DOCSLIB.ORG

Las Vegas to Los Angeles Rail Corridor Improvement Feasibility Study

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Las Vegas to Los Angeles Rail Corridor Improvement Feasibility Study Regional Transportation Commission of Southern Nevada Las Vegas to Los Angeles Rail Corridor Improvement Feasibility Study Interim Legislative Committee on Transportation January 23, 2008 Results of Feasibility Study ReestablishmentReestablishment ofof passengerpassenger railrail serviceservice betweenbetween LasLas VegasVegas andand LosLos AngelesAngeles isis feasiblefeasible •• Within existing rail corridors • Using conventional (non-electric) equipment • In a shared-use rail environment 2 Elements of Service Feasibility ThereThere is:is: •• A strong travel market • Good ridership potential with opportunity for growth • Acceptable farebox recovery ratio 3 Technical Advisory Committee Members 4 Track Ownership 5 ALTERNATIVE A1 Most Feasible 6 ALTERNATIVE A2 7 ALTERNATIVE A3 8 ALTERNATIVE B 9 ALTERNATIVE C1 10 ALTERNATIVE C2 11 Conceptual A1 Time Reductions Schedule Times By Level of Project Improvement 7.5 7 Hours 15 Minutes – Desert Wind 7.0 - 45 Minutes 6.5 - 1 Hour 15 Minutes - 1 Hour 22 Minutes 6.0 - 1 Hour 15 Minutes 5.5 Schedule Hours, Las Vegas to LAUPT via A1 via toLAUPT Vegas Las Hours, Schedule - 1 Hour 45 Minutes 4 Hours 55 Minutes – Auto, No Traffic - 1 Hour 52 Minutes 5.0 Unimproved Low Improvements High Improvements Amtrak 1997 Surfliner Talgo JetTrain 12 Need for Rail Improvements •• LimitedLimited availableavailable rightsrights--ofof--wayway •• SharedShared--useuse withwith freightfreight andand commutercommuter railrail servicesservices •• SignificantSignificant growthgrowth inin goodsgoods movementmovement •• CajonCajon PassPass constraintsconstraints ¾¾ HighHigh traintrain volumesvolumes ¾¾ RailRail capacitycapacity issuesissues 13 Examples of Needed Rail Improvement Projects • TrackTrack upgradesupgrades •• AdditionalAdditional mainmain trackstracks •• StationStation improvementsimprovements •• IncreasingIncreasing ““superelevationsuperelevation”” onon curvescurves •• NewNew railrail sidingssidings andand sidingsiding extensionsextensions 14 Needed Rail Improvement Projects • ProjectsProjects wouldwould provideprovide benefitsbenefits toto bothboth passengerpassenger railrail andand freightfreight servicesservices •• LowLow-- && HighHigh--BuildBuild improvementimprovement plansplans rangerange fromfrom $1.1B$1.1B toto $3.5B$3.5B 15 Impact of Fare & Schedule on Ridership Year 2010 Forecasts Alternative A1 # of Trips Fare Fare & Trips Average Rail Travel Time between Las Vegas and Los Angeles 5-1/2 hours 5-1/2 hours 5-1/2 hours 5-1/2 hours Average One Way Fare $ 57.25 $ 57.25 $ 85.00 $ 85.00 Average Weekly Roundtrips 24 15 24 34 Average Riders per Train 145 157 112 102 Ridership 362,200 276,800 279,100 361,300 Revenue (2006$) $ 18,730,000 $14,420,000 $ 21,160,000 $ 27,180,000 Estimated O&M Costs $ 34,000,000 $23,100,000 $ 32,700,000 $ 43,100,000 Net Operating Loss $ 15,270,000 $ 8,680,000 $ 11,540,000 $ 15,920,000 Fare Recovery Percentage 55.09% 62.42% 64.71% 63.06% Coaches per Trainset 55 4 4 16 Impacts of Increased Travel Time on Ridership & Revenue Year 2010 Forecasts Alternative A-1 +1/2 Hour +1 Hour Average Rail Travel Time between Las Vegas and Los Angeles 5-1/2 hours 6 hours 6-1/2 hours Average Riders per Train 145 115 92 Ridership 362,200 288,100 229,220 Revenue (2006$) $ 18,730,000 $14,930,000 $ 11,900,000 Average One Way Fare $ 57.25 $ 57.25 $ 57.25 Average Weekly Roundtrips 24 24 24 Change from A-1 -21% -36% 17 Three Conceptual Station Areas Considered Downtown Mid-Strip South Strip 18 Regional Transportation Commission NEXTNEXT STEPSSTEPS 19 Future Phases of Project Development •• RailRail CapacityCapacity ModelingModeling •• ConceptualConceptual EngineeringEngineering •• ImplementationImplementation andand FinancingFinancing PlanPlan •• ConstraintsConstraints andand OpportunitiesOpportunities AssessmentAssessment •• EnvironmentalEnvironmental AssessmentAssessment asas neededneeded toto preservepreserve additionaladditional ROWROW 20 Thank You!.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • GAO-02-398 Intercity Passenger Rail: Amtrak Needs to Improve Its
