DOCSLIB.ORG

January 22, 2021 Board Meeting San Joaquin Joint Powers Authority

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
January 22, 2021 Board Meeting San Joaquin Joint Powers Authority January 22, 2021 Board Meeting San Joaquin Joint Powers Authority ITEM 1 Call to Order, Pledge of Allegiance, Roll Call San Joaquin Joint Powers Authority ITEM 2 Consent Calendar 2.1 Approve Minutes from November 20, 2020 Board Meeting 2.2 Appoint New Members to San Joaquin Valley Rail Committee 2.3 Next Board Meeting Location 2.4 SJJPA Operating Expense Report 2.5 Blue Ribbon Task Force Letter 2.6 Washington Update 2.7 Administrative Items San Joaquin Joint Powers Authority ITEM 3 Public Comments Please use the GoToMeeting chat function to alert staff if you wish to make a Public Comment. Alternatively, you may write in your public comment to [email protected] and staff will read the comment aloud. Public comments should be limited to approximately two minutes and no more than 240 words per comment. San Joaquin Joint Powers Authority ITEM 4 Approve a Resolution of the Board of the San Joaquin Joint Powers Authority Adopting the Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (Final IS/MND) for the Madera Station Relocation Project (Project), Adopting the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project, Approving the Madera Station Relocation Project, Authorizing and Directing the Executive Director to Execute and File a Notice of Determination Under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the Project, and Authorizing the Executive Director to Execute Any and All Documents Related to the Project (Dan Leavitt) Madera Station Relocation Project Background . Existing Madera San Joaquins Station located in vicinity of Madera Acres . Proposed Station located just north of Avenue 12 along the existing BNSF tracks CEQA Process Schedule . May 14, 2020: SJJPA held webinars . October 14, 2020: SJJPA released a Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Madera Station Relocation Project, which provided information about the 30-day public review and comment period, how to submit public comments, and public online meetings related to the Draft IS/MND. November 5, 2020: Virtual public meetings were conducted for the Draft IS/MND public review period. CEQA Process Schedule . January 6, 2021: Final IS/MND and responses to comments posted to Project webpage and notification sent to agencies commenting on Draft IS/MND. Notification sent to interested parties and stakeholders. January 22, 2021: Final IS/MND is presented to SJJPA for adoption and Proposed Project is considered for approval. Phase 1: San Joaquins Relocated Station Phase 2: HSR Interim Service Station Phase 2: HSR Interim Service Station Key Issues of Concern Raised on Draft IS/MND . Transportation—concern regarding access to the station by bicyclists and pedestrians, and a lack of storage areas at the station for bicycles. Air Quality: . concern regarding generation of construction related dust, and pathogens such as Valley Fever that could be carried in construction dust. concern that equipment exhausts as well as fugitive dust should be quantified. Key Issues of Concern Raised on Draft IS/MND . advised the SJJPA utilize the cleanest reasonably available off-road construction fleets and practices . expressed the potential need for a health risk assessment on one property located over 700 feet from the alignment. Key Issues of Concern Raised on Draft IS/MND . Traffic—Draft IS/MND comments on potential heavy dust during construction near SR-99 as a serious traffic concern. Traffic—Draft IS/MND comments requested further details regarding how VMT reductions were calculated. Noise and Vibration—Draft IS/MND comments expressed concern regarding Amtrak horn noise at existing Madera Station location. Key Issues of Concern Raised on Draft IS/MND . Land Use—Draft IS/MND comments asked how close the new station would be to the college. Funding—Draft IS/MND comments expressed concern where funding would come from for Phase 2. Alternatives—Draft IS/MND comments were submitted stating that the Avenue 12 location seems far south and that Road 17 & Road 15 should be considered. Summary of Environmental Impacts . The Proposed Project would have less than significant impacts with mitigation for all environmental resource areas. Mitigation measures are included in the Final IS/MND to reduce potentially significant impacts to less than significant for the Madera Station Relocation Project. The impacts that necessitated these mitigation measures are evaluated in Section 3 of the Initial Study (IS), along with the determination of less than significant after their implementation. Ridership Estimated Proposed Project Ridership 3 1 Project Phase 2 No Build Phase 12 2029 2025 2025 (High-Speed Rail (San Joaquins) (San Joaquins) Service) 40,2001 103,1002 210,6003 (passenger ons/offs) (passenger ons/offs) (passenger ons/offs) Notes: 1 Assumes eight (8) San Joaquins roundtrips serving the Existing Station. 