Fact Sheet: Amtrak in Illinois

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Fact sheet: Amtrak in Illinois Passengers in Illinois, 2013-2019: Illinoisans near a station boarding & detraining (in thousands) Within 25 miles: 10,714,374 (84%) 5,063.6 Within 50 miles: 12,499,569 (97%) 4,884.4 4,753.3 4,738.7 4,808.7 4,580.0 4,679.3 Amtrak service in the state Cardinal - 3 trains/wk Lincoln Service - Multiple trains daily Hiawatha - Multiple trains daily Wolverine - Multiple trains daily Illini/Saluki - Multiple trains daily IL Zephyr/Carl Sandburg - Multiple trains daily Empire Builder - Daily service Capitol Limited - Daily service California Zephyr - Daily service Southwest Chief - Daily service City of New Orleans - Daily service Texas Eagle - Daily CHI-SAS, 3x/wk CHI-LAX 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Blue Water - Daily service Lake Shore Limited - Daily service Hoosier State - 4 trains/wk Quick recap, 2019 (arrivals and departures) Pere Marquette - Daily service Coach/ First/ Business Sleeper Total 30 Amtrak stations Passengers 4,570,338 238,359 4,808,697 2017 2018 2019 Average trip 236 miles 1217 miles 284 miles Alton 63,579 66,591 67,938 Average fare $ 36.00 $307.00 $ 50.00 Normal 237,565 235,458 240,607 Average yield, per mi 15.4¢ 25.2¢ 17.5¢ Carbondale 99,207 89,919 84,521 Carlinville 10,062 12,089 11,957 Centralia 20,546 20,685 20,629 Top city pairs by ridership, 2019 Champaign 156,175 153,470 180,741 Chicago 3,321,201 3,293,590 3,379,760 1. Chicago - Milwaukee, WI 86 mi Du Quoin 8,665 8,293 7,954 2. Chicago - St. Louis, MO 284 mi Dwight 10,058 9,913 10,073 3. Chicago - Milwaukee Airport, WI 78 mi Effingham 25,574 24,131 23,651 4. Chicago - Normal 124 mi Galesburg 98,876 93,224 91,033 5. Champaign - Chicago 129 mi Gilman 2,372 2,317 2,130 6. Chicago - Ann Arbor, MI 243 mi Glenview 55,216 55,497 62,347 7. Chicago - Springfield 185 mi Homewood 36,446 35,878 36,623 8. Chicago - Kalamazoo, MI 138 mi Joliet 60,607 60,618 67,175 9. Chicago - Sturtevant, WI 62 mi Kankakee 19,586 19,109 18,862 10. Chicago - Dearborn, MI 273 mi Kewanee 17,841 17,236 17,955 La Grange 12,643 10,925 10,799 Top city pairs by revenue, 2019 Lincoln 21,713 23,443 24,011 Macomb 65,759 60,081 57,016 1. Chicago - Milwaukee, WI 86 mi Mattoon 35,312 33,908 34,052 2. Chicago - St. Louis, MO 284 mi Mendota 22,833 22,066 22,768 3. Chicago - Washington, DC 921 mi 4. Chicago - Los Angeles, CA 2,728 mi Naperville 45,416 41,753 40,981 5. Chicago - Emeryville, CA 2,438 mi Plano 6,187 6,442 6,296 6. Chicago - Ann Arbor, MI 243 mi Pontiac 16,552 17,604 17,358 7. Chicago - Seattle, WA 2,205 mi Princeton 36,230 37,708 37,266 8. Chicago - New York, NY 1,146 mi Quincy 40,869 36,851 37,640 9. Chicago - Denver, CO 1,038 mi Rantoul 4,773 4,999 4,945 10. Chicago - Milwaukee Airport, WI 78 mi Springfield 174,207 166,645 170,100 Summit 12,614 18,813 21,509 1200 G St NW, Ste 240 Washington, DC 20005 (202) 408-8362 railpassengers.org Copyright 2020 Rail Passengers Association 20200405.

