MEETING NOTICE AND AGENDA
LOSSAN RAIL CORRIDOR AGENCY JOINT POWERS BOARD The Board may take action on any item appearing on this agenda.
Wednesday, May 7, 2008
11:45 a.m. – 1:45 p.m. – Meeting (Lunch Provided) 2:00 p.m. – 3:30 p.m. -- Tour of SPRINTER light rail line
North County Transit District (NCTD) 311 S. Tremont St. Oceanside, CA 92054
SANDAG Staff Contact: Linda Culp (619) 699-6957 [email protected]
AGENDA HIGHLIGHTS
• LOSSAN QUICK IMPROVEMENTS STUDY
• COMPREHENSIVE STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT FOR THE LOSSAN CORRIDOR
• LOSSAN CORRIDOR ON-TIME PERFORMANCE ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS
www.lossan.org MEETING LOCATION NCTD 311 S. Tremont St. Oceanside, CA 92054
The LOSSAN Board of Directors meeting will be held at the Tremont offices of North County Transit District (NCTD) in Oceanside, CA.
The Tremont office is a short walk across the parking lot from the Oceanside Transit Center, which is served by Amtrak’s Pacific Surfliner, Metrolink, COASTER, and SPRINTER rail lines. For specific schedules, see www.amtrak.com or www.metrolinktrains.com.
From Interstate 5 – Take the Mission Avenue exit, proceed west and make a left turn on South Coast Highway. Make a right on Michigan and the next left onto Tremont. There is visitor parking next to the building.
Oceanside Transit Center
2 LOSSAN RAIL CORRIDOR AGENCY JOINT POWERS BOARD Wednesday, May 7, 2008
ITEM # TAC RECOMMENDATION 1. CHAIR’S REPORT
Welcome and Introductions
2. PUBLIC COMMENT AND COMMUNICATIONS
Speakers are limited to three minutes each.
+3. FEBRUARY 8, 2008, MEETING SUMMARY APPROVE
The meeting summary is included for approval.
+4. LOSSAN CORRIDOR QUICK IMPROVEMENTS STUDY REVIEW AND (Abbe McClenahan, OCTA) COMMENT
OCTA and Caltrans released a draft report on potential improvements for rail services in the LOSSAN corridor that could: (1) enhance the customer experience, and (2) be implemented within a year and at minimal expense. The LOSSAN Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) reviewed the report and has provided comments for the Board’s consideration.
5. COMPREHENSIVE STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT FOR THE LOSSAN DISCUSSION CORRIDOR (Abbe McClenahan, OCTA; Bill Bronte, Caltrans)
Caltrans and OCTA continue to lead efforts to better integrate corridor passenger rail services and will provide an update to the Board at the meeting. A Request for Proposals (RFP) was issued by OCTA, which is in the process of selecting a qualified consultant for the 12-month study. Project partners in addition to Caltrans and OCTA are Metro, Metrolink, NCTD, and SANDAG. Major milestones will be reviewed by the Board of Directors.
+6. LOSSAN CORRIDOR ON-TIME PERFORMANCE ISSUES AND ACCEPT FOR RECOMMENDATIONS (Jacki Bacharach, Metro) DISTRIBUTION
In September 2006, the Board created an ad hoc committee to develop strategies to improve the corridor’s on-time performance. The Committee last met April 15th and recommends the Board accept the final OTP issues paper for distribution to corridor agencies.
3
ITEM # TAC RECOMMENDATION 7. UPDATE ON STATE BUDGET AND CORRIDOR PROJECTS; DISCUSSION INTERCITY RAIL DAY WRAP-UP (Bill Bronte, Caltrans)
Caltrans will provide an update on the funding status of corridor projects and the Governor’s proposed May Revisions to the state budget due on May 14. A summary of Intercity Rail Day, held in Sacramento in February, and the intercity rail video will be provided at the meeting.
+8. RELEVANT STATE LEGISLATION (Linda Culp, SANDAG) DISCUSSION/ POSSIBLE ACTION There are a number of state bills that warrant the Board’s attention at this time.
+9. RECENT VISIT WITH FEDERAL DELEGATION DISCUSSION (Julianne Nygaard, NCTD)
A summary of LOSSAN’s recent visit to Washington, DC, will be provided at the meeting. Staff will update the Board on recent federal efforts on the Amtrak appropriation and reauthorization and the status of a potential federal rail matching funding program. The LOSSAN Corridor definition correction continues to be stalled in the Senate.
10. VENTURA – SANTA BARBARA INTERREGIONAL RAIL INFORMATION ANALYSIS (Bob Huddy, SCAG)
SCAG, VCTC, AND SBCAG have been working cooperatively on an analysis of proposed interregional rail service between Ventura and Santa Barbara counties and will review the major findings from the final report at the meeting.
11. BOARD MEMBER UPDATES INFORMATION
12. NEXT MEETING INFORMATION
The next meeting of the Board of Directors is scheduled for Wednesday, September 3, 2008, in Santa Barbara, 10:45 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.
+ Next to an item indicates an attachment
4 Los Angeles – San Diego – San Luis Obispo Rail Corridor Agency JOINT POWERS BOARD
May 7, 2008 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 3
Action Requested: APPROVE
FEBRUARY 6, 2008, MEETING SUMMARY File Number 4000100
Attendance
The LOSSAN Board of Directors met on February 6, 2008, in Los Angeles, CA. In attendance were:
Art Brown, OCTA, Chair Jerry Rindone, MTS Jacki Bacharach, Metro, Vice Chair Bill Bronte, Caltrans Julianne Nygaard, NCTD via teleconference Lou Bone, SCAG Joe Kellejian, SANDAG Bea Proo, Metro
Meeting Summary
CHAIR’S REPORT
Art Brown (OCTA) reported that he and other board members and staff from OCTA, Metro, NCTD and SANDAG held a rail tour on February 1, 2008 between Los Angeles to Santa Barbara. The tour group was assembled to raise awareness of the LOSSAN corridor and to discuss the improvements needed throughout the corridor.
PUBLIC COMMENT AND COMMUNICATIONS
None.
DECEMBER 12, 2007 MEETING SUMMARY
The meeting summary was approved with no changes.
FY 2009 DRAFT LOSSAN OVERALL WORK PROGRAM
Linda Culp (SANDAG) discussed the FY 2009 Draft LOSSAN Overall Work Program (OWP). The member allocations methodology that has been used in previous years is based on the number of votes for each member agency. The FY 2009 Draft LOSSAN OWP includes a $1,000 increase per vote, which is about a 20 percent increase over the FY 08 member assessments. The LOSSAN Technical Advisory Committee recommended approval of the FY 2009 Draft LOSSAN OWP at the January 29, 2008, meeting. Mr. Brown wanted clarification on what the increases will pay for. Ms. Culp explained that there have been many additional conference calls with the LOSSAN TAC as well as
5
weekly conference calls with the other California State Rail Committees. In addition to the increased calls, LOSSAN has the opportunity to receive grants in the upcoming year that would require a local match and project administration. Jacki Bacharach (Metro) acknowledged Ms. Culp for the growth in work that LOSSAN has undertaken over the past few years. The Board approved the FY 2009 Draft LOSSAN OWP.
UPDATE ON STATE ITEMS: STATE BUDGET, LOSSAN CORRIDOR PROJECTS, AND JOINT AGENCY EFFORTS
Bill Bronte (Caltrans) indicated the State of California is anticipating a $14.5 billion deficit for the upcomming fiscal year. In terms of the intercity rail program, Caltrans has requested $79 million for operations. However, this does not include potential additional costs as a result of the new Amtrak labor agreement, which includes a retroactive pay adjustment of approximately 35 percent, which would be spread over two lump-sum payments. Caltrans has estimated that California’s impact would be between $6.5 million to $7.5 million in order to maintain the existing service level. Caltrans is working on finding and securing additional funding, however, service cuts may become an option.
The Trade Corridor Infrastructure Fund (TCIF) is one component of Proposition 1B, the $19 billion statewide transportation bond measure passed by voters in 2006. TCIF project applications have been submitted to the California Transportation Commission (CTC), which will approve a list of projects on April 10, 2008. The legislature would then be responsible for allocating the funds for each project.
The State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) projects that were previously funded under the Public Transportation Account (PTA) will now be backfilled using Proposition 1B intercity rail funds. The list of Proposition 1B intercity rail projectsthat was submitted to the CTC by the Division of Rail was discussed. Mr. Brown asked about the $70 million requested for the triple track project. Mr. Bronte said that the cost would cover the seven-mile triple-track construction but not the required grade seperations. Joe Kellejian (SANDAG) asked for clarification on the funding that listed $30 million for Sorrento-Miramar or San Onofre-Pulgas track projects in San Diego County. Mr. Bronte indicated that the $30 million requested would cover the cost of Phase I Sorrento- Miramar or the complete cost of the entire San Onofre-Pulgas project. The project that will offer the biggest bang for the buck will be chosen. Both of the projects are also listed on SANDAG’s TCIF list that was also submitted to the CTC. John Hoegemeier (BNSF Consultant) stated that of the San Diego LOSSAN project submissions, the Sorrento-Miramar Phase I project would offer the biggest advantage for freight because it would allow for increased train lengths. Ms. Culp added that local TransNet funds would be used for the local match for the San Diego County project selected from the TCIF application.
The state department of finance has been conducting an audit of the Caltrans Division of Rail. The Department of Finance believes that no additional rail equipment is necessary. The bond money that was allocated for intercity rail has been frozen during the audit process, which has caused delays in the process of ordering new rail equipment. Ms. Bacharach inquired if there were any actions the LOSSAN Board can do to support Caltrans Division of Rail during the audit. Mr. Bronte stated that after the audit report is completed on April 20, 2008, the LOSSAN Board could then contact legislatures. The LOSSAN Board voted to write a letter to the Department of Finance in support of the Division of Rail and urging release of these funds.
6
STATUS OF FEDERAL LEGISLATION
Ms. Culp provided an update on several federal legislative issues related to the LOSSAN Corridor. Amtrak will receive $1.325 billion for the FY 2008 appropriation, which is 2.4 percent more than the FY 2007 level. The appropriations bill also includes $30 million for state capital matching on a 50/50 basis.
Amtrak Reauthorization has been stalled but it appears that the House could begin working on the bill in March. LOSSAN staff is writing a joint letter, along with the other California rail corridors, in support of the reauthorization bill.
The LOSSAN corridor definition correction is part of the SAFTEA-LU Technical Corrections Bill, which was passed in the House but put on hold indefinitely in the Senate due to a number of earmarks that were added on. The bill may be stalled until reauthorization beginning in 2009.
LOSSAN is planning a federal legislative visit in Washington, DC, on March 13. Julianne Nygaard (NCTD) and staff will be meeting with area representatives and the Federal Railroad Administration to promote rail corridor improvements.
PASSENGER RAIL SERVICE INTEGRATION IN THE LOSSAN CORRIDOR
Mr. Bronte discussed the recent efforts on passenger rail integration on the LOSSAN corridor. OCTA and Caltrans have been working cooperatively together and will be soon releasing an initial draft report on the “low-hanging fruit”—low-cost, short-term improvements. A prioritized list of projects will be included in the report. Abbe McClenahan (OCTA) also noted that a conference call will be held on Wednesday February 13, 2008, for TAC members to review the proposed scope of work for the longer-term corridorwide strategic assessment.
