Sounder Commuter Rail (Seattle)

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Sounder Commuter Rail (Seattle) Public Use of Rail Right-of-Way in Urban Areas Final Report PRC 14-12 F Public Use of Rail Right-of-Way in Urban Areas Texas A&M Transportation Institute PRC 14-12 F December 2014 Authors Jolanda Prozzi Rydell Walthall Megan Kenney Jeff Warner Curtis Morgan Table of Contents List of Figures ................................................................................................................................ 8 List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. 9 Executive Summary .................................................................................................................... 10 Sharing Rail Infrastructure ........................................................................................................ 10 Three Scenarios for Sharing Rail Infrastructure ................................................................... 10 Shared-Use Agreement Components .................................................................................... 12 Freight Railroad Company Perspectives ............................................................................... 12 Keys to Negotiating Successful Shared-Use Agreements .................................................... 13 Rail Infrastructure Relocation ................................................................................................... 15 Benefits of Infrastructure Relocation .................................................................................... 15 Challenges to Infrastructure Relocation ................................................................................ 15 Benefits and Impacts of Commuter Rail ................................................................................... 16 Travel Time ........................................................................................................................... 16 Vehicle Operating Costs ....................................................................................................... 16 Safety .................................................................................................................................... 17 Air Pollution .......................................................................................................................... 17 Other Environmental Impacts ............................................................................................... 17 Agency Cost Savings ............................................................................................................ 18 Economic Development Impacts .......................................................................................... 18 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................... 19 Project Overview ......................................................................................................................... 20 Sharing Rail Infrastructure ....................................................................................................... 22 Three Scenarios for Sharing Rail Infrastructure ....................................................................... 22 Considerations for Sharing Rail Infrastructure ......................................................................... 24 Challenges to Sharing Rail Infrastructure ................................................................................. 25 Rail Infrastructure Relocation................................................................................................... 27 Benefits of Infrastructure Relocation ........................................................................................ 27 Challenges to Infrastructure Relocation ................................................................................... 28 Freight Railroad Company Perspectives .................................................................................. 29 Keys to Negotiating Successful Shared-Use Agreements ........................................................ 32 Find Common Goals and Objectives ........................................................................................ 32 Build a Trusting Relationship ................................................................................................... 32 Cover the Freight Railroads’ Costs ........................................................................................... 33 Secure On-Time Performance .................................................................................................. 35 Preserve Time for Scheduled Track Maintenance .................................................................... 35 Address Service Expansion ...................................................................................................... 35 Address Safety Concerns .......................................................................................................... 35 Address Liability ....................................................................................................................... 36 Benefits and Impacts of Commuter Rail .................................................................................. 37 Benefits ..................................................................................................................................... 37 Travel Time ........................................................................................................................... 37 Vehicle Operating Costs ....................................................................................................... 38 Safety .................................................................................................................................... 38 Environment .......................................................................................................................... 39 4 Other Environmental Impacts ............................................................................................... 39 Agency Cost Savings ............................................................................................................ 40 Economic Development Impacts .............................................................................................. 40 Land-Use Patterns ................................................................................................................. 40 Job Creation .......................................................................................................................... 41 A Texas Case Study .................................................................................................................... 45 Cotton Belt Corridor Overview ................................................................................................ 45 Cotton Belt Corridor Western Segment—TEX Rail ................................................................ 46 Cotton Belt Corridor Eastern Segment ..................................................................................... 47 Benefits of Passenger Rail in the Cotton Belt Corridor ............................................................ 48 Lessons Learned from the Cotton Belt Corridor Project .......................................................... 49 Public Ownership or Control of a ROW May Not Extinguish or Shorten Existing Freight Operating Agreements .................................................................................... 49 Liability Is the Leading Concern for Freight Railroads in Shared Use ................................ 50 Negotiations and Development of Commuter Rail Service Often Take Much Longer than Originally Expected ............................................................................................ 50 Multiple Parties Mean Multiple Issues and Interests ............................................................ 50 Neglected and/or Unconsidered Details in Agreements Can Be Significant Hurdles .......... 50 Conclusions .................................................................................................................................. 52 Appendix A—Public Use of Rail Right-of-Way Case Studies ................................................ 54 FrontRunner (Salt Lake City, Utah) ......................................................................................... 54 Overview ............................................................................................................................... 54 Stakeholders Involved ........................................................................................................... 54 Nature of Agreement ............................................................................................................. 55 Concerns Raised .................................................................................................................... 56 Realized Benefits .................................................................................................................. 57 Political/Social Context ........................................................................................................ 57 Future Issues ......................................................................................................................... 58 Lessons Learned ...................................................................................................................