    United States General Accounting Office Report to the Honorable Ron Wyden GAO U.S. Senate April 2002 INTERCITY PASSENGER RAIL Amtrak Needs to Improve Its Decisionmaking Process for Its Route and Service Proposals GAO-02-398 Contents Letter 1 Results in Brief 2 Background 3 Status of the Growth Strategy 6 Amtrak Overestimated Expected Mail and Express Revenue 7 Amtrak Encountered Substantial Difficulties in Expanding Service Over Freight Railroad Tracks 9 Conclusions 13 Recommendation for Executive Action 13 Agency Comments and Our Evaluation 13 Scope and Methodology 16 Appendix I Financial Performance of Amtrak’s Routes, Fiscal Year 2001 18 Appendix II Amtrak Route Actions, January 1995 Through December 2001 20 Appendix III Planned Route and Service Actions Included in the Network Growth Strategy 22 Appendix IV Amtrak’s Process for Evaluating Route and Service Proposals 23 Amtrak’s Consideration of Operating Revenue and Direct Costs 23 Consideration of Capital Costs and Other Financial Issues 24 Appendix V Market-Based Network Analysis Models Used to Estimate Ridership, Revenues, and Costs 26 Models Used to Estimate Ridership and Revenue 26 Models Used to Estimate Costs 27 Page i GAO-02-398 Amtrak’s Route and Service Decisionmaking Appendix VI Comments from the National Railroad Passenger Corporation 28 GAO’s Evaluation 37 Tables Table 1: Status of Network Growth Strategy Route and Service Actions, as of December 31, 2001 7 Table 2: Operating Profit (Loss), Operating Ratio, and Profit (Loss) per Passenger of Each Amtrak Route, Fiscal Year 2001, Ranked by Profit (Loss) 18 Table 3: Planned Network Growth Strategy Route and Service Actions 22 Figure Figure 1: Amtrak’s Route System, as of December 2001 4 Page ii GAO-02-398 Amtrak’s Route and Service Decisionmaking United States General Accounting Office Washington, DC 20548 April 12, 2002 The Honorable Ron Wyden United States Senate Dear Senator Wyden: The National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) is the nation’s intercity passenger rail operator.
    [Show full text]
  • Colorail Newsletter
    ColoRail Newsletter September, 1996 Issue #20 r — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —> Don't forget! Best of times.... ColoRail meet in Boulder Saturday, September 21st and the worst of times L _ _____________ _. Inside these pages you'll find between Front Range cities and the members and members of allied news that shows that we are Southwest Chief to ease the impact of groups to study the issues, attend the indeed living in interesting loss of the Desert Wind; the Colorado meetings where decisions are Department of Transportation moves developed, and to speak up in an times: Amtrak service cuts turn back ahead with planning for regional rail informed manner. Now, turn the page the clock to the bad old days of the service and gets ski bus runs set up for a new era.... - rwr- 1970's for Denver; Amtrak shows off for this winter; and the most important the Danish-designed IC-3; ColoRail news in the long run - - the Photo of IC-3 in Denver by Jon Esty. pushes for a Thruway bus connection demonstrated willingness of ColoRail "A Voice for Colorado's Rail Passengers Page 2 Colorado loses SoCal links Wyoming - Northern Colo, cut! at destinations to improve equipment by Jon Esty utilization, and operating the South• Why these cuts now? west Chief/Capitol Limited and Em• Thomas Downs, President of Am• pire Builder/City of New Orleans This round of cuts is the result of trak, announced on August 8 that through Chicago. (A plan to run the complex interaction between rival some 3,000 miles of passenger CZ through to Boston was dropped Congressional budget cutters, Ad• routes serving the West will be elimi• because of Superliner clearance ministration budget officials, and nated on November 10.