Ms. Bacharach suggested improving the information available on Amtrak’s Web site as a possible idea for the low-cost, short-term improvements report. Mr. Kellejian added the idea of integrating Amtrak Intercity rail information with the 511 phone system as another idea.
CORRIDOR TRENDS
Ms. Culp reviewed the recent ridership, revenue, and on-time performance for the corridor. In December, ridership and revenue increased over the same period last year. On-time performance in the corridor was 78.2 percent in December and the northern part of the corridor performed better than in the south.
Ms. Culp discussed the mudslide that occurred near Chemult, Oregon, which covered tracks and has disrupted service on the Coast Starlight service. Pictures of the mudslide sight were displayed and revealed enormous amounts of debris covering the tracks. February 6, 2008, marked the first day that the Coast Starlight resumed truncated service between Los Angeles and Sacramento. It is unknown how long it will take to restore the tracks, but Union Pacific estimates that it could take anywhere from weeks to months.
FY 08/09 CALTRANS PLANNING GRANT SUBMITTALS
Danny Veeh (SANDAG) discussed the FY 08/09 Caltrans Planning Grants. The LOSSAN Board of Directors asked staff to develop three Caltrans Planning Grant applications at the December 12,
7
2007, Board meeting. SANDAG prepared and submitted an application for the Integrated Transit Timetables and Customer Information at Rail Stations grant. SLOCOG prepared and submitted an application for the Rail Planning 101 grant. Unfortunately, due to time constraints we were unable to prepare a grant application for the Accessing Green Ways to Rail Stations grant. Caltrans will announce which grants are awarded in August, which would allow a time frame to begin work on these projects in January 2009.
Mr. Kellejian inquired about the Rail Planning 101 grant and discussed the idea of holding the course at an annual California League of Cities event so that it will be attended by many public officials. Mr. Brown suggested that if LOSSAN is awarded the grant, staff will explore the opportunity of holding a condensed Rail Planning 101 course at a League of Cities conference.
STATUS OF THE CORRIDOR LONG-RANGE PLANS
Ms. Culp announced that in November, SANDAG approved its 2030 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and highlighted that there is $2.5 billion for LOSSAN corridor improvements in the revenue constrained funding scenario. The improvements include double tracking and tunnels in Del Mar and University Towne Centre.
Ms. Culp announced that Bob Huddy presented information about SCAG’s Draft RTP at the January 29, 2008, TAC meeting. There is no indication of intercity rail in the financially constrained section of SCAG’s Draft RTP. Ms. Bacharach requested that LOSSAN officially go on record and comment that SCAG should include LOSSAN corridor projects in the RTP. Lou Bone (SCAG) stated that SCAG has made a major effort to incorporate public input; however, there are numerous needs and limited resources. The Board made an action to send a letter to SCAG that addresses LOSSAN’s concerns.
SAVE THE DATE – STATEWIDE INTERCITY RAIL DAY
Ms. Culp announced that the state rail corridors are organizing Intercity Rail Day on February 21, 2008, to be held in Sacramento. A noontime reception will feature guest speakers from each corridor, Caltrans Director Will Kempton, and Amtrak’s Board of Directors Chairman Donna McLean. The event will also include the premier of the intercity rail video. In addition to the reception, Board and TAC members from each corridor will participate in a number of legislative visits with State Assembly and Senate members.
BOARD MEMBER UPDATES
Jerry Rindone (MTS) announced that he has been recently appointed to the League of Cities Transportation Committee.
Ms. Culp reminded the Board that Form 700 is due and all Board members and TAC members are required to file a Form 700 through LOSSAN, in addition to their local jurisdictions.
Ms. Culp also announced that SCAG is hosting a meeting on February19 and 20 for the West Coast Corridor Coalition (WCCC), which is a group that is made up of representatives from Alaska, Washington, Oregon, and California, which focuses on goods movement issues. Mr. Bone mentioned that he recently attended a WCCC meeting in Oregon and said that the WCCC members were hesitant to discuss passenger rail.
8
CHANGES TO THE 2008 MEETING SCHEDULE
The next meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, May 7, 2008, in Oceanside at 11:30 a.m. (with a SPRINTER tour following the meeting). The start time of the September 3 meeting in Santa Barbara has been changed to 10:45 a.m. to accommodate those arriving by train.
9 Los Angeles – San Diego – San Luis Obispo (LOSSAN) Rail Corridor Agency JOINT POWERS BOARD
May 7, 2008 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 4
Action Requested: REVIEW AND COMMENT
LOSSAN CORRIDOR QUICK IMPROVEMENTS STUDY File Number 4000100
On April 15, 2008, the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) and Caltrans released for public comment the LOSSAN Corridor Quick Improvements Study, which identifies potential improvements for rail services on the LOSSAN rail corridor that: (1) would enhance the utility for rail services for riders, (2) could be implemented within a year, and (3) could be implemented with minimal expense (Attachment 1).
The Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) discussed the draft report at its April 15 meeting and has put together a number of comments, which will be transmitted to OCTA and the project consultants, Wilbur Smith and Associates. These comments are summarized in Table 1 for the Board’s consideration.
All comments will be provided to OCTA and Caltrans, who will decide on the appropriate response. For example, there may be cases where comments may be more appropriately addressed in other planning efforts or future studies.
Attachment: 1. Draft Report LOSSAN Quick Improvements Study
10
Table 1 SUMMARY OF TAC COMMENTS – LOSSAN QUICK IMPROVEMENTS STUDY DRAFT REPORT Report Section Summary of Comments 1. Consolidated LOSSAN Corridor Please note that SANDAG and LOSSAN recently submitted Timetable a Caltrans planning grant application to develop this and other station information, pending award in fall 2008. The main focus of that grant is to develop a timetable and additional information improvements at stations and could help implement this improvement. Consider incorporating discussion that Metrolink currently publishes a joint Metrolink/Amtrak joint timetable within their service area. Note that Metrolink and OCTA are currently developing links to the new Google Transit Trip Planner. 2. Connections Consider adding discussion on current connections within the corridor. 4. Orange County Mid-Day Service Consider noting potential impacts on the intercity rail trip and intercity rail market of additional intercity stops in Orange County. Consider that there may be other segments of the corridor that warrant additional service. Consider adding other service possibilities such as Caltrans plans to report to the CTC in May on the progress and any issues involved in implementing limited stop express service between San Diego and Los Angeles. 5. Passenger Information at Stations For some time, LOSSAN has monitored Amtrak’s efforts to operate digital message signs at Surfliner stations. Testing was recently completed and most signs are currently operational. Consider incorporating information on this project, in addition to the Metrolink discussion. Consider tying this section with Sections 6, 8, and 9 – are their coordinated options between these information sources (e.g., Metrolink passenger information phones could also be connected to Amtrak to provide similar information)? 13. Joint Marketing Consider adding discussion of other joint marketing efforts currently underway in the corridor, in addition to the specific marketing conducted as part of the Rail2Rail program (e.g., university partnerships, special events). Additional clarifications. 14. Transfers Clarifications of some current transfer opportunities as well as description of Rail2Rail.
11
Table 1 SUMMARY OF TAC COMMENTS – LOSSAN QUICK IMPROVEMENTS STUDY DRAFT REPORT Report Section Summary of Comments 15. Airport Connections Consider adding discussion on connections from Norwalk station. Additional clarifications. 18. WiFi At Stations Consider discussion of need for onboard WiFi. Recommended Priorities Consider including discussion of how priorities are determined. Improvement Plans Several updates and text corrections regarding the various corridor studies (e.g., LOSSAN North, South, and Corridorwide Strategic Business Plans).
12 Attachment 1
13
LOSSAN CORRIDOR QUICK IMPROVEMENTS STUDY
Draft Report
Prepared for
Orange County Transportation Authority
Prepared by
Wilbur Smith Associates
April 4, 2008
14 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Introduction ...... 1
Potential LOSSAN Rail Corridor Service Improvements 1. Consolidated LOSSAN Corridor Timetable ...... 1 2. Connections...... 2 3. Ticketing...... 4 4. Orange County Mid-day Service ...... 4 5. Passenger Information at Stations ...... 5 6. Amtrak Distribution of Metrolink Information at Joint Stations ...... 7 7. On-Train Information ...... 7 8. Orange County Station Signage...... 8 9. San Diego County Station Signage...... 11 10. Central Information Booth at Los Angeles Union Station...... 12 11. Impact of Schedule Changes on Local Transit...... 13 12. Mutual Aid Agreement ...... 14 13. Joint Marketing ...... 14 14. Transfers ...... 15 15. Airport Connections ...... 15 16. Amtrak Bus and Metrolink Coordination...... 17 17. Freeway Changeable Message Signs Used to Promote Train Travel ...... 17 18. WiFi at Stations...... 18 19. 511 Information...... 19 20. Minimize Dwell Times...... 19
Recommended Priorities Actions Underway or Continuing...... 20 First Priority Actions ...... 21 Second Priority Actions ...... 22
LOSSAN Corridor Rail Service Improvement Plans Amtrak / Caltrans Division of Rail...... 22 Southern California Regional Rail Authority ...... 26 North County Transit District / San Diego Association of Governments...... 26 Santa Barbara County Association of Governments...... 27 Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Commission (Metro) ...... 27 Orange County Transportation Authority ...... 27
102102 LOSSAN CORRIDOR QUICK IMPROVEMENTS STUDY WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES Page i 15 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Tables Page Table 1: Goleta to San Diego, Southbound Weekdays...... 29 Table 2: San Diego to Goleta, Northbound Weekdays ...... 30
Figures Page Figure 1: EPIS Sign Prototype...... 6 Figure 2: Irvine Station Signage, Showing Information Phone and Transit Kiosk...... 9 Figure 3: Laguna Niguel Signage, Showing Station Layout...... 10 Figure 4: Orange Station Signage: Showing Bus Connections ...... 10 Figure 5: NCTD / Coaster Signage ...... 11 Figure 6: CMS on the San Francisco Peninsula, Showing Caltrain Information...... 18
Appendix Appendix 1: Commentary Regarding the Oceanside Transportation Center
102012 LOSSAN CORRIDOR QUICK IMPROVEMENTS STUDY WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES Page ii 16
LOSSAN CORRIDOR QUICK IMPROVEMENTS STUDY
INTRODUCTION The Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) and the Rail Division of the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) initiated this study with an objective of identifying potential improvements for rail services on the LOSSAN rail corridor that (1) would enhance the utility for rail services for riders, (2) could be implemented within a year, and (3) be implemented with minimal expense.
Such improvements are dubbed “low hanging fruit” by the agencies, a term which reflects the concept of improvements that could be done quickly and easily. In late 2007, OCTA and Caltrans Division of Rail hired Wilbur Smith Associates to develop the concepts.