Recommended publications
  • Bus and Shared-Ride Taxi Use in Two Small Urban Areas
    Bus and Shared-Ride Taxi Use in Two Small Urban Areas David P. Middendorf, Peat, Marwick, Mitchell and Company Kenneth W. Heathington, University of Tennessee The demand for publicly owned fixed-route. fixed-schedule bus service are used for work and business-related trips to and was compared with tho demand for privately owned shared-ride taxi ser­ within CBDs and for short social, shopping, medical, vice in Davenport. Iowa, and Hicksville, New York, through on-board and personal business trips. surveys end cab company dispatch records and driver logs. The bus and In many small cities and in many suburbs of large slmrcd·ride taxi systems in Davenport com11eted for the off.peak-period travel market. During off-peak hours, the taxis tended to attract social· metropol.il;e:H!:i, l.lus~s nd taxicabs operate within tlie recreation, medical, and per onal business trips between widely scattered same jlu·isclictions and may compete for the same public origins and destinations, while the buses tended 10 attract shopping and transportation market. Two examples of small commu­ personal business trips to the CBD. The shared-ride taxi system in Hicks· nities in which buses and ta.xis coexist are Davenport, ville, in addition to providing many-to·many service, competed with the Iowa, and Hicksville, New York. The markets, eco­ counlywide bus system as a feeder system to the Long Island commuter nomic characteristics, organization, management, and railroad network. In each study area, the markets of each mode of public operation of the taxicab systems sel'Ving these commu­ transportation were similar.
    [Show full text]
  • US Army Railroad Course Railway Track Maintenance II TR0671
    SUBCOURSE EDITION TR0671 1 RAILWAY TRACK MAINTENANCE II Reference Text (RT) 671 is the second of two texts on railway track maintenance. The first, RT 670, Railway Track Maintenance I, covers fundamentals of railway engineering; roadbed, ballast, and drainage; and track elements--rail, crossties, track fastenings, and rail joints. Reference Text 671 amplifies many of those subjects and also discusses such topics as turnouts, curves, grade crossings, seasonal maintenance, and maintenance-of-way management. If the student has had no practical experience with railway maintenance, it is advisable that RT 670 be studied before this text. In doing so, many of the points stressed in this text will be clarified. In addition, frequent references are made in this text to material in RT 670 so that certain definitions, procedures, etc., may be reviewed if needed. i THIS PAGE WAS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK. ii CONTENTS Paragraph Page INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................. 1 CHAPTER 1. TRACK REHABILITATION............................................................. 1.1 7 Section I. Surfacing..................................................................................... 1.2 8 II. Re-Laying Rail............................................................................ 1.12 18 III. Tie Renewal................................................................................ 1.18 23 CHAPTER 2. TURNOUTS AND SPECIAL SWITCHES........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Co M M U Te R