2 Assumes eight (8) San Joaquins roundtrips serving the Relocated Station. 3 Assumes eighteen (18) high-speed rail roundtrips serving the Relocated Station. Capital Costs Preliminary Proposed Project Capital Cost Estimates Phase 1 Phase 2 Total (Both Phases) $24.9 Million $105.0 Million $129.9 Million Source: AECOM 2020 Adopt Madera Station Relocation Project IS/MND Fiscal Impact: Funding for Phase 1 of the Proposed Project is included in the 2018 $500.5 million Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program (TIRCP) award for the Valley Rail Program. Adopt Madera Station Relocation Project IS/MND Recommendation: Approve a Resolution of the Governing Board of the San Joaquin Joint Powers Authority Adopting the Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (Final IS/MND) for the Madera Station Relocation Project (Project), Adopting the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project, Approving the Madera Station Relocation Project, Authorizing and Directing the Executive Director to Execute and File a Notice of Determination Under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the Project, and Authorizing the Executive Director to Execute Any and All Documents Related to the Project. San Joaquin Joint Powers Authority ITEM 5 Approve a Resolution of the Governing Board of the San Joaquin Joint Powers Authority Authorizing the Chair to Accept and Sign Waiver of Potential and Actual Conflicts of Interest Letters with SJJPA Counsel, Neumiller and Beardslee (N&B), Arising from Concurrent Representation of San Joaquin Joint Powers Authority and San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission Regarding 1) a Joint Use Agreement and 2) Rail Maintenance Facility (RMF) Use Agreement and Electing to Waive the Conflict and allow N&B to prepare the Agreements for both SJJPA and SJRRC (Stacey Mortensen/Dan Schroeder) Background . Neumiller and Beardslee (N&B) concurrently represents both San Joaquin Joint Powers Authority (SJJPA) and San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission (SJRRC) and as general counsel . Staff serving both SJJPA and SJRRC have consulted with N&B to work on two agreements: 1) a Joint Use Agreement 2) the Rail Maintenance Facility (RMF) Use Agreement . In order for N&B to represent two clients with presently adverse or potentially adverse interest, both clients are required to agree to waive conflicts arising from concurrent representation. Background . Waivers of Potential and Actual Conflicts of Interest letters have been provided by N&B . There are two separate waiver letters for review and approval by SJJPA Board: 1) Joint Use Agreement 2) RMF Use Agreement Background Options as to this Conflict: . Option No. 1: Waive the Conflict and allow N&B to prepare the Joint Use Agreement for both SJJPA and SJRRC. Option No. 2: Waive the Conflict and allow N&B to represent either SJJPA or SJRRC in the preparation of the Joint Use Agreement, but not both . Option No. 3: Do not grant a waiver and SJJPA and SJRRC retain separate legal counsel Background . At this time related to these two Agreements, staff does not see a material conflict and recommends Option 1 to waive the conflict . The same letters were presented to the SJRRC Board at their January 8th meeting and SJRRC elected Option 1 to waive the conflict . Additional waiver letters will be provided to the Board on a project-by-project basis and will be specific to the conflict arising from those projects Fiscal Impact and Recommendation Fiscal Impact: There is no fiscal impact. Recommendation: Approve a Resolution of the Governing Board of the San Joaquin Joint Powers Authority Authorizing the Chair to Accept and Sign Waiver of Potential and Actual Conflicts of Interest Letters with SJJPA Counsel, Neumiller and Beardslee (N&B), Arising from Concurrent Representation of San Joaquin Joint Powers Authority and San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission Regarding 1) a Joint Use Agreement and 2) Rail Maintenance Facility (RMF) Use Agreement and Electing to Waive the Conflict and allow N&B to prepare the Agreements for both SJJPA and SJRRC. San Joaquin Joint Powers Authority ITEM 6 Approve a Resolution of the Governing Board of the San Joaquin Joint Powers Authority Approving a Reimbursement Agreement with Capital Corridor Joint Powers Authority (CCJPA) for Design, Installation, Operation, and Maintenance of California Passenger Information Display