DOCSLIB.ORG

Chapter 2 – Existing Transportation Conditions and Major Markets Tier 1 Draft EIS

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Chapter 2 – Existing Transportation Conditions and Major Markets Tier 1 Draft EIS Chapter 2 – Existing Transportation Conditions and Major Markets Tier 1 Draft EIS 2. Existing Transportation Conditions and Major Markets Section 2.1 presents an overview and route description of the existing Empire Corridor rail system. Section 2.2 describes the importance of the Empire Corridor to major markets, including the existing regional transportation market. Section 2.3 describes the linkages of the Empire Corridor to other rail routes. Sections 2.4 through 2.9 present the existing conditions of the Empire Corridor freight and passenger rail service relative to current rail operations, infrastructure, deficiencies, and safety considerations. 2.1. Empire Corridor Rail System 2.1.1. Railroad Ownership Exhibit 2-1 illustrates track ownership on the Empire Corridor. Amtrak owns, maintains, and dispatches the southernmost 20 miles of track on Empire Corridor South (west side line of former New York Central Railroad), from Penn Station to the Spuyten Duyvil Bridge that spans the Harlem River at the northern tip of Manhattan. Metro-North leases the track22 along the east side of the Hudson River, from the Spuyten Duyvil Bridge to Poughkeepsie, for its Hudson Line service with responsibility for maintenance and dispatching. With the exception of one short (6.8-mile) segment owned by Amtrak west of the Schenectady Station, located between the station and Hoffmans, CSXT is the owner of the Empire Corridor West rail infrastructure from Poughkeepsie to Niagara Falls. This CSXT corridor comprises the Hudson Subdivision (Poughkeepsie north to Albany-Rensselaer and west to Hoffmans); Selkirk Subdivision (Hoffmans to Amsterdam); Mohawk Subdivision (Amsterdam to Syracuse); Rochester Subdivision (Syracuse to Buffalo); Buffalo Terminal Subdivision in Buffalo; and Niagara Subdivision (Buffalo to Niagara Falls). In 2012, NYSDOT facilitated a lease agreement between CSXT and Amtrak for portions of the Empire Corridor between Poughkeepsie, Albany-Rensselaer, and Hoffmans, NY. When combined with previous lease agreements for portions of the corridor within this 94-mile segment, Amtrak assumed full responsibility for dispatching and maintenance from the northern boundary of Metro- North control through Albany to Hoffmans, where CSXT’s freight-only Selkirk Branch joins the Empire Corridor. The 2012 lease agreement marks the first time in the corridor’s history that passenger-only carriers have controlled the entire Empire Corridor from New York to Albany and beyond. CSXT retains responsibility for the operation of freight trains within the territory leased by Amtrak as well as on the Metro-North Hudson Line. West of Hoffmans, CSXT remains responsible for maintenance and dispatching of the Empire Corridor. North of the Buffalo Terminal Subdivision, CSXT owns the Niagara Subdivision as far as CP-28. In December 2012, Amtrak took over ownership, control, and maintenance of approximately 0.37 mile of former CSXT and Canadian National Railway track from immediately west of CP-28 to the U.S.- Canada international border on the Whirlpool Bridge. The Whirlpool Bridge, a railroad and vehicular passenger bridge located at the international border crossing, is owned and maintained by the Niagara Falls Bridge Commission. 22 / Midtown TDR Ventures LLC (the company that now owns the assets of the former Penn Central Railroad) owns the right-of-way fee interest. High Speed Rail Empire Corridor Program Page 2-1 New York State Department of Transportation Tier 1 Draft EIS Chapter 2 – Existing Transportation Conditions and Major Markets Exhibit 2-1—Empire Corridor Ownership 2.1.2. Route Description Empire Corridor South (New York City to Albany) Empire Corridor South extends 142 miles (Mileposts [MPs] 0 to 14323) north from Penn Station to 23 / Mileposts referenced in this EIS are measured south to north using Hudson Line mileposts from Grand Central Terminal. Mileposts referenced extend north to Albany-Rennselaer, then east to west on Empire Corridor West. Although Empire Corridor South extends to Page 2-2 High Speed Rail Empire Corridor Program New York State Department of Transportation Chapter 2 – Existing Transportation Conditions and Major Markets Tier 1 Draft EIS approximately one mile north of Albany-Rensselaer Station in Rensselaer County (refer to Exhibit 2-3). This route continues from Manhattan through the Bronx (Bronx County), Yonkers and Croton-Harmon (Westchester County), Poughkeepsie (Dutchess County), extending to approximately one mile north of Albany-Rensselaer