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 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 ............................................................................................................................................ 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 ........................................................................................................................... 10 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 Additional Siding Tracks ................................................................................................................. 27 Snow Protection ............................................................................................................................. 28 5 Operator Options ................................................................................................................ 29 Case Studies .................................................................................................................................... 33 Conclusions ..................................................................................................................................... 34 June 2020 Feasibility of an East-West Intercity Passenger Rail System for Washington State | Draft Report 6 Community Support ............................................................................................................. 35 Workgroup ...................................................................................................................................... 35 Stakeholder Meetings .................................................................................................................... 35 Survey – Public Outreach ............................................................................................................... 36 Survey Respondent Characteristics ................................................................................................ 36 Project Support ............................................................................................................................... 40 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 3.1: Demand Model Approach ...................................................................................................... 13 Figure 3.2: East-West Rail Ridership Model Zoning System ..................................................................... 14 Figure 4.1: Winnemucca Station, Nevada ................................................................................................ 25 Figure 6.1: Age and Gender Distribution of Survey Participants .............................................................. 37 Figure 6.2: Employment Status of Survey Participants............................................................................. 37 Figure 6.3: Household Income Distribution of Survey Participants .......................................................... 38 Figure 6.4: Map of Origin and Destination Pairs for All Survey Participants ............................................ 39 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 Table 2.1: Amtrak Services Through State of Washington Key Statistics ................................................... 6 Table 2.2: Runtime and Average Speed ...................................................................................................... 8 Table 2.3: Base Schedule for Twice Daily Passenger Rail Services From Seattle to Spokane. .................... 9 Table 2.4: Base Schedule for Twice Daily Passenger Rail Services From Spokane and Seattle. ................. 9 June 2020 Feasibility of an East-West Intercity Passenger Rail System for Washington State | Draft Report Table 2.5: Service Strategies ..................................................................................................................... 10 Table 2.6: Equipment Costs (Four-Coach Train) ....................................................................................... 11 Table 2.7: Equipment Costs (Eight-Coach Train) ...................................................................................... 11 Table 3.1: Ridership Estimates by Service Option .................................................................................... 17 Table 3.2: Travel Time Sensitivity Test, 2020............................................................................................ 18 Table 3.3: 2018 Air Service Levels and Passenger Volumes
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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]
  • 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]
  • Appendix 6-B: Chronology of Amtrak Service in Wisconsin
    Appendix 6-B: Chronology of Amtrak Service in Wisconsin May 1971: As part of its inaugural system, Amtrak operates five daily round trips in the Chicago- Milwaukee corridor over the Milwaukee Road main line. Four of these round trips are trains running exclusively between Chicago’s Union Station and Milwaukee’s Station, with an intermediate stop in Glenview, IL. The fifth round trip is the Chicago-Milwaukee segment of Amtrak’s long-distance train to the West Coast via St. Paul, northern North Dakota (e.g. Minot), northern Montana (e.g. Glacier National Park) and Spokane. Amtrak Route Train Name(s) Train Frequency Intermediate Station Stops Serving Wisconsin (Round Trips) Chicago-Milwaukee Unnamed 4 daily Glenview Chicago-Seattle Empire Builder 1 daily Glenview, Milwaukee, Columbus, Portage, Wisconsin Dells, Tomah, La Crosse, Winona, Red Wing, Minneapolis June 1971: Amtrak maintains five daily round trips in the Chicago-Milwaukee corridor and adds tri- weekly service from Chicago to Seattle via St. Paul, southern North Dakota (e.g. Bismark), southern Montana (e.g. Bozeman and Missoula) and Spokane. Amtrak Route Train Name(s) Train Frequency Intermediate Station Stops Serving Wisconsin (Round Trips) Chicago-Milwaukee Unnamed 4 daily Glenview Chicago-Seattle Empire Builder 1 daily Glenview, Milwaukee, Columbus, Portage, Wisconsin Dells, Tomah, La Crosse, Winona, Red Wing, Minneapolis Chicago-Seattle North Coast Tri-weekly Glenview, Milwaukee, Columbus, Portage, Wisconsin Hiawatha Dells, Tomah, La Crosse, Winona, Red Wing, Minneapolis 6B-1 November 1971: Daily round trip service in the Chicago-Milwaukee corridor is increased from five to seven as Amtrak adds service from Milwaukee to St.
