MEETING NOTICE AND AGENDA
LOSSAN RAIL CORRIDOR AGENCY TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE (TAC) The LOSSAN TAC may take action on any item appearing on this agenda.
Friday, November 1, 2013
12:30 to 2:30 p.m.
Santa Barbara County Administration Building Large Supervisor’s Conference Room, 4th Floor 105 East Anapamu Street Santa Barbara, CA
Staff Contact: Danny Veeh (619) 699-7317 [email protected]
AGENDA HIGHLIGHTS
• MANAGING AGENCY ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT AGREEMENT STATUS UPDATE
• SANTA MARIA REFINERY EXPANSION
• LOSSAN 2014 LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM
• INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE LOSSAN RAIL CORRIDOR IN SAN DIEGO COUNTY
To request this document or related reports in an alternative format, please call (619) 699-1900, (619) 699-1904 (TTY), or fax (619) 699-1905. MEETING LOCATION
The meeting will be located at the County Administration Building 105 East Anapamu Street in Santa Barbara, California. Metropolitan Transit District operates a downtown electric shuttle along State Street connecting the Amtrak station to the meeting location. The downtown shuttle operates every 15 minutes with a fare of $0.50.
105 East Anapamu
Several LOSSAN member agencies will be attending this meeting via teleconference from the following locations: Riverside County Transportation Commission, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside, CA Amtrak, 530 Water Street, Oakland, CA Caltrans Division of Rail, 1120 N Street, Sacramento, CA
The public is welcome to attend and testify at any of the LOSSAN member agency locations listed above, all of which are accessible to the public. For more information, please contact LOSSAN staff at (619) 699-7317 or email [email protected] for specific meeting room locations at least 72 hours in advance of the meeting. Otherwise, conference calling is available.
2 Los Angeles – San Diego – San Luis Obispo (LOSSAN) Rail Corridor Agency TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE Friday, November 1, 2013
ITEM # ACTION
1. WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS
2. PUBLIC COMMENT/COMMUNICATIONS
Speakers are limited to three minutes each.
+3. OCTOBER 3, 2013, MEETING MINUTES (Danny Veeh, SANDAG) APPROVE
The LOSSAN TAC is asked to approve the minutes from the TAC’s last meeting. Please see the attachment.
4. MANAGING AGENCY ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT AGREEMENT INFORMATION STATUS UPDATE (Linda Culp, SANDAG)
The Draft Administrative Support Agreement with the LOSSAN Managing Agency was presented to the Board at its October meeting and will consider finalizing this agreement at the November 20, 2013, meeting. Staff will provide a status update.
5. SANTA MARIA REFINERY EXPANSION (Pete Rodgers, SLOCOG) INFORMATION
The Phillips 66 oil refinery in San Luis Obispo County has proposed an expansion that includes increased shipments by rail (estimated at 10 trains per week). Staff will discuss potential conflicts between the additional freight rail service and the existing/future passenger rail service on the LOSSAN North Corridor, and Coast Corridor north of San Luis Obispo.
+6. LOSSAN 2014 LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM (Linda Culp, SANDAG) DISCUSSION
LOSSAN staff will review the proposed 2014 LOSSAN Legislative Program and seek TAC comments.
+7. CHANGES TO BOARD POLICY NOS. 01 AND 02 BASED ON THE DISCUSSION AMENDED JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT AND BYLAWS (Linda Culp, SANDAG)
LOSSAN staff will review potential changes to LOSSAN Board Policy Nos. 01 and 02 that will be presented to the LOSSAN Board for approval on November 20, 2013.
3 +8. INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE LOSSAN RAIL INFORMATION CORRIDOR IN SAN DIEGO COUNTY (Linda Culp, SANDAG; Lane Fernandes, Parsons Brinkerhoff)
SANDAG and Parsons Brinkerhoff will summarize the findings of the recently completed Infrastructure Development Plan for the LOSSAN Rail Corridor in San Diego County.
9. CALIFORNIA INTERCITY PASSENGER RAIL PROGRAM CORRIDOR INFORMATION JOINT POWERS AUTHORITIES CHAIRS AND VICE CHAIRS MEETING (Danny Veeh, SANDAG)
The chairs, vice chairs, and staff representing LOSSAN, Capitol Corridor, San Joaquin, Coast Daylight, and other emerging corridors met on October 17, 2013, in Orange, California. Staff will present a summary of the meeting.
10. LOSSAN NORTH ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT/ INFORMATION ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (Joe Valdez, Caltrans)
Caltrans Division of Rail is working collaboratively with Caltrans District 5 to prepare a program-level environmental document to become eligible for federal funding. Project scoping meetings were held in January 2012 and the draft document is expected to be released to the public in March 2014, with the final document in October 2014. Caltrans staff will provide a status update.
+11. REVISED DRAFT 2014 LOSSAN MEETING SCHEDULE INFORMATION (Michael Litschi, OCTA)
Staff will discuss the proposed changes to the 2014 LOSSAN Meeting Schedule.
+12. CORRIDOR TRENDS (Danny Veeh, SANDAG) INFORMATION
The latest corridor statistics, including ridership and revenue statistics and customer satisfaction indices, are attached.
+13. REVIEW NOVEMBER 20, 2013, BOARD OF DIRECTORS DRAFT REVIEW AND AGENDA (Linda Culp, SANDAG) COMMENT
The LOSSAN TAC will review the draft agenda for the next LOSSAN Board of Directors meeting.
14. LOSSAN TAC MEMBER UPDATES INFORMATION
4 15. NEXT MEETING APPROVE
The next LOSSAN TAC meeting is scheduled for December 5, 2013, at LA Metro in Los Angeles from 12:30 to 2:30 p.m.
+ next to an item indicates an attachment
5 Los Angeles – San Diego – San Luis Obispo Rail Corridor Agency TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
November 1, 2013 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 3
Action Requested: APPROVE
OCTOBER 3, 2013, MEETING MINUTES File Number 3400600
The LOSSAN Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) met on October 3, 2013, in Los Angeles. In attendance were:
Danny Veeh, SANDAG Linda Culp, SANDAG Weston Parsel, OCTA Sheldon Peterson, RCTC William Ringland, SCRRA Mark Waier, SCRRA Michael Litschi, OCTA Mike Dwyer, Amtrak Jay Fuhrman, Metro Via Teleconference: Henning Eichler, SCRRA John Preston, Amtrak Scott Spaulding, SBCAG Jonathan Hutchinson, Amtrak Megan Taylor, OCTA Joe Valdez, Caltrans James Hinkamp, VCTC Pete Rodgers, SLOCOG Steve Fox, SCAG Gretchen Brigaman, Caltrans
WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS
Danny Veeh (SANDAG) welcomed everyone to the meeting. He also mentioned that there will be a tour of Amtrak's new First Class passenger lounge in Union Station. Those who are interested should meet at the Subway sandwich shop inside Union Station at 2:30 p.m. Mr. Veeh thanked Amtrak for arranging this tour.
PUBLIC COMMENTS/COMMUNICATION
No public comments.
SEPTEMBER 5, 2013, MEETING MINUTES
The minutes were approved.
STATUS OF MANAGING AGENCY ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES AGREEMENT
Linda Culp (SANDAG) informed the TAC that the initial Draft Administrative Services Agreement (ASA) was presented to the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA). OCTA has reviewed and provided comments back to LOSSAN staff. The LOSSAN negotiations team will then review the comments from OCTA and develop staff responses to be included in a revised draft ASA for the October 16, 2013, Board meeting. No action is requested in October, but the goal is to have a final approval from the Board of Directors in November.
6
Pete Rodgers (SLOCOG) asked if the Amtrak California Thruway Bus service would be addressed in the ASA. Michael Litschi (OCTA) mentioned that the ASA is a high-level document, but the Thruway bus connections will be addressed in the Interagency Transfer Agreement.
METROLINK BIKE PROGRAM OVERVIEW
William Ringland (SCRRA) provided an overview of the Metrolink bike program. Metrolink has 24 specifically designated bike cars in their fleet as well as capacity for 3 bikes on all other cars. Bike cars are assigned to specific trains with high bike usage and clearly listed in the Metrolink timetable. Metrolink trains carry over 900 bikes per weekday on all routes. In 2013, bikes on board have increased with an 8 percent growth in the first quarter and 10 percent growth in the second quarter. Metrolink tracks bike usage and places bike cars based on demand. Metrolink also supports and promotes many events including CicLAvia, bike to work week, and other special requests from bike groups. All bike information is housed on Metrolink’s website. There was a following discussion regarding ridership and storage facilities at stations. The TAC felt that it was important to track bike boardings by stations to help prioritize investments in bike infrastructure at stations.
ORANGE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY BIKE PROGRAM OVERVIEW
Weston Parsel (OCTA) presented a general overview of OCTA's bike program. OCTA’s goal is to increase bike funding and focus on first- and last-mile connections. OCTA was awarded $9.4 million for a bike corridor improvement program and subsequently awarded grants to local agencies. They also have held events such as national bike month and produced a promotional bike video, which is hosted on their website. OCTA also is initiating a bike share pilot program in the City of Fullerton. This program will track usage via GPS units installed on bikes. The data from this pilot program will provide key information that can be used to pursue additional funding.
Ms. Culp announced that the SANDAG Board approved a bike Early Action Plan allocating $200 million to be used for the construction of bike infrastructure in San Diego County, including construction along the Coastal Rail Trail, which shares the LOSSAN Corridor. Mr. Veeh suggested that the bike data summary that was presented at the TAC meeting in September, along with the summaries of the Metrolink and OCTA bike programs from today, should be presented to the LOSSAN Board. Other LOSSAN agencies that would like to include a summary of their bike programs at the Board meeting should contact Mr. Veeh.
PACIFIC SURFLINER WINTER 2013 RIDERSHIP PROFILES
John Preston (Amtrak) worked in partnership with Caltrans to conduct onboard surveys to develop an ongoing demographic profile of passengers on the Pacific Surfliner. There were over 5,000 surveys conducted between February and March 2013. All trains were surveyed and the survey included questions about satisfaction, demographics, and overall behavior. One key finding is that 95 to 96 percent of riders would recommend Amtrak California. There also is a higher percentage of younger riders on the Pacific Surfliner than most other Amtrak lines. The medium household income for riders on the Pacific Surfliner is $76,000, which is high compared to other lines. The TAC requested Amtrak to provide a copy of the final onboard survey report to review the details. Ms. Culp suggested that this presentation be shared with the Board in November.