Station (Rensselaer County). The line runs through the Hudson Valley (Westchester, Putnam, Dutchess, Columbia counties, passing close to Rockland, Orange, Ulster, and Greene counties on the opposite side of the Hudson River) north to the Capital District (which includes Rensselaer County). Metropolitan Transportation Authority’s (MTA’s) Metro-North Railroad (Metro-North) operates Hudson Line commuter rail service (formerly Hudson River Line and New York Central Railroad) between Poughkeepsie and Grand Central Terminal (GCT) (MPs 0 to 73.5). Empire Corridor South consists of the Empire Connection and the Metro-North/CSXT Hudson Line. The Empire Connection runs from Penn Station, northward along the west side of Manhattan, across the Harlem Ship Canal at Spuyten Duyvil Bridge (refer to Exhibit 2-2), and then joins with Metro-North’s Hudson Line, a distance of 10.8 miles. The Hudson Line is double tracked north of the Croton-Harmon Station at Croton-on-Hudson (Milepost 33.2), with some three-track sections, and is mostly four tracks (two express and two local) and includes an electrified third rail to the south. The southern portion of the Hudson Line begins at interlocking Control Point (CP) 12 on the Hudson Line, where the Empire Connection from Penn Station joins Metro-North’s Hudson Line from GCT. The length of the segment is 21.4 miles, ending at Croton-Harmon, MP 33.2. Exhibit 2-2 - Spuyten Duyvil Bridge over Harlem Portions of the Hudson Line have 110 mph River passenger train operation and limited freight activity (approximately four trains a day). The Empire Corridor South has a capability of accommodating the second highest rail car weight limit class (286,000 pounds) for freight. Metro- North operates between roughly 50 (weekend) and 77 (weekday) daily roundtrips along the Hudson Line, of which approximately half are express trains servicing Poughkeepsie and half are local trains to Croton-Harmon Station. Amtrak operates thirteen daily roundtrips (weekdays) along the Empire Corridor South between Albany-Rensselaer and New York City, with eleven daily roundtrips on the weekends. In addition to Empire Service to Buffalo and points beyond, this section of track also accommodates Amtrak service that extends north of Schenectady Station on the Canadian Pacific Railway to Montreal (Adirondack—one daily roundtrip) and Vermont (Ethan Allen Express—one daily roundtrip). There is also one daily connecting service from Albany- Rensselaer to Boston, Massachusetts. With few exceptions, the tracks generally follow the east shoreline of the Hudson River. The northern portion of the Metro-North Hudson Line begins at MP 33.2 at Croton-Harmon Station and ends at MP 73.5 at Poughkeepsie Station. The under running third rail electrification ends at MP 143, the mileage from Penn Station to MP 143 totals to 142 miles. This is because the mileposts, as designated by the railroads, skip a mile where the Hudson line merges with the Empire Corridor at the Manhattan-Bronx county line near the Spuyten Duyvil Station. High Speed Rail Empire Corridor Program Page 2-3 New York State Department of Transportation Tier 1 Draft EIS Chapter 2 – Existing Transportation Conditions and Major Markets Exhibit 2-3—Empire Corridor South Croton-Harmon Station and all trains north of that point are operated with conventional diesel electric locomotives. Parts of this segment have sharper curvature than do segments to the south. These curves limit maximum speed to 60 to 70 mph; otherwise, 80 mph is the predominant speed. The northern section above the Hudson Highlands, where the Hudson River and the railroad are significantly straighter, allows for 90 mph operation of passenger trains. Leaving Croton-Harmon Station to the north, Amtrak intercity trains stop only at Poughkeepsie. Page 2-4 High Speed Rail Empire Corridor Program New York State Department of Transportation Chapter 2 – Existing Transportation Conditions and Major Markets Tier 1 Draft EIS The CSXT Hudson Subdivision south of Albany-Rensselaer begins at Poughkeepsie Station, MP 73.5, and ends at Albany-Rensselaer Station, MP 142.1. This segment has the highest maximum authorized speeds (MAS) on the Empire Corridor, with speeds of up to 110 mph. The higher speeds are, in large measure, due to generally following the Hudson River, which is comparatively straight relative to segments to the south. The higher speeds also reflect extensive investment by New York State since the 1970s. Empire Corridor West (Albany to Buffalo) Empire Corridor West extends 294 miles west (MPs 143 to 437) from approximately one mile north of Albany-Rensselaer Station to just east of the Buffalo-Exchange Street Station (refer to Exhibit 2-4). This section of track passes through the