The intent of this analysis has been to look at improvements that could be implemented on the whole of the corridor, from San Luis Obispo in the north to San Diego in the South. There are three rail carriers along this route. They are Amtrak, operating both the long distance Coast Starlight and the Pacific Surfliner trains, the latter sponsored by Caltrans; the Metrolink Los Angeles area commuter rail service, operated by the Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA); and The Coaster San Diego area commuter rail service, operated by the North County Transit District (NCTD). While the study team paid particular attention to improvements that could be made at Orange County and San Diego County stations, many of the improvement concepts identified would have application at other LOSSAN Corridor stations.
The first step in the process was to solicit service improvement concepts from the LOSSAN Technical Advisory Committee. This committee consists of representatives from Caltrans, SCRRA, NCTD, OCTA, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro), the Ventura County Transportation Commission (VCTC), the Santa Barbara County Association of Governments (SBCAG), the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG), the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG), and Amtrak. Most of these agencies participated in a brainstorming conference call in December, when the study team asked the participants for their ideas. SCRRA separately provide a list of its suggestions. With these concepts in hand, the study team began its assessment of how feasible these ideas were.
The results of this assessment are the following 20 concepts, which meet the “low hanging fruit” criteria specified by the study sponsors. As part of the assignment, the study team also did a brief review of rail service improvement plans developed by the rail service operators on the LOSSAN Corridor since the Year 2000. The review follows the analysis of service concepts.
POTENTIAL LOSSAN RAIL CORRIDOR SERVICE IMPROVEMENTS 1. Consolidated LOSSAN Corridor Timetable The merit of a consolidated LOSSAN corridor timetable is obvious. Such a document, either printed or a website, would allow the train rider to see all the trains in the corridor, as well as the potential connections between trains. This timetable would incorporate Coaster, Metrolink, and Surfliner service between Goleta/ Santa Barbara (or perhaps San Luis Obispo) and San Diego.
The majority of rail passengers probably use only one system, or two at the most. Metrolink and Coaster passengers, being largely daily commuters with repeat ridership patterns, might find only limited use for a
102102 LOSSAN CORRIDOR QUICK IMPROVEMENTS STUDY WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES Page 1 17 combined timetable, and the train information currently available in the form of small booklets or cards will satisfy most of their needs. However, other passengers and potential passengers represent those making trips that could involve different system’s trains, with travel across the traditional service breakpoints at Los Angeles and Oceanside. For these, a unified timetable would be of considerable help in looking up and visualizing the travel options available through connections and transfers.
For example, a train rider in Santa Barbara (a Pacific Surfliner station) seeking to make a trip to Northridge or Burbank Downtown (stations only served by Metrolink) could see when the most desirable connection to Metrolink could be made at Chatsworth or Van Nuys (stations served jointly by Surfliners and Metrolink).
Appearing at the end of this analysis, Tables 1 and 2 show the weekday train schedules for Surfliner, Metrolink, and The Coaster along the LOSSAN Corridor from Goleta to San Diego. The tables illustrate what a corridor-wide unified timetable might look like for weekday services. Showing all the services will probably require a fold-out timetable, and as further trains are added, that timetable will grow in size. Colors can be effective in identifying the trains of different operators. Also, because weekend and holiday schedules are significantly different, a separate fold-out table would be necessary for those operations.
Please note that while the unified timetable concept allows a clear listing of trains in the LOSSAN Corridor, including the transfer/connection possibilities, it does not show the connecting services available at Los Angeles to other Metrolink lines – the Antelope Valley, San Bernardino, and Riverside Lines. Attempting to show all of those schedules on a single page together with the LOSSAN Corridor route would be impractical.
One feature that an electronic version of the timetable might have that would be useful to riders is an on-line rail trip planner. With this feature, a rider could simply query train itineraries between station pairs and avoid piecing together a rail journey by referencing a large timetable. The trip planner might also include a map for each journey indicating the origin, destination, and transfer point.
Recommended Action: Develop a LOSSAN Corridor Consolidated Timetable, showing all trains in the corridor from San Luis Obispo to San Diego. The timetable should highlight potential connections between services, as discussed in the preceding section. The timetable would be available on-line in an electronic format and include a LOSSAN Corridor rail trip planner with illustrative mapping showing connections. Given the potential complexity of programming such an electronic timetable and trip planning tool, development might last longer than a year.
2. Connections Since Tables 1 and 2 show all trains running in the corridor, they also provide a visible means of highlighting available connections, particularly those at Los Angeles and Oceanside where many trains originate and terminate. For the purposes of this analysis, a connection is assumed to be a transfer from an inbound to an outbound train that can occur within 30 minutes of the arrival time.
Los Angeles Connections - Metrolink’s Ventura and Orange County lines are operated into Los Angeles basically as separate commuter systems. On each line, there are more inbound trains in the morning and more outbound trains in the afternoon. No Metrolink trains currently operate through Los Angeles, so any passengers desiring to go from stations on one line to stations on the other line must transfer between trains. Four Surfliner schedules do provide through service with no change of trains, but they serve fewer stations than Metrolink.
Southbound at Los Angeles, there are 5 connections between Metrolink trains. There are 5 additional connections between Metrolink and Surfliner services, making a total of 10 potential connections throughout the day. In addition, 4 Amtrak Surfliner trains operate through Los Angeles to yield a total of 14 daily through services.
102102 LOSSAN CORRIDOR QUICK IMPROVEMENTS STUDY WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES Page 2 18
Northbound at Los Angeles, there are 7 Metrolink to Metrolink connection opportunities, 3 more between Metrolink and Surfliner, and 1 connection between a Surfliner train and Amtrak’s long distance Coast Starlight. This accounts for 11 connections. There also are 4 through Surfliner trains, making a total of 15 daily potential through opportunities.
If the definition of a connection were broadened to cover an hour of transfer time, the number of connecting travel opportunities at Los Angeles would be even greater. Some of these connections are purposely created by schedule design, but others are available to LOSSAN riders as a matter of happenstance. Schedules designed for optimal inbound (to Los Angeles) arrivals just happen to coincide with subsequent departures. As the number of services offered by Metrolink and the state-support Surfliners grows in future years, additional connection opportunities are bound to be created.
Some of the connections involve a 91 Line train south of Los Angeles, so LOSSAN Corridor travel is only possible as far as Fullerton. Still, there are a surprising number of connection opportunities that the casual traveler might not be aware of by looking at the separate Metrolink line by line timetables, or the separate Surfliner timetables. The key to making the two services more useful lies in new marketing efforts to increase the awareness of the through travel possibilities that do exist.
Recommended Action: Metrolink and Amtrak/Caltrans should continue to consider potential connections with each schedule adjustment made in future years. Further, the agencies should promote the connectivity of trains. One tool to promote connections would be the Consolidated Corridor Timetable discussed above.
Oceanside Connections – Like Los Angeles, Oceanside presents a divide between Metrolink and Coaster services, but has the benefit of through operation by Surfliner trains.
Southbound at Oceanside, there are 3 daily connection opportunities between Metrolink and Coaster. There is one Amtrak to Coaster option, and 4 Metrolink to Amtrak opportunities. These result in 8 connections per day. In addition, Amtrak operates 11 through Surfliner trains per day and one additional train on Friday, yielding a potential 19 through services on most weekdays. The Surfliner trains serve only the major stations, however, and thus there are only limited opportunities to travel between the lesser-used stations, such as Tustin to Encinitas.
Northbound at Oceanside, there is only 1 Coaster to Metrolink connection. There are 4 Coaster to Amtrak opportunities, and 2 Amtrak to Metrolink connections. This provides only 7 connections per day northbound. In addition, there are 11 through Surfliner runs and an additional run on Fridays, resulting in 18 through trip options on most weekdays. As with the southbound services, the Surfliner trains only stop at selected major stations, so travel opportunities through Oceanside between smaller stations is limited.
Metrolink service on the Orange County Line is primarily scheduled for northbound morning peak travel, while Coaster is a southbound peak hour service. This limits the number of opportunities through the day for connections. Both Metrolink and Coaster have limited flexibility to adjust their schedules for better Oceanside connections, because the single track nature of the railroad on both sides of Oceanside creates tight windows of opportunity. Further, the separate constituencies and governmental organizations of each commuter operator have differing priorities relative to the services that are provided, making trips across the Oceanside “divide” even more difficult to schedule.
Operating one or two Metrolink trains south of Oceanside, and one or two Coaster trains to the north, is often suggested as a means to better unite the communities throughout the Corridor, but additional double track and turn-back facilities would probably be necessary, and the potential travel market for such services is not clear. The assessment of the market potential for such service might be a future research effort by the
102102 LOSSAN CORRIDOR QUICK IMPROVEMENTS STUDY WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES Page 3 19 Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) and SANDAG transportation modeling teams or become part of an upcoming comprehensive LOSSAN Corridor strategic assessment.
Recommended Actions: (A) Metrolink, NCTD/Coaster and Amtrak/Caltrans should continue to consider potential connections with each schedule adjustment made in future years. Further, the agencies should promote the connectivity of trains. One tool to promote connections would be the Consolidated Corridor Timetable discussed above. (B) SCAG and SANDAG should be requested to undertake an analysis of the market for rail travel through Oceanside.
3. Ticketing Metrolink and Amtrak are developing joint ticketing improvements. According to Metrolink, the concept will allow train riders: • At Metrolink stations to buy Pacific Surfliner tickets. • At Pacific Surfliner stations to buy Metrolink tickets.
This will be accomplished through new ticket vending machines (TVMs) currently being tested at some Metrolink and Surfliner stations. A specific date for deployment at all stations was not available from SCRRA at the time of this writing.
If a single TVM could be programmed to sell the tickets of two different rail operators, it would appear possible that the same machines could be programmed to sell tickets of a third operator, The Coaster. The capability would facilitate Metrolink-Coaster transfers at Oceanside. A potential constraint is the kinds of ticket stock that the machines could handle. However, if a common stock were acceptable to all three operators, it would seem possible to program the machines to sell tickets for all three operators.
Ideally, TVMs at Coaster-only stations would be able to sell riders Metrolink and Pacific Surfliner tickets as well. However, this may require purchase of new TVMs by NCTD, which likely would take longer than a year to implement and would have the associated capital costs.
Recommended Action: Metrolink, Amtrak/Caltrans and NCTD/Coaster should investigate the potential for selling Coaster tickets through the new TVMs.
4. Orange County Mid-Day Service Despite the number of Amtrak and Metrolink trains passing through Orange County, the full route between Los Angeles and southern Orange County is not well served during mid-day hours. This is because Metrolink service is concentrated in peak periods, and Amtrak does not stop at many Orange County stations (and in addition, has higher fares between common points). OCTA’s plan to establish all day service in the county, with 30-minute headways, will fulfill this need, but is still several years from implementation.
Southbound, Metrolink 600 runs between Los Angeles and Oceanside with a Los Angeles departure at 8:00am. The next through service, Metrolink 602, departs Los Angeles at 3:20pm. During this daytime “service gap” there are some 91 Line and IEOC Line trains that serve some Orange County stations, and several Surfliner trains that only stop at selected major stations.
In the northbound direction, Metrolink 687 departs Laguna Niguel at 8:25am and operates through to Los Angeles. The next through Metrolink train is 609, departing Oceanside at 3:35pm. Again, there are some 91 Line and IEOC Line trains that serve stations on part of the route, and several Surfliner trains serving a limited number of stations.