7
METROLINK SYSTEM DEMOGRAPHICS
Henning Eichler (SCRRA) presented the findings from a past Metrolink onboard survey. This survey period extended between July and December 2012 and covered 61 trains. There were a total of 3,500 surveys completed. Some of the key findings were that monthly passes are the most popular fare type, though purchases of this type have recently decreased. Metrolink ridership has become more diverse with a 64 percent minority share, while 10 years ago minority riders only accounted for 54 percent of riders. Other trends also were discussed and survey findings were summarized. Ms. Culp asked if any of the findings could indicate a reason for the declining ridership. Mr. Eichler stated that the last data was collected in 2012 before ridership started declining and informed the group that there is further analysis being conducted in order to identify reasons behind current ridership decline.
LOSSAN NORTH
Joe Valdez (Caltrans) informed the TAC that the draft administrative environmental document has been completed for the LOSSAN North Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement. Caltrans Legal Department and the Federal Railroad Administration will be reviewing the document before the release of the public draft document. Ms. Culp asked if there would be an opportunity for the TAC members to review this document in advance of the public release. Mr. Valdez informed the group that the soonest TAC members would be able to review this document would be in conjunction with the release for public review. Mr. Valdez also mentioned that during the public review process there would be meetings held in each of the LOSSAN North counties. Several TAC members offered to assist Caltrans in hosting any public meetings.
LOSSAN BRANDING
Mr. Litschi presented the potential branding options of the LOSSAN Joint Powers Agency (JPA) service. LA Metro proposed rebranding the LOSSAN agency in their managing agency proposal, so that the public would be able to better associate the LOSSAN Board with the Pacific Surfliner service. Mr. Litschi reviewed other Amtrak logos and presented some preliminary concepts for a new logo. LOSSAN would remain the legal name, but there could be a different name that people would publicly associate with the agency. There also was a discussion regarding the logistics of changing the name, which may require changes to the JPA agreement by each member agency, legislative changes, and potential agreements to use Amtrak trademarked logos. The TAC decided that this item should be further discussed at future TAC meetings, looking specifically at the timing, cost, and effort involved in a rebranding effort.
LOSSAN JOINT TIMETABLE
Mr. Veeh announced that the LOSSAN joint timetable is currently being updated with the September 30 Metrolink schedules and the October 7 Amtrak and COASTER schedules. The webpage lossan.org/timetable currently has links to each operator’s website for current schedules. North County Transit District is working on updating the timetable graphics file and it should be posted online next week. Mr. Veeh will contact the TAC members when the new timetable is posted and notify the public via social media.
8
CORRIDOR TRENDS
Mr. Veeh presented the recent LOSSAN Corridor trends to the group. The Board requested more information on the Metrolink ridership losses and lower On-Time Performance (OTP) on the Pacific Surfliner. An updated report with any new findings regarding Metrolink will be presented to the Board on October 16, 2013. The potential impacts to Pacific Surfliner OTP for the six trains that will stop at all COASTER stations was discussed. Bike trends also will continue to be tracked.
REVIEW OF OCTOBER 16, 2013, BOARD OF DIRECTORS DRAFT AGENDA
Ms. Culp reviewed the LOSSAN Board draft agenda planned for the next Board meeting that will be held in OCTA’s Board room. OCTA will provide transportation from the Anaheim station to OCTA’s building. There also was a brief discussion regarding the proposed 2014 schedule. Ms. Culp reminded the group that there is absolutely no food or drink allowed in the Metro Board room. Additionally, Metro may scale back lunches in the future.
LOSSAN TAC MEMBER UPDATES
Scott Spaulding (SBCAG) reminded the group that the Santa Barbra Open Streets event will be taking place November 2, 2013, which is the day after the TAC meeting.
NEXT MEETING
The next LOSSAN TAC meeting is scheduled for Friday, November 1, 2013, in Santa Barbara, 12:30 to 2:30 p.m.
Key Staff Contact: Danny Veeh, (619) 699-7317, [email protected]
9 Los Angeles – San Diego – San Luis Obispo (LOSSAN) Rail Corridor Agency TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
November 1, 2013 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 6
Action Requested: DISCUSSION
LOSSAN 2014 LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM File Number 3400600
Introduction
The LOSSAN Board of Directors annually approves a legislative program of strategic goals and policies that provides direction to the Technical Advisory Committee and staff when individual legislative efforts are reviewed. The Board last updated this program in December 2012.
Attachment 1 is the proposed 2014 LOSSAN Legislative Program. The main changes focus on increasing support for the California Intercity Rail Program and implementation of the California Passenger Rail Program Guiding Principles, approved by the Board of Directors on September 25, 2013.
Attachment: 1. Proposed 2014 LOSSAN Legislative Program
Key Staff Contact: Linda Culp, (619) 699-6957, [email protected]
10 Attachment 1
PROPOSED 2014 LOSSAN LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM
No. GOAL PRIORITY FEDERAL STATE LOCAL
1 Support implementation of the California Passenger Rail Guiding Principles. HIGH X X X
2 Increase stakeholder support for California’s Intercity Passenger Rail Program. HIGH X X 3 Support efforts to pursue a stable, recurring source of intercity rail operations and HIGH X X capital funding. 4 Support efforts to implement SB 1225 (Padilla) and work collaboratively with the San HIGH X Joaquin Corridor to support efforts to implement AB 1779 (Galgiani). 5 Support efforts to implement Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP‐21) in terms of appropriate funding levels, transit and rail investments, and process HIGH X X X improvements. 6 Support reauthorization of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act HIGH X (PRIIA), including the development of a federal rail capital investment program. 7 Support reauthorization of MAP‐21 including the development of a federal rail capital HIGH X investment program. 8 Support efforts to apply for federal rail capital matching program funds, including PRIIA HIGH X and annual appropriations, for projects.
9 Support funding for LOSSAN Priority Projects. HIGH X X X 10 Ensure continued and expanded federal support for Amtrak, and specifically, a stable, HIGH X adequate, multi‐year funding source for operations.
11
PROPOSED 2014 LOSSAN LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM
No. GOAL PRIORITY FEDERAL STATE LOCAL
11 Expand efforts on joint activities with the Capitol, San Joaquin, and Coast Rail Corridors HIGH X X at both the federal and state levels.
12 Strengthen efforts to advocate for the LOSSAN Corridor. HIGH X X X 13 Support mechanisms and funding providing for the implementation of the LOSSAN Corridorwide Strategic Implementation Plan, State Rail Plan, and other rail HIGH X X improvement plans. 14 Support member agency funding requests consistent with the LOSSAN policylegislative HIGH X X program. 15 Support generation of new revenue sources; maximize flexibility in use of federal and HIGH X X state funds, including emerging funding programs, such as cap and trade. 16 Support legislation promoting rail safety and rail security, including efforts to fund and HIGH X X X implement Positive Train Control. 17 Secure Homeland Security funds for rail system protection and passenger protection HIGH X X projects. 18 Support goods movement proposals that have a positive impact on passenger rail HIGH X X X systems. 19 Lower the current two‐thirds voter requirement for special purpose taxes, such as MED X transportation and quality of life improvements, to a simple majority vote.
12
PROPOSED 2014 LOSSAN LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM
No. GOAL PRIORITY FEDERAL STATE LOCAL
20 Support legislation that supports smart growth and transit‐oriented development, MED X X X mixed‐use development, and joint development opportunities.
21 Oppose efforts that would reduce transportation funding. HIGH X X X
13 Los Angeles – San Diego – San Luis Obispo (LOSSAN) Rail Corridor Agency TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
November 1, 2013 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 7
Action Requested: DISCUSSION
CHANGES TO BOARD POLICY NOS. 01 AND 02 BASED File Number 3400600 ON THE AMENDED JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT AND BYLAWS
The amended Joint Powers Agreement and revised bylaws approved by the LOSSAN Board of Directors in June 2013, necessitates minor changes to Board Policy Nos. 01 and 02 (Attachments 1 and 2 respectively). These changes are minor in nature and include updating terminology such as executive director with managing director and regions from LOSSAN North and South to wording consistent with the current four regions (North, Central, South Central, and South).
Staff plans to ask for Board approval by resolution at its November 20, 2013, meeting.
Attachments: 1. LOSSAN Board Policy No. 01 2. LOSSAN Board Policy No. 02
Key Staff Contact: Linda Culp, (619) 699-6957, [email protected]
14 Attachment 1
BOARD POLICY NO. 01
BOARD LEADERSHIP NOMINATIONS PROCESS
Article IV, Section C of the LOSSAN Rail Corridor Agency Bylaws state:
Election of Officers - The Agency at its first meeting and at its first quarterly meeting every year thereafter, and at such other times as there may be a vacancy in either office, shall elect a Chair who shall preside at meetings and a Vice Chair who shall preside in the Chair’s absence.
1. Nominations Committee
The Chair shall appoint a nominations committee on or before the September meeting for the purpose of recommending candidates for incoming Chair and Vice Chair to the Board of Directors no later than the November meeting.
The Chair shall use these guidelines when appointing members to the nominations committee: i. The committee should be comprised of three members with geographic diversity from the southern and northern segments of the corridor. ii. Membership is limited to voting members only.
2. Eligible Candidates for Chair and Vice Chair
An application will be distributed to the Board of Directors in or around July for those interested in applying for Chair or Vice Chair and will be due to staff by early September. The Nominations Committee shall review each application using the following guidelines: i. Candidates are required to be sitting Board members. ii. Candidates should have experience with LOSSAN, either serving on the Board of Directors, or formerly serving on the Technical Advisory Committee, or other board committee. iii. The bylaws make provisions for the Executive Committee to have representation from both southern and northern portions of the corridorregional diversity; therefore, the nominations for Chair and Vice Chair do not require geographic balance. Broad geographical representation is encouraged, but is secondary to LOSSAN experience. iv. Candidates for Chair and Vice Chair are not required to be voting members of the member agency Board of Directors. v. Candidates for Chair and Vice Chair are not required to currently hold office, but do need to have served in that capacity in the past. vi. Although not required, candidates are encouraged to provide a letter of recommendation from their member agency Board leadership or chief executive officer.
15
3. Nominations Process
After the September meeting when nominations have closed, the Nominating Committee shall review the candidates that have filed an application for Chair and Vice Chair.
They shall first consider the applications received and if they find that there are insufficient applications in number or qualifications, they shall seek nominees from the remainder of the Board of Directors.
Should they have to recruit a candidate, they must secure the nominee’s agreement to serve and also notify the member agency to endorse the selection.
LOSSAN Board of Directors Policy No. 01 Approved September 30, 2010, Revised January 16, 2013, Revised November 20, 2013 Page 2 of 2
16 Attachment 2
BOARD POLICY NO. 02
APPOINTMENT OF THE LOSSAN EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
Article IV, Section D of the LOSSAN Rail Corridor Agency Bylaws state:
Executive Committee – There shall be a maximum of four voting members including the Chair, Vice Chair, and Past Chair, if available, or if the past chair is not available, one person appointed by the Board. The Executive Managing Director shall serve as a non-voting member. Among these members, there shall be at least one member from LOSSAN North and LOSSAN Souththe North region (as defined in JPA, Section 1.9 of the Joint Powers Agreement). The Executive Committee will meet as needed.