Mohawk Valley from the Capital District cities of Albany (Albany County) and Schenectady (Schenectady County), passing through the central- western New York cities of Utica (Oneida County), Syracuse (Onondaga County) and Rochester (Monroe County) in the Finger Lakes Region, and Buffalo (Erie County) on Lake Erie. Outside of these metropolitan areas, the railroad also passes through the more rural counties of Montgomery, Herkimer, Madison, Cayuga, Wayne, Monroe, and Genesee. This section of track is a two-track line that is the busiest freight track in the state, carrying one of the highest volumes on the CSXT system nationwide. This is the only railroad crossing upstate/western New York that can accommodate the maximum freight rail car weight (315,000 pounds). The entire line west of Hoffmans (west of Schenectady) also has adequate clearance for double-stack intermodal trains. CSXT operates this as a high-volume railroad that is heavily used by 50 to 60 daily freight trains.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2012 Annual Report Pursuing Our Unlimited Potential Annual Report 2012
    For the year ended March 31, 2012 Pursuing Our Unlimited Potential Annual Report 2012 Annual Report 2012 EAST JAPAN RAILWAY COMPANY JR East’s Strengths 1 AN OVERWHELMINGLY SOLID AND ADVANTAGEOUS RAILWAY NETWORK The railway business of the JR East Being based in the Tokyo metro- Group covers the eastern half of politan area is a major source of our Honshu island, which includes the strength. Routes originating in the Tokyo metropolitan area. We provide Kanto area (JR East Tokyo Branch transportation services via our Office, Yokohama Branch Office, Shinkansen network, which connects Hachioji Branch Office, Omiya Tokyo with regional cities in five Branch Office, Takasaki Branch directions, Kanto area network, and Office, Mito Branch Office, and intercity and regional networks. Our Chiba Branch Office) account for JR EAST’S SERVICE AREA networks combine to cover 7,512.6 68% of transportation revenue. kilometers and serve 17 million Japan’s total population may be people daily. We are the largest declining, but the population of the railway company in Japan and one of Tokyo metropolitan area (Tokyo, TOKYO the largest in the world. Kanagawa Prefecture, Saitama Prefecture, and Chiba On a daily basis, about 17million passengers travel a network of 70 train lines stretching 7,512.6 operating kilometers An Overwhelmingly Solid and Advantageous Railway Network Annual Report 2012 SECTION 1 OVERALL GROWTH STRATEGY Prefecture) continues to rise, mean- OPERATING REVENUES OPERATING INCOME ing our railway networks are sup- For the year ended March 31, 2012 For the year ended March 31, 2012 ported by an extremely sturdy Others 7.9% Transportation Others 6.1% Transportation operating foundation.
    [Show full text]
  • Master HSIPR Selection Sheet 030413 Updates.Xlsx
    FRA High‐Speed Intercity Passenger Rail (HSIPR) Program Updated 3/4/2013 Funding Selection Summary (Sorted by State Abbreviation, Funding Source, and Project Type) Funding Potential Estimated State Project Type Project Name Project Summary Source Funding* Alabama ‐ Total Funding Amount: $200,000 AL FY 2009 Planning Project New Passenger Rail Service in Alabama Completion of a feasibility study to restore intercity passenger rail service from Birmingham to Montgomery to Mobile, AL.$ 200,000 Amtrak ‐ Total Funding Amount: $449,944,000 This project will boost capacity, reliability, and speed in one of the most heavily used sections of the Northeast Corridor (NEC). The project will create a 24 mile segment of track between New Brunswick and Trenton, NJ capable of 160 mph train operations with high‐tension catenary, upgraded electric Amtrak ARRA Corridor Program NEC Power, Signal, Track, Catenary Improvements power facilities, and high‐speed rail interlockings that allow express trains to overtake and pass local trains, reducing delays that often affect this track $ 449,944,000 section. In addition, this project makes related track and interlocking investments between Trenton, NJ and Morrisville, PA and at New York Penn Station. The upgraded power facilities will reduce power failures, which are frequently experienced on this segment of the NEC. California ‐ Total Funding Amount: $4,243,143,231 This project encompasses the purchase of 15 passenger rail cars and 4 locomotives for use on the Pacific Surfliner, San Joaquin, and Capitol Corridors in California. These new cars and locomotives will be compliant with standards for equipment that can travel at speeds up to 125 mph established Next Generation Passenger Rail Equipment CA ‐ DOT ARRA Corridor Program pursuant to Section 305 of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008.