    RAIL COMMUTER Effective August 12, 2019 Monday – Saturday EBJ Union Station Victory Station Medical/Market Center Station Downtown Irving/ Heritage Crossing Station West Irving Station CentrePort DFW Airport Station (Fare Boundary) Bell Station Richland Hills Station Fort Worth Central Station Fort Worth T & P Station TRE Schedule booklet_AUG 2019 Designer: JH 525-008-0619 SIZE: 3.25X9 CMYK w/Bleeds TrinityRailwayExpress.org RideTrinityMetro.org DART.org 817-215-8600 214-979 -1111 DART TICKETS & PASS PRICES PRECIOS DE PASES Y BOLETOS DE DART FARES TARIFAS Fare Category FARE Categoría de tarifa TARIFA Single Ride - Local (Bus Only) $2.50 Viaje Sencillo - Local (Sólo Autobús) $2.50 Single Ride - Reduced* (Bus Only) $1.25 Viaje Sencillo - Reducido* (Sólo Autobús) $1.25 AM/PM Pass - Local $3.00 Pase AM/PM - Local $3.00 AM/PM Pass - Reduced* $1.50 Pase AM/PM - Reducido* $1.50 Midday - Local (9:30 a.m. - 2:30 p.m.) $2.00 Mediodía - Local (9:30 a.m. - 2:30 p.m.) $2.00 Day Pass - Local $6.00 Pase Diario - Local $6.00 Day Pass - Reduced* $3.00 Pase Diario - Reducido* $3.00 Day Pass - Regional $12.00 Pase Diario - Regional $12.00 Monthly Pass - Local † $96.00 Pase Mensual - Local † $96.00 Monthly Pass - Reduced* † $48.00 Pase Mensual - Reducido* † $48.00 Monthly Pass - Regional $192.00 Pase Mensual - Regional $192.00 Local: DART rail and buses; Trinity Railway Express Local: ferroviario y autobuses de DART; servicio de (TRE) service between EBJ Union Station & CentrePort Trinity Railway Express (TRE) entre EBJ Union Station y Station; GoLink & Flex service.
    [Show full text]
  • DART / TRE / Texrail / DCTA Effective: August 12, 2019
    Rail System Map DART / TRE / TEXRail / DCTA Effective: August 12, 2019 O R Parker Road P PLANO MAP LEGEND Fare ChangeDENTON — PLANO Downtown Plano Blue Line B UNT Dallas to Downtown Rowlett President George Bush Turnpike ExpresswayCentral to Denton (operated by DCTA) Red Line R Westmoreland to Parker Rd. Regional Zone Cityline/Bush P Downtown Denton TC Dallas North Tollway Green Line G 35E P LIMITED PARKING AVAILABLE 75 North Carrollton/Frankford to Buckner Med Park P Orange Line O Highland Village/Lewisville Lake DFW Airport to LBJ/Central P LIMITED PARKING AVAILABLE LBJ/Central to Parker, Galatyn Park G Old Town P Weekdays Peak Only P Parking Available North Fare Change Carrollton/ Hebron P — Trinity Railway Express Frankford George Turnpike Bush President P (No Sunday Service) ADDISON Arapaho Center P TEXRail CARROLLTON RICHARDSON 121 Regional Zone A-Train Trinity Mills P Regional Zone Fare Zone Boundry Downtown RICHARDSON Stemmons FreewayCarrollton P Regional Fares Apply 161 Spring Valley P FARMERS Regional Zone — Fare Change Only Peak Weekdays BRANCH ROWLETT P Farmers Branch P Grapevine/ GARLAND Lyndon B. Johnson Freeway Main Street Rd. Parker to LBJ/Central Line Orange B 635 635 Downtown Dallas North Tollway Downtown 114 Royal Lane P O LBJ/Central P Forest/Jupiter P 635 Garland Rowlett DFW P P P Airport Belt P 114 Line Walnut Hill/ Forest Lane P North North Irving Denton P P Lake Covention College Center 35E P Walnut Hill LBJ/Skillman Bachman P P R. L. Thornton Fwy Burbank Lake DFW DFW Las Colinas P Park Lane Highlands P 30 Airport Airport Urban P LOOP North P 12 Terminal Terminal Center Freeway Stemmons Richland Hills/ B A Lovers Lane White Rock P Smitheld DFW 161 University Inwood/ UNIVERSITY PARK of Dallas Love Field MESQUITE P North Richland P HIGHLAND 75 SMU/Mockingbird Hills/Iron Horse P 114 Southwestern PARK 183 Medical District/ Cityplace/Uptown P Mercantile Center LOOP Parkland Pearl/Arts 12 Market P District 635 P 35E LOOP North Side Center St.