System for an Amount Not-to- Exceed $700,000 and Authorizing the Executive Director to Execute Any and All Documents Related to the Projects (Brian Schmidt/Autumn Gowan) San Joaquin Joint Powers Authority . The California Passenger Information Display System (CA-PIDS) is a train status and messaging system that was implemented by Capitol Corridor Joint Powers Authority (CCJPA) and subsequently other California InterCity Passenger Rail (CA IPR) routes, as well as ACE, in the early 2000’s. CCJPA led the initial design, and Amtrak procured the services with various vendors. San Joaquin Joint Powers Authority . CA-PIDS takes in the real-time GPS location of trains and translates it into estimated times of arrival (ETA). Station digital signage displays current time, ETA’s of various passenger trains up to 30 minutes away, delay information, and other messages related to service amenities and changes to regular service. Audio announcements are synchronized with visual messages at all stations, indoor and outdoor.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Quarterly Report on the Performance and Service Quality of Intercity Passenger Train Operations
    Pursuant to Section 207 of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-432, Division B): Quarterly Report on the Performance and Service Quality of Intercity Passenger Train Operations Covering the Quarter Ended June, 2019 (Third Quarter of Fiscal Year 2019) Federal Railroad Administration United States Department of Transportation Published August 2019 Table of Contents (Notes follow on the next page.) Financial Table 1 (A/B): Short-Term Avoidable Operating Costs (Note 1) Table 2 (A/B): Fully Allocated Operating Cost covered by Passenger-Related Revenue Table 3 (A/B): Long-Term Avoidable Operating Loss (Note 1) Table 4 (A/B): Adjusted Loss per Passenger- Mile Table 5: Passenger-Miles per Train-Mile On-Time Performance (Table 6) Test No. 1 Change in Effective Speed Test No. 2 Endpoint OTP Test No. 3 All-Stations OTP Train Delays Train Delays - Off NEC Table 7: Off-NEC Host Responsible Delays per 10,000 Train-Miles Table 8: Off-NEC Amtrak Responsible Delays per 10,000 Train-Miles Train Delays - On NEC Table 9: On-NEC Total Host and Amtrak Responsible Delays per 10,000 Train-Miles Other Service Quality Table 10: Customer Satisfaction Indicator (eCSI) Scores Table 11: Service Interruptions per 10,000 Train-Miles due to Equipment-related Problems Table 12: Complaints Received Table 13: Food-related Complaints Table 14: Personnel-related Complaints Table 15: Equipment-related Complaints Table 16: Station-related Complaints Public Benefits (Table 17) Connectivity Measure Availability of Other Modes Reference Materials Table 18: Route Descriptions Terminology & Definitions Table 19: Delay Code Definitions Table 20: Host Railroad Code Definitions Appendixes A.
    [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]
  • Administrator's Letterhead Stationery
    Pursuant to Section 207 of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-432, Division B): Quarterly Report on the Performance and Service Quality of Intercity Passenger Train Operations Covering the Quarter Ended June, 2014 (Third Quarter of Fiscal Year 2014) Federal Railroad Administration United States Department of Transportation Published September 2014 Table of Contents (Notes follow on the next page.) Page Financial Table 1 (A/B): Short-Term Avoidable Operating Costs (Note 1) 1 – 2 Table 2 (A/B): Fully Allocated Operating Cost covered by Passenger-Related Revenue 3 – 4 Table 3 (A/B): Long-Term Avoidable Operating Loss (Note 1) 5 – 6 Table 4 (A/B): Adjusted Loss per Passenger- Mile 7 – 8 Table 5: Passenger-Miles per Train-Mile 9 On-Time Performance (Table 6) Test No. 1 Change in Effective Speed 10 Test No. 2 Endpoint OTP 10 Test No. 3 All-Stations OTP 10 Train Delays Train Delays - Off NEC Table 7: Off-NEC Host Responsible Delays per 10,000 Train-Miles 11 – 12 Table 8: Off-NEC Amtrak Responsible Delays per 10,000 Train-Miles 13 Train Delays - On NEC Table 9: On-NEC Total Host and Amtrak Responsible Delays per 10,000 Train-Miles 14 Other Service Quality Table 10: Customer Satisfaction Indicator (CSI) Scores 15 Table 11: Service Interruptions per 10,000 Train-Miles due to Equipment-related Problems 16 Table 12: Complaints Received 17 Table 13: Food-related Complaints 18 Table 14: Personnel-related Complaints 19 Table 15: Equipment-related Complaints 20 Table 16: Station-related Complaints 21 Public Benefits (Table 17) Connectivity Measure 22 Availability of Other Modes 22 Reference Materials Table 18: Route Descriptions 23 Terminology & Definitions Table 19: Delay Code Definitions 24 Table 20: Host Railroad Code Definitions 25 Appendixes A.