    [Show full text]
  • GAO-02-398 Intercity Passenger Rail: Amtrak Needs to Improve Its
    United States General Accounting Office Report to the Honorable Ron Wyden GAO U.S. Senate April 2002 INTERCITY PASSENGER RAIL Amtrak Needs to Improve Its Decisionmaking Process for Its Route and Service Proposals GAO-02-398 Contents Letter 1 Results in Brief 2 Background 3 Status of the Growth Strategy 6 Amtrak Overestimated Expected Mail and Express Revenue 7 Amtrak Encountered Substantial Difficulties in Expanding Service Over Freight Railroad Tracks 9 Conclusions 13 Recommendation for Executive Action 13 Agency Comments and Our Evaluation 13 Scope and Methodology 16 Appendix I Financial Performance of Amtrak’s Routes, Fiscal Year 2001 18 Appendix II Amtrak Route Actions, January 1995 Through December 2001 20 Appendix III Planned Route and Service Actions Included in the Network Growth Strategy 22 Appendix IV Amtrak’s Process for Evaluating Route and Service Proposals 23 Amtrak’s Consideration of Operating Revenue and Direct Costs 23 Consideration of Capital Costs and Other Financial Issues 24 Appendix V Market-Based Network Analysis Models Used to Estimate Ridership, Revenues, and Costs 26 Models Used to Estimate Ridership and Revenue 26 Models Used to Estimate Costs 27 Page i GAO-02-398 Amtrak’s Route and Service Decisionmaking Appendix VI Comments from the National Railroad Passenger Corporation 28 GAO’s Evaluation 37 Tables Table 1: Status of Network Growth Strategy Route and Service Actions, as of December 31, 2001 7 Table 2: Operating Profit (Loss), Operating Ratio, and Profit (Loss) per Passenger of Each Amtrak Route, Fiscal Year 2001, Ranked by Profit (Loss) 18 Table 3: Planned Network Growth Strategy Route and Service Actions 22 Figure Figure 1: Amtrak’s Route System, as of December 2001 4 Page ii GAO-02-398 Amtrak’s Route and Service Decisionmaking United States General Accounting Office Washington, DC 20548 April 12, 2002 The Honorable Ron Wyden United States Senate Dear Senator Wyden: The National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) is the nation’s intercity passenger rail operator.
    [Show full text]
  • Submitted by the City of Rensselaer
    Downtown Revitalization Initiative “Resurgent Rensselaer” – Submitted by the City of Rensselaer BASIC INFORMATION Regional Economic Development Council (REDC) Region: Capital District Municipality Name: City of Rensselaer Downtown Name: Rensselaer Transit Village County: Rensselaer Vision for Downtown. Provide a brief statement of the municipality’s vision for downtown revitalization. The City of Rensselaer is in the process of reinventing itself as an active waterfront transit village where residents can “Live, Work and Play.” In order to accomplish this mission, the city plans to completely redevelop its waterfront, redefine Broadway as its Main Street, and improve connectivity from new residential, retail, commercial and recreational uses to the Albany/Rensselaer Train Station. Justification. Provide an overview of the downtown, highlighting the area’s defining characteristics and the reasons for its selection. Explain why the downtown is ready for Downtown Revitalization Initiative (DRI) investment, and how that investment would serve as a catalyst to bring about revitalization. The City of Rensselaer is the prime example of a community which is in the midst of rebirth as a modern-day transit village. The city boasts a wonderful location with easy access to regional rail transportation, waterfront recreation, new mixed-use housing developments and a traditional Main Street thoroughfare along Broadway. Moreover, Broadway directly connects the waterfront to a number of historic resources within the city, offering an opportunity to rebrand the city as a modern transit village and historic maritime port of call along the Hudson. A historic impediment to redevelopment along Broadway and the waterfront has been the existence of perceived and potential brownfield sites, as highlighted in the City’s New York State Brownfield Opportunity Areas Program Nomination Study.