The Executive Committee shall have the authority and duty to:
a. Review and approve the agendas for the meetings of the Governing Board as needed;
b. Provide direction to the Executive Managing Director;
c. Make recommendations as needed to the Board regarding the work program, budget, positions to be taken on issues, contracts, and all other matters within the jurisdiction of the agency;
d. Evaluate Executive Managing Director and provide such evaluation to the Governing Board for action and to the Managing Agency for information. In conjunction with the Board;
e. Monitor the function of all agency committees.
f. Minutes of Executive Committee shall be circulated to the Governing Board of Directors.
g. Executive Committee is authorized to act in emergency situations but all actions must be reported to , and confirmed by, the Governing Board.
1. APPOINTMENTS
If the Immediate Past Chair is unavailable to serve on the Executive Committee, the Board of Directors will appoint a voting member to serve on the Committee. Interested candidates will contact the Chair, who will present the roster to the Board of Directors on or before their last meeting of the current year for a selection.
LOSSAN Board of Directors Policy No. 02, Approved December 15, 2010 Page 1 of 2 17 If the Chair and the Vice Chair are both from the same LOSSAN South (defined in the Bylaws as Los Angeles, Orange, and San Diego Counties) or LOSSAN North (defined in the Bylaws as Ventura, Santa Barbara, and San Luis Obispo Counties)region (as defined in Section 1.9 of the Joint Powers Agreement, Section 1.9), the third voting member appointed to serve in the absence of the Immediate VicePast Chair, or the potential fourth member, will be appointed from the a region currently not represented by the Chair and Vice Chair.
If the Chair, Vice Chair, and Immediate Past Chair are all from the LOSSAN South or LOSSAN North region, a fourth member will be appointed from the region currently not represented by the Chair, Vice Chair, and Immediate Past Chair.
2. SELECTION PROCESS
Interested candidates for the third and/or fourth members on the committee will contact the Chair four weeks prior to the Board’s last meeting of the calendar year.
The members of the Executive Committee will be determined at the Board’s last meeting of the calendar year.
Should a vacancy occur, the Chair will appoint a replacement member, recognizing that at least one member is required from either tThe LOSSAN North or LOSSAN South region.
3. EXECUTIVE MANAGING DIRECTOR
The Executive Managing Director will serve as a non-voting member. In the absence of an Executive Director, LOSSAN Staff will serve in this function as outlined in the bylaws.
LOSSAN Board of Directors Policy No. 02, Approved December 15, 2010, Revised November 20, 2013 Page 2 of 2
18 Los Angeles – San Diego – San Luis Obispo (LOSSAN) Rail Corridor Agency TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
November 1, 2013 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 8
Action Requested: INFORMATION
INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT PLAN File Number 3400600 FOR THE LOSSAN RAIL CORRIDOR IN SAN DIEGO COUNTY
The San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) is responsible for transit capital improvements in the San Diego region, including improvements to the 60.1-mile segment of the LOSSAN corridor owned by the North County Transit District (NCTD) and the San Diego Metropolitan Transit System. The current SANDAG capital improvement program for the corridor is comprised of more than 20 projects in various stages of development that will add double tracking and make other improvements to the corridor for the benefit of commuter, intercity, and freight rail services. This Early Action Program (EAP) totals $300 million and is a combination of local, state, and federal funds.
In 2009, SANDAG, along with Caltrans, Amtrak, NCTD, and Burlington Northern Santa Fe, developed a prioritization of LOSSAN projects that served as a basis for this EAP. Recently, SANDAG, with the assistance of NCTD, confirmed these priorities through a detailed rail operations modeling effort by Parsons Brinckerhoff. Both efforts are service-driven plans, based on future levels of service by each operator in the corridor. The Infrastructure Development Plan for the LOSSAN Rail Corridor in San Diego County includes both a summary of these findings as well as a number of technical memorandums detailing various service plans or individual capital projects. The summary is included as Attachment 1.
Attachment: 1. Excerpt from Infrastructure Development Plan for the LOSSAN Rail Corridor in San Diego County
Key Staff Contact: Linda Culp, (619) 699-6957, [email protected]
19 Attachment 1
SAN DIEGO ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS LOSSAN RAIL OPEERATIONS MODELING
INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE LOSSAN RAIL CORRIDOOR IN SAN DIEGO COUNTY
SUMMARY REPORT
Prepared by:
401 B Street, Suite 1650 San Diego, CA 92101
Prepared for:
San Diego Association of Governments 401 B Street, Suite 800 San Diego, CA 92101
August 2013
20 Infrastructure Development Plan for San Diego County
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 2.0 TRANSPORTATION PLANS AND VISIONS ...... 2 2.1 CORRIDORWIDE ...... 2 2.2 REGIONAL ...... 3 2.3 SUB-REGIONAL ...... 3 2.3.1 San Diego-LOSSAN Corridor Project Prioritization Analysis ...... 3 2.3.2 Public Works Plan/Transportation & Resource Enhancement Program ...... 4 3.0 SERVICE DRIVEN PLANS ...... 4 3.1 INTERCITY SERVICE ...... 4 3.2 COMMUTER SERVICE ...... 4 3.3 FREIGHT SERVICE ...... 5 3.4 SERVICE LEVEL ASSUMPTIONS ...... 5 4.0 NEW STATIONS AND PLATFORMS ...... 6 4.1 CAMP PENDLETON STATION ...... 6 4.2 CONVENTION CENTER PLATFORM ...... 7 4.3 DEL MAR FAIRGROUNDS SPECIAL EVENTS PLATFORM ...... 7 4.4 SAN DIEGO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT INTERMODAL TRANSPORTATION CENTER ...... 7 5.0 RIGHT-OF-WAY DESCRIPTION AND SUMMARY ...... 7 6.0 MODELING & CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT PHASING ...... 8 7.0 NEW CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS ...... 12 7.1 CP ROSE – MILEPOST 256.2 ...... 12 7.2 CP PONTO UNIVERSAL CROSSOVER ...... 12 7.3 CP SONGS ...... 13 7.4 STUART MESA MAINTENANCE FACILITY ...... 13 7.5 SANTA FE DEPOT POTENTIAL CONSTRAINTS ...... 13 7.6 DEL MAR SPECIAL EVENTS PLATFORM OPERATIONS ANALYSIS ...... 14 8.0 PARKING DEMAND ASSESSMENT AND FACILITY PRIORITIZATION ...... 14 8.1 STATION PARKING NEEDS ASSESSMENT ...... 14 8.2 PARKING EXPANSION PROJECT PRIORITIZATION ...... 15 9.0 EQUIPMENT NEEDS ...... 17 10.0 GRADE SEPARATIONS ...... 18
APPENDIX 1: EXCERPT FROM LOSSAN CORRIDORWIDE STRATEGIC IMPLEMENTATION PLAN .... 20 APPENDIX 2: EXCERPTS FROM 2050 SAN DIEGO REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN ...... 66 APPENDIX 3: EXCERPT FROM SAN DIEGO-LOSSAN PROJECT PRIORITIZATION ANALYSIS...... 81 APPENDIX 4: SAN DIEGO FULL NETWORK BUILD-OUT OPERATIONS ANALYSIS ...... 107 APPENDIX 5: SAN DIEGO NEAR-TERM BUILD-OUT OPERATIONS ANALYSIS ...... 136 APPENDIX 6: SAN DIEGO MID-TERM BUILD-OUT OPERATIONS ANALYSIS ...... 165 APPENDIX 7: SAN DIEGO LONG-TERM BUILD-OUT OPERATIONS ANALYSIS ...... 191 APPENDIX 8: ANALYSIS OF SERVICE CAPACITY AND THIRD TRACK FOR ACCESS FOR STUART MESA MAINTENANCE FACILITY...... 204 APPENDIX 9: OPERATIONS ANALYSIS FOR ADDITIONAL PASSENGER TRACK AT SANTA FE DEPOT AND LAYOVER TRACK AT TROLLEY YARD ...... 219 APPENDIX 10: OPERATIONS ANALYSIS FOR PROPOSED DEL MAR SEASONAL PLATFORM ...... 244 APPENDIX 11: STATION PARKING NEEDS ASSESSMENT ...... 270 APPENDIX 12: STATION PARKING EXPANSION PROJECT PRIORITIZATION ...... 293 APPENDIX 13: RESPONSE TO AGENCY COMMENTS ...... 297
LOSSAN Rail Operations Model LOSSAN Rail Operations Modeling Page i
21 Infrastructure Development Plan for San Diego County
TABLE OF FIGURES
Table 3.1: Service Level Assumptions (Orange County Line to Oceanside)...... 6 Table 3.2: Service Level Assumptions (Oceanside to San Diego) ...... 6 Table 6.1: LOSSAN Capital Projects – San Diego County Project Operations Phasing ...... 10 Table 6.2: LOSSAN Capital Projects – San Diego County Project Operations Results...... 11 Table 8.1: Parking Supply and Demand Summary ...... 15 Table 8.2: Parking Expansion Prioritization Results ...... 16 Table 9.1: COASTER Estimated Equipment Needs by Phase ...... 17 Figure 10.1: LOSSAN Rail Corridor At-Grade Crossings ...... 19
LOSSAN Rail Operations Model LOSSAN Rail Operations Modeling Page ii
22 Infrastructure Development Plan for San Diego County
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The San Diego coastal rail Corridor is the southern terminus of the 351-mile Los Angeles-San Diego-San Luis Obispo (LOSSAN) Rail Corridor. The LOSSAN Rail Corridor is the nation’s second busiest intercity passenger rail corridor, and it is shared by commuter and intercity passenger and freight rail services. In San Diego, the 60-mile coastal rail Corridor runs south from Orange County to downtown San Diego. With sections of the Corridor dating back to the 1880s, just less than half of the Corridor is single track. Trains traverse six coastal lagoons and the coastal cities of Oceanside, Carlsbad, Encinitas, Solana Beach, Del Mar, and San Diego. North County Transit District (NCTD) is the owner of the railway between the Orange County line (at Milepost 207.4) and the southern limits of the City of Del Mar (at Milepost 245.7). The San Diego Metropolitan Transit System (MTS) owns the railway south from Milepost (MP) 245.7 to the Santa Fe Depot in downtown San Diego. NCTD operates, maintains, and dispatches the entire San Diego County portion of the LOSSAN Rail Corridor.
COASTER commuter trains operate south from Oceanside to downtown San Diego. The Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) operates Metrolink commuter trains north from Oceanside to Orange, Los Angeles, and Ventura counties and the Inland Empire. The BNSF Railway (BNSF) and Pacific Sun Railroad (a subsidiary of the BNSF) are the freight rail operators on the Corridor, operating trains from the Port of San Diego north, as well as serving the various industries along the Corridor as well as along the Escondido Subdivision between the Cities of Oceanside and Escondido. On a typical weekday, there are up to 64 trains operating along portions of the coastal rail Corridor. This increases to 119 trains by 2030 based on the current service plans of each operator. As a result, critical improvements are needed in areas that will benefit all users of the coastal rail Corridor.