    [Show full text]
  • Colorail Newsletter "A Voice for Colorado's Rail Passenger"
    ColoRail Newsletter "A Voice for Colorado's Rail Passenger" April, 1995 Issue #15 The Battle to Save Amtrak Continues: As the weather around the country turns warmer, the fight over preserving our national rail passenger system has also been heating up. The House of Representatives is now considering legislation that would eliminate the Amtrak "subsidy" along with a host of other government programs ranging from public broadcasting to solar energy research. Colorado's own Rep. Joel Hefley is leading the charge with his bill, (H.R. 259) which would end federal support for Amtrak. In prior years, similar proposals by Hefley have been overwhelmingly voted down. Neither the House proposals or Hefley's bill address the issue of federal, state, and local subsidies for highways and air transportation. There is to be no reductions for these programs. The narrow view of many of those in Congress is most unfortunate in view of worsening air pollution, costs of highway and airport construction, and growing dependence on Persian Gulf countries for petroleum to fuel autos which not only puts this country at a strategic disadvantage but is one of the main reasons why we have a balance of payments problem resulting in the falling value of the dollar against major foreign currencies. It should be noted that those countries with strong currencies such as Switzerland and Germany spend significantly more, per capita, than the United States on passenger rail development. According to the International Railway Journal, the United States ranked between Bolivia and Turkey in the per capita amount spent on passenger rail services in I994.
    [Show full text]
  • RCED-98-151 Intercity Passenger Rail B-279203
    United States General Accounting Office GAO Report to Congressional Committees May 1998 INTERCITY PASSENGER RAIL Financial Performance of Amtrak’s Routes GAO/RCED-98-151 United States General Accounting Office GAO Washington, D.C. 20548 Resources, Community, and Economic Development Division B-279203 May 14, 1998 The Honorable Richard C. Shelby Chairman The Honorable Frank R. Lautenberg Ranking Minority Member Subcommittee on Transportation Committee on Appropriations United States Senate The Honorable Frank R. Wolf Chairman The Honorable Martin Olav Sabo Ranking Minority Member Subcommittee on Transportation and Related Agencies Committee on Appropriations House of Representatives Since it began operations in 1971, the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) has never been profitable and has received about $21 billion in federal subsidies for operating and capital expenses. In December 1994, at the direction of the administration, Amtrak established the goal of eliminating its need for federal operating subsidies by 2002. However, despite efforts to control expenses and improve efficiency, Amtrak has only reduced its annual net loss from $834 million in fiscal year 1994 to $762 million in fiscal year 1997, and it projects that its net loss will grow to $845 million this fiscal year.1 Amtrak remains heavily dependent on substantial federal operating and capital subsidies. Given Amtrak’s continued dependence on federal operating subsidies, the Conference Report to the Department of Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 1998 directed us to examine the financial (1) performance of Amtrak’s current routes, (2) implications for Amtrak of multiyear capital requirements and declining federal operating subsidies, and (3) effect on Amtrak of reforms contained in the Amtrak Reform and Accountability Act of 1997.
    [Show full text]
  • Memorandum To
    MEMORANDUM TO: THE TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION FROM: JEFF SUDMEIER, CDOT CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER DATE: OCTOBER 15, 2020 SUBJECT: MONTHLY CASH BALANCE UPDATE Purpose To provide an update on cash management, including forecasts of monthly revenues, expenditures, and cash balances in Fund 400, the State Highway Fund. Action No action is requested or required at this time. Background Figure 1 below depicts the forecast of the closing Fund 400 cash balance in each month, as compared to the targeted minimum cash balance for that month (green shaded area). The targeted minimum cash balances reflect the Transportation Commission’s directive (Policy Directive #703) to limit the risk of a cash overdraft at the end of a month to, at most, a probability of 1/1,000 (1 month of 1,000 months ending with a cash overdraft). Figure 1 – Fund 400 Cash Forecast Page 1 of 3 2829 West Howard Place, Denver, CO 80204 P 303.757.9262 F 303.757.9656 Summary Due to recent events in response to the global COVID-19 pandemic, including statewide safer-at-home orders, the Department is anticipating a significant immediate impact to revenue collections, followed by a longer downturn. Reduced motor fuel tax collections, due to decreased travel along with corresponding reductions in other sources, will negatively impact the short-term revenue and associated cash forecast. The current forecast, which includes actual data for March through June 2020, appears consistent with the preliminary forecast of revenue losses – approximately $50 million between March 2020 and February 2021. The forecast reflects the Department’s anticipated cash balance based on the current budget allocation plan and associated planned project expenditures.