    [Show full text]
  • Oklahoma Department of Transportation Rail Publication
    2018 UPDATE RAIL Page Table of Contents Rail Programs Division - ODOT............................................................... Page 3 Rail Moves Through Oklahoma................................................................ Page 7 Passenger Rail Transportation.................................................................. Page 9 History and Current Status of Oklahoma Rail Line Acquisitions......... Page 11 Railroad State Map................................................................................... Page 17 Preface Rail Involvement he Oklahoma Department of Transportation serves In August 2014, ODOT and the Stillwater Central Railroad T in a number of roles related to railroads and railroad completed a $75 million sale of the Sooner Sub rail line related activities. ODOT currently manages leases with between Midwest City and Sapulpa. The sale of this 97.5 mile three different railroad companies operating on state-owned line was the culmination of a 180 day process put into place in track, administers the Federal Highway Administration’s 2013 by the State Legislature. Commitments included in the Grade Crossing Safety Program which provides funding for sale call for the introduction of a pilot program for passenger- safety improvements to Oklahoma’s nearly 3800 at-grade rail service, dubbed the “Eastern Flyer” connecting Midwest public rail/roadway intersections, manages Oklahoma’s City and Sapulpa to be implemented by August 2019. Heartland Flyer passenger rail service which is one of Amtrak’s highest-rated trains for customer satisfaction, With the sale of the Sooner Sub rail line, ODOT announced serves as a liaison between ODOT and rail companies a $100 million initiative to accelerate safety projects at for ODOT projects which involve operations or railroad railroad crossings statewide. State budget reductions in property and reviews federal funding opportunities to grow 2016 have subsequently limited the program to $75 million.
    [Show full text]
  • State of Oklahoma
    Amtrak Fact Sheet, Fiscal Year 2011 State of Oklahoma Amtrak-Oklahoma partnership z Grants from the State of Oklahoma help support the daily Heartland Flyer service between Oklahoma City and Fort Worth Amtrak Service & Ridership Amtrak serves Oklahoma with one corridor train, the Heartland Flyer (daily Oklahoma City-Fort Worth, Texas). The Heartland Flyer provides connections to the Amtrak national train network at Fort Worth. During FY11 Amtrak served the following Oklahoma locations: City Boardings + Alightings Ardmore 9,941 Norman 14,364 Oklahoma City 56,368 Pauls Valley 6,067 Purcell 2,152 Total Oklahoma Station Usage: 88,892 (up 2.5% from FY10) Procurement/Contracts Amtrak placed orders valued at $953,310 for goods and services in Oklahoma in FY11, most of it in Oklahoma City. Employment At the end of FY11, Amtrak employed 3 Oklahoma residents. Total wages of Amtrak employees living in Oklahoma were $181,070 during FY11. State-Assisted Services The Heartland Flyer has been funded by the State of Oklahoma since the train began service in 1999. Oklahoma has made capital upgrades to the BNSF Railway tracks in Oklahoma, allowing for speed increases to 79 mph over segments of the route and reducing the trip time for the Heartland Flyer. FY11 Amtrak Government Affairs: December 2011 ridership on Heartland Flyer trains was 2.8% above FY10. The State of Texas also began a contract partnership with Amtrak in FY07 to support the operation of the train. Green Energy Amtrak and the Oklahoma and Texas DOTs conducted the nation’s first-ever test of a cleaner and renewable biodiesel fuel blend to power the Heartland Flyer, with the aim of reducing greenhouse gas emissions and the use of foreign oil.