102102 LOSSAN CORRIDOR QUICK IMPROVEMENTS STUDY WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES Page 4 20 On an interim basis, it may be possible to negotiate with Amtrak and Caltrans to have one or two of the mid- day Surfliner trains make added stops in Orange County to increase the number of mid-day travel options for county residents. This could be balanced by deleting one or two stops that Surfliners now make in Orange County during the peak periods, when there are several Metrolink trains making all stops in the same time periods.
For example, southbound Surfliner 578, which recently added stops at Orange and Laguna Niguel, could also stop at Buena Park and Tustin. Southbound Surfliner 784, which is bracketed by Metrolink trains just before and after its schedule run through Orange County, might skip one or two current stops and operate on an express basis. Northbound, Surfliner 573 which now stops at Laguna Niguel, could add stops at Tustin, Orange, and Buena Park. Surfliner 763, also bracketed by Metrolink all-stop service, could become an express run by deleting one or two Orange County stops. These changes would particularly benefit Orange County rail users by providing additional travel options during the mid-day period.
Recommended Action: Negotiate with Amtrak and Caltrans to have one or two of the mid-day Surfliner trains make added stops in Orange County.
5. Passenger Information at Stations Metrolink Electronic Passenger Information System (EPIS) – One of the primary concerns expressed by riders and stakeholders is the provision of accurate, real-time train status information that keeps passengers informed of arrival and departure information, late trains, or other operating conditions that can disrupt their regular trip patterns.
Metrolink stations are equipped with one-line changeable message signs on the platforms. The signs can display limited pre-programmed messages, or unique messages created in the Metrolink Operating Center (MOC). Typically, these signs can advise waiting passengers of late trains or other operating conditions, and only display Metrolink train information. MOC personnel can also make voice announcements at any particular station when warranted.
Metrolink is developing a new information system for eventual installation at all stations. Known as the Electronic Passenger Information System (EPIS), the system is currently under contract. The target date for an initial test or prototype installation is summer, 2008.
EPIS signs will display two information sections on each sign. The upper section will display the projected arrival/departure times for the next several trains expected at each station. This section will use track circuit data, and ultimately, GIS data from approaching trains to estimate the arrival/departure times, which will be displayed automatically, and will scroll to indicate the next trains after each train has departed the station.
The lower section will display changeable messages to describe operating conditions, service disruptions, or other information useful to waiting passengers. This section will be programmable, with up-to-date information provided by the Metrolink control center.
Information displayed on the signs also can be announced at each station, either as automated duplication of the message sign, or as unique announcements pertinent to any special operating conditions.
The EPIS message boards will be installed on each station platform, replacing the current outdated single-line message signs. The system will have the capability to install additional signs within station waiting rooms or at other locations if it is desirable to do so. A typical EPIS message board is illustrated below.
102102 LOSSAN CORRIDOR QUICK IMPROVEMENTS STUDY WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES Page 5 21 Figure 1: EPIS Sign Prototype
Initially, the system will display only Metrolink train status, but it is capable of including Amtrak Surfliner services as well. The MOC dispatches most of the Metrolink lines as well as the Coaster line south of Oceanside. Where dispatching is done by the railroads (UP or BNSF), the control center has access to the railroad dispatch panels and communicates directly with the railroads, so complete operating data are available.
Expansion of the EPIS system to include Amtrak Surfliner services may require supplemental agreements between Amtrak, Caltrans, and Metrolink to define cost sharing arrangements. While EPIS has many automated features, it still requires manual monitoring and intervention to use its features to the maximum extent, and thus represents a substantial cost to Metrolink for both installation and subsequent operation and maintenance.
Supplemental Passenger Information Systems – In an age of cell phones, PDAs, laptop computers, and other electronic means of communication, much or all of the operating data displayed on the new EPIS signboards can be available to riders at remote locations. A passenger could, for example, check the status of his train on the internet before leaving home or office, and adjust the trip to the station to fit the projected train time.
The initial installation of EPIS is planned to include both general internet access and e-mail distribution to those passengers who sign up for such services. • Internet access through the Metrolink website will allow passengers to ask for information about service by a particular train, or about all services at a particular station. Users will basically be able to see the EPIS sign data on their own computer.
102102 LOSSAN CORRIDOR QUICK IMPROVEMENTS STUDY WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES Page 6 22 • Automatic e-mail distribution will permit users to sign up for data for specific trains or stations, and the train data along with any delays or special conditions will be forwarded to each user as it becomes available. • Although not planned initially, the system could be interconnected to a 511 type of telephone system. Caltrans has initiated the 511 system in various parts of the state (the Central Coast and the greater Los Angeles areas are not currently part of the system, while the San Francisco Bay Area and San Diego area are) to provide highway and traffic condition reports, and some systems already incorporate local transit data in their menu of available data.
Recommended Action: Given that EPIS will respond to passengers’ need for train information both at stations and via the internet, no further immediate action appears necessary at this time. Once the system is in place and working, Metrolink and Caltrans should consider expanding it on an expedited basis to include Surfliner trains within Metrolink’s service area.
6. Amtrak Distribution of Metrolink Information at Joint Stations It would seem reasonable as well that Amtrak personnel at stations shared with Metrolink and Coaster trains could help riders with information on Metrolink and Coaster trains. This may be as simple as passing out Metrolink and Coaster schedules, helping a rider read a schedule, or pointing out where the ticket vending machines are and how to use them. Amtrak staffed stations shared with Metrolink (other than LAUS) and Coaster include from north to south:
• Oxnard • Irvine • Van Nuys • Oceanside • Fullerton • Solana Beach • Anaheim • San Diego • Santa Ana
To encourage Metrolink and Coaster riders’ information seeking, signs could be posted at these stations reading: “Information on all trains stopping here can be obtained from Amtrak station agents.”
During a February 4 visit by the consulting team to the Anaheim Station, Amtrak station staff confirmed they do not distribute Metrolink train information, and that they do not announce the arrival of Metrolink trains. It may be that getting Amtrak station agents to agree to help Metrolink riders with information may require overcoming a long-standing “cultural divide” that has persisted since Metrolink’s early days.
Recommended Action: Metrolink, NCTD/Coaster and Amtrak/Caltrans should discuss the means of encouraging or empowering Amtrak station agents to respond affirmatively to information requests from both commuter and Amtrak riders and to announce arrivals of all trains.
7. On-Train Information A lesser concern of riders is the occasional lack of information provided to on-train riders when their train is delayed. Rail users, and particularly daily commuters, are creatures of habit, used to arriving somewhere at the same time each day. Delays are noticeable and create anxiety. Whether out of curiosity or concern for making an appointment or a connection, passengers want to be informed of the reasons for delays, and the expected amount of delay. Most crew members explain the delays as soon as they reasonably can – when they get the information themselves, or when they are able to divert their attention from more important operating issues to make an announcement. Cell phone and internet access to delay information seems likely
102102 LOSSAN CORRIDOR QUICK IMPROVEMENTS STUDY WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES Page 7 23 to resolve most of these passenger concerns, but it remains important that crews inform passengers of delays and arrival expectations whenever they can do so without compromising their operating roles.
Because on-board train riders typically want to know information regarding their trains only, there appears to be no need for an on-board deployment of EPIS showing the status of other trains.
Recommended Action: Continue to encourage on-board explanation of delays on Metrolink, Coaster, and Surfliner trains.
8. Orange County Station Signage Directional Signage – The study team visited Orange County stations during early February, driving to each station by car. Our visits were particularly oriented to observations of current directional signage leading motorists to the stations, but these observations were not all-inclusive in that the team did not attempt to survey or drive all the potential combinations of local streets that serve the stations.
The team’s impression of directional signage is that freeways are well signed. Each exit that provides access to a nearby rail station is signed in advance along the freeway, and at the base of the exit ramp there is generally a sign indicating which direction to take on the intersecting local street. Similarly, there appear to be sufficient local directional signs in the immediate vicinity of the stations that enable motorists to access the parking or drop-off facilities.
The directional signage on arterials roads and local streets between the freeway exits and the immediate station area appeared to be less complete. In a few instances, the team had to consult street maps to find the stations because directional signs on local streets were sparse. These signs usually are the responsibility of each community, and may be established using different standards. In some instances, signs may have been overlooked because of the plethora of competing traffic instruction and commercial advertising signs.
OCTA should continue to consult with each local community to encourage ample directional signage to each station. While regular users will know their way to the station after their initial trip, occasional users need more assistance. In addition, ample directional signage serves as a reminder to non-users that rail service is an available option to be considered.
Signage need not be complex or specialized. A simple standard logo sign with the symbol of a station and a directional arrow will suffice in most cases. The addition of the words “Metrolink” or “Amtrak” or “Train Station” would be optional.
Station Signage – During its visits to various Orange County Metrolink stations, the team looked particularly for informational and directional signage that would be helpful to the casual or first time user. Overall, the team found the signs to be sufficient to provide the essential direction a new user would require.
Each station platform is provided with a triangular information “kiosk” or sign tower. One panel on these units provides a guide to the station layout, including the location of pedestrian walks, bus loading and parking facilities, station waiting room or restrooms (if available), the designation of platforms and the usual direction of trains, and directions for using the ticket vending equipment. A second panel contains a map of connecting bus lines, their destination, and operating frequencies. The third panel contains additional information about the station and its vicinity. Metrolink stations outside Orange County have similar sign displays with a uniform graphics scheme. Some have timetable folders available.
In addition, each station platform has a scrolling or changeable message sign that can be used to give information about late trains or service disruptions. During our visits, these displayed only the date and time, although we did experience trains as late as 15 minutes.
102102 LOSSAN CORRIDOR QUICK IMPROVEMENTS STUDY WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES Page 8 24
Each station platform also has a blue information telephone that passengers may use to ask questions about services. We did not test the rapidity of response or the nature of information that could be provided. It is our understanding these are connected during business hours to Metrolink information clerks, and at other times to the Metrolink Control Center.
Station platforms are signed as to Track 1, Track 2, etc. and each platform has signs indicating the direction or destination of trains normally using that platform. Some had additional signs showing the scheduled times of the trains. We did not experience any situations where a train was operating on the opposite track from “normal,” although that can occur occasionally, so we did not experience how a waiting passenger is informed of a “change of track.” Since each station has both the changeable message signs and an announcement system, we assume that Metrolink has the ability to advise passenger in advance if they should use the opposite platform for any particular train.
As noted elsewhere in this report, Amtrak agents at Fullerton, Anaheim, Santa Ana, Irvine, and San Juan Capistrano do not announce Metrolink trains, but do announce arriving Amtrak trains and give appropriate track number and boarding location information.
In general, the station signage and directional information at Orange County stations is complete, but may require the first time user to look around to find the appropriate assistance. Most signs, as well as Metrolink ticket vending equipment, are located near the center of each platform or near the base of each overcrossing or undercrossing of the tracks. Metrolink information was sometimes found in the Amtrak waiting rooms at staffed stations, but availability was not consistent. Metrolink and Amtrak need to “rekindle” their partnership in this respect.
Examples of station platform signs are shown below.