Copy Link

Recommended publications

GAO-02-398 Intercity Passenger Rail: Amtrak Needs to Improve Its
United States General Accounting Office Report to the Honorable Ron Wyden GAO U.S. Senate April 2002 INTERCITY PASSENGER RAIL Amtrak Needs to Improve Its Decisionmaking Process for Its Route and Service Proposals GAO-02-398 Contents Letter 1 Results in Brief 2 Background 3 Status of the Growth Strategy 6 Amtrak Overestimated Expected Mail and Express Revenue 7 Amtrak Encountered Substantial Difficulties in Expanding Service Over Freight Railroad Tracks 9 Conclusions 13 Recommendation for Executive Action 13 Agency Comments and Our Evaluation 13 Scope and Methodology 16 Appendix I Financial Performance of Amtrak’s Routes, Fiscal Year 2001 18 Appendix II Amtrak Route Actions, January 1995 Through December 2001 20 Appendix III Planned Route and Service Actions Included in the Network Growth Strategy 22 Appendix IV Amtrak’s Process for Evaluating Route and Service Proposals 23 Amtrak’s Consideration of Operating Revenue and Direct Costs 23 Consideration of Capital Costs and Other Financial Issues 24 Appendix V Market-Based Network Analysis Models Used to Estimate Ridership, Revenues, and Costs 26 Models Used to Estimate Ridership and Revenue 26 Models Used to Estimate Costs 27 Page i GAO-02-398 Amtrak’s Route and Service Decisionmaking Appendix VI Comments from the National Railroad Passenger Corporation 28 GAO’s Evaluation 37 Tables Table 1: Status of Network Growth Strategy Route and Service Actions, as of December 31, 2001 7 Table 2: Operating Profit (Loss), Operating Ratio, and Profit (Loss) per Passenger of Each Amtrak Route, Fiscal Year 2001, Ranked by Profit (Loss) 18 Table 3: Planned Network Growth Strategy Route and Service Actions 22 Figure Figure 1: Amtrak’s Route System, as of December 2001 4 Page ii GAO-02-398 Amtrak’s Route and Service Decisionmaking United States General Accounting Office Washington, DC 20548 April 12, 2002 The Honorable Ron Wyden United States Senate Dear Senator Wyden: The National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) is the nation’s intercity passenger rail operator.
[Show full text]
Issue of Play on October 4 & 5 at the "The 6 :,53"
I the 'It, 980 6:53 OCTOBER !li AMTRAK... ... now serving BRYAN and LOVELAND ... returns to INDIA,NAPOLIS then turns em away Amtrak's LAKE SHORE LIMITED With appropriate "first trip" is now making regular stops inaugural festivities, Amtrak every day at BRYAN in north introduced daily operation of western Ohio. The westbound its new HOOSIER STATE on the train stops at 11:34am and 1st of October between IND the eastbound train stops at IANAPOLIS and CHICAGO. Sev 8:15pm. eral OARP members were on the Amtrak's SHENANDOAH inaugural trip, including Ray is now stopping daily at a Kline, Dave Marshall and Nick new station stop in suburban Noe. Complimentary champagne Cincinnati. The eastbound was served to all passengers SHENANDOAH stops at LOVELAND and Amtrak public affairs at 7:09pm and the westbound representatives passed out train stops at 8:15am. A m- Amtrak literature. One of trak began both new stops on the Amtrak reps was also pas Sunday, October 26th. Sev sing out OARP brochures! [We eral OARP members were on don't miss an opportunity!] hand at both stations as the Our members reported that the "first trains" rolled in. inaugural round trip was a OARP has supported both new good one, with on-time oper station stops and we are ation the whole way. Tracks glad they have finally come permit 70mph speeds much of about. Both communities are the way and the only rough supportive of their new Am track was noted near Chicago. trak service. How To Find Amtrak held another in its The Station Maps for both series of FAMILY DAYS with BRYAN qnd LOVELAND will be much equipment on public dis fopnd' inside this issue of play on October 4 & 5 at the "the 6 :,53".
[Show full text]
R0202'11 LSB Research Services Division MG
Rep. McCann offered the following concurrent resolution: House Concurrent Resolution No. 41. A concurrent resolution to urge the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) to pursue bicycle friendly policies by providing for bicycles on board trains and bicycle parking in future station plans. Whereas, An efficient, modern, transportation system is a pillar of a healthy economic climate and vital for Michigan's future. All modes of 21st century transportation infrastructure should be made accessible to modern travelers, whether tourists or commuters. Seamless multi-modal connections are essential to facilitate tourism and to allow greater mobility for bike commuters and those without cars. Bicyclists should be able to switch between transportation modes and link trips by bringing bicycles on trains without having to check them as boxed luggage. Bicycle tourism and commuting would be further accommodated with short and long-term bike parking at Amtrak stations. Unfortunately, Amtrak does not allow bicycles on board Michigan routes at this time and bike parking is not always available; and Whereas, Amtrak's routes out of Chicago, the Downstate Illinois Service and Missouri River Runner, offer roll-on bike service; the option to bring bicycles on board, either by storing bikes on board in bike racks, or secured as checked baggage with tie-down equipment (not in a box), and allow folding bicycles on board as carry-on baggage. All three of the Michigan Amtrak routes, The Blue Water, Lake Shore Limited and Pere Marquette lines, use the same equipment as Chicago area trains and would only have to update the reservations system to allow bikes on board in Michigan; and Whereas, Bicycle tourism is a booming industry and many Michigan bike tour events are located in or near cities accessible by Amtrak service.
[Show full text]
CAPITOL LIMITED Train Time Schedule & Line Route
CAPITOL LIMITED train time schedule & line map Capitol Limited View In Website Mode The train line Capitol Limited has 2 routes. For regular weekdays, their operation hours are: (1) Chicago Union Station: 4:05 PM (2) Washington Union Station: 7:40 PM Use the Moovit App to ƒnd the closest CAPITOL LIMITED train station near you and ƒnd out when is the next CAPITOL LIMITED train arriving. Direction: Chicago Union Station CAPITOL LIMITED train Time Schedule 16 stops Chicago Union Station Route Timetable: VIEW LINE SCHEDULE Sunday 4:05 PM Monday 4:05 PM Union Station 50 Massachusetts Avenue Ne, Washington Tuesday 4:05 PM Rockville Amtrak Wednesday 4:05 PM 250 Rockville Pike, Rockville Thursday 4:05 PM Harpers Ferry Amtrak Friday 4:05 PM 182 Potomac St, Harpers Ferry Saturday 4:05 PM Martinsburg Amtrak Station 229 East Martin Street, Berkeley County Cumberland Amtrak Station 200 Park St, Cumberland CAPITOL LIMITED train Info Direction: Chicago Union Station Connellsville Amtrak Stops: 16 Trip Duration: 1060 min Pittsburgh Amtrak Station Line Summary: Union Station, Rockville Amtrak, 1100 Liberty Avenue, Pittsburgh Harpers Ferry Amtrak, Martinsburg Amtrak Station, Cumberland Amtrak Station, Connellsville Amtrak, Alliance Amtrak Pittsburgh Amtrak Station, Alliance Amtrak, Cleveland, Elyria Amtrak, Sandusky Amtrak Station, Cleveland Toledo, Waterloo Amtrak Station, Elkhart Amtrak 200 Cleveland Memorial Shoreway, Cleveland Station, South Bend Amtrak Station, Chicago Union Station Elyria Amtrak 410 East River Road, Elyria Sandusky Amtrak Station
[Show full text]
Senate Bill Policy Committee Analysis
SJR 30 Page 1 Date of Hearing: August 23, 2018 ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION Jim Frazier, Chair SJR 30 (McGuire) – As Introduced August 9, 2018 SENATE VOTE: 33-0 SUBJECT: Amtrak National Network. SUMMARY: Urges the Congress and the President of the United States to support the retention of, and investment in, the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) National Network of passenger trains and for Congress to reject the President’s proposed budget cuts to Amtrak. Specifically, this resolution: 1) Makes findings and declarations including the history of Amtrak in the United States and its importance to the State of California that WHEREAS: a) Amtrak was created in 1970 to assume the common carriers’ obligations of the private railroads and provide intercity passenger rail service throughout the United States; and, b) Amtrak’s mission is to deliver intercity transportation that helps move people, the economy, and the nation forward; and, c) Amtrak operates a nationwide rail network, serving more than 500 destinations in 46 states, the District of Columbia, and three Canadian provinces, in addition to serving as a contractor in various capacities for several commuter rail agencies; and, d) Amtrak National Network trains are often the only form of public transportation available to thousands of small communities nationwide, and are a vital link between urban and rural America; and, e) The State of California has a vested interest in the continued success of the local and national Amtrak network as it is home to three of the
[Show full text]
All Aboard Indiana September 2017
ALL INDIANA ABOARD The Official Newsletter of the Volume 4, Number 9 September 2017 IN THIS ISSUE: Coxhead Urges Patience with CSX Page Two USA TODAY Article Tells as “Heat” Turned Up on Railroad Readers: Feds Urging CSX By Donald Yehle To Fix Problems Here’s a summary of the “train delay” situation as it affects the Hoosier State and Cardinal trains. Seven-Day Cardinal Push Taken to State Government “CSX (Transportation) hosts the Hoosier State in Indiana, and the Cardinal in several states. Cardinal On-Time Performance With the new top management at CSX, many organizational changes are being implemented, Lafayette Train Volunteer very rapidly. This has led to severe operational problems at CSX, affecting their freight opera- Speaks Out on Rail Issues tions as well as Amtrak operations,” writes Steve Coxhead, president, Indiana Passenger Rail (continued on p 3-4) Alliance (IPRA). Page Three The Surface Transportation Board (STB) has become concerned and is asking CSX to explain why Lafayette Train Volunteer they are having problems, and when they will be resolved. They have specifically noted the effect CSX internal problems are having on Amtrak service (including the Hoosier State and Cardinal). Speaks Out on Rail Issues Part of the reason for STB concern was the receipt of complaints from shippers’ groups from sev- (story spans p. 2-4) eral industries, to the effect that CSX was not providing reliable freight service. These problems, as occurring across the CSX system, are most likely the cause of the poor performance many of Page Four you have been seeing, he continues.