    [Show full text]
  • State of Wisconsin
    Amtrak Fact Sheet, Fiscal Year 2012 State of Wisconsin Amtrak-Wisconsin partnership Hiawatha Service – seven daily round trips, Milwaukee-Chicago Record Hiawatha ridership in Fiscal 2012 Almost 43,000 Wisconsin residents are members of the Amtrak Guest Rewards frequent user program Amtrak Service & Ridership Amtrak operates one long-distance train through Wisconsin, the Empire Builder (daily Chicago- Milwaukee-St. Paul-Seattle/Portland via Columbus, Portage, Wisconsin Dells, Tomah, and La Crosse), and the Hiawatha Service, with seven daily round-trips daily on the Milwaukee-Chicago corridor. During FY12 Amtrak served the following Wisconsin locations: City Boardings + Alightings Columbus 16,259 La Crosse 28,872 Milwaukee 632,078 Milwaukee Airport 163,772 Portage 6,747 Sturtevant 75,052 Tomah 10,775 Wisconsin Dells 13,543 Total Wisconsin Station Usage: 947,098 (up 2.5% from FY11) Procurement/Contracts Amtrak spent $16,505,263 on goods and services in Wisconsin in FY12. Most of this was in the following locations: City Amount Fox Point $ 1,311,486 Glendale $ 2,608,686 Milwaukee $ 9,463,251 Oak Creek $ 1,650,687 Amtrak Government Affairs: November 2012 Employment At the end of FY12, Amtrak employed 70 Wisconsin residents. Total wages of Amtrak employees living in Wisconsin were $4,817,978 during FY12. State-Assisted Services The State of Wisconsin, in partnership with the State of Illinois, funds the operation of seven daily, round-trip Hiawatha Service trains between Milwaukee and Chicago. In FY12, Hiawatha Service ridership was 838,355, up 2.3% from 2011, which is an all-time record number of riders for the route.
    [Show full text]
  • Passenger Rail Needs Assessment
    Oregon State Rail Plan Passenger Rail Needs Assessment draft report prepared for Oregon Department of Transportation prepared by Cambridge Systematics, Inc. March 31, 2014 www.camsys.com draft Oregon State Rail Plan Passenger Rail Needs Assessment prepared for Oregon Department of Transportation prepared by Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 555 12th Street, Suite 1600 Oakland, CA 94607 date March 31, 2014 Oregon State Rail Plan DRAFT Passenger Rail Needs Assessment Table of Contents 4.0 Passenger Rail Needs Assessment ................................................................... 4-1 4.1 Existing Intercity Passenger Rail Service................................................. 4-1 4.2 Existing Passenger Rail System Performance ....................................... 4-10 4.3 Cascades Corridor Physical and Operational Needs .......................... 4-18 4.4 Other Potential Corridors ........................................................................ 4-22 4.5 Summary .................................................................................................... 4-29 Cambridge Systematics, Inc. i 8053-084 Oregon State Rail Plan DRAFT Passenger Rail Needs Assessment List of Tables Table 4.1 Oregon Intercity Passenger Rail Stations .............................................. 4-2 Table 4.2 Intercity Passenger Rail Ridership to and from Oregon Stations as a Percent of Total Ridership, FY 2012 ............................................... 4-6 Table 4.3 Destinations of Amtrak Trips Originating at Oregon Stations as a Percent of
    [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]
  • Deterioration of Intercity Passenger Service in Southern Montana and Southern North Dakota Since the Discontinuance of Amtrak Service in October, 1979
    Deterioration of intercity passenger service in Southern Montana and Southern North Dakota since the discontinuance of Amtrak service in October, 1979: October 6, 2019 marked 40 years since the last scheduled passenger trains traversed Southern Montana and Southern North Dakota. Amtrak’s North Coast Hiawatha, which served 16 stations in Montana and North Dakota (mostly along the I-94/I-90 corridor) was discontinued in 1979 as a result of politics, budget concerns, aging equipment, and apathy. Amtrak was created in 1971 to relieve America’s railroads of the burden of money- losing passenger trains. Passenger trains began to be unprofitable as the government continued to tax railroads while subsidizing competition by building Interstate highways and airports. Today in the United States, the only transportation infrastructure in the private sector are freight railroads. Truckers, buses, automobiles, barges, ships and other watercraft, and airplanes all operate on infrastructure built and managed by a government entity. Such unfair subsidization to the competition became untenable in the 1960s, which led the government to create Amtrak to maintain a modicum of rail passenger service. Initially, the route used by Amtrak’s North Coast Hiawatha in Southern Montana was not part of the Amtrak system. But through the “urging” of then-Senate Majority Leader Mike Mansfield of Montana, rail passenger service was reinstated on the route in June of 1971. However, Mansfield retired from the Senate, and Amtrak remained a chronically underfunded entity by Congress. By 1979, many of Amtrak’s “Long-Distance” passenger trains were threatened with extinction. Amtrak never had the means to properly promote the North Coast Hiawatha.