    [Show full text]
  • Transportations &
    Transportations & map - Overview and detail maps - To Hamamatsu station from airport by trains - Transportation in Hamamatsu city Map overview Tokaido Shinkansen (bullet train) NRT HND Venue, Sep. 12 KIX NGO Venue, Sep. 11 and 13 Accommodation Hotel Crown Palais Hamamatsu To Hamamatsu from airport by trains JR (Japan Railway) Lines Limited express “Narita Express” Tokaido Shinkansen Keikyu Line Tokyo Narita airport (NRT), Terminal 1 (bullet train) Super express Tokyo Haneda airport (HND), International terminal Tokyo Narita airport (NRT), Terminal 2 ・3 “Kodama” or “Hikari” 85min Tokyo Tokyo Shinagawa Shinagawa Shinagawa Shin-Yokohama You can use both Tokyo and Shinagawa to change trains but it is easy to do it at Shinagawa because 80 or 110 min Shinagawa is much smaller station than Tokyo. Shizuoka Meitetsu Line Chubu international airport (NGO) Hamamatsu (Nagoya international airport) 30 or 50 min Nagoya Nagoya Limited express “Haruka” 55 or 70 min - There are many different ways. Here I show Kyoto Kyoto only the most simplest way from each airport. Shin-Osaka Shin-Osaka - You can also use google map to find route 55min including train and bus. Kansai international airport (KIX) Tokaido Shinkansen (bullet train) - Shinkansen, a super express bullet train, is the fastest railway in Japan. - There are so many Tokaido Shinkansen trains between Tokyo and Shin-Osaka station, but trains stopping at Hamamatsu station are limited numbers. - There are 3 types of trains in Tokaido Shinkansen as below. You can use “Hirakari” or “Kodama” to Hamamatsu. Train Detail Duration to Hamamatsu(min) name Tokyo Shinagawa Nagoya Shin-Osaka Nozomi It is fastest but DOES NOT stop at NA NA NA NA Hamamatsu.
    [Show full text]
  • Six Empire Service Trains Will Stop at Grand Central Terminal Instead of New York Penn Station Starting July 10 Through Sept. 1
    Six Empire Service Trains Will Stop at Grand Central Terminal Instead of New York Penn Station Starting July 10 through Sept. 1, 2017 Infrastructure Renewal at New York Penn Station As part of the Infrastructure Renewal at New York Penn Station, Amtrak will perform a series of major track and switch renewal projects that will strengthen railroad infrastructure, operations and preparedness -- and ultimately improve reliability at America’s busiest rail hub. The Infrastructure Renewal work accelerates several years of already planned improvements to track, switch and other infrastructure at Penn Station to improve track conditions. This major work will require three northbound and three southbound Empire Service trains to use Grand Central Terminal instead of Penn Station from July 10 – Sept. 1, 2017. If you are getting on or off the following trains at Grand Central Terminal, here are a few things you should know: Trains 230, 233, 235, 236, 239 and 242 Will Stop at Grand Central Terminal Location: Grand Central Terminal is located about a mile north of Penn Station at 89 E 42nd Street, New York, NY, 10017. Transferring between Grand Central Terminal and New York Penn Station: If you are transferring between New York Penn Station and Grand Central Terminal, taxi and local transit are available from both stations, or you can choose to walk. Customers are encouraged to allow extra time if transferring between stations. Schedule Change: Note the new arrival and departure times on your ticket. Trains arriving at and departing from Grand Central Terminal will operate an adjusted schedule. Contact Amtrak for schedule information.
    [Show full text]
  • PRIIA Report
    Pursuant to Section 207 of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-432, Division B): Quarterly Report on the Performance and Service Quality of Intercity Passenger Train Operations Covering the Quarter Ended June, 2020 (Third Quarter of Fiscal Year 2020) Federal Railroad Administration United States Department of Transportation Published August 2020 Table of Contents (Notes follow on the next page.) Financial Table 1 (A/B): Short-Term Avoidable Operating Costs (Note 1) Table 2 (A/B): Fully Allocated Operating Cost covered by Passenger-Related Revenue Table 3 (A/B): Long-Term Avoidable Operating Loss (Note 1) Table 4 (A/B): Adjusted Loss per Passenger- Mile Table 5: Passenger-Miles per Train-Mile On-Time Performance (Table 6) Test No. 1 Change in Effective Speed Test No. 2 Endpoint OTP Test No. 3 All-Stations OTP Train Delays Train Delays - Off NEC Table 7: Off-NEC Host Responsible Delays per 10,000 Train-Miles Table 8: Off-NEC Amtrak Responsible Delays per 10,000 Train-Miles Train Delays - On NEC Table 9: On-NEC Total Host and Amtrak Responsible Delays per 10,000 Train-Miles Other Service Quality Table 10: Customer Satisfaction Indicator (eCSI) Scores Table 11: Service Interruptions per 10,000 Train-Miles due to Equipment-related Problems Table 12: Complaints Received Table 13: Food-related Complaints Table 14: Personnel-related Complaints Table 15: Equipment-related Complaints Table 16: Station-related Complaints Public Benefits (Table 17) Connectivity Measure Availability of Other Modes Reference Materials Table 18: Route Descriptions Terminology & Definitions Table 19: Delay Code Definitions Table 20: Host Railroad Code Definitions Appendixes A.
    [Show full text]
  • No Action Alternative Report
    No Action Alternative Report April 2015 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................................. 1 2. NEC FUTURE Background ............................................................................................................................ 2 3. Approach to No Action Alternative.............................................................................................................. 4 3.1 METHODOLOGY FOR SELECTING NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE PROJECTS .................................................................................... 4 3.2 DISINVESTMENT SCENARIO ...................................................................................................................................................... 5 4. No Action Alternative ................................................................................................................................... 6 4.1 TRAIN SERVICE ........................................................................................................................................................................ 6 4.2 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE RAIL PROJECTS ............................................................................................................................... 9 4.2.1 Funded Projects or Projects with Approved Funding Plans (Category 1) ............................................................. 9 4.2.2 Funded or Unfunded Mandates (Category 2) .......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Regional Rail Service the Vermont Way
    DRAFT Regional Rail Service The Vermont Way Authored by Christopher Parker and Carl Fowler November 30, 2017 Contents Contents 2 Executive Summary 4 The Budd Car RDC Advantage 5 Project System Description 6 Routes 6 Schedule 7 Major Employers and Markets 8 Commuter vs. Intercity Designation 10 Project Developer 10 Stakeholders 10 Transportation organizations 10 Town and City Governments 11 Colleges and Universities 11 Resorts 11 Host Railroads 11 Vermont Rail Systems 11 New England Central Railroad 12 Amtrak 12 Possible contract operators 12 Dispatching 13 Liability Insurance 13 Tracks and Right-of-Way 15 Upgraded Track 15 Safety: Grade Crossing Upgrades 15 Proposed Standard 16 Upgrades by segment 16 Cost of Upgrades 17 Safety 19 Platforms and Stations 20 Proposed Stations 20 Existing Stations 22 Construction Methods of New Stations 22 Current and Historical Precedents 25 Rail in Vermont 25 Regional Rail Service in the United States 27 New Mexico 27 Maine 27 Oregon 28 Arizona and Rural New York 28 Rural Massachusetts 28 Executive Summary For more than twenty years various studies have responded to a yearning in Vermont for a regional passenger rail service which would connect Vermont towns and cities. This White Paper, commissioned by Champ P3, LLC reviews the opportunities for and obstacles to delivering rail service at a rural scale appropriate for a rural state. Champ P3 is a mission driven public-private partnership modeled on the Eagle P3 which built Denver’s new commuter rail network. Vermont’s two railroads, Vermont Rail System and Genesee & Wyoming, have experience hosting and operating commuter rail service utilizing Budd cars.