    [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]
  • Board of Directors J U L Y 2 4 , 2 0
    BOARD OF DIRECTORS JULY 24, 2015 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA REGIONAL RAIL AUTHORITY BOARD ROSTER SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA REGIONAL RAIL AUTHORITY County Member Alternate Orange: Shawn Nelson (Chair) Jeffrey Lalloway* Supervisor, 4th District Mayor Pro Tem, City of Irvine 2 votes County of Orange, Chairman OCTA Board, Chair OCTA Board Gregory T. Winterbottom Todd Spitzer* Public Member Supervisor, 3rd District OCTA Board County of Orange OCTA Board Riverside: Daryl Busch (Vice-Chair) Andrew Kotyuk* Mayor Council Member 2 votes City of Perris City of San Jacinto RCTC Board, Chair RCTC Board Karen Spiegel Debbie Franklin* Council Member Mayor City of Corona City of Banning RCTC Board RCTC Board Ventura: Keith Millhouse (2nd Vice-Chair) Brian Humphrey Mayor Pro Tem Citizen Representative 1 vote City of Moorpark VCTC Board VCTC Board Los Angeles: Michael Antonovich Roxana Martinez Supervisor, 5th District Councilmember 4 votes County of Los Angeles, Mayor City of Palmdale Metro Board Metro Appointee Hilda Solis Joseph J. Gonzales Supervisor, 1st District Councilmember County of Los Angeles City of South El Monte Metro Board Metro Appointee Paul Krekorian Borja Leon Councilmember, 2nd District Metro Appointee Metro Board Ara Najarian [currently awaiting appointment] Council Member City of Glendale Metro Board One Gateway Plaza, 12th Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90012 SCRRA Board of Directors Roster Page 2 San Bernardino: Larry McCallon James Ramos* Mayor Supervisor, 3rd District 2 votes City of Highland County of San Bernardino, Chair SANBAG Board SANBAG Board
    [Show full text]
  • Texrail Is Off and Running, and Here's Where to Catch It
    FRIDAY JANUARY112019 Local 3A Star Telegram,STAR-TELEGRAM.C OM1/11/2019 Cropped page Page: 3A S1 TEXRail is off and running, and here’s where to catch it Transit’s Orange Line the retired American Ea- BY GORDON DICKSON light-rail service a few gle employee said. “We fly [email protected] hundred feet away in out of the airport all the Terminal A. time.” DFW AIRPORT The commuter rail serv- After delays related to ice already was proving TEXRAIL STATIONS the federal shutdown, the popular. A T&P Station (down- long-awaited TEXRail Just after 10 a.m. Thurs- town Fort Worth) commuter line is now day, a train pulled into the 221 W. Lancaster Ave. open to anyone who wants station at the lower level Fort Worth, TX 76102 to ride it. of Terminal B carrying 67 A ITC Station (down- But where the heck are passengers. A handful town Fort Worth) the stations? carried luggage and ap- 1001 Jones St. For rail aficionados, it peared to be ready to Fort Worth, TX 76102 might seem like a simple board flights. A North Side Station question. But the simple Other riders said they (north Fort Worth) fact is, TEXRail is running just wanted to check out 2829 Decatur Ave. through parts of Northeast the quality of the train Fort Worth, TX 76106 GORDON DICKSON [email protected] Tarrant County that ride. Among them was A Mercantile Center Passengers step off a TEXRail train at DFW Airport Terminal B. The commuter rail line is haven’t had passenger Kurt Troeger, a retiree Station (north Fort Worth) now open to the public and free to ride through the end of January.