    [Show full text]
  • Texas Eagle-Heartland Flyer-Chicago-Los Angeles-Oklahoma City-Fort Worth-May072012
    TEXAS EAGLE® MAY 7, 2012 and HEARTLAND FLYER® Effective SM Enjoy the journey. TEXAS EAGLE® serving CHICAGO - ST. LOUIS - LITTLE ROCK DALLAS - FORT WORTH - SAN ANTONIO 1-800-USA-RAIL LOS ANGELES And intermediate stations Call HEARTLAND FLYER® serving OKLAHOMA CITY - FORT WORTH and intermediate stations AMTRAK.COM Visit NRPC Form P21–175M–5/7/12 Stock #02-3675 Schedules subject to change without notice. Amtrak is a registered service mark of the National Railroad Passenger Corp. National Railroad Passenger Corporation Washington Union Station, 60 Massachusetts Ave. N.E., Washington, DC 20002. TEXAS EAGLE Service on the Texas Eagle® 21/421 Train Number 22/422 R Coaches: Reservations required. As indicated As indicated in column Normal Days of Operation in column s Sleeping cars: Superliner sleeping accommodations. R s R s - Amtrak Metropolitan Lounge available in Chicago, and On Board Service a private waiting area available in St. Louis for r y l r y l Sleeping car passengers. Read Down Mile Symbol Read Up - Sleeping car passengers arriving at Los Angeles are l1 45P Daily 0 Dp Chicago, IL–Union Station (CT) ∑w- Ar l1 52P Daily welcome to occupy their accommodations until 6:30 b Madison—see back a.m. R2 40P Daily 37 Joliet, IL ∑v D12 56P Daily r Dining-Cross Country Café: Casual service offering 3 27P Daily 92 Pontiac, IL >v 11 39A Daily complete meals. y l4 04P Daily 124 Bloomington-Normal, IL ∑v- l11 08A Daily Sightseer Lounge: Sandwiches, snacks and b Davenport, Indianapolis beverages. —see back l Checked baggage at select stations.
    [Show full text]
  • Texas Eagle-Chicago-Los Angeles-October122020
    TEXAS EAGLE® Effective October 12, 2020 serving CHICAGO - ST. LOUIS - LITTLE ROCK - DALLAS - FORT WORTH - SAN ANTONIO - LOS ANGELES and intermediate stations Amtrak.com BOOK TRAVEL, CHECK TRAIN STATUS, ACCESS YOUR ETICKET AND MORE THROUGH THE Amtrak app. 1-800-USA-RAIL Service on the Texas Eagle® 21/421 3Train Number4 22/422 R Coaches: Reservations required. As indicated As indicated in column 3Normal Days of Operation4 in column s Private rooms. For more information, visit R s r R s r Amtrak.com/rooms. 3On Board Service4 r Dining service: For more information, visit y l O y l O Amtrak.com/dining. Read Down Mile 6 Symbol 5 Read Up y Café service: For more information, visit l1 45P TuFrSu 0 Dp Chicago, IL–Union Station (CT) ∑w- Ar l1 52P WeSaMo Amtrak.com/cafe. b Janesville—see page 2 l Checked baggage at select stations. lR2 40P TuFrSu 37 Joliet, IL ∑v p lD12 56P WeSaMo O Bicycles on Amtrak: We offer a number of different 3 27P TuFrSu 92 Pontiac, IL >v 11 39A WeSaMo services to transport your bike on many routes. Each l4 04P TuFrSu 124 Bloomington-Normal, IL ∑w- l11 08A WeSaMo train has different equipment and loading procedures b Indianapolis—see page 2 that dictate what service will be offered. Reservations 4 37P TuFrSu 156 Lincoln, IL >v 10 25A WeSaMo are required and additional charges may apply. Visit 1l5 14P TuFrSu 185 Springfield, IL ∑w 1l9 55A WeSaMo Amtrak.com/bikes for all the details before you book 5 49P TuFrSu 224 Carlinville, IL >w 9 15A WeSaMo your trip.