Previously, SANDAG had tasked Parsons Brinckerhoff to conduct an analysis to confirm that the infrastructure improvements identified for the short-term, mid-term and long- term continue to be sufficient to support revised assumptions for the proposed service levels that were first identified in the San Diego-LOSSAN Corridor Project Prioritization Analysis (2009) and later updated in the LOSSAN Corridorwide Strategic Implementation Plan (2012). The purpose of this Infrastructure Development Plan (IDP) is to summarize these findings and provide a “roadmap” to the infrastructure construction required throughout the San Diego County portion of the LOSSAN Rail Corridor in order to support proposed operational service plans.
In addition to projects that increase track capacity, this includes improvements identified as supporting the proposed service growth, such as accommodating the anticipated parking demand and at-grade crossing improvements (e.g. grade separations) to enhance overall corridor safety. For reference, the relevant detailed technical memoranda and reports for the various analyses performed along the Corridor are included in the appendix.
The complete vision for the LOSSAN Rail Corridor is based on an agreed program of rail improvements between the various transportation and regional agencies along the corridor from San Luis Obispo to San Diego, which include:
San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) – www.slocog.org
LOSSAN Rail Operations Modeling Page 1
23 Infrastructure Development Plan for San Diego County
Santa Barbara County Association of Governments (SBCAG) – www.sbcag.org Ventura County Transportation Commission (VCTC) – www.goventura.org Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) – www.scag.ca.gov Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LA Metro) – www.metro.net Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) – www.octa.net Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) – www.rctc.org North County Transit District (NCTD) – www.gonctd.com San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) – www.sandag.org San Diego Metropolitan Transit System (MTS) – www.sdmts.com Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) – www.metrolinktrains.com California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) – www.dot.ca.gov/rail BNSF Railway (BNSF) – www.bnsf.com Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) – www.up.com National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) – www.amtrak.com
The goal of the collective efforts of these agencies is to improve capacity, ridership, travel times, operational flexibility and reliability, and on-time performance for all services operating on the Corridor.
2.0 TRANSPORTATION PLANS AND VISIONS
2.1 CORRIDORWIDE
SANDAG, NCTD, and MTS are the San Diego County representatives to the LOSSAN Rail Corridor Agency. The LOSSAN Rail Corridor Agency is a Joint Powers Board established in 1989 to provide a forum for the transportation and regional agencies along the Corridor (listed in the previous section) to collaborate on ways to increase ridership, revenue, capacity, reliability, and safety on the LOSSAN Rail Corridor.
In 2009, the LOSSAN Board of Directors developed a new vision for the Corridor that focused on expanding and enhancing the integration of the Corridor’s passenger rail services, identifying a Corridorwide capital improvement program, enhancing local transit connections at both commuter and intercity stations, developing an integrated fare policy, and providing better customer information.
In support of this vision and to advance a long-term Corridorwide strategy to increase the market for passenger rail in southern California, the LOSSAN Rail Corridor Agency completed the LOSSAN Corridorwide Strategic Implementation Plan (LOSSAN Plan) in April 2012 (see excerpts in Appendix 1). This Plan includes the establishment of a 20- year service objective for the entire Corridor and identifies a range of infrastructure improvements required to support this objective.
LOSSAN Rail Operations Modeling Page 2
24 Infrastructure Development Plan for San Diego County
This Plan was created as a first step in implementing the new Corridorwide vision of passenger rail services. The purpose of the Plan was to collectively provide in a strategic document a road map to identifying “the infrastructure to allow more peak period trains, faster through-express trains and additional service improvements that meet current and future conventional and high-speed intercity, commuter and freight demands”. Specific long-term goals were also identified and include:
Additional commuter and intercity service including all-stop, “cross-county”, commuter service between Los Angeles and San Diego.
New San Diego stops at the Airport Intermodal Transportation Center and the San Diego Convention Center.
Conversion of peak period intercity service to limited stop express.
New intercity service between LA and San Francisco; additional commuter service between Ventura and Santa Barbara, including a new commuter station at North Goleta.
Integration with future High-Speed Trains at Anaheim and Los Angeles Union Station.
2.2 REGIONAL
The 2050 Regional Transportation Plan (2050 RTP) (see excerpts in Appendix 2) is the blueprint for major transportation improvement projects in the San Diego region. Together, these projects make up a regional transportation system that “further enhances quality of life, promotes sustainability, and offers more mobility options for people and goods.” This plan also indicates the planned levels of commuter rail service increases, which include 20 minute peak headways by 2018 and 20 minute peak and 60 minute off peak headways by 2030. In order to implement these service increases, the 2050 RTP identifies $2.6 billion in capital improvements to the LOSSAN Rail Corridor in San Diego County. This includes new bridges and structures, additional track, optimal locations for crossovers and signal spacing, new stations and station improvements, and construction of a tunnel to reroute the rail corridor from the coastal bluffs in the City of Del Mar.
2.3 SUB-REGIONAL
2.3.1 San Diego-LOSSAN Corridor Project Prioritization Analysis
Preceding the LOSSAN Plan to set a long-term vision for the entire Corridor, SANDAG, in collaboration with NCTD, Caltrans, Amtrak and the BNSF Railway completed the San Diego-LOSSAN Corridor Project Prioritization Analysis in 2009 (see excerpts in Appendix 3), which prioritized 40 rail improvement projects along the LOSSAN Rail Corridor in San Diego County into three tiers, each needed in order to increase service. This ranking was based on the service plans of each operator, which are discussed in the Service Level Assumptions section of this report. Projects were evaluated on both a quantitative and qualitative basis, with rail operations weighted the heaviest. SANDAG used this analysis to both seek federal funding and develop an Early Action Plan of corridor projects.
LOSSAN Rail Operations Modeling Page 3
25 Infrastructure Development Plan for San Diego County
Currently, 23 of these projects are in various stages of planning, engineering design and construction, including the first priority tier which is largely funded through construction.
2.3.2 Public Works Plan/Transportation & Resource Enhancement Program
SANDAG and Caltrans District 11 (San Diego) released the draft Public Works Plan/Transportation and Resource Enhancement Program (PWP/TREP) in March 2013. The PWP/TREP proposes transportation, community, and resource enhancement improvements along the LOSSAN and Interstate 5 (I-5) Corridors within a 27-mile stretch of coastal North County from La Jolla to Oceanside. It is an implementation blueprint for $6.5 billion of rail, highway, environmental and coastal access improvements, the majority of which are consistent with other plans like the 2050 RTP. It is a single, integrated regulatory document that will be considered by the California Coastal Commission in an effort to streamline project review that could otherwise require multiple coastal development permits.
Rail improvement projects that improve the movement of freight, passengers, and/or are needed to maintain the rail line for interstate rail traffic will be subject to review by the Coastal Commission through the federal consistency review process. These consistency determinations are made by the Coastal Commission and are subject to public review and comment. This applies to the improvement projects discussed in this report.
3.0 SERVICE DRIVEN PLANS
The LOSSAN Plan included the development of both a short-term (2014) and long-term (2030) business case that identified the service objectives and levels for the Corridor. These service levels were reviewed and agreed to by a project working group, made up of all rail operators/owners and planning agencies along the Corridor.
As this was a Corridorwide study, it addressed all rail traffic: commuter, intercity and freight. The expected increases in each of these services were studied and a short and long-term service plan was developed and simulated. This then led to identifying the infrastructure and capital needs of the Corridor that would potentially be necessary to support the proposed service plan as defined in the Strategic Implementation Plan.
3.1 INTERCITY SERVICE
Intercity frequency goals are based on the California State Rail Plan (SRP), which identified hourly service for the Amtrak Pacific Surfliner trains. As of April 2013, 22 intercity trains travel between Los Angeles and San Diego. The SRP projects these levels to increase to 36 trains by 2030 and the LOSSAN Plan further defined this increase to represent 28 “local” trains making all stops and 8 limited -stop peak period trains. This equates to one hour headways in both peak (6:00 AM to 9:00 AM) and (3:00 PM to 6:00 PM) as well as off-peak periods.
3.2 COMMUTER SERVICE
Frequencies for commuter trains in San Diego County are based on the peak and off- peak service goals laid out in the 2050 RTP, which are also represented in the LOSSAN
LOSSAN Rail Operations Modeling Page 4
26 Infrastructure Development Plan for San Diego County
Plan. These plans assumed a total of 54 commuter trains between Oceanside and San Diego by the year 2030. This includes 20-minute commuter headways during peak period operations with approximately hourly frequency during off-peak time periods.
Further, NCTD and SCRRA have been in exploratory talks to study the feasibility of cross-county commuter service, which would make all stops between San Diego and Los Angeles. That is, the possibility of extending Metrolink service south of Oceanside to San Diego and extending COASTER service north into Orange and possibly Los Angeles County. Currently, some early morning departures and early evening arrivals by Metrolink in San Diego are being examined as a “pilot program” for cross county commuter operations. This is consistent with the service goals identified in the LOSSAN Plan.
3.3 FREIGHT SERVICE
For the purposes of taking into account the freight traffic in the Corridor, it was assumed that the daily number of six freight trains operating along the Corridor within San Diego County would increase to 11 by the year 2030. This estimate was based on an estimated growth rate of about 3% per year, which was revised upward from 2%, based on the most recent economic growth forecasts for Southern California.
3.4 SERVICE LEVEL ASSUMPTIONS
Service levels outlined in this summary report reflect those presented in the San Diego Full Network Build-Out Operations Analysis (see Appendix 4), which are consistent with the 2030 service levels evaluated as part of the LOSSAN Plan and 2050 RTP. For San Diego County, the agreed to service levels assumed a total of 54 commuter trains and 36 intercity trains between Oceanside and San Diego.
Frequencies for commuter trains are based on the peak and off-peak service goals laid out in the 2050 RTP, which identified 20-minute headways during peak period operations with approximately hourly frequency during off-peak time periods. Intercity frequencies were based on the 2013 California State Rail Plan and assumed hourly frequency during both commuter peak and off-peak periods. The frequency assumptions for commuter and intercity are not inclusive of each other (i.e. intercity trains are not assumed to be part of the 20-minute commuter train frequencies). By 2030, service plans call for the level of service south of Oceanside to nearly double, from 50 trains currently to 101. The current and assumed future service levels are summarized in Tables 3.1 and 3.2.