    [Show full text]
  • Chicago-South Bend-Toledo-Cleveland-Erie-Buffalo-Albany-New York Frequency Expansion Report – Discussion Draft 2 1
    Chicago-South Bend-Toledo-Cleveland-Erie-Buffalo- Albany-New York Frequency Expansion Report DISCUSSION DRAFT (Quantified Model Data Subject to Refinement) Table of Contents 1. Project Background: ................................................................................................................................ 3 2. Early Study Efforts and Initial Findings: ................................................................................................ 5 3. Background Data Collection Interviews: ................................................................................................ 6 4. Fixed-Facility Capital Cost Estimate Range Based on Existing Studies: ............................................... 7 5. Selection of Single Route for Refined Analysis and Potential “Proxy” for Other Routes: ................ 9 6. Legal Opinion on Relevant Amtrak Enabling Legislation: ................................................................... 10 7. Sample “Timetable-Format” Schedules of Four Frequency New York-Chicago Service: .............. 12 8. Order-of-Magnitude Capital Cost Estimates for Platform-Related Improvements: ............................ 14 9. Ballpark Station-by-Station Ridership Estimates: ................................................................................... 16 10. Scoping-Level Four Frequency Operating Cost and Revenue Model: .................................................. 18 11. Study Findings and Conclusions: .........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Quarterly Report on the Performance and Service Quality of Intercity Passenger Train Operations
    Pursuant to Section 207 of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-432, Division B): Quarterly Report on the Performance and Service Quality of Intercity Passenger Train Operations Covering the Quarter Ended June, 2019 (Third Quarter of Fiscal Year 2019) Federal Railroad Administration United States Department of Transportation Published August 2019 Table of Contents (Notes follow on the next page.) Financial Table 1 (A/B): Short-Term Avoidable Operating Costs (Note 1) Table 2 (A/B): Fully Allocated Operating Cost covered by Passenger-Related Revenue Table 3 (A/B): Long-Term Avoidable Operating Loss (Note 1) Table 4 (A/B): Adjusted Loss per Passenger- Mile Table 5: Passenger-Miles per Train-Mile On-Time Performance (Table 6) Test No. 1 Change in Effective Speed Test No. 2 Endpoint OTP Test No. 3 All-Stations OTP Train Delays Train Delays - Off NEC Table 7: Off-NEC Host Responsible Delays per 10,000 Train-Miles Table 8: Off-NEC Amtrak Responsible Delays per 10,000 Train-Miles Train Delays - On NEC Table 9: On-NEC Total Host and Amtrak Responsible Delays per 10,000 Train-Miles Other Service Quality Table 10: Customer Satisfaction Indicator (eCSI) Scores Table 11: Service Interruptions per 10,000 Train-Miles due to Equipment-related Problems Table 12: Complaints Received Table 13: Food-related Complaints Table 14: Personnel-related Complaints Table 15: Equipment-related Complaints Table 16: Station-related Complaints Public Benefits (Table 17) Connectivity Measure Availability of Other Modes Reference Materials Table 18: Route Descriptions Terminology & Definitions Table 19: Delay Code Definitions Table 20: Host Railroad Code Definitions Appendixes A.
    [Show full text]
  • 20210419 Amtrak Metrics Reporting
    NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION 30th Street Station Philadelphia, PA 19104 April 12, 2021 Mr. Michael Lestingi Director, Office of Policy and Planning Federal Railroad Administrator U.S. Department of Transportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20590 Dear Mr. Lestingi: In accordance with the Metrics and Minimum Standards for Intercity Passenger Rail Service final rule published on November 16, 2020 (the “Final Rule”), this letter serves as Amtrak’s report to the Federal Railroad Administration that, as of April 10, 2021, Amtrak has provided the 29 host railroads over which Amtrak currently operates (listed in Appendix A) with ridership data for the prior month consistent with the Final Rule. The following data was provided to each host railroad: . the total number of passengers, by train and by day; . the station-specific number of detraining passengers, reported by host railroad whose railroad right-of-way serves the station, by train, and by day; and . the station-specific number of on-time passengers reported by host railroad whose railroad right- of-way serves the station, by train, and by day. Please let me know if you have any questions. Sincerely, Jim Blair Sr. Director, Host Railroads Amtrak cc: Dennis Newman Amtrak Jason Maga Amtrak Christopher Zappi Amtrak Yoel Weiss Amtrak Kristin Ferriter Federal Railroad Administration Mr. Michael Lestingi April 12, 2021 Page 2 Appendix A Host Railroads Provided with Amtrak Ridership Data Host Railroad1 Belt Railway Company of Chicago BNSF Railway Buckingham Branch Railroad
    [Show full text]