    [Show full text]
  • Ms 711 Rg 1 National Railroad Passenger Corporation / Amtrak : James L
    MS 711 RG 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION / AMTRAK : JAMES L. LARSON OPERATIONS AND PLANNING FILES 1971-2003, bulk 1976-2003. 16.5 linear ft. Original order has been maintained. The James L. Larson files are arranged in the following series: 1. REPORTS 2. CHRONOLOGICAL FILES 3. LAWSUITS PROVENANCE Gift of Mrs. Mary Larson (387-2090), 2011. HISTORICAL INFORMATION James Llewellyn Larson was born on March 27, 1935 in Madison, Wisconsin to Ruth (Thurber) and LeRoy Larson. While attending high school, Mr. Larson spent many hours at the Chicago and North Western Railway Company's interlocking tower in Madison, Wisconsin where he learned telegraphy. He went to work for the Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul, and Pacific Railroad in 1952 as an agent, telegrapher, and tower operator. In 1953, Mr. Larson began working for the Chicago and North Western Transportation Company as a telegrapher, then as a wire changer. During his 20-year tenure with C&NW, he worked in the Operating Department, was a Train Dispatcher from 1957 to 1959, and then spent eight years as an Assistant Trainmaster and a Trainmaster. He was a System Rules Examiner from 1966 to 1968, an Assistant Division Superintendent from 1968 to 1969, Assistant Superintendent -Transportation from 1969 to 1972, where he managed Operations Center in Chicago. From 1972 to 1973, he was an Assistant Division Master of Transportation on the Twin Cities Division. Mr. Larson was recruited by Amtrak in 1973. During his 25-year tenure with Amtrak he served as Manager of Station Operations, Director of Personnel, Assistant Vice President of Administrative Staff, and Assistant Vice President of Contracts.
    [Show full text]
  • Southwest Multi-State Rail Planning Study Technical Background Report September 2014
    Southwest Multi-State Rail Planning Study Technical Background Report September 2014 Table of Contents Chapter 1. Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 7 1.1 Overview .................................................................................................................................................... 7 1.2 What is a Multi-State Rail Plan? ................................................................................................................ 7 1.3 Why the Southwest?.................................................................................................................................. 8 1.4 Geographic Scope of Study ........................................................................................................................ 9 1.5 Study Stakeholders .................................................................................................................................. 10 1.6 Guiding Principles for Southwest Multi-State Rail Network Planning ..................................................... 11 Chapter 2. Planning Context ................................................................................................................................. 12 2.1 Overview of the Study Area ..................................................................................................................... 12 2.2 Population and Travel Demand ..............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Technical Feasibility Study of Passenger Rail Service Along the West Route Between Las Vegas and Los Angeles
    Technical Feasibility Study of Passenger Rail Service along the West Route between Las Vegas and Los Angeles Prepared By Dr. Hualiang (Harry) Teng Associate Professor Director, Railroad, High Speed Rail and Transit Initiative Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Construction University of Nevada, Las Vegas 4505 Maryland Parkway, Box 454015 Las Vegas, NV 89154-4015 and Boniphace Kutela Graduate Student Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Construction University of Nevada, Las Vegas 4505 Maryland Parkway, Box 454015 Las Vegas, NV 89154-4015 June 25, 2015. Abstract The study evaluates the feasibility of running passenger train service from Las Vegas, NV to Los Angeles, CA. Starting from Las Vegas, the train will go south on the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR). When it reaches Barstow, California, it will turn west, riding on the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) track. At Mojave of California, it will turn south, getting on UPRR track again. When it arrives at Lancaster, it will stop and passengers will transfer to trains run by Metrolink which will carry them to their destinations in Southern California. The same route will be followed for the trip from Los Angeles to Las Vegas, but with the reverse order of journey as from Las Vegas. Instead of running passenger trains regularly, the proposed passenger train service is expected to provide excursion train service only for special events in order to minimize disturbance of passenger train service to freight operation. In this study, the railroad infrastructure was inventoried and issues related to running the passenger service were identified. Passenger train operation was evaluated based on a railroad simulation model.