LOSSAN Rail Operations Modeling Page 5
27 Infrastructure Development Plan for San Diego County
Table 3.1: Service Level Assumptions (Orange County Line to Oceanside) 2012 2020 2025 2030 Growth 2030 Frequency Operator / Line Base Case Near-Term Mid-Term Full-Build (2012-2030) Goals (minutes)1
Intercity (All Stop) 21 24 27 28 7 60 PK / 60 OP
Intercity Not applicable3 12 2 5 8 7 (Limited Stop)
Commuter 16 16 16 18 2 30 PK / 60-90 OP
BNSF Freight 4 8 8 8 4 Not applicable
TOTAL 42 50 56 62 20
Table 3.2: Service Level Assumptions (Oceanside to San Diego) 2012 2020 2025 2030 Growth 2030 Frequency Operator / Line Base Case Near-Term Mid-Term Full-Build (2012-2030) Goals (minutes)1
Intercity (All Stop) 21 24 27 28 7 60 PK / 60 OP
Intercity Not applicable3 12 2 5 8 7 (Limited Stop)
Commuter 22 30 36 54 32 20 PK / 60-90 OP
BNSF Freight 6 11 11 11 5 Not applicable
TOTAL 50 67 79 101 51
4.0 NEW STATIONS AND PLATFORMS
Along with the projected service levels, also taken into consideration are the planned additional stations and platforms. The addition of “new” stations or platforms will have an impact on the development of schedules and travel times as well as capacity improvement needs. Capacity becomes a key component of adding new stations, which require adjustments in schedules and overall travel time, which in turn can shift the location where trains “meet” while operating in opposing directions (and therefore where double track infrastructure is necessary). These stations were incorporated into the various simulation modeling efforts conducted on the corridor and are summarized in Section 6.0, Modeling and Capital Improvement Project Phasing.
4.1 CAMP PENDLETON STATION
This project has been identified at the request of the United States Marine Corps (USMC) to provide service to the base for their residents as well as employees, many of which live off base and are required to commute to work. This project is currently under planning and conceptual design by NCTD and the planned location for the station is directly east from the Stuart Mesa Maintenance Facility (SMMF), at MP 222.2.
1 Frequency goals are based on general guidelines identified in the SANDAG 2050 RTP and State Rail Plan for peak (PK) commute periods and off-peak (OP) non-commute periods of the day.
2 As of April 1, 2013, Amtrak and Caltrans reverted limited stop trip back to all-stop service.
3 The State Rail Plan currently does not distinguish frequencies between an “all stop” or “limited stop” intercity services, No specific limited stop frequency was identified and limited stop trains were considered part of the overall frequency identified for “all stop” intercity trains.
LOSSAN Rail Operations Modeling Page 6
28 Infrastructure Development Plan for San Diego County
This station would require a third track for trains to “turn” off the mainline and an island platform so that trains that currently operate through this section of the corridor could have the potential to service the station in the future. Modifications were assumed to Control Point (CP) Stuart and CP Mesa to allow access to the new station track. However, a preferred track configuration has not yet been agreed to by NCTD or the USMC, therefore, the assumed configuration for this analysis may change in the future.
4.2 CONVENTION CENTER PLATFORM
This platform would be located one half mile south of Santa Fe Depot in San Diego at approximately MP 268.0. It is expected this would be a limited-use platform, used primarily for COASTER service to San Diego Padre Baseball games at PETCO Park, as well as any special events at the San Diego Convention Center or in the Gaslamp District. This project is currently in the planning phase by NCTD.
4.3 DEL MAR FAIRGROUNDS SPECIAL EVENTS PLATFORM
This platform would be located immediately adjacent to the Del Mar Fairgrounds at approximately MP 242.8. It is expected this would be a limited-use platform, used for COASTER and Amtrak service to the San Diego County Fair, the annual Del Mar Horse Racing Season, as well as any special events at the Fairgrounds that may merit the service. This project is currently in preliminary engineering and going through the environmental clearance process by SANDAG.
4.4 SAN DIEGO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT INTERMODAL TRANSPORTATION CENTER
The Intermodal Transportation Center (ITC) would be located off Pacific Highway on the north side of San Diego International Airport. In addition to commuter and intercity rail, it is expected that the ITC would include trolley service and a number of bus connections and future high-speed rail service. Subsequently, the ITC is expected to become a major transportation hub for downtown San Diego. This project is currently in the planning phase by SANDAG.
5.0 RIGHT-OF-WAY DESCRIPTION AND SUMMARY
As mentioned previously, the segment of the LOSSAN Rail Corridor that is the primary focus of this analysis is the portion that is solely within San Diego County. It is entirely publicly-owned between NCTD and MTS. Starting at the Orange County Line and continuing just south of the Santa Fe Depot, NCTD dispatches all trains operating on the Corridor. BNSF Railway owns the right-of-way and dispatches trains south of the Santa Fe Depot however this section does not currently host revenue passenger service and is not considered a part of the LOSSAN Rail Corridor.
Currently, there are eight stations in San Diego County: Oceanside, Carlsbad Village, Carlsbad Poinsettia, Encinitas, Solana Beach, Sorrento Valley, Old Town and Santa Fe Depot. The COASTER serves every station while Amtrak intercity trains regularly serve Oceanside, Solana Beach, Old Town, and Santa Fe Depot. Expected to begin in late 2013, a limited number of Amtrak intercity trains (three in each direction) will serve every station in San Diego County.
LOSSAN Rail Operations Modeling Page 7
29 Infrastructure Development Plan for San Diego County
The Corridor is just over 60 miles in length from the Orange County Line to the Santa Fe Depot (41 miles from Oceanside to San Diego) with slightly over 50% of it currently double-tracked with 34 rail-highway at-grade crossings. The entire right of way is in the process of being fitted with Positive Train Control.
Positive train control (PTC) is a system for monitoring and controlling train movements to provide increased safety. In September 2008, Congress approved a new rail safety law that set a deadline of December 15, 2015 for implementation of PTC technology across most of the U.S. rail network. NCTD is spearheading this multi-million dollar effort within San Diego County, which includes the installation of new fiber optic cable from the County Line to Santa Fe Depot in San Diego. SCRRA is responsible for its installation north of the San Diego / Orange County line. The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) mandates the PTC project be complete and operational by 2016 to conform to the Congressional mandate established in September 2008.
NCTD is responsible for all maintenance of the right of way in San Diego County and this is currently accomplished under a contract to TransitAmerica Services, Inc. The right of way is maintained to FRA Class V track standards allowing for a top speed of 89 miles per hour (mph) in some areas. Given the abundance of capital work, as well as required maintenance, on the right of way, on any given day there can be a number of work zones within the Corridor to allow for the maintenance and construction of infrastructure. These designated work zones require train traffic to slow and receive radio clearance from the train dispatcher in order to proceed into these work zones. These work zones, which can also require the complete shutdown of the Corridor for a period up to 72 hours, can have a significant impact on train operations and on time performance.
6.0 MODELING & CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT PHASING
The San Diego-LOSSAN Corridor Project Prioritization Analysis (2009) analyzed the individual projects necessary to support the forecasted increases in services and maintain or improve system reliability on the LOSSAN Rail Corridor for three time periods: 1) Near term (around 2020), 2) Mid-Term (2025), and 3) Long-Term (2030). A prioritized list of both track and non-track improvements, as well as equipment and other needs were identified for each time period.
Operations modeling and ridership forecasting for several short and long-term service scenarios comprised the business case for new passenger rail service in the LOSSAN Plan. The service levels for the San Diego section of the corridor were consistent with the 2009 analysis.
In support of the IDP, simulations and modeling were conducted in 2012 as part of the San Diego Full Network Build-Out Operations Analysis to confirm the specific infrastructure improvements necessary to support the service plans that were updated using on the frequencies identified in the 2050 RTP and 2013 SRP. This modeling and analysis identified “choke points” along the Corridor where improvements were identified as necessary to maintain reliable train operations based on the schedule assumptions identified in each service plan. This includes all identified track miles, crossovers and signaling additions and improvements. This report also identified the preferred crossover configuration, intermediate signal locations, and signal re-spacing for interim construction phasing and ultimate build-out of the projects along the Corridor.
LOSSAN Rail Operations Modeling Page 8
30 Infrastructure Development Plan for San Diego County
As part of the simulations performed, a more specific break down between forecast years was made to allow infrastructure improvements to be identified in phases. The phases that were then simulated specific to San Diego County included:
Base Case: Base case projects are those either in construction or 100 percent designed and permitted as of 2009. (See Appendix 5)
Near-Term: The Near-Term scenario includes projects and service assumptions for the 2020 time frame, in addition to the Base Case. (See Appendix 5)
Mid-Term: The Mid-Term scenario includes projects and service assumptions for the 2025 time frame, in addition to the Base Case and Near-Term. (See Appendix 6)
Full Build: The Full Build scenario includes all improvement projects in the previous scenarios. The service level assumptions are for 2030. (See Appendix 4)
Long-Term: The Long-Term scenario includes all Full Build Projects and the Del Mar Tunnel and is assumed to be a post 2030 scenario. (See Appendix 7)
Table 6.1 shows the phase for each identified project and what, if any changes to phasing or project components were recommended based on the recent operations analyses. In addition, a review of the capacity needs at both Stuart Mesa Maintenance Facility and the Santa Fe Depot given Full Build conditions was completed. An analysis was also completed that examined the potential need to stage a special events train providing service to the Del Mar Special Events Platform.
The Appendix includes the specific technical memos for each of these analyses.
It is also important to provide an analysis of the operational results in terms of the level of service and number of times trains may pass within individual project areas in order to assist in the completion of project-level technical studies in support of environmental documentation. Table 6.2 provides this information for each capacity project.
LOSSAN Rail Operations Modeling Page 9
31 Infrastructure Development Plan for San Diego County
Table 6.1: LOSSAN Capital Projects – San Diego County Project Operations Phasing Project Priority Change to Priority Phase as Compared to Phase1,2 2009 Project Prioritization Analysis
CP SONGS Second Track Extension Full Build No change
San Onofre to Pulgas Double Track Phase 1 Near-Term No change
San Onofre to Pulgas Double Track Phase 2 Near-Term No change
Camp Pendleton Station Near-Term No change
Eastbrook to Shell Double Track Mid-Term No change
Oceanside Through Track Near-Term No change
Carlsbad Village Double Track Mid-Term No change
Carlsbad Double Track Base No change
Poinsettia Station Improvement Base No change
Batiquitos Lagoon Double Track Full Build Consider accelerating to Mid-Term phase for consistent 20 min peak commuter headways.
Convert CP Ponto to Universal Crossover Mid-Term Added. Was not originally in 2009 report.
CP Moonlight to CP Swami Double Track Full Build Consider accelerating to Mid-Term phase for consistent 20 min peak commuter headways.