Figure 2: Irvine Station Signage Showing Information Phone and Transit Kiosk
102102 LOSSAN CORRIDOR QUICK IMPROVEMENTS STUDY WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES Page 9 25 Figure 3: Laguna Niguel Signage Showing Station Layout
Figure 4: Orange Station Signage Showing Bus Connections
102102 LOSSAN CORRIDOR QUICK IMPROVEMENTS STUDY WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES Page 10 26 Recommended Action: With regard to directional signage, OCTA should work with local communities with stations to ensure adequate signage is in place. With regard to station signage, Amtrak and Metrolink should work together with LOSSAN Corridor public transportation agencies to ensure passenger information is located optimally per location for the benefit of all train riders.
9. San Diego County Station Signage Directional Signage – Amtrak/Coaster stations in San Diego County were visited primarily as a basis for comparison with Orange County directional signs. The team found the same level of freeway signing, with Caltrans roadside signs approaching each exit having proximity to a nearby Coaster station. At the base of the exit ramp, a sign indicated the direction to the rail station. Once on the local street network, NCTD directional signs reinforce the direction to the stations. While the team did not methodically check each major street approaching a station area, it was the team’s impression that while the old Coast Highway and the freeway-connecting streets are well signed, there are other major streets leading to stations areas that do not have similar directional signs. Similar signs provide directions to the new Sprinter stations. In one instance (in Solana Beach) a sign noted both Coaster and Amtrak as the station user on one sign; in another instance in Oceanside, there were separate Sprinter and Coaster signs only a short distance apart directing motorists to the station.
A typical NCTD directional sign is shown in Figure 5.
Figure 5: NCTD/Coaster Signage
The use of standardized signs with either a station platform or train “icon” creates a sense of identity, and serves to tell the public of the existence of a facility and service – even those who are not headed to the station when they see the sign. The directional signs are an indirect advertisement for the service, and those who see them in various locations throughout a community may think about using the service for future travel.
102102 LOSSAN CORRIDOR QUICK IMPROVEMENTS STUDY WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES Page 11 27 Station Signage – Once the motorist reaches the station area, station signs provide direction to parking and drop-off facilities. In general, the signage at the stations is sufficient for the passenger to find the ticket, waiting room, shelter, or TVM facilities at each station.
The Oceanside station presents signage and informational challenges that are not present at other stations, because it serves four separate systems – Surfliner, Metrolink, The Coaster, and the new Sprinter trains. The information provided by each system is not centrally located; ticketing machines are spread out; train times are displayed by each system independently of the others; and public address information is lacking except for Amtrak announcements made by Amtrak station personnel. A Metrolink display of train times includes Amtrak trains, but only shows those heading north to Los Angeles, and does not indicate which of these go beyond Los Angeles. It does not display Amtrak service running south to San Diego. The only complete listing of Amtrak service is inside the small Amtrak waiting area and ticket facility. Coaster and Sprinter times are displayed on separate panels in separate locations.
While the two tracks are clearly signed as Track 1 and Track 2, passengers frequently do not know which track to expect a train on, except in the case of Amtrak trains which are announced in advance. Many passengers do not even recognize the difference between Coaster and Metrolink trains, which use the same type of equipment, even though they have different paint schemes. There is no central information booth, and Amtrak ticket agents often resent their resulting roles as information agents for the other systems. Coaster, Sprinter, and Metrolink tickets are obtained from separate TVMs. The passageway under the tracks to access Track 2 is some distance removed from the central part of the facility, and patrons appear confused as to how and when they should be on that platform. If any station needs an information booth or a system of “station hosts” it is Oceanside.
The February 2008 issue of the Western Rail Passenger Review (the newsletter of the Rail Passenger Association of California, a rail and transit advocacy organization) contained a critique of the Oceanside station by the group’s President. The March 2008 issue contained a response from one of the Amtrak ticket agents at Oceanside. These articles are reproduced in Appendix 1 of this report, not as endorsements of either the critique or the response, but as indicative of the problems and solutions to issues of information and directions at busy transportation hubs.
Recommended Action: NCTD/Coaster appears to have an active program to provide directional signs. NCTD should work with local communities with stations to ensure adequate signage is in place, particularly on major streets that don’t connect to/from Interstate 5. With regard to Oceanside, Amtrak/Caltrans, Metrolink, and NCTD/Coaster should undertake a mutual conferencing or workshop process to identify both short term measures and longer term actions to coordinate information, signage, and public address announcements at that major facility.
10. Central Information Booth at Los Angeles Union Station Amtrak, Metro and Metrolink personnel separately distribute their train information at LAUS. This arrangement works well to savvy train riders, who know what service they want to ride. However, it may be confusing for the occasional rider, who may not understand the difference in the two services; he might approach one counter and be told to go to another.
With so many trains operating on the same tracks and sharing stations, it seems reasonable that a Central Information Booth, staffed by attendants fluent in both Amtrak and Metrolink operations, would prove both useful to travelers and a relatively inexpensive service to implement.
The key requirements for the Central Information Booth would be twofold. First, it must be located in the right location – accessible and easily seen. It must be clearly labeled so that information seekers can see it and feel comfortable going there for train details. One such location exists today at the entrance to Union Station
102102 LOSSAN CORRIDOR QUICK IMPROVEMENTS STUDY WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES Page 12 28 – the location of the historic Union Station Information Booth. But two others may be more useful: one at the east portal of the under track tunnel, and another at the west portal. These latter two would better serve Amtrak, Metrolink, and Metro Red and Gold Line riders. (If anything, the historic information booth may be out of today’s main passenger flow.) Second, for maximum train rider benefit, a booth should be staffed daily from early in the morning until late at night, seven days a week, with at least one person knowledgeable of Amtrak and Metrolink train information and capable of explaining the information.
A February 3 evening visit by the consultant team to the station revealed that the historic booth was not staffed, though two chairs were located inside the booth. At the same time, the station was busy, with Amtrak and Metrolink riders moving to and from trains, apparently paying scant attention to the unattended booth.
Staffing the information booth could involve some expense. However, since booth attendant’s service would benefit Amtrak, Metrolink and even Metro riders, the attendant’s expense should be shared by these agencies. The impact on the agencies would be minimal. Alternatively, these agencies could encourage a volunteer information effort, similar to a “station host” program or Travelers Aid effort at airports. Even with volunteer staff, some paid coordination would be needed.
Recommended Action: Metrolink, Metro, and Amtrak/Caltrans should jointly investigate the potential for locating and staffing a central information booth or booths at high foot traffic points in points in LAUS, e.g. at the east and west portals of the LAUS station under track pedestrian tunnel.
11. Impact of Schedule Changes on Local Transit Today, transit connections along the LOSSAN Corridor are documented in “The LOSSAN Corridor Transit Connections Guide,” available for pick up at corridor stations. Transit connections to and from trains are also cited on Amtrak schedules and on the Metrolink and NCTD websites.
However, going beyond such coordination is challenging. This is because trains run on schedules which are mostly irregular: headways between trains vary on account of a multitude of operating considerations. Unless buses are specifically tied to train arrivals (the bus will not leave until the train has arrived), a local transit connection to a bus from a train cannot be guaranteed. Without such linkage, train riders could be left waiting for connections at stations.
At the same time, good transit connections do exist at LAUS. This is not so much a result of coordination but rather of the short headways operated by Metro services. A Metrolink or Amtrak rider never has more than a few minutes to wait for the next outbound Metro Red Line train, for example.
With the implementation of 30-minute all day service in Orange County in the future, it appears likely that meaningful coordination between OCTA sponsored trains and OCTA buses can be achieved. In this case, trains, like buses, would be operating on clock headways. A simple way to achieve bus-train coordination would be to have a bus stop at a station 15 minutes before the scheduled train arrival. In this way bus riders could have 15 minutes to wait for a train, and train riders would have 15 minutes to wait for the next outbound bus.
As for the near term, however, some review of transit-train connections on the LOSSAN Corridor would be reasonable, especially in light of any changes in train schedules. Generally speaking, there are more buses than trains on routes that connect, and so it seems fair to ask OCTA and other transit line planners to review their timetables to optimize the potential for good connections wherever possible. Since rail and bus schedules undergo periodic adjustments to better serve mobility needs along an entire route, these schedule changes should routinely include review of train-bus transfers that might be affected.
102102 LOSSAN CORRIDOR QUICK IMPROVEMENTS STUDY WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES Page 13 29 Recommended Action: Given the anticipated changes to train schedules, particularly on Metrolink, local transit providers in the LOSSAN Corridor should be asked to regularly review their timetables to optimize the potential for good transit-rail connections wherever possible. Where possible, OCTA in particular should schedule bus arrival at stations 15 minutes prior to scheduled train arrivals and bus departures 15 minutes after scheduled train arrivals as a means to facility bus-to-rail transfers.
12. Mutual Aid Agreement Metrolink and Amtrak already have an informal mutual aid agreement. This agreement allows the carriers to assist each other in case of an emergency. For example, if mechanical problem stops a Metrolink train, presumably a following Amtrak train could accept the passengers and make stops for them en route to or from LAUS.
This informal agreement could be formalized, with a citing of specific situations in which the carriers would come to each others aid in times of emergency, and how the emergencies might be handled. This enhancement would reduce uncertainty of how emergencies are resolved. In so doing, it could save time and money and would go far to relieve the anxiety of riders should an emergency develop, as train crews and their supervisors would be know precisely what they should do.
Furthermore, NCTD could be made part of this agreement, thus extending its reach all the way to San Diego.
Recommended Action: Metrolink, Amtrak/Caltrans and NCTD/Coaster should formalize a mutual aid agreement.
13. Joint Marketing Per the Metrolink website, “Rail 2 Rail® is a cooperative ticket and service program provided by Metrolink, Amtrak and Caltrans. Rail 2 Rail® gives Metrolink and Amtrak customers more options for travel in Southern California.
“The Rail 2 Rail® program allows Metrolink monthly pass holders along the Orange and Ventura County corridors to travel on Amtrak Pacific Surfliner trains within the station pairs of their pass, including Saturday and Sunday. Metrolink passengers simply show their monthly pass and board any Amtrak Pacific Surfliner train to their destination. Amtrak Pacific Surfliner ticket holders can ride any Metrolink train between the same station pairs as their Amtrak ticket.”
The program is also explained on the Amtrak California website. NCTD notes the program on its website. According to the site, “The Rail2Rail program allows COASTER monthly pass holders to ride any Amtrak train between Oceanside and San Diego within the zone limits of their monthly pass.
“Rail2Rail riders benefit from enhanced service options and added convenience between Oceanside and San Diego. Passengers simply show their COASTER Monthly Pass to the conductor after boarding a coach car of any Amtrak Pacific Surfliner train. Amtrak Pacific Surfliner ticket holders enjoy the same great option on COASTER trains by simply showing their Amtrak ticket to the COASTER conductor.”
Thus, Metrolink, NCTD/Coaster, and Amtrak/Caltrans jointly market Rail 2 Rail®. Still, the potential of the program may await further creative development. One concept could be for Metrolink and NCTD contact major employers in their respective areas, where workers are known to ride commuter trains, and ask the employers to highlight the program on internal newsletters.