    [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]
  • ABOARD Aboard They Made Their Way West—The Painted Desert, the Petrified Forest, the Rockies, Rio Grande River and Red Cliffs of New Mexico
    Other Sour ith'entutes AwaitYou! The Southwest Chief, traveling between Los WELCOME All Angeles and Chicago by way of Flagstaff, Albuquerque and Kansas City. Amtrak's Southwest Chief travels along the historic Santa Fe Trail—past some of the same wonders first glimpsed by the early settlers as ABOARD Aboard they made their way west—the Painted Desert, the Petrified Forest, the Rockies, Rio Grande River and Red Cliffs of New Mexico. Along the way, don't miss the chance to visit the Grand Canyon, Albuquerque or Am!mk! Santa Fe. The Sunset Limited, traveling between Los Angeles and New Orleans, passing through Phoenix, Tucson, El Paso, San Antonio and Houston. Travel the Sunset Limited and you'll experience the extraor- dinary variety of the great Southwest, from Texas oil ou're traveling on Amtrak's Superliner train—the fields to blue bayous; Indian prairies to mountain Empire Builder. On this route, you'll he traveling ranges; the Alamo to the Superdome. between Seattle or Portland and Chicago, by way of The California Zephyr, Desert Wind, and Spokane, the great northern plains and Minne- Pioneer—three trains traveling between San Fran- apolis/St. Paul. cisco, Los Angeles or Seattle, respectively, and While on board, you'll be experiencing the ut- Chicago via Salt Lake City and Denver. The Califor- most in train travel, along with some of the country's nia Zephyr, Desert Wind, and Pioneer will take you most exciting and colorful sights. The Cascade Moun- past some of the most breathtaking sights in America— tains of Washington or the Columbia River Gorge.
    [Show full text]
  • Nevada Passenger Rail Strategic Plan
    Nevada Passenger Rail Strategic Plan February 16, 2021 Introduction to SRF For Sustainable Industrial Development Michael Sussman, Established in 1995 in Philadelphia to advise short line Chairman/CEO railroads and companies in the North American rail industry. [email protected] SRF has completed projects in 46 US states and Canadian provinces and offers diverse services to the industry: • Railroad business valuations, sales, and acquisitions John Elliott, • Railroad operational analysis President/CFO [email protected] • Public and private finance • Capital project planning • Transportation planning and policy Strategic Rail Finance • Rail business development and site selection 1700 Sansom Street, Suite 500 Philadelphia, PA 19103 Presently advising on approximately $1.7B in rail-related (215) 564-3122 projects across North America. www.strategicrail.com Nevada Rail Passenger Issues and Objectives ISSUES: • Limited Rail Passenger Service and Frequency • Limited Stations and Routes • Limited Funding Sources OBJECTIVES • Encourage Private Sector Rail Passenger Initiatives: Las Vegas – Southern California • Focus on Use of Existing Railroad Infrastructure as a Base for New Passenger Transit Development: Intercity, Excursion, Amtrak’s Westbound California Zephyr at Reno Commuter INTERCITY: Proposed Amtrak Station Stops Proposed Amtrak California Zephyr Station Stops: • Sparks • Fernley • Lovelock • West Wendover INTERCITY: Amtrak California Zephyr OTHER PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS: • Resume Daily Service • Add Second Daily Train on the route • Improve Elko Station Facilities • Add Sleeping Cars to the California Zephyr • Replace 40+ year-old Superliner Cars Lounge Car on Amtrak’s California Zephyr Crossing Nevada East of Reno INTERCITY: Extend Amtrak Capitol Corridor • Extend Service to Reno/Sparks • Alternative to I-80 congestion and weather issues • Improves Connections between Northern California cities and Reno Metro area INTERCITY: Brightline West High Speed Rail • Las Vegas to S.
    [Show full text]
  • Nevada Passenger Rail Strategic Plan
    CHAPTER 3 Nevada Passenger Rail Strategic Plan 3-1 Chapter 3 Table of Contents Chapter 3 Proposed Passenger Rail Improvements and Investments .................................................... 3-4 A. Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 3-4 B. Passenger Rail Improvement Opportunities .................................................................................. 3-4 B-1. Intercity Rail Improvements ................................................................................................... 3-5 Amtrak California Zephyr .......................................................................................................... 3-5 Extension of Amtrak’s Capital Corridor to Reno/Sparks ........................................................... 3-10 Multistate Intercity Equipment Pool........................................................................................ 3-12 Brightline West – Rancho Cucamonga, CA to Las Vegas, NV .................................................... 3-12 Southwest Multi- State Rail Planning Study ............................................................................. 3-14 Thruway expansion & “C-Route”: Reno to Las Vegas by way of Central California ................... 3-16 Amtrak Salt Lake City-to-Las Vegas and Los Angeles Service .................................................... 3-20 B-2. Excursion Rail Improvements ..............................................................................................
    [Show full text]