San Elijo Double Track Near-Term No change
San Dieguito Double Track (including Del Mar Mid-Term Construction of universal crossover at CP Special Events Platform) Valley
Del Mar Tunnel Long-Term No change
Los Penasquitos Lagoon Double Track Long-Term No change
Sorrento Valley Double Track Base No change
Sorrento to Miramar Double Track Phase 1 Base No change
Sorrento to Miramar Double Track Phase 2 Mid-Term No change
Elvira to Morena Double Track Mid-Term Construction of CP Rose
CP Tecolote to CP Friar Double Track Full Build No change
Tecolote and Washington Crossovers Base No change
Airport Intermodal Transportation Center Full Build No change
Convention Center Platform Full-Build
1 As directed by SANDAG, the “Base” priority phase includes the projects considered in the LOSSAN Corridorwide Strategic Implementation Plan under the 2014 service plan analysis. 2 Base=2014; Near-Term=2020; Mid-Term=2025; Full-Build=2030; Long-Term=2030+
LOSSAN Rail Operations Modeling Page 10
32 Infrastructure Development Plan for San Diego County
Table 6.2: LOSSAN Capital Projects – San Diego County Project Operations Results Level of Service by Phase Train Meets by Phase Capacity Project (number of trains per weekday) (number) 2014 2020 2025 2030 2030+ 2020 2025 2030
CP SONGS Second Track Extension 42 50 56 62 62 - - 8
San Onofre to Pulgas Phase 1 42 50 56 62 62 3 5 7
San Onofre to Pulgas Phase 2 42 50 56 62 62 3 5 1
Eastbrook to Shell Double Track 42 50 56 62 62 - 6 10
Oceanside Through Track 50 67 79 101 101 15 19 20
Carlsbad Village Double Track 50 67 79 101 101 - 6 11
Poinsettia Station Improvement 50 67 79 101 101 5 10 6
Batiquitos Lagoon Double Track 50 67 79 101 101 - - 7
CP Moonlight to CP Swami 50 67 79 101 101 - - 10
San Elijo Double Track 50 67 79 101 101 9 9 11
San Dieguito Double Track 50 67 79 101 101 1 8 14
Del Mar Tunnel 50 67 79 101 101 - - -
Los Penasquitos Lagoon Double Track 50 67 79 101 101 - - -
Sorrento Valley Double Track 50 67 79 101 101 7 15 20
Sorrento to Miramar Phase 2 50 67 79 101 101 - 10 23
CP Elvira to CP Morena 50 67 79 101 101 - 11 16
CP Tecolote to CP Friar 50 67 79 101 101 - - 5
LOSSAN Rail Operations Modeling Page 11
33 Infrastructure Development Plan for San Diego County
7.0 NEW CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS
As part of the modeling and analysis work performed for the LOSSAN Plan and the subsequent San Diego Full Network Build-Out Operations Analysis, additional capital improvements were identified as necessary to support the proposed service plans developed for the Corridor as well as its overall maintenance.
7.1 CP ROSE – MILEPOST 256.2
As part of the current CP Elvira to CP Morena Double Track Project, the existing crossover at CP Elvira is scheduled to be removed. In order for this to happen, and be able to maintain operational flexibility and an efficient maintenance of way plan in this area, a new universal crossover was recommended to be installed 1.7 miles north of the existing CP Elvira to be named CP Rose. A universal crossover allows trains to change from Track 1 to Track 2 or from Track 2 to Track 1, regardless of the direction of travel. The track realignment work of the Elvira to Morena Project will make it impossible to maintain the crossover at the existing CP Elvira location. This makes the installation of the CP Rose universal crossover a critical element for maintaining the Corridor on the south side of Miramar Hill.
CP Rose was identified as the logical solution to provide the necessary connectivity to both tracks when CP Elvira is impacted and taken out of service by either the Mid-Coast Light Rail Project or CP Elvira to CP Morena Double Track Project. To maintain existing operational flexibility, CP Rose must be installed prior to these projects or at a minimum prior to any work at CP Elvira.
7.2 CP PONTO UNIVERSAL CROSSOVER
Based on the current infrastructure design configurations for the mid-term (2025 time period), the only location identified along the Corridor to pocket a freight train without impacting vehicular at-grade crossings or restricting access to passenger stations was in Del Mar, between the Solana Beach station and just north of the Camino Del Mar overpass in the future San Dieguito Double Track project area. As such, an additional location was recommended to pocket a freight train at a location between the Oceanside and Solana Beach stations.
A possible location for this could be between the Poinsettia and Encinitas stations. By converting the existing CP Ponto to a universal crossover (instead of removing the control point), this can provide a “pocket” between CP Ponto and the “new” CP Moonlight of about 9,500 feet, which would be sufficient to hold up to a 9,000 foot freight train without impacting access to passenger stations or highway-rail at-grade crossings. This length of the pocket track is sufficient for accommodating the length of freight trains in operation today.
While this location was identified as a reasonable location for pocketing a freight train from an operational perspective, it should be noted that this second track extension between CP Ponto and CP Moonlight crosses Batiquitos Lagoon. It may be feasible for shorter freight trains to be “pocketed” or held out of the way between the rail-highway at- grade crossing of Leucadia Boulevard and the grade separated overpass at La Costa Road. However, pocketing longer trains would require the train to be held while across
LOSSAN Rail Operations Modeling Page 12
34 Infrastructure Development Plan for San Diego County
the lagoon in order to clear the crossing at Leucadia Boulevard. In addition, longer freight trains that are traveling in a northbound direction may be required to hold in part on a short 1,100 foot section of a 1.2% grade climbing out of the lagoon crossing approaching CP Ponto.
7.3 CP SONGS
The maintenance criteria established by NCTD suggests a maximum crossover spacing of six miles. This spacing is typical in the industry for allowing maintenance personnel to take short segments of track out of service between Control Points while still allowing trains to continue to operate around the maintenance personnel on the track that is still in operation. With the proposed extension of double track north of CP SONGS by 2030, the spacing between the turnout at the new control point (north of SONGS) and the proposed control point (near existing CP Pulgas) is nearly eight miles. It was recommended that when the second track is extended north of CP SONGS, a new universal crossover is considered in proximity to the existing CP San Onofre. This additional crossover would create a spacing of approximately four miles between control points and be within the maintenance criteria established by NCTD.
This project was first identified in the LOSSAN Plan.
7.4 STUART MESA MAINTENANCE FACILITY
In order to support 2030 service levels, it was anticipated that a total of four additional trainsets may need to be stored at the Stuart Mesa Maintenance Facility (SMMF). To do this, the storage capacity of the existing yard will need to be expanded. Four potential options have been identified to address capacity improvements to the yard to support the storage of more 5-6 car trainsets and are presented in detail in the Analysis of Service Capacity and Third Track for Access for Stuart Mesa Maintenance Facility attached in Appendix 8.
7.5 SANTA FE DEPOT POTENTIAL CONSTRAINTS
The Additional Passenger Track at San Diego Santa Fe Depot and Layover Track at MTS Trolley Yard technical memorandum, attached in Appendix 9, showed that capacity for the proposed 2030 service levels could be supported on the existing Tracks 1-3 of Santa Fe Depot under optimum conditions, still allowing BNSF to operate freight trains through the Depot on Track 4 during mid-day periods. Further, during periods when delays may occur, as is the case today, Track 4 can be used as a “relief” track to turn trains that may be operating “out of slot” without presenting significant impact to freight operations.
What remains to be reconciled with this are the requirements that future Light Rail Transit (LRT) service increases may bring to Santa Fe Depot. It is believed that these service improvements may require more track space at the Depot. Further analysis of the capacity requirements of the Santa Fe Depot is required in order to understand the overall capacity needed at the Santa Fe Depot to address both rail and transit proposed service plans.
LOSSAN Rail Operations Modeling Page 13
35 Infrastructure Development Plan for San Diego County
7.6 DEL MAR SPECIAL EVENTS PLATFORM OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
A number of operational alternatives for service to the Del Mar Special Events Platform were completed as summarized in the Del Mar Seasonal Platform Operations Analysis, which is included in Appendix 10. Overall, the conclusion was that passenger service would be required from both Track 1 and Track 2. Furthermore, a number of potential locations for a staging track to queue a 10-car Amtrak special event train for service at the platform following events were analyzed both north and south of the platform. It was concluded that staging should occur south of the platform and that, as one option, it was feasible to stage the train at the Santa Fe Depot during the desired time frame.
8.0 PARKING DEMAND ASSESSMENT AND FACILITY PRIORITIZATION
8.1 STATION PARKING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
Just as track improvements are necessary in order to increase rail service, additional station parking capacity is needed in order to serve the projected increase in ridership throughout the LOSSAN corridor. The Station Parking Needs Assessment developed parking estimates for forecast year 2030 at existing and proposed stations along the LOSSAN Rail Corridor in San Diego County, utilizing available and recent ridership forecasts for both intercity (Amtrak) and commuter (COASTER, Metrolink) rail passengers, station access mode splits, and other relevant information (Appendix 11). Parking demand numbers were based on the ridership estimates that were performed as part of the LOSSAN Plan and from recent survey data.
There were four key steps that were used to derive parking demand: 1) Calculating daily boarding estimates by station; 2) identifying station mode of access splits; 3) calculating boarding estimates by mode of access; and 4) estimating parking demand by station and service type. Further analysis and details on the methodology are included in Appendix 11.
Parking demand in 2030 will be influenced by future investments in connecting transit service as well as future smart growth development around stations. According to SANDAG’s regional transportation model, a lower proportion of parking would be required to accommodate the increased ridership on the LOSSAN corridor as more passengers would be able to access the station by transit, walking, or biking. Likewise, higher density developments around stations will impact demand for parking. However, it was assumed that if the investments to the transit network and surrounding land uses were not made, parking demand rates would be similar to current levels. Therefore two Options were developed to show a range of parking demand estimates. Option 1 includes lower parking rates assuming investments in the transit network and land use changes while Option 2 includes parking rates that are consistent with existing conditions. Furthermore, the parking demand numbers are inclusive of commuter and intercity rail use only. There may be additional demand for other transit services or other community purposes. Table 8.1 presents the projected 2030 parking supply and demand.
LOSSAN Rail Operations Modeling Page 14
36 Infrastructure Development Plan for San Diego County
Table 8.1: Parking Supply and Demand Summary
6 Existing Existing 2030 Projected Demand Additional Spaces Needed Station 4 5 Supply Demand Option A Option B Option A Option B
Oceanside 1,259 939 1,490 1,730 240 480
Carlsbad Village 540 379 720 890 180 350
Poinsettia 335 286 630 820 300 490
Encinitas 309 294 630 640 330 340
Solana Beach 326 296 620 620 300 300
Sorrento Valley 118 84 280 280 170 170
Old Town San Diego NA NA 170 170 TBD TBD
Airport Intermodal NA NA 120 120 TBD TBD Transportation Center (Planned)
Santa Fe Depot NA NA 120 120 TBD TBD
Convention Center NA NA 20 20 TBD TBD (Planned)
Note: Existing parking supply/demand at Old Town was not included due to the inability to accurately isolate the COASTER parking from trolley, bus and State Park uses. There is no official existing transit parking at the Santa Fe Depot.