Beyond Rail 2 Rail®, there appears to be a potential for very directed marketing efforts, which may or may not involve Rail 2 Rail®. For example, Amtrak/Caltrans and Metrolink could promote using both services to get to a particular special event. On both websites, language could explain which combination of trains to use
102102 LOSSAN CORRIDOR QUICK IMPROVEMENTS STUDY WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES Page 14 30 to get to events at the Ontario Motor Speedway from stations served only by the Surfliners, and riders could use the new TVMs to purchase tickets for the ride. NCTD and Amtrak/Caltrans could develop similar opportunities.
Recommended Action: Metrolink, NCTD/Coaster and Amtrak/Caltrans should discuss the opportunities for very directed joint marketing for service to special events, as suggested above. Furthermore, the three agencies should explore creative ways to develop the potential of Rail 2 Rail® in the LOSSAN Corridor.
14. Transfers Allowable free rail-bus transfers uncovered in the course of this analysis include: • OCTA, Metro, and NCTD offer Metrolink riders free transfers away from rail stations. • NCTD offers transfers to Coaster and Amtrak riders away from stations. • San Diego MTS offers Coaster riders a transfer within 2 hours away from a station. • Santa Barbara MTD offers Amtrak riders a free transfer to and from the Santa Barbara Station, if ticket is shown.
Also, Metrolink monthly pass riders can uses OCTA, NCTD and Metro transit services, and Amtrak honors Metrolink monthly pass holders with the Rail 2 Rail® program.
There may be other transfers available to train riders in the corridor, which the consulting team has yet to uncover.
Free transfer from rail-to-bus is an inexpensive and easy-to-implement improvement, encouraging rail and transit travel in the corridor.
Recommended Action: All transit services connecting to trains in the LOSSAN Corridor should be encouraged to offer free transfers to train riders. Cost sharing agreements, where necessary between agencies, should be developed to support maximum ease of transfers.
15. Airport Connections There are six commercial airports near the LOSSAN Corridor. With the exception of Burbank/Bob Hope Airport, improved transit connections to the LOSSAN Corridor appear possible.
Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) - The current LOSSAN rail-bus connection to LAX is via LAUS and the Metro-sponsored Flyaway bus service. This service operates every half hour, from early in the morning until late at night, seven days a week. This noted, it seems that another connection could be made at Fullerton, which would be more convenient for Orange County Amtrak and Metrolink riders. The service between Fullerton Station and LAX would be mostly via SR 91, I-605, and I-105. Assuming a 50 mph average speed (mostly freeway driving), the 33-mile trip should take 40 minutes.
Orange County - OCTA offers a bus service connecting the Tustin Metrolink Station with the John Wayne Airport. This is route 470. Service is on weekdays only, and is oriented to John Wayne in the morning peak and to Tustin Station in the afternoon peak. There is no mid-day service. Typical runtime is just over 40 minutes. This service would work for a Metrolink rider bound for the airport at in the morning peak, but it appears its primary benefit is to local riders working at the airport or at intermediate stops.
A more useful train-bus-plane connection could be developed at the Santa Ana Station. Something akin to the Metro-sponsored Flyaway service could be implemented between Santa Ana and John Wayne, with
102102 LOSSAN CORRIDOR QUICK IMPROVEMENTS STUDY WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES Page 15 31 service on clock headways all day long, seven days per week. This service would be would be both faster and serve more riders than service to and from Tustin, as Santa Ana is a station shared with Amtrak. The service between the Santa Ana Station and John Wayne would be mostly via North and South Main Street.
The Flyaway bus service is a contracted service, i.e. Metro hires a private operator to provide the connection. This could be done at Tustin and Fullerton for the potential John Wayne and LAX Flyaway options. If so, capital cost requirements would be minimal, though there would be other cost implications if fare revenue did not cover operating expenses. Alternatively, OCTA could provide these services directly. If rolling stock were not available, then OCTA would have to incur capital costs for the requisite number of buses to support the new rail-bus-plane services. Assuming an average 25 mph speed (mostly city driving), the 6.5-mile trip should take 16 minutes.
Other Corridor Airports – There are four other airports in or near the LOSSAN Corridor. These are Burbank/Bob Hope Airport, San Diego International Airport/Lindbergh Field, Santa Barbara Airport, and the San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport.
Burbank: This station is well served by both Amtrak and Metrolink, and the train station where both services stop is within a quarter mile of the airport. No improvement here is required. The walking distance is comparable to that of rental car or parking lot users.
San Diego: According to the NCTD website, “Validated COASTER tickets may be used for a free transfer to the Airport Flyer, San Diego Transit Bus number 992 to San Diego International Airport. Shuttles depart near the Santa Fe Depot (at the northeast corner of Kettner and Broadway) every 12 to 15 minutes between 5:00 a.m. - 12:52 a.m. Buses stop at all Lindbergh Field Terminals. Approximate travel time to the airport is 10 minutes.” The Airport Flyer is operated by the San Diego Metropolitan Transit System (MTS). Coaster riders can board the Airport Flyer, MTS Route 992, with a valid ticket for a rider to the airport. Amtrak passengers can use this service as well, but would have to pay a fare of $2.25 per trip. Amtrak could work with MTS to provide a free transfer.
Santa Barbara: This airport’s website did not include any specific information about connections to Amtrak. A traveler seeking transportation between the train and the plane would either have to call a shuttle or a taxi, or ride local transit to Downtown Santa Barbara and transfer to either a line running to the airport or to Amtrak. The local transit operator, Santa Barbara Metropolitan Transit District (SBMTD), should be consulted to see if a more direct service is merited. Amtrak riders to get a free transfer onto SBMTD with a valid Amtrak ticket. Surfliners serving Santa Barbara also stop at Goleta, which may be closer to the airport, but less likely to have taxi service.
San Luis Obispo: Amtrak is cited on the airport’s website as ground transportation, but there is no regularly schedule transit service operating between the airport and the San Luis Obispo Amtrak station. Persons seeking to travel between a train and a plane would have to use a taxi or call for a shuttle, Ride-On Transportation. The local transit operator, San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority, should be consulted to see if there might be a demand for a bus service between the airport and the Amtrak station.
Recommended Action: At a minimum, new airport connection services should be explored from the Fullerton Station to LAX and from the Santa Ana Station to John Wayne. Amtrak and MTS should discuss the potential for Amtrak riders getting a free transfer to the Airport Flyer for a ride to the airport, as Coaster riders can today.
102102 LOSSAN CORRIDOR QUICK IMPROVEMENTS STUDY WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES Page 16 32 16. Amtrak Bus and Metrolink Coordination Dedicated Amtrak California Thruway buses carry Amtrak riders to and from Pacific Surfliner trains along the LOSSAN Corridor from San Diego in the south to San Luis Obispo in the north (these buses travel serve San Francisco and Oakland as well.) State law requires that passengers on these routes must be using the bus in connection with rail travel.
“While schedules are primarily designed to connect with Amtrak trains, passengers may also use these buses to connect with other rail services, such as Caltrain (on the San Francisco Peninsula) or Metrolink,” according to the Operating Timetable of Amtrak California System (Timetable No. 36, effective October 29, 2007).
To ride the buses, advanced train ticket purchase is required. Thus, a Metrolink passenger seeking to ride an Amtrak Thruway bus would either have to show a train ticket or a monthly pass to the bus driver.
It is possible that these connections could be easily promoted in schedules or on websites. For example, a Metrolink monthly pass holder could board a Thruway bus at Oxnard at 12:30pm daily for a run south to LAUS, to connect with Metrolink trains heading to San Bernardino, Riverside or Orange Counties. However, neither Amtrak nor Metrolink appear to promote such potential bus-train trips today.
It is also possible that Thruway bus schedules could be modified to include more Metrolink destinations. For example, on the aforementioned run between Oxnard and LAUS, only one intermediate station is included: Van Nuys. Additional intermediate station stops would enhance the attractiveness of this connection for Metrolink ticket holders.
Recommended Action: Metrolink and Amtrak/Caltrans should discuss promotion of Metrolink/Thruway bus connections in their respective schedules. They should also discuss the potential for Thruway buses for making more stops so as to increase their utility for Metrolink riders.
17. Freeway Changeable Message Signs Used to Promote Train Travel This concept would include showing train information on the large Changeable Message Signs overhanging freeways.
According to the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, “It is the policy of the Department of Transportation to display only real-time information that convey current traffic safety and congestion information on Changeable Message Signs (CMS).”
It is important to note that Caltrain commuter train information appears on CMS facilities in the Bay Area. (Please see Figure 6.). If there, why not in Southern California?
Comments from Caltrans District 12 did not rule out the potential. The comments noted that locations and institutional issues have to be hammered out. Regarding the Caltrain info, Caltrans District 4 (Bay Area) personnel related their impression that Caltrain contributes funding to support the CMS program that displays its train information. Presumably, funding would be a consideration for I-5 CMS facilities.
Beyond these arrangements, District 12 cited priority in messaging as a key consideration. If there were an accident on I-5, the train information would be subordinated to traffic condition information.
As regards the promotion of train travel, District 12 related that showing advertising on CMS facilities is against Caltrans policy. However, if there were some way that promotion of train use could be accomplished without compromising the integrity of the real time sign information, Caltrans could explore it.
Recommended Action: Amtrak/Caltrans, Metrolink and NCTD should discuss with Caltrans the potential for putting train information on freeway CMSs in the LOSSAN Corridor.
102102 LOSSAN CORRIDOR QUICK IMPROVEMENTS STUDY WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES Page 17 33
Figure 6: CMS on the San Francisco Peninsula Showing Caltrain Information
18. WiFi at Stations Short for “wireless fidelity”, WiFi refers to forms of wireless local network internet access. WiFi systems allow computer users to send and receive e-mails and access the internet from their personal computers. WiFi “hotspots” or access points are becoming ever more common. Starbucks regularly installs WiFi at its stores, as do many other retail establishments. They exist at airports as well. Airports and Starbucks, among others, pass on access charges to people using their WiFi systems, but this does not happen everywhere. Smaller retailers may offer WiFi internet access for free to encourage customers.
Amtrak is currently deploying WiFi for its riders along Northeast Corridor stations. Certainly, LOSSAN Corridor train stations could become WiFi hotspots as well. In fact, the San Diego Station is one today. An internet search showed no other corridor station offering WiFi access.
It appears very feasible that WiFi could be implemented quickly and easily at all other train stations in the LOSSAN Corridor, especially as it has already been done at least at one station. Riders could access the internet for e-mails, search the internet, and even retrieve train conditions while waiting for their trains, assuming train information is placed on the internet. If this were done, riders could receive more detailed information on train status as opposed to short messages that will appear on the EPIS variable message signs.
Amtrak/Caltrans, Metrolink, and NCTD could deploy WiFi at stations as a joint project. Doing so would ensure one system was deployed rather than various systems, thus enhancing system reliability. Station owners, which include LOSSAN Corridor cities, could also contribute to both the capital and operating cost requirements of the systems.
Recommended Action: Amtrak/Caltrans, Metrolink and NCTD/Coaster should jointly explore WiFi service options at station locations.
102102 LOSSAN CORRIDOR QUICK IMPROVEMENTS STUDY WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES Page 18 34 19. 511 Information In the San Francisco Bay Area, 511 is a free phone and website service that consolidates transportation information into a one-stop resource. 511 provides up-to-the-minute information on traffic conditions, incidents and driving times; schedule, route and fare information for the Bay Area’s public transportation services; instant carpool and vanpool referrals; bicycling information and more. It is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. The 511 is also up and running in the San Diego area; San Diego’s 511 website is 511sd.org.