    [Show full text]
  • FY 2016 Operating & Capital Budget & 5 Year Capital Improvement Plan
    PROPOSED FY 2016 Operating & Capital Budget & 5 Year Capital Improvement Plan Capital Metropolitan Transportation Authority | Austin, Texas Capital Metropolitan Transportation Authority Proposed FY 2016 Operating and Capital Budget and Five Year Capital Improvement Plan Table of Contents Organization of the Budget Document ....................................................................................... 1 Transmittal Letter ....................................................................................................................... 2 Introduction History and Service Area ..................................................................................................... 4 Capital Metro Service Area Map .......................................................................................... 4 Community Information and Capital Metro Involvement ..................................................... 5 Benefits of Public Transportation......................................................................................... 6 Governance ......................................................................................................................... 7 Management ........................................................................................................................ 8 System Facility Characteristics ............................................................................................ 9 MetroRail Red Line Service Map ......................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Metra, CTA Bus and “L” Routes Near Mccormick Place
    Metra, CTA Bus and “L” Routes Near McCormick Place Bus System (CTA) Metra Trains CTA Bus #3, King Drive Metra Electric District CTA Bus #21, Cermak Stations There is a Metra Electric District McCormick Place Bus Stops station located on Level 2.5 of the Grand Concourse in the South The #3 King Drive bus and the #21 Building. Metra Electric commuter Cermak bus makes stops at railroad provides direct service within McCormick Place. seven minutes to and from downtown Chicago. For information on riding the CTA Bus System, please visit their website: For information on riding the Metra Electric Line, please visit their http://www.transitchicago.com/riding_ website: cta/service_overview.aspx http://metrarail.com/ CTA “L” Trains Green “L” line Cermak-McCormick Place Station - This station is just a short two and a half block walk to the McCormick Place West Building Blue “L” line - Service to/from O’Hare Airport. You may transfer at Clark/Lake to/from the Green line. Orange “L” line - Service to/from Midway Airport. You may transfer at Roosevelt to/from the Cermak-McCormick Place Green Line. Green Line Station McCormick Place Red “L” line - Either transfer to the Green Line at Roosevelt or exit at the Cermak-Chinatown Station and take CTA Bus #21 The Blue and Orange “L” trains are also in easy walking distance from most CTA Bus stops and Metra stations. For more information about specific routes, please visit their website:.
    [Show full text]
  • Big Freight Railroads to Miss Safety Technology Deadline
    Big Freight railroads to miss safety technology deadline FILE - In this June 4, 2014 file photo, a Norfolk Southern locomotive moves along the tracks in Norfolk, Va. Three of the biggest freight railroads operating in the U.S. have told telling the government they won’t make a 2018 deadline to start using safety technology intended to prevent accidents like the deadly derailment of an Amtrak train in Philadelphia last May. Norfolk Southern, Canadian National Railway and CSX Transportation and say they won’t be ready until 2020, according to a list provided to The Associated Press by the Federal Railroad Administration. Steve Helber, File AP Photo BY JOAN LOWY, Associated Press WASHINGTON Three of the biggest freight railroads operating in the U.S. have told the government they won't meet a 2018 deadline to start using safety technology intended to prevent accidents like the deadly derailment of an Amtrak train in Philadelphia last May. Canadian National Railway, CSX Transportation and Norfolk Southern say they won't be ready until 2020, according to a list provided to The Associated Press by the Federal Railroad Administration. Four commuter railroads — SunRail in Florida, Metra in Illinois, the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority and Trinity Railway Express in Texas — also say they'll miss the deadline. The technology, called positive train control or PTC, relies on GPS, wireless radio and computers to monitor train positions and automatically slow or stop trains that are in danger of colliding, derailing due to excessive speed or about to enter track where crews are working or that is otherwise off limits.
    [Show full text]
  • Nurail Project ID: Nurail2012-UTK-R04 Macro Scale
    NURail project ID: NURail2012-UTK-R04 Macro Scale Models for Freight Railroad Terminals By Mingzhou Jin Professor Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering University of Tennessee at Knoxville E-mail: [email protected] David B. Clarke Director of the Center for Transportation Research University of Tennessee at Knoxville E-mail: [email protected] Grant Number: DTRT12-G-UTC18 March 2, 2016 Page 1 of 6 DISCLAIMER Funding for this research was provided by the NURail Center, University of Illinois at Urbana - Champaign under Grant No. DTRT12-G-UTC18 of the U.S. Department of Transportation, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research & Technology (OST-R), University Transportation Centers Program. The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors, who are responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the information presented herein. This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation’s University Transportation Centers Program, in the interest of information exchange. The U.S. Government assumes no liability for the contents or use thereof. March 2, 2016 Page 2 of 6 TECHNICAL SUMMARY Title Macro Scale Models for Freight Railroad Terminals Introduction This project has developed a yard capacity model for macro-level analysis. The study considers the detailed sequence and scheduling in classification yards and their impacts on yard capacities simulate typical freight railroad terminals, and statistically analyses of the historical and simulated data regarding dwell-time and traffic flows. Approach and Methodology The team developed optimization models to investigate three sequencing decisions are at the areas inspection, hump, and assembly.
    [Show full text]
  • Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) and Light Rail Transit
    Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) and Light Rail Transit (LRT) Performance Characteristics Stations Mixed Traffic Lanes* Service Characteristics Newest Corridor End‐to‐End Travel Departures Every 'X' Travel Speed (MPH) City Corridor Segment Open length (mi) # Spacing (mi) Miles % Time Minutes BRT Systems Boston Silver Line Washington Street ‐ SL5 2002 2.40 13 0.18 1.03 42.93% 19 7 7.58 Oakland San Pablo Rapid ‐ 72R 2003 14.79 52 0.28 14.79 100.00% 60 12 14.79 Albuquerque The Red Line (766) 2004 11.00 17 0.65 10.32 93.79% 44 18 15.00 Kansas City Main Street ‐ MAX "Orange Line" 2005 8.95 22 0.41 4.29 47.92% 40 10 13.42 Eugene Green Line 2007 3.98 10 0.40 1.59 40.00% 29 10 8.23 New York Bx12 SBS (Fordham Road ‐ Pelham Pkwy) 2008 9.00 18 0.50 5.20 57.73% 52 3 10.38 Cleveland HealthLine 2008 6.80 39 0.17 2.33 34.19% 38 8 10.74 Snohomish County Swift BRT ‐ Blue Line 2009 16.72 31 0.54 6.77 40.52% 43 12 23.33 Eugene Gateway Line 2011 7.76 14 0.55 2.59 33.33% 29 10 16.05 Kansas City Troost Avenue ‐ "Green Line" 2011 12.93 22 0.59 12.93 100.00% 50 10 15.51 New York M34 SBS (34th Street) 2011 2.00 13 0.15 2.00 100.00% 23 9 5.22 Stockton Route #44 ‐ Airport Corridor 2011 5.50 8 0.69 5.50 100.00% 23 20 14.35 Stockton Route #43 ‐ Hammer Corridor 2012 5.30 14 0.38 5.30 100.00% 28 12 11.35 Alexandria ‐ Arlington Metroway 2014 6.80 15 0.45 6.12 89.95% 24 12 17.00 Fort Collins Mason Corridor 2014 4.97 12 0.41 1.99 40.00% 24 10 12.43 San Bernardino sbX ‐ "Green Line" 2014 15.70 16 0.98 9.86 62.79% 56 10 16.82 Minneapolis A Line 2016 9.90 20 0.50 9.90 100.00% 28 10 21.21 Minneapolis Red Line 2013 13.00 5 2.60 2.00 15.38% 55 15 14.18 Chapel Hill N‐S Corridor Proposed 8.20 16 0.51 1.34 16.34% 30 7.5 16.40 LRT Systems St.
    [Show full text]