8.2 PARKING EXPANSION PROJECT PRIORITIZATION
The 2050 RTP calls for additional parking to be constructed at all existing COASTER stations by 2030. SANDAG is currently developing Project Study Reports (PSRs) for parking structures at Oceanside, Carlsbad Village, Carlsbad Poinsettia, Encinitas, Solana Beach, and Santa Fe Depot. Previous studies have identified conceptual engineering for parking structures at Sorrento Valley and Old Town. Considering the likelihood that limited funding would become available, a prioritized list of parking structures was created to focus resources on the parking structures that would create the greatest benefit to the LOSSAN corridor and for the San Diego region.
4 Information provided by NCTD
5 Average mid-week parking demand based on counts performed in October 2012
6 Those stations as labeled “TBD” will have parking estimated determined based upon further studies of existing supply utilization.
LOSSAN Rail Operations Modeling Page 15
37 Infrastructure Development Plan for San Diego County
Planning staff from SANDAG and NCTD drafted criteria and conducted a quantitative and qualitative analysis to prioritize parking structures at each COASTER station. The criteria were organized into the following categories:
Parking Demand
o Percent Increase in Parking Demand by 2030
o Additional Spaces Needed by 2030
o Potential for Shared Parking Demand for Transit
o Existing Parking Demand
Ridership
o Percent Increase in Ridership by 2030
Project Delivery
o Magnitude of Temporary Construction Impacts
o Community Support
o Public Right of Way
o Smart Growth Opportunity
The data used to conduct the analysis was derived from the LOSSAN Plan, Station Parking Needs Assessment (Appendix 11), SANDAG COASTER Parking Structure draft PSRs, and other planning documents. Weighting of the criteria was determined by SANDAG and NCTD planning staff by distributing 1/3 of the points for each of the three criteria categories and then prioritizing the importance of the criteria within each category. Table 8.2 lists the final parking structure rankings.
Table 8.2: Parking Expansion Prioritization Results Station Score Rank
Oceanside 70.6 1
Solana Beach 70.1 2
Carlsbad Poinsettia 62.0 3
Carlsbad Village 61.0 4
Old Town 59.7 5
Sorrento Valley 57.5 6
Santa Fe Depot 56.9 7
Encinitas 56.1 8
Additional information on the criteria and prioritization is provided in Appendix 12.
LOSSAN Rail Operations Modeling Page 16
38 Infrastructure Development Plan for San Diego County
9.0 EQUIPMENT NEEDS
For each forecast year analyzed, equipment assumptions were made to assist in identifying the possible equipment cycles necessary to support terminal capacity analyses. While it should be noted that these equipment assumptions are conceptual, they can assist in identifying the possible equipment needs associated with projected service level growth over the next 15-20 years.
This section of the report summarizes the estimated equipment needs for COASTER service based on the service plan assumptions outlined in the Near-Term, Mid-Term and Full Network Build-Out Analyses (reference Appendices 4, 5 and 6). Metrolink and Amtrak equipment need assumptions are not possible to calculate without taking into consideration the service outside Orange and San Diego Counties.
Table 9.1: COASTER Estimated Equipment Needs by Phase Existing (2013) Near-Term (2020) Mid-Term (2025) Full Build-Out 2030)
Coaches Engines Coaches Engines Coaches Engines Coaches Engines
Revenue Operating 20 4 25 5 30 6 30 6 Equipment
Spare Equipment (20% future ratio 8 3 5 1 6 1 6 1 assumed)
Total Estimated 28 7 30 6 36 7 36 7 Equipment Need
Note: Trainsets assumed 4 coaches, 1 cab car, and 1 locomotive With regards to the San Diego Full Network Build-Out Operations Analysis, equipment assumptions, it is important to note that equipment needs may be higher depending on whether Metrolink or COASTER equipment is used to operate the anticipated “cross- county” commuter service between San Diego and Los Angeles or the Inland Empire. For the purposes of this summary, it was assumed that Metrolink equipment would be utilized for these commuter services in the Full Build-Out scenario.
The proposed “cross-county” commuter service identified in both the Near-Term and Mid- Term scenarios is also assumed to be operated using Metrolink equipment based on discussions that took place between NCTD, OCTA and Metrolink in spring of 2012.
LOSSAN Rail Operations Modeling Page 17
39 Infrastructure Development Plan for San Diego County
10.0 GRADE SEPARATIONS
There are 34 at-grade vehicular crossings of the LOSSAN corridor in San Diego County (Figure 10.1). Grade separating the rail from the road at key crossings is important to the long-term enhancement of the corridor. Three LOSSAN Corridor grade separation projects were included in the San Diego LOSSAN Corridor Project Prioritization Analysis: (1) Taylor Street in Old Town, (2) a trench and grade separations in Downtown San Diego, and (3) Leucadia Boulevard in Encinitas. While the operations modeling completed as part of that analysis did not indicate these projects would allow for increased levels of service in the Corridor, they would however eliminate existing conflicts between the rail corridor and key roadways, as well as greatly reduce accident potential on these heavily travelled streets.
Three grade separation projects are included in the 2050 RTP, at Leucadia Boulevard and two additional grade separation projects to be determined. Each is included in the 2041-2050 phase. Also as part of the 2050 RTP, local jurisdictions had the opportunity to include key grade separation projects which were then ranked on the regional rail grade separation priority listing, included as Table TA 4.24 in Appendix 2. In addition, three pedestrian grade separations in the City of Encinitas are also included in future plans.
The 2050 RTP also calls for quiet zone improvements along certain sections of the Corridor where, provided local jurisdictions make specific improvements to mitigate the risk associated with the absence of horns, rail services can cease FRA mandated horn soundings. The RTP does not specify their exact locations and NCTD is currently coordinating these future improvements with local jurisdictions.
For the IDP, no additional analysis on rail grade separations was completed.
LOSSAN Rail Operations Modeling Page 18
40 Infrastructure Development Plan for San Diego County
Figure 10.1: LOSSAN Rail Corridor At-Grade Crossings
LOSSAN Rail Operations Modeling Page 19
41 Agenda Item #11 LOSSAN TAC November 1, 2013 Draft 2014 LOSSAN MEETING SCHEDULE
BOARD OF DIRECTORS Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) (Monthly, Third Monday 12:30 – 2:30 p.m. at (Monthly, First Thursday 12:30 – Metro unless noted) 2:30 p.m. at Metro unless noted)
January 9
Wednesday, January 15 – OCTA (11 a.m. – 1 p.m.) February 6
Wednesday, February 19 March 6
Monday, March 17 April 3
Monday, April 28 – Santa Barbara (1 – 3 p.m.)* May 1
Monday, May 19 June 5
Monday, June 16 July 10
Monday, July 21 August 7
Thursday, August 14 – San Luis Obispo September 4 (1:30 – 3:30 p.m.)*
Monday, September 15 October 2
Monday, October 20 November 6
Monday, November 17 – San Diego (1 – 3 p.m.) December 4
Monday, December 15 *Tentative
Staff Contact: Michael Litschi OCTA 550 S. Main Street Orange, CA [email protected] 714-560-5581 www.lossan.org
42 Los Angeles – San Diego – San Luis Obispo Rail Corridor Agency TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
November 1, 2013 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 12
Action Requested: INFORMATION
CORRIDOR TRENDS File Number 3400600
Introduction
This report includes statistics that measure ridership, revenue, on-time performance (OTP), and customer satisfaction index (CSI) for the passenger rail services on the LOSSAN Corridor, including the Pacific Surfliner, Coast Starlight, Metrolink, and COASTER. The Capitol Corridor, San Joaquin, and Amtrak overall figures are included for comparison.
Ridership
When compared to the previous year, the Pacific Surfliner ridership decreased by 2.3 percent in September after two very high ridership months in July and August. The Coast Starlight experienced a slight decline by 2.1 percent in September. The Capital Corridor had virtually no change in ridership compared to September last year and ridership has leveled off after 13 months of declines. The San Joaquin experienced a slight decrease of 0.9 percent in September. Amtrak nationwide was also down 1.9 percent.
For the commuter rail services on the LOSSAN Corridor, Metrolink has had fluctuating monthly ridership since July 2012. Metrolink total system ridership was down slightly by 0.4 percent in September. Ridership on the Ventura County Line was up 1.8 percent, while the Orange County line increased by 4.9 percent in September. Average weekday ridership declines have been consistently near 3.4 percent over the past several months while the varying number of weekdays from month to month result in the fluctuating monthly ridership trend. For example, as was reported last month, a comparison of August 2013 monthly Metrolink ridership with one year ago shows a 9.8 percent decline. A comparison of average weekday ridership for this same period shows a 2.3 percent decline. The drop in Metrolink weekday ridership can, in part, be contributed to decreases in commuters into Union Station as the Downtown Los Angeles job market has been shrinking. COASTER ridership has been up for five consecutive months including a 5.0 percent increase in September.
43
Change In Passenger Rail Ridership
Pacific Capitol Coast Amtrak Surfliner Corridor San Joaquin Starlight Nationwide Metrolink COASTER 20%
15% Year
10%
Previous 5%
0% From
‐5% Change ‐10%
‐15%
Apr 2013 May 2013 Jun 2013 Jul 2013 Aug 2013 Sep 2013
Change In Ridership of Corridor Passenger Rail Service Previous 12 Months 25%
20% Year
15% Previous 10% From 5%
0% Change
‐5%
‐10% 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 12 12 12 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ Jul Jan Jun Oct Apr Sep Feb Dec Aug Nov Mar May
Pacific Surfliner Coast Starlight Metrolink COASTER
44
Total LOSSAN Ridership 800,000 700,000 600,000 500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep 12 12 12 12 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13
Pacific Surfliner Orange County Line Ventura County Line COASTER
Revenue
Corresponding with the drop in ridership, the Pacific Surfliner revenue was down slightly 1.2 percent in September. The Capitol Corridor revenue was down 3.2 percent, the San Joaquin was down 1.5 percent, and the Coast Starlight increased by 1.0 percent.