    [Show full text]
  • Presentation
    People Before Freight On-time trains on host railroads 3 LATEST REPORT CARD SIGNALS NEW GOLDEN AGE OF ON-TIME TRAINS 1 Canadian Pacific A 2 BNSF A 3 Union Pacific A 4 CSX A 5 Canadian National A 6 Norfolk Southern A Average grade for all host railroads: A 4 Amtrak National Network Passengers Continue to Experience Poor On-Time Performance 1 Canadian Pacific A 2 BNSF B 3 Union Pacific B- 4 CSX B- 5 Canadian National D- 6 Norfolk Southern F Average grade for all host railroads: C 5 Grading National Network routes on OTP 17 of 28 State-Supported Services Fail Class I Freight Percentage of trains on‐time State‐Supported Trains Route Host Railroads within 15 minutes Pass = 80% on‐time Hiawatha CP 96% Keystone (other hosts) 91% Capitol Corridor UP 89% New York ‐ Albany (other hosts) 89% Carl Sandburg / Illinois Zephyr BNSF 88% Ethan Allen Express CP 87% PASS Pere Marquette CSX, NS 84% Missouri River Runner UP 83% Springfield Shuttles (other hosts) 82% Downeaster (other hosts) 81% Hoosier State CSX 80% Pacific Surfliner BNSF, UP 78% Lincoln Service CN, UP 76% Blue Water NS, CN 75% Roanoke NS 75% Piedmont NS 74% Richmond / Newport News / Norfolk CSX, NS 74% San Joaquins BNSF, UP 73% Pennsylvanian NS 71% Adirondack CN, CP 70% FAIL New York ‐ Niagara Falls CSX 70% Vermonter (other hosts) 67% Cascades BNSF, UP 64% Maple Leaf CSX 64% Wolverine NS, CN 60% Heartland Flyer BNSF 58% Carolinian CSX, NS 51% Illini / Saluki CN 37% 6 Grading National Network routes on OTP 14 of 15 Long Distance Services Fail Class I Freight Percentage of trains on‐time Long
    [Show full text]
  • Amtrak Station Program and Planning Guidelines 1
    Amtrak Station Program and Planning Guidelines 1. Overview 5 6. Site 55 1.1 Background 5 6.1 Introduction 55 1.2 Introduction 5 6.2 Multi-modal Planning 56 1.3 Contents of the Guidelines 6 6.3 Context 57 1.4 Philosophy, Goals and Objectives 7 6.4 Station/Platform Confi gurations 61 1.5 Governing Principles 8 6.5 Track and Platform Planning 65 6.6 Vehicular Circulation 66 6.7 Bicycle Parking 66 2. Process 11 6.8 Parking 67 2.1 Introduction 11 6.9 Amtrak Functional Requirements 68 2.2 Stakeholder Coordination 12 6.10 Information Systems and Way Finding 69 2.3 Concept Development 13 6.11 Safety and Security 70 2.4 Funding 14 6.12 Sustainable Design 71 2.5 Real Estate Transactional Documents 14 6.13 Universal Design 72 2.6 Basis of Design 15 2.7 Construction Documents 16 2.8 Project Delivery methods 17 7. Station 73 2.9 Commissioning 18 7.1 Introduction 73 2.10 Station Opening 18 7.2 Architectural Overview 74 7.3 Information Systems and Way Finding 75 7.4 Passenger Information Display System (PIDS) 77 3. Amtrak System 19 7.5 Safety and Security 78 3.1 Introduction 19 7.6 Sustainable Design 79 3.2 Service Types 20 7.7 Accessibility 80 3.3 Equipment 23 3.4 Operations 26 8. Platform 81 8.1 Introduction 81 4. Station Categories 27 8.2 Platform Types 83 4.1 Introduction 27 8.3 Platform-Track Relationships 84 4.2 Summary of Characteristics 28 8.4 Connection to the station 85 4.3 Location and Geography 29 8.5 Platform Length 87 4.4 Category 1 Large stations 30 8.6 Platform Width 88 4.5 Category 2 Medium Stations 31 8.7 Platform Height 89 4.6 Category 3 Caretaker Stations 32 8.8 Additional Dimensions and Clearances 90 4.7 Category 4 Shelter Stations 33 8.9 Safety and Security 91 4.8 Thruway Bus Service 34 8.10 Accessibility 92 8.11 Snow Melting Systems 93 5.
    [Show full text]
  • Ray Lang, Amtrak
    Emerging Rail Corridors Ray Lang, Senior Director, Government Affairs September 18, 2019 Amtrak Route Network: 1971 2 Amtrak Route Network: 2019 3 Growing Metros are Forming “Megaregions” 4 Source: Regional Plan Association 5 Recent Expansion . Oct 2017: Together with the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation, extend service to Roanoke . Jun 2018: With our state partners at Connecticut DOT, implement the CTrail Hartford Line Service . Jul 2018: In partnership with North Carolina, add a third frequency to the daily Piedmont between Raleigh and Charlotte . Nov 2018: The Northern New England Passenger Rail Authority, which manages Amtrak’s Downeaster service, extends two roundtrips from Portland to Brunswick . Mar 2019: Together with the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation, add second daily roundtrip to Norfolk . May 2019: Amtrak increases weekend Acela frequencies . Aug 2019: Amtrak and Massachusetts DOT launch Valley Flyer service in Western and Northern Massachusetts . Sep 2019: Amtrak Starts Acela Nonstop Service between Washington, D.C. and New York City Future Expansion Opportunities: Amtrak is currently working on 16 initiatives with 13 DOT’s or Agency stakeholders to establish new or expanded intercity passenger rail services, that if successful, would add service to 60+ communities and 5 new state partners. Northeast Midwest . Extension of Ethan Allen . Hiawatha Service, 3 additional Round Trips. (Chicago to . Extension of Springfield Line Service Milwaukee) . Chicago to the Quad Cities, Illinois,(Moline). Extension of Downeaster to Rockland, Maine . Chicago to St. Paul, Minnesota. (2nd frequency). Northern Lights Express-Minneapolis to Duluth, Minnesota . Chicago to Rockford, Illinois . Detroit, Michigan to Toronto, Ontario South West .
    [Show full text]
  • Heartland Flyer-Oklahoma City-Fort Worth-March102019
    HEARTLAND FLYER® Effective March 10, 2019 serving OKLAHOMA CITY - FORT WORTH and intermediate stations Amtrak.com 1-800-USA-RAIL 821 3Train Number4 822 HEARTLAND FLYER ROUTE MAP and SYMBOLS Daily 3Normal Days of Operation4 Daily R y 3On Board Service4 R y Read Down Mile 6 OklahomaSymbol City, OK5 Read Up b Norman, OK 8903 Amtrak Thruway Connection— 8904 Newton, KS - Oklahoma City, OK Purcell, OK b4 00A 0 Dp Newton, KS–Amtrak Station (CT) ∑v Ar b2 15A b5 00A 28 Dp Wichita, KS > Dp Paulsb V1alle 35Ay, OK b7 35A 189 Ar Oklahoma City, OK (CT) Ar>dmow-re, OKDp b10 40P –Amtrak Station Gainesville, TX OKLAHOMA CITY 8 25A 0 Dp Oklahoma City, OK (CT)Fort> Ww-orth, TXAr 9 27P 8 51A 20 Norman, OK >w p 8 47P 9 08A 35 Purcell, OK >w 8 26P FORT WORTH 9 32A 57 Pauls Valley, OK >w 8 01P 10 24A 102 Ardmore, OK >w 7 11P Heartland Flyer ® 11 10A 141 q Gainesville, TX >w 6 30P Other Amtrak Train Routes 12 27P 206 Ar Fort Worth, TX (CT) ∑w- Dp 5 25P EFFECTIVE 10/18/17 SYMBOLS KEY ® Oklahoma City, OK Service on the Heartland Flyer Norman, OK CT Central time R Coaches: Reservations required. Purcell, OK b Bus stop y Café: Sandwiches, snacks and beverages. Pauls Valley, OK - Quik-Trak self-serve ticketing kiosk Ardmore, OK > Unstaffed station All Amtrak services and stations are non-smoking. Gainesville, TX ∑ Staffed ticket office; may orOKLAHOMA may not CITY be open Fort Worth, TX for all train departures Trails and Rails Program: In cooperation with the National Park Service, w Station wheelchair accessible;FORT WORTH no barriers volunteer rangers provide on board narratives between May and September between station and train v on selected days over parts of this route.
    [Show full text]