511 is scheduled for deployment in the Los Angeles area in the August-September period this year. The site will feature Metrolink and Amtrak/Caltrans train information, and Metro and OCTA transit information. The transit component development is being led by Ken Coleman of Metro.
Metro is working on the inclusion of a transit trip planner, accessible by phone or the internet. Development of the trip planner is focusing on the Metro rail and bus system now. Once perfected, it could include Amtrak/Caltrans, Metrolink, and transit operators like OCTA.
Metro is also working on a real-time transit information component, whereby the status of specific Metro trains and buses can be accessed by phone or the internet. This component also has the potential for the inclusion of Amtrak/Caltrans, Metrolink and other transit operators at some point in the future.
Recommended Action: Transit agencies in the LOSSAN Corridor desirous of having their transit information included in the 511 deployment should contact Mr. Coleman at 213-922-2951.
20. Minimize Dwell Times Station dwell time is an important ingredient of service scheduling and on-time operations. Amtrak Surfliner schedules currently are based on a 2-minute station dwell time, while Metrolink schedules incorporate station dwells from 30 seconds to 1 minute. When train dwell exceeds these amounts, trains will begin to run late and may encounter difficulties making scheduled meets at critical locations on single track portions of the route.
Surfliner trains require greater station dwell time because: • Passengers are more likely to be “first time” or “one time” passengers, and are not as familiar with stopping locations, boarding procedures, or needs to get on and off trains expeditiously. Passengers looking for the business class car may not be in position along the platform, and will need to seek out the appropriate car. • Surfliner passengers are likely to be carrying more luggage than commuters, and some may need help lifting the luggage into a train. • Loading and unloading checked baggage (on selected trains) often requires more dwell time than typical commuter services. • Depending on loads in each car, conductors may direct passengers to cars with excess seating capacity, with resulting time lost as passengers shift locations along the platform. • Surfliner crews may decide to utilize on-board handicap lifts in particular cars, with resulting extended delay for dwell time.
At staffed stations, announcements by Amtrak ticket agents help to get passengers in position for the arriving train, and help to minimize the station dwell time. Dwell time at unstaffed stations may be longer. Since all trains are on time-sensitive schedules, efforts to promote rapid boarding and alighting within the allotted station dwell times will contribute to more effective operations.
102102 LOSSAN CORRIDOR QUICK IMPROVEMENTS STUDY WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES Page 19 35
Most Amtrak trains make 7 intermediate stops between Los Angeles and San Diego. If the boarding process were to take an extra minute at each stop, the resulting 7 minutes added to the running time is sufficient to prevent planned meets between trains on the critical single track portions of the LOSSAN Corridor, both south of Laguna Niguel-Mission Viejo, and north of Van Nuys. Each missed meet between trains leads to other ill-timed meets, and results in unraveling of carefully planned schedules. The planned introduction of 30-minute service headways between Fullerton and Laguna Niguel-Mission Viejo will require that other Amtrak and Metrolink services follow an every 10-minute pattern, with 2 trains in each direction running between the 30-minute intra-county trains. This pattern provides approximately 10 minutes between trains and maintains appropriate train spacing in areas where trains operate up to 90 miles per hour.
Minimizing station dwell time for both Amtrak and commuter services requires consistent effort by station and train employees to prepare passengers to get off trains in a timely manner, and to encourage quick boarding. There are no simple formulas to do this. The most effective step has already been employed – the purchase of railcars with two entries per car and a minimum of steps to negotiate. Continued employee emphasis on rapid – but still safe – boarding and alighting will encourage passengers to develop travel habits that help keep trains running on time. Periodic checks by supervisory staff may be needed to identify any particularly problematic stations, and informational publications, improved signage, or station announcements may need to be developed for those locations. When group moves such as school field trips are known in advance, group leaders may need to be advised about the need to be ready to board expeditiously.
Recommended Action: All operators in the corridor should investigate the potential for any improvements in the safe and expeditious boarding and alighting of passengers which would help minimize dwell times.
RECOMMENDED PRIORITIES The topics presented above all represent actions that can be started within the year. Indeed, some are already underway, and are mentioned to highlight the need for continued attention. Many are coordinating actions to be undertaken with other partners in and along the rail corridor. Assignment of priorities is a judgment call, as all are deserving of attention. Each action item is listed below, grouped into one of three general priority categories – actions underway, first priority, and second priority.
Actions Underway or Continuing Los Angeles Connections: Metrolink and Amtrak/Caltrans should continue to consider potential connections with each schedule adjustment made in future years. Further, the agencies should promote the connectivity of trains. One tool to promote connections would be a Consolidated Corridor Timetable.
Oceanside Connections: (A) Metrolink, NCTD/Coaster and Amtrak/Caltrans should continue to consider potential connections with each schedule adjustment made in future years. Further, the agencies should promote the connectivity of trains. One tool to promote connections would be a Consolidated Corridor Timetable. (B) SCAG and SANDAG should be requested to undertake an analysis of the market for rail travel through Oceanside.
On Train Information: Continue to encourage on-board explanation of delays on Metrolink, Coaster, and Surfliner trains.
102102 LOSSAN CORRIDOR QUICK IMPROVEMENTS STUDY WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES Page 20 36 First Priority Actions Consolidated Timetable: Develop a LOSSAN Corridor Consolidated Timetable, showing all trains in the corridor from San Luis Obispo to San Diego. The timetable should highlight potential connections between services, as discussed in the preceding section. The timetable would be available on-line in an electronic format and include a LOSSAN Corridor rail trip planner with illustrative mapping showing connections. Given the potential complexity of programming such an electronic timetable and trip planning tool, development might last longer than a year.
Mid Day Service: Negotiate with Amtrak and Caltrans to have one or two of the mid-day Surfliner trains make added stops in Orange County.
Orange County Station Signage: With regard to directional signage, OCTA should work with local communities with stations to ensure adequate signage is in place. With regard to station signage, Amtrak and Metrolink should work together with LOSSAN Corridor public transportation agencies to ensure passenger information is located optimally per location for the benefit of all train riders.
San Diego County Station Signage: NCTD/Coaster appears to have an active program to provide directional signs. NCTD should work with local communities with stations to ensure adequate signage is in place, particularly on major streets that do not connect to/from Interstate 5. With regard to Oceanside, Amtrak/Caltrans, Metrolink, and NCTD/Coaster should undertake a mutual conferencing or workshop process to identify both short term measures and longer term actions to coordinate information, signage, and public address announcements at that major facility.
Mutual Aid Agreement: Metrolink, Amtrak/Caltrans and NCTD/Coaster should formalize a mutual aid agreement.
Joint Marketing: Metrolink, NCTD/Coaster and Amtrak/Caltrans should discuss the opportunities for very directed joint marketing for service to special events, as suggested above. Furthermore, the three agencies should explore creative ways to develop the potential of Rail 2 Rail® in the LOSSAN Corridor.
Transfers: All transit services connecting to trains in the LOSSAN Corridor should be encouraged to offer free transfers to train riders. Cost sharing agreements, where necessary between agencies, should be developed to support maximum ease of transfers.
Airport Connections: At a minimum, new airport connection services should be explored from the Fullerton Station to LAX and from the Santa Ana Station to John Wayne. Amtrak and MTS should discuss the potential for Amtrak riders getting a free transfer to the Airport Flyer for a ride to the airport, as Coaster riders can today.
Amtrak Bus/Metrolink Coordination: Metrolink and Amtrak/Caltrans should discuss promotion of Metrolink/Thruway bus connections in their respective schedules. They should also discuss the potential for Thruway buses for making more stops so as to increase their utility for Metrolink riders.
511 Information: Transit agencies in the LOSSAN Corridor desirous of having their transit information included in the 511 deployment should contact Mr. Coleman at 213-922-2951.
Minimize Dwell Times: All operators in the corridor should investigate the potential for any improvements in the safe and expeditious boarding and alighting of passengers which would help minimize dwell times.
102102 LOSSAN CORRIDOR QUICK IMPROVEMENTS STUDY WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES Page 21 37 Second Priority Actions Ticketing: Metrolink, Amtrak/Caltrans and NCTD/Coaster should investigate the potential for selling Coaster tickets through the new TVMs.
Passenger Information: Given that EPIS will respond to passengers’ need for train information both at stations and via the internet, no further immediate action appears necessary at this time. Once the system is in place and working, Metrolink and Caltrans should consider expanding it on an expedited basis to include Surfliner trains within Metrolink’s service area.
Information Distribution: Metrolink, NCTD/Coaster and Amtrak/Caltrans should discuss the means of encouraging or empowering Amtrak station agents to respond affirmatively to information requests from both commuter and Amtrak riders and to announce arrivals of all trains.
LAUS Information Booth: Metrolink, Metro, and Amtrak/Caltrans should jointly investigate the potential for locating and staffing a central information booth or booths at high foot traffic points in points in LAUS, e.g. at the east and west portals of the LAUS station under track pedestrian tunnel.
Schedule Change Impact on Transit: Given the anticipated changes to train schedules, particularly on Metrolink, local transit providers in the LOSSAN Corridor should be asked to regularly review their timetables to optimize the potential for good transit-rail connections wherever possible. Where possible, OCTA in particular should schedule bus arrival at stations 15 minutes prior to scheduled train arrivals and bus departures 15 minutes after scheduled train arrivals as a means to facilitate bus-to-rail transfers.
Freeway Signs: Amtrak/Caltrans, Metrolink and NCTD should discuss with Caltrans the potential for putting train information on freeway CMS facilities in the LOSSAN Corridor.
WiFi at Stations: Amtrak/Caltrans, Metrolink and NCTD/Coaster should jointly explore WiFi service options at station locations.
LOSSAN CORRIDOR RAIL SERVICE IMPROVEMENT PLANS Appearing below are summaries of studies of various rail studies involving the LOSSAN Corridor from Year 2000 to the present. Ongoing studies are also cited. Most of these studies had the participation of members of the study team. The studies are listed under the agencies or entities which either sponsored or led the studies.
Amtrak / Caltrans Division of Rail Amtrak/Caltrans On-time Performance Exploratory – (Green Group, prepared for Amtrak Market Research and Analysis, June 8, 2007.) Amtrak conducted 15 customer focus group sessions in April 2007 to learn customer experiences, emotions, and perceptions to train delays. The focus group sessions were held in 6 California cities, gathering experience from all three major California rail corridor operations (Surfliner, San Joaquin, and Capitol routes). Along the LOSSAN corridor, sessions were held in San Diego, Irvine, Los Angeles, and Santa Barbara. These included Metrolink monthly ticket holders who use the Rail 2 Rail® program.
Customers identified three broad problem areas: • Lack of awareness of informational resources, with many customers not aware of telephone and internet information on train status. • Isolation from information, particularly in platform areas and at unstaffed stations.
102102 LOSSAN CORRIDOR QUICK IMPROVEMENTS STUDY WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES Page 22 38 • Underutilization of information resources, including failure to make maximum use of electronic message boards to report and explain delays.