[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]
Feasibility of an East-West Intercity Passenger Rail System for Washington State
Draft Report June 2020 Feasibility of an East-West Intercity Passenger Rail System for Washington State Washington State Joint Transportation Committee Our ref: 23685001 Draft Report June 2020 Feasibility of an East-West Intercity Passenger Rail System for Washington State Prepared by: Prepared for: Steer Washington State Joint Transportation Committee 2201 Cooperative Way, Suite 606 Columbia Street NW, 600 Suite 105, Herndon, VA 20171 Olympia, WA 98504-0937 +1 (703) 788-6500 www.steergroup.com Our ref: 23685001 Steer has prepared this material for Washington State Joint Transportation Committee. This material may only be used within the context and scope for which Steer has prepared it and may not be relied upon in part or whole by any third party or be used for any other purpose. Any person choosing to use any part of this material without the express and written permission of Steer shall be deemed to confirm their agreement to indemnify Steer for all loss or damage resulting therefrom. Steer has prepared this material using professional practices and procedures using information available to it at the time and as such any new information could alter the validity of the results and conclusions made. Feasibility of an East-West Intercity Passenger Rail System for Washington State | Draft Report Contents Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................... i Overview ...........................................................................................................................................
[Show full text]
Appendix 6-B: Chronology of Amtrak Service in Wisconsin
Appendix 6-B: Chronology of Amtrak Service in Wisconsin May 1971: As part of its inaugural system, Amtrak operates five daily round trips in the Chicago- Milwaukee corridor over the Milwaukee Road main line. Four of these round trips are trains running exclusively between Chicago’s Union Station and Milwaukee’s Station, with an intermediate stop in Glenview, IL. The fifth round trip is the Chicago-Milwaukee segment of Amtrak’s long-distance train to the West Coast via St. Paul, northern North Dakota (e.g. Minot), northern Montana (e.g. Glacier National Park) and Spokane. Amtrak Route Train Name(s) Train Frequency Intermediate Station Stops Serving Wisconsin (Round Trips) Chicago-Milwaukee Unnamed 4 daily Glenview Chicago-Seattle Empire Builder 1 daily Glenview, Milwaukee, Columbus, Portage, Wisconsin Dells, Tomah, La Crosse, Winona, Red Wing, Minneapolis June 1971: Amtrak maintains five daily round trips in the Chicago-Milwaukee corridor and adds tri- weekly service from Chicago to Seattle via St. Paul, southern North Dakota (e.g. Bismark), southern Montana (e.g. Bozeman and Missoula) and Spokane. Amtrak Route Train Name(s) Train Frequency Intermediate Station Stops Serving Wisconsin (Round Trips) Chicago-Milwaukee Unnamed 4 daily Glenview Chicago-Seattle Empire Builder 1 daily Glenview, Milwaukee, Columbus, Portage, Wisconsin Dells, Tomah, La Crosse, Winona, Red Wing, Minneapolis Chicago-Seattle North Coast Tri-weekly Glenview, Milwaukee, Columbus, Portage, Wisconsin Hiawatha Dells, Tomah, La Crosse, Winona, Red Wing, Minneapolis 6B-1 November 1971: Daily round trip service in the Chicago-Milwaukee corridor is increased from five to seven as Amtrak adds service from Milwaukee to St.
[Show full text]
October 2017
May 2017 Error! No text of specified style in document. fff October 2017 September 2016 E r r o r ! No text of specified style in document. | i Indiana State Rail Plan Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................ S-1 S.1 PURPOSE OF THE INDIANA STATE RAIL PLAN .................................................................................................. S-1 S.2 VISION, GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ................................................................................................................. S-1 S.3 INDIANA RAIL NETWORK ............................................................................................................................ S-3 S.4 PASSENGER RAIL ISSUES, OPPORTUNITIES, PROPOSED INVESTMENTS AND IMPROVEMENTS ................................... S-7 S.5 SAFETY/CROSSING ISSUES, PROPOSED INVESTMENTS AND IMPROVEMENTS ....................................................... S-9 S.6 FREIGHT RAIL ISSUES, PROPOSED INVESTMENTS, AND IMPROVEMENTS .............................................................. S-9 S.7 RAIL SERVICE AND INVESTMENT PROGRAM ................................................................................................ S-12 1 THE ROLE OF RAIL IN STATEWIDE TRANSPORTATION (OVERVIEW) ................................................ 1 1.1 PURPOSE AND CONTENT .............................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 MULTIMODAL
[Show full text]