYS Assessing Opportunities for Intelligent Transportation Systems in California's Passenger Intermodal Operations and Services Mark A. Miller Dimitri Loukakos November 9, 2001 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This work was conducted under the sponsorship of the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Office of New Technology and Research (ONT&R) (Interagency Agreement #65A0013) and the authors especially acknowledge Bob Justice and Pete Hansra of ONT&R for their support of this project.
    [Show full text]
  • TROLLEY EXTENSION May Do So Using Any of the Following Methods: Post Until 3/12/2021
    Proposed Major The MTS Board of Directors will also hold a Public Hearing in March 2021 to consider these proposals, Take Service Changes prior to approval of any major service changes. If you wish One to comment on any proposal for the Public Hearing, you TROLLEY EXTENSION may do so using any of the following methods: Post Until 3/12/2021 In Fall 2021, the UC San Diego Blue Line light rail • Testimony at the • Our website, extension will open and expand the San Diego sdmts.com/Trolley-Extension Trolley system from Downtown San Diego to PUBLIC HEARING: the UTC Transit Center, serving nine new Trolley Thursday, March 11, 2021, Please use the comment form UC SAN DIEGO UC San DiegoExecutive DriveUTC stations. Health La Jolla 9:00 a.m. UC San Diego See box below. • U.S. Mail. Send to: MTS is also proposing to change the bus network Central Campus MTS Public Hearing Comments to connect people and communities to the Trolley VA Medical Center extension. Extensive rider and public outreach Blue Line • Telephone Hotline: 1255 Imperial Avenue, Suite 1000, was conducted in 2018-2019 to collect ideas and Nobel Drive (619) 595-4912 feedback on potential changes.. The results of that (leave your comments as a San Diego, CA 92101 outreach, combined with detailed data analysis, Balboa Avenue resulted in the proposals detailed in this Take One. message on the voicemail) Clairemont Drive IN SUMMARY: • E-Mail: [email protected] • Current bus routes affected would include: Tecolote Road Routes 8, 9, 27, 30, 44, 50, 105, 150, and Green Line 201/202.
    [Show full text]
  • San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission Teleconference Board Meeting
    Chair, Christina Fugazi, City of Stockton Commissioner, Nancy Young, City of Tracy Vice Chair, Leo Zuber, City of Ripon Commissioner, Bob Elliott, San Joaquin County Commissioner, Debby Moorhead, City of Manteca Commissioner, Scott Haggerty, Alameda County Commissioner, John Marchand, City of Livermore Executive Director, Stacey Mortensen SAN JOAQUIN REGIONAL RAIL COMMISSION TELECONFERENCE BOARD MEETING Call-In Information: 1 (872) 240-3412 Conference Access Code: 442-680-861 GoToMeeting Link: https://www.gotomeet.me/acerail/sjrrc-board-meeting-april SPECIAL NOTICE Coronavirus COVID-19 In accordance with the Governor’s Executive Order N-29-20, San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission Board Members will be attending this meeting via teleconference. Members of the public may observe the meeting by dialing 1 (872) 240-3412 with access code: 442-680-861 or log-in using a computer, tablet or smartphone at GoToMeeting.com using link: https://www.gotomeet.me/acerail/sjrrc-board-meeting-april. Please note that all members of the public will be placed on mute until such times allow for public comments to be made. If a person wishes to make a public comment during the meeting, to do so they must either 1) use GoToMeeting and will have the option to notify SJRRC staff by alerting them via the “Chat” function or they can 2) contact SJRRC staff via email at [email protected] in which staff will read the comment aloud during the public comment period. Public comments will be limited to two (2) minutes per comment. This Agenda shall be made available upon request in alternative formats to persons with a disability, as required by the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Oceanside Transit Center Platform Improvement Project Fact Sheet
    Transportation OCEANSIDE TRANSIT CENTER PLATFORM IMPROVEMENT PROJECT FACT SHEET TOTAL COST: $23.6 million The Project CAMP The Oceanside Transit Center (OTC) is one of PENDLETON COMPLETION: 2017 the busiest in the San Diego region, where 5 more than 1.2 million passengers annually Vandegrift Blvd. board trains and buses. The station connects 76 transit services between San Diego, Orange, Riverside, and Los Angeles counties. VISTA To enhance regional transit service, SANDAG OCEANSIDE 78 and the North County Transit District (NCTD) are undertaking an expansion of the transit Carlsbad Dr. center to increase the number of trains that Village TR OF ANS NT P E O can board passengers simultaneously and M R T T A R T A I Palomar Airport Rd. O P allow freight trains to move through the E N D U N A station while passenger trains are boarding. CARLSBAD C IT I E R D E S M TA F A TES O Planned improvements include adding a third rail track in the center of the railroad right-of-way, building a new 1,000-foot-long TR OF ANS NT P E O M R boarding platform to the south, adding a T T A R T A I O P E N new passenger walkway at the southern D U N A C IT I end of the transit center, and modifying E R D E M ST A ATES OF existing boarding platforms, as needed. After the project is done, Metrolink and COASTER trains will be able to use the new track, leaving the two existing main rail lines available for Amtrak Pacific Surfliner and passing freight trains.
    [Show full text]
  • Passenger Rail
    TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PASSENGER RAIL SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS TECHNICAL REPORT DRAFT FOR PUBLIC REVIEW AND COMMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 INTRODUCTION 2 REGIONAL SIGNIFICANCE 2 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK 3 ANALYTICAL APPROACH 5 EXISTING CONDITIONS 6 STRATEGIES 27 NEXT STEPS 44 CONCLUSION 45 TECHNICAL REPORT PASSENGER RAIL DRAFT FOR PUBLIC REVIEW AND COMMENT connectsocal.org EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM This Connect SoCal Passenger Rail report lays out a vision of passenger rail services for the SCAG Region for the next three decades. It demonstrates Passenger Rail the progress that has been made over the last two decades in terms of growing ridership, new rail services, capital improvements and new funding opportunities. It demonstrates the regional importance and significance of passenger rail in the SCAG region, and why growing rail services by increasing frequencies in underserved corridors, as well as establishing service in unserved markets, is crucial to the future mobility and sustainability of our region. The report highlights recent success in establishing new funding opportunities for passenger rail, including the Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program (TIRCP) and Senate Bill (SB) 1. Amtrak’s Pacific Surfliner intercity rail service is benefiting from these new funding opportunities as well as recent institutional arrangements that establish local control for the service. The Southern California Regional Rail Authority’s (SCRRA) Southern California Optimized Rail Expansion (SCORE) program is an ambitious
    [Show full text]
  • TCRP Report 102 – Transit-Oriented
    TRANSIT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH TCRP PROGRAM REPORT 102 Transit-Oriented Sponsored by Development in the the Federal United States: Transit Administration Experiences, Challenges, and Prospects TCRP OVERSIGHT AND PROJECT TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE 2004 (Membership as of January 2004) SELECTION COMMITTEE (as of January 2004) OFFICERS CHAIR Chair: Michael S. Townes, President and CEO, Hampton Roads Transit, Hampton, VA J. BARRY BARKER Vice Chair: Joseph H. Boardman, Commissioner, New York State DOT Transit Authority of River City Executive Director: Robert E. Skinner, Jr., Transportation Research Board MEMBERS MEMBERS KAREN ANTION MICHAEL W. BEHRENS, Executive Director, Texas DOT Karen Antion Consulting SARAH C. CAMPBELL, President, TransManagement, Inc., Washington, DC GORDON AOYAGI Montgomery County Government E. DEAN CARLSON, Director, Carlson Associates, Topeka, KS RONALD L. BARNES JOHN L. CRAIG, Director, Nebraska Department of Roads Central Ohio Transit Authority DOUGLAS G. DUNCAN, President and CEO, FedEx Freight, Memphis, TN LINDA J. BOHLINGER GENEVIEVE GIULIANO, Director, Metrans Transportation Center and Professor, School of Policy, HNTB Corp. Planning, and Development, USC, Los Angeles ANDREW BONDS, JR. BERNARD S. GROSECLOSE, JR., President and CEO, South Carolina State Ports Authority Parsons Transportation Group, Inc. SUSAN HANSON, Landry University Prof. of Geography, Graduate School of Geography, Clark University JENNIFER L. DORN JAMES R. HERTWIG, President, Landstar Logistics, Inc., Jacksonville, FL FTA HENRY L. HUNGERBEELER, Director, Missouri DOT NATHANIEL P. FORD, SR. ADIB K. KANAFANI, Cahill Professor of Civil Engineering, University of California, Berkeley Metropolitan Atlanta RTA RONALD F. KIRBY, Director of Transportation Planning, Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments CONSTANCE GARBER HERBERT S. LEVINSON, Principal, Herbert S. Levinson Transportation Consultant, New Haven, CT York County Community Action Corp.
    [Show full text]
  • In Substantially the Same Form As the Existing Rail 2 Rail MOU A
    Agenda NORTH COUNTY Item # TRANSIT DISTRICT jr 8 STAFF REPORT AUTHORIZE THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO EXECUTE A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING TO CONTINUE THE RAIL 2 RAIL PROGRAM Time Sensitive OX Consent OX STAFF Authorize the Executive Director to finalize and execute a memorandum of RECOMMENDATION: understanding ( MOU) in substantially the same form as the existing Rail 2 Rail MOU after review and approval by General Counsel to continue the Rail 2 Rail program for one ( 1) additional one ( 1) year term expiring August 1, 2017 in an amount not -to -exceed $ 575, 300. BACKGROUND On August 1, 2013, NCTD entered into an MOU with Amtrak and CALTRANS INFORMATION: for continuation of the Rail 2 Rail program between Oceanside Transit Center OTC) and San Diego Santa Fe Depot on the San Diego subdivision. This service, which commenced operations in October 2013, provides additional service to NCTD COASTER customers outside peak hours, and increases flexibility for Amtrak customers to take a first train option. The service is provided under the following guidelines of the MOU. Rail 2 Rail Program — FY 2014 to Present: Amtrak stops six trains at all eight train stations between OTC and Santa Fe Depot. o Southbound departure from OTC to Santa Fe Depot at: 7: 00 p. m. 9: 24 p. m. 11: 53 p. m. o Northbound departure from Santa Fe Depot to OTC at: 8: 20 a. m. 10: 42 a. m. 9: 00 P. M. Passengers may use any valid COASTER fare ( single ride, round trip, day pass, or monthly pass) to board the six identified Amtrak trains.
    [Show full text]