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 Train Trek to Ellensburg
    2021 Train Trek to Ellensburg August 21, 2021 Patrick Carnahan, Co-Executive Director Charles Hamilton, Co-Executive Director 1 2021 Train Trek Thursday, August 12 Wednesday, August 18 ● Edmonds ● Pacific Northwest Rail Forum Big ● Everett Sky, MT Friday, August 13 Thursday, August 19 ● Leavenworth ● Spokane ● Wenatchee Friday, August 20 Saturday, August 14 ● Cheney ● Yakima ● Ritzville ● Toppenish ● Tri-Cities Saturday, August 21 Sunday, August 15 ● Ellensburg ● Cle Elum: AAWA Annual Picnic ● Walla Walla ● Clarkston-Lewiston 2 2021 Train Trek Sponsors ● Ford Hill ● Horace Horton ● Bill Jenkin ● Liz Knapke ● Robert Krebs ● Matt Boehnke ● Bob Lawrence ● John Bowen ● Duncan McRayde ● Boyce Burdick ● Mark Meyer ● John Carlin ● In Memory of Jim Neal ● David Clinton ● Janice Rudnitski ● Edward Cohen ● Maricela Sanchez ● John Crowley ● Riley Shewak ● Carl Fowler ● John R. Smith ● Maradel Gale ● Jack Staples ● Larry Glickfeld ● Thomas & Lael White ● Robert Gorski ● Gary Wirt ● Barry Green ● Warren Yee ● Glenda Hanson ● Larry Yok 3 Who is All Aboard Washington? • Champions of better passenger and freight rail service in the Pacific Northwest for over 40 years • Nonprofit advocacy organization of citizens, businesses, and other goal-oriented groups What We’ll Talk About Today 1. Connecting Our ‘3 Es’ to Transportation 2. AAWA’s Current Efforts a. East-West Stampede Pass Rail Service b. Restoring and Improving Cascades Service 3. How You Can Help 5 What is World-Class Transportation? It’s More Than Just Trains It Really Boils Down to One Simple Question Is it reasonably easy to get from here to there? Most of the Time, It Isn’t... Today’s Reality in Central Washington Tire chains, traffic, and an empty wallet.
    [Show 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 ...........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Location: Connell, WA Project Type: Rural Applicant
    Location: Connell, WA Project Type: Rural Applicant: City of Connell Co-Applicant: Columbia Basin Railway Type of Applicant: City Government FY 18 CRISI Funding Requested: $16.6 Million DUNS Number: 618129605 Website: www.cityofconnell.com Contact: Maria Pena, City Administrator 104 E. Adams Street PO Box 1200 Connell, WA 99326-1200 I. COVER PAGE Project Title: Connell Rail Interchange Lead Applicant: City of Connell, Washington Co-Sponsor: Great Northern Corridor Coalition Project Track: Track 2: PE /NEPA Track 3: FD/ Construction Will this project contribute to the Restoration or Initiation of No Intercity Passenger Rail Service? Was a Federal grant application previously submitted for this Yes Project? If ye, state the name of the Federal grant program and title of Federal Grant Program: Tiger, INFRA, BUILD the project in the previous application Project Title: Connell Rail Interchange If applicable, what stage of NEPA is the project in NEPA Stage: anticipate a CE Is this a Rural Project? What percentage of the project cost is Yes, based in a Rural Area? Percent of total project cost: 100% City(ies), State(s), where the project is located Connell, WA Urbanized Area where the project is located N/A Population of Urbanized Area N/A Is the project currently programmed in the: State Rail Plan Yes State Freight Plan Does not include project programming TIP Yes STIP Yes, (Connecting WA) MPO Long Range Transportation Plan Yes State Long Range Transportation Plan Included on 2016 Project List State, County, City and District Washington, Franklin County, Connell 4th Congressional District WA State House and Senate District 9 Demographics Population City of Connell (2017): 5,535 Population of Franklin Co.
    [Show full text]
  • Amtrak Empire Builder Route Guide.Pdf
    E m p i r E B u i l d E r r O u T E G u i d E sEattlE • pOrTland • spOkanE • St. paul – minnEapOlis • chicago We hope that you enjoy reading this guide and learning about points of interest along the route. It is written starting from the western termini of the train in both Seattle and Portland and proceeds to points east, ending in Chicago. If you boarded in Chicago, read the guide in reverse; just remember to look in the opposite direction shown to see the sight referenced. AMTRAK STATIONS are shown in all capital letters, as opposed to upper and lower case for towns and geographical areas through which the train travels but does not stop. The Amtrak System Timetable or the Empire Builder panel card schedule should be consulted for actual station times; the times shown in this guide are approximate. While all service presented in this guide was accurate at the time of publication, routes and services are subject to change. Please contact Amtrak at 1-800-USA-RAIL, visit Amtrak.com, or call your travel agent for the most current information. A few generations ago, this route was pure wilderness, roamed by Native Americans and buffalo. Following early traders and gold miners came the merchants, timber men, farmers and – dramatically – railroaders. In the northern plains, the greatest of these was James J. Hill, a freewheeling, big-dealing tycoon who linked St. Paul and Seattle with his Great Northern Railway. He acquired the land, built the tracks, and encouraged homesteading along the route.
    [Show full text]
  • Intercity Passenger Rail
    Chapter 6: Intercity Passenger Rail Table of Contents Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 3 Overview of Existing Intercity Passenger Rail in Wisconsin ...................................................................... 4 History of intercity passenger rail in Wisconsin .................................................................................... 4 Amtrak Hiawatha Service: Chicago-Milwaukee .................................................................................... 6 Amtrak Thruway bus routes.................................................................................................................. 9 Wisconsin passenger rail stations ....................................................................................................... 10 Roles in Planning and Implementation of Intercity Passenger Rail Service ............................................ 12 Federal role ......................................................................................................................................... 12 Regional role ....................................................................................................................................... 15 Wisconsin’s role in planning and implementing intercity passenger rail ........................................... 17 Issues Impacting Intercity Passenger Rail ..............................................................................................
    [Show full text]