Pacific Surfliner Ridership and Revenue 20.0% 15.0% 10.0% 5.0% 0.0% ‐5.0% ‐10.0% 12 12 13 12 13 12 13 13 13 13 13 13 13
Jul Jan Jun Oct Apr Feb Sep Sep Dec Aug Nov Mar May
Revenue Ridership
45
Change In Intercity Passenger Revenue
Amtrak Pacific Surfliner Capitol Corridor San Joaquin Coast Starlight Nationwide 15%
10% Year
5%
Previous 0%
‐5% From
‐10% Change ‐15%
‐20%
Apr 2013 May 2013 Jun 2013 Jul 2013 Aug 2013 Sep 2013
Amtrak Fiscal Year 2013
The Pacific Surfliner finished federal fiscal year (FFY) 2013 (October 2012 through September 2013) with 2,705,823 passengers, an increase of 2.5 percent over FFY 2012 maintaining its rank as the second busiest rail corridor in the nation. Revenue on the Pacific Surfliner was up 6.8 percent over last year which ranks as the third best corridor in terms of revenue. The Amtrak California services continue to be among Amtrak’s best performing corridors in terms of ridership generating 18 percent of Amtrak’s total ridership. State-supported Amtrak services continue to represent more than half of Amtrak’s overall ridership.
Top 10 Amtrak Revenue Top 10 Amtrak Ridership Corridors FFY 2013 Corridors FFY 2013 Ridership Corridor Ridership Revenue Corridor Rank (Millions) Rank 1 Northeast Corridor 11.4 1 Northeast Corridor 2 Pacific Surfliner 2.7 2 Empire Builder 3 Capitol Corridor 1.7 3 Pacific Surfliner 4 Keystone 1.5 4 California Zephyr 5 San Joaquin 1.2 5 Southwest Chief 6 Empire (NYP-ALB) 1.1 6 Empire 7 Hiawatha 0.8 7 Coast Starlight 8 Cascades 0.8 8 Silver Meteor Chicago-St. Louis 9 0.7 9 San Joaquin (Lincoln Service) Washington-Newport 10 0.6 10 Keystone News
46
OTP
The Pacific Surfliner OTP was 82.5 percent in September improving from two months below 80 percent in July and August. The LOSSAN North segment OTP performed better than LOSSAN South, with 94.9 percent and 83.0 percent, respectively. The COASTER OTP increased to 98.1 percent in September. Metrolink OTP in September was 94.7 percent for all lines, with the Ventura County Line at 94.0 percent and the Orange County Line at 95.0 percent.
Metrolink schedules changed on September 30, 2013, while Amtrak and COASTER schedules changed on October 7, 2013. One significant change was the addition of four additional COASTER stops on six Pacific Surfliner trains as part of the Caltrans/North County Transit District Rail2Rail agreement. The schedules were adjusted in April to accommodate the additional time needed to make these stops; therefore, no additional time has been added to these trains in October. Staff will monitor any impact to OTP related to the additional COASTER stops.
The methodologies between calculating OTP for intercity and commuter services are different. Commuter trains are considered late if they are 6 or more minutes late to the terminal location. Pacific Surfliner trains operating between Goleta and San Diego are considered late if they arrive 10 or more minutes after their scheduled times, and 20 minutes or more for trains operating between San Luis Obispo and San Diego. There also are different assumptions as to whether annulled trains are included in OTP calculations.
On‐Time Performance of
100.0% Corridor Passenger Rail Services 95.0% 90.0% 85.0% 80.0% 75.0% 70.0% 65.0% 60.0% 55.0% 13 12 12 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 12 13
Jul Jan Jun Oct Apr Feb Sep Dec Aug Nov Mar May
Coast Starlight Metrolink COASTER Pacific Surfliner
47
On‐Time Performance of LOSSAN North and LOSSAN South
100.0% 95.0% 90.0% 85.0% 80.0% 75.0% 70.0% 65.0% 60.0% 55.0% 12 13 13 13 13 12 12 13 13 13 13 13
Jul Jan Jun Oct Apr Feb Sep Dec Aug Nov Mar May
Surfliner North Surfliner South Ventura County Line Orange County Line
48
CSI
The August Pacific Surfliner CSI remained above average with an average score of 91. Attachment 1 is the Pacific Surfliner CSI summary sheet for August 2013. The Coast Starlight average CSI was 87, the Capitol Corridor had an average score of 90, the San Joaquin corridor average score was 90, and the Amtrak nationwide average CSI score was 87 in August.
Amtrak Overall Customer Satisfaction Index (CSI)
Surfliner Coast Starlight Capitol Corridor San Joaquin All Amtrak 100
95 Score 90 Average 85 CSI
80
75
Mar‐13 Apr‐13 May‐13 Jun‐13 Jul‐13 Aug‐13
Pacific Surfliner Bike Reservations
Amtrak and Caltrans initiated a bike reservation system to manage the limited bike storage capacity onboard Pacific Surfliner trains. The reservation system went into effect on June 1, 2013. There is no cost for a reservation; however, Rail2Rail passengers must purchase an Amtrak ticket if they wish to bring their bikes on the Pacific Surfliner. The total number of bike reservations increased steadily between June (2,443) and August (3,055) and showed a slight decrease in September (2,778). This early trend corresponds to the overall trend in ridership; however, bike reservations are growing at a faster rate than ridership.
49
Pacific Surfliner Bike Reservations and Ridership 3,500 300,000 3,000 250,000 2,500 200,000 2,000 150,000 1,500 Reservations
100,000 Ridership 1,000 Bike 500 50,000 0 0 13 14 13 14 14 14 14 14 13 13 13 13 13
Jul Jan Jun Jun Oct Apr Feb Sep Dec Aug Nov Mar May
Bike Reservations Ridership
Attachment: 1. Pacific Surfliner Customer Satisfaction Index Summary Sheet – August 2013
Key Staff Contact: Danny Veeh, (619) 699-7317, [email protected]
50 Attachment 1 Pacific Surfliner FY13 Customer Satisfaction Scores (with change vs year ago)
August 2013 3 Month Average Fiscal Year-to-Date FY13 Goal*: 88% % Very % Very % Very % Very % Very % Very FY12 Year-End Score*: 86% Satisfied Dissatisfied** Average Satisfied Dissatisfied** Average Satisfied Dissatisfied** Average (80, 90, 100) (0, 10, 20) Score (80, 90, 100) (0, 10, 20) Score (80, 90, 100) (0, 10, 20) Score CSI Chg. CSI Chg. CSI Chg. CSI Chg. CSI Chg. CSI Chg. CSI Chg. CSI Chg. CSI Chg.
Overall CSI 90% +3 2% -2 91 +3 88% +1 3% 0 90 +1 89% +3 2% 0 91 +2
Value of Amtrak service for price paid 82% -2 3% -1 87 +1 82% -1 3% +1 87 +1 83% +1 2% -1 87 +1
Trip information prior to boarding train 87% +2 1% -4 92 +4 89% +1 2% -2 91 +1 91% +3 2% -1 92 +2
Comfort of seat 88% +5 2% +2 89 +3 87% 0 2% +1 89 +1 85% 0 1% 0 88 +1 Smooth/comfortable ride 92% +5 3% +2 90 +1 91% +3 2% +1 90 0 89% +2 1% 0 90 +1 Air temperature 95% +9 1% 0 93 +5 90% +3 2% +1 90 +1 88% +2 1% 0 89 +1
Overall cleanliness of train 90% +9 1% -1 90 +5 87% +2 1% -1 89 +1 84% +1 1% 0 88 +1 Cleanliness of train windows 76% +16 1% -2 84 +8 72% +7 3% 0 81 +2 70% +5 3% -2 81 +3 Restroom cleanliness 76% +17 3% +1 81 +4 70% +2 5% +1 78 -1 66% +2 4% -1 78 +1 Restroom odor 70% +16 5% +3 81 +7 65% 0 8% +2 76 0 63% 0 7% 0 76 +1
Information given on services/safety 79% +7 1% -3 86 +5 78% +6 2% -2 84 +2 78% +5 2% -1 85 +3 Information given on problems/delays 87% +7 3% -2 89 +5 84% +3 4% -1 87 +2 83% +3 3% -1 87 +2 Clarity of announcements 75% +5 4% +1 83 +2 74% +1 4% 0 83 +1 76% +3 3% -1 84 +2
On-time performance 87% +9 2% -5 89 +8 86% +4 3% -2 88 +3 87% +6 3% -2 89 +4
Personal security on the train 94% +12 0% 0 94 +6 92% +3 1% 0 92 +1 91% +2 1% 0 92 +1
Friendliness/helpfulness of train conductors 84% -1 5% +3 89 +1 86% +1 2% -2 89 +2 88% +3 2% 0 90 +1
Availability of food in café car 70% -4 5% +5 82 +1 67% -7 5% +4 80 -3 68% +1 5% +2 79 0 Friendliness/helpfulness of café car personnel 86% -5 3% +3 91 0 88% +1 4% +3 90 +1 85% 0 4% +2 88 0 Quality/freshness of food in café car 75% -2 6% +6 82 -1 74% -4 4% +4 83 -2 72% +1 4% +1 82 +2 Variety of food items in café car 59% 0 8% +3 78 0 61% 0 6% +3 76 -1 54% -2 6% 0 74 +2 Overall experience in café car 75% -7 3% +3 86 +1 79% +1 4% +4 84 -1 76% +2 4% +2 83 +1
Overall Wi-Fi service 55% -3 15% +8 69 -4 56% -1 12% +1 71 -1 Ease of accessing Wi-Fi service (sign-on process) Due to the lower response rates for the 72% +4 11% +6 78 -1 71% +4 8% 0 79 +1 Wi-Fi questions, scores for these Ability to perform online activities attributes are not reported at the 58% -1 18% +7 69 -2 59% +1 15% +1 71 0 Ability to stay connected to Wi-Fi service monthly level. 50% -6 15% +1 67 -2 52% -2 16% +1 68 0 Time it takes to load/access websites, emails, etc. 56% +7 18% +6 68 +1 53% 0 16% +2 69 +1
Number of responses in current period 92 311 1,100
Number of responses year ago 95 333 1,148 * Overall CSI score, % very satisfied ** For % Very Dissatisfied, a negative change in the year-over-year score shows an improvement; a positive change shows the score has worsened.
Amtrak Market Research and Analysis Confidential and Proprietary - 51 - 10/4/13 Agenda Item #13 LOSSAN TAC November 1, 2013
LOSSAN RAIL CORRIDOR AGENCY JOINT POWERS BOARD Wednesday, November 20, 2013 - Los Angeles, CA
ITEM # TAC RECOMMENDATION
CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
1. CHAIR’S REPORT
2. PUBLIC COMMENT AND COMMUNICATIONS
CONSENT
+3. OCTOBER 16, 2013, MEETING, MINUTES APPROVE
+4. CHANGES TO BOARD POLICY NOS. 01 AND 02 BASED ON THE APPROVE AMENDED JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT AND BYLAWS
+5. CORRIDOR TRENDS INFORMATION
REPORTS
+6. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH THE LOSSAN APPROVE MANAGING AGENCY
7. MANAGING AGENCY STATUS REPORT DISCUSSION
+8. LOSSAN AGENCY 2014 LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM APPROVE
9. BOARD MEMBER UPDATES INFORMATION
10. NEXT MEETING INFORMATION
52