Similarly, customers offered three broad categories of solutions and ideas: • Maximize existing resources to be more proactive in anticipating customer needs for information concerning delays. • Mobilize technology, such as text messages, to help customers better manage their time. • Rededicate employees to respond to customer anxiety and uncertainty about delays or service disruptions.
When trying to define a difference between minor and major delays, commuters were less tolerant of delays while leisure travelers were more tolerant.
While primarily directed at Amtrak riders, the reactions and suggestions of the participants include measures that could equally apply to Metrolink and Coaster services along the corridor.
Specific concerns mentioned that warrant evaluation in the LOSSAN Corridor include: • Make passengers more aware that 1-800-USA-RAIL provides trains status information. • Any listing of a train as “delayed” should include a time estimate or explanation. • Standing in line to get train information from an agent is counterproductive for passengers and agents alike. • Provide information on all platforms (many riders don’t pass through a station building). • Post real time information and explanations on electronic message boards. • Explain causes of “progressive delays” as well as possible. • Extend all public address announcements to platforms and unstaffed stations. • Use message boards to remind riders of train status availability from 1-800-USA-RAIL. • Ensure that on-board electrical outlets are working. • Initiate automated text messages to users of particular schedules. • Expand Wi-Fi availability. • Work to eliminate cell phone “drop zones” for improved communications. • Improve Amtrak employee actions and announcements during delays. • Provide some compensating measure for extreme delays or cancellations, such as a drink coupon, future travel discount, etc.
Amtrak employee suggestions related to need for improved communications between dispatchers and operations/station personnel; providing conductor phone numbers to station personnel; and generally improving employee responses to relieve customer anxiety and uncertainty.
102102 LOSSAN CORRIDOR QUICK IMPROVEMENTS STUDY WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES Page 23 39 LOSSAN Corridor Strategic Business Plan – (Caltrans Division of Rail and LOSSAN Member Agencies, with IBI Group, December 2007.) The document is an outgrowth of earlier business plans prepared for the corridor: A LOSSAN South plan completed in October 2003, and a LOSSAN North plan completed in August 2007.
Ownership of the corridor is shared between Union Pacific, Burlington Northern Santa Fe, and several local public agencies. Services are operated over parts or all of the corridor by several entities: • Amtrak (Long Distance Coast Starlight and Southwest Chief trains) • Amtrak/Caltrans(Surfliner corridor service, San Luis Obispo to San Diego) • Southern California Regional Rail Authority (Metrolink commuter service, Montalvo to Oceanside) • North County Transit District (Coaster commuter service, Oceanside to San Diego) • Union Pacific (freight service north of Los Angeles) • Burlington Northern Santa Fe (freight service south of Los Angeles)
Overall, the corridor carries more than 7.5 million riders per year, and it is the second busiest corridor in the nation (surpassed only by the Boston-Washington North East Corridor). Freight service operates in part over trackage owned by the public agencies, and commuter service operates over track owned by the two freight railroads – making the corridor a truly “shared service” operation through multiple agreements between the various parties. The Los Angeles-San Diego-San Luis Obispo Rail Corridor Agency, known as LOSSAN, is an umbrella agency composed of representatives of the owning, operating, and planning agencies along the corridor. LOSSAN provides coordination of planning and programs for intercity rail in the corridor. Operating support for the Surfliner intercity services is shared between Caltrans and Amtrak. Commuter services are funded by their respective agencies.
Despite extensive public investment in the corridor, the strategic plan indicates that another $6-8 billion in improvements will be needed to accommodate future passenger and freight services. The significant improvements that will provide the greatest benefit are listed in the plan. Most if not all of these improvements were also identified by prior studies, including the two earlier corridor business plans, and earlier planning work by Amtrak.
The plan details the expected increases in rail service in the corridor. Overall, it anticipates an increase in daily passenger and freight trains from 268 trains in 2006 to as many as 523 trains in 2025 – almost a 100 percent growth factor.
The plan cites several driving factors that support the improvement plan: • Population, employment, and travel demand growth. • Need for adequate transportation capacity. • A goal of reducing rail travel times. • A goal of attaining increased reliability and on-time performance. • Efforts to maximize cost-effectiveness of the various services.
The strategic plan then lists the rail improvement projects recommended to accommodate the projected growth in rail services, and at the same time achieve the objectives of travel time reduction and reliability improvement. Projects are listed by county, and also are categorized as immediate, near-term, or vision projects. In dollar terms, the bulk of the projects are in the vision category.
102102 LOSSAN CORRIDOR QUICK IMPROVEMENTS STUDY WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES Page 24 40
The plan lists 7 immediate projects. Six are located north of Los Angeles, and 1 on the southern segment: Camp Pendleton Double Tracking, with an estimated cost of $39 million. There are 16 proposed near-term projects. Fifteen of these are north of Los Angeles. The only project directly involving service south of Los Angeles is the Union Station Run-through Tracks, at a cost of $640 million.
In the vision category, several of the projects listed south of Los Angeles have “low build” and “high build” alternatives, suggesting that planning, at least in some segments of the corridor, is still in early stages. The alternatives may also reflect community opposition to some features of the projects. Some of the alternatives involve extensive tunnel construction.
The LOSSAN Strategic Plan is oriented to capital improvement projects that will accommodate anticipated growth. It does not address current operating issues, service patterns, or non-capital improvements that could improve service within the corridor.
LOSSAN North Strategic Plan – (Caltrans Division of Rail and LOSSAN Member Agencies, with IBI Group, October 2007.) This plan is basically a more detailed version of the overall LOSSAN Strategic Plan dated December 2007. It was produced by the same consulting firm, working with the LOSSAN Agencies and Caltrans. It presents project descriptions and justifications in detail, whereas the overall plan reads more like a long executive summary. It does not include projects for the portion of the corridor south of Los Angeles, which was the subject of an earlier planning study (date?).
Coast Daylight Implementation Plan – (Wilbur Smith Associates, June 2000.) Performed for the Coast Rail Coordinating Council and Caltrans, this study developed alternative schedules, operating plans, equipment analyses, and a financial plan to support additional rail passenger service between San Francisco and Los Angeles over the Union Pacific Railroad’s Coast Line. The study required coordination with Amtrak and Caltrans, as well as Metrolink and Caltrain commuter services, and included projections of costs and revenues. The study involved a Preliminary Environmental Analysis for Caltrans of improvements at three new stations, including Pajaro in Santa Cruz County.
Surfliner Route Station Analysis – (Wilbur Smith Associates, May 2000.) Performed for the former Amtrak West, this study was an analysis of the current stations along the central portion of the Surfliner route (Camarillo to San Juan Capistrano). It included a review of facilities at each station, and identified the primary service area of each station together with current and future population of the service area. The report was intended as an internal reference document for Amtrak, to help in service planning choices and identifying areas where station service areas overlap or areas that might be underserved by the existing station locations.
California Passenger Rail System 20-year Improvement Plan – (Amtrak and Caltrans, with various consultants including Wilbur Smith Associates, March 2001.) The study envisioned service and capital improvements on all three corridor services in California, including the Pacific Surfliner/LOSSAN Corridor. The future number of trains and the capital improvements to support them were identified, and ridership increases resulting from more and faster trains were forecasted. Capital improvements included rolling stock, track improvements, and station improvements. The plan also identified potential funding mechanisms for the improvements.
102102 LOSSAN CORRIDOR QUICK IMPROVEMENTS STUDY WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES Page 25 41 Southern California Regional Rail Authority Metrolink/Amtrak Station Passenger Counts – (Rea & Parker Research, April 19, 2007.) The summary report presents results of boarding and alighting counts at Metrolink stations along the Orange County Line. The counts did not include LAUS.
Initial counts for most stations were made by observers at each station from January 22 through January 26, 2007. Some follow-up counts were made in subsequent weeks to verify findings or to correct for deficiencies in the original counts. The counts for three stations were made March 19 through March 23, 2007, and again some follow-up counts were conducted.
The boarding and alighting data were collected for each station and each train. Only the summary results are included in the final report. Mean daily boardings and alightings at each station are presented for Amtrak trains, Orange County Line trains, Inland Empire-Orange County Line trains, and 91 Line trains, as well as for all trains combined. Daily counts ranged from 2,849 at Fullerton and 2,781.8 at Irvine, down to as few as 235.6 at San Clemente and 114.2 at Commerce. (The latter stations are served by only a few trains.)
Boardings and alightings are also shown by direction for each station, by day of the week for each station, and time of day for each station. However, there is no indication of the origin-destination patterns of Metrolink or Amtrak travel between stations.
The data summarized in the report could be useful for planning parking facilities, access improvements, and other features of any given station. The data also provide an understanding of passenger volumes at each station that is not available from typical counts of total passengers carried on each train.
Metrolink Commuter Rail Strategic Assessment – (SCRRA with Wilbur Smith Associates and Systra Consulting, January 2007.) This study investigated alternative development scenarios for the Metrolink commuter rail service. The major focus of the effort was forecasting ridership for 7 commuter rail lines (including the LOSSAN Corridor) and over 3,600 potential station pairs. The effort utilized work-trip forecasts developed by the Southern California Association of Governments and origin-destination data from the Metrolink on-board survey to develop a model to forecast Metrolink ridership for 2010, 2015, 2020 and 2030. A key consideration was the impact of increasing congestion of parallel highways, which would spur commuter rail ridership. The ridership forecast was able to factor probable congestion impacts into the model projections. Revenues, operating costs and capital costs for all the scenarios were developed. Specific capital improvements (such as new layover space and additional trackage) facilitating the scenarios were identified. The scenarios were then evaluated and selected. The result was a blue print for service expansion in 2010, 2015, 2020 and 2030. The plan contained now funding commitments for the expansion plans by SCRRA member agencies.
North County Transit District / San Diego Association of Governments NCTD Strategic Plan / Commuter Rail Element – (Wilbur Smith Associates, 2001.) This study developed schedules for increasing the service level for the Coaster, the San Diego County commuter rail service operated by NCTD. The study interviewed operations and maintenance personnel to fully understand existing operations and operational challenges. Second, it benchmarked existing operations relative to other commuter operations in the U.S. in an effort to understand where opportunities for service level improvements might exist. The study then developed schedules to meet regional transit goals over a 20- year period. From these schedules, the study prioritized the capital improvements in the line required to expand the service.
Apart from this study, NCTD reported that the agency several years ago signed an MOU whereby it agreed, with several other agencies to use the Caltrans LOSSAN Corridor improvement studies as the plans for
102102 LOSSAN CORRIDOR QUICK IMPROVEMENTS STUDY WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES Page 26 42 future improvements. It also reported that SANDAG is now responsible for all regional transportation planning in San Diego County, including capital improvements on LOSSAN Corridor in San Diego County.
Santa Barbara County Association of Governments 101 in Motion Study / Commuter Rail Element – (Wilbur Smith Associates, July 2005.) 101 In Motion Study (developed for a coalition of jurisdictions and agencies led by the SBCAG) contained this feasibility analysis of a new commuter rail service between Camarillo in Ventura County and Santa Barbara and Goleta north of Los Angeles. (Goleta is home to the University of California at Santa Barbara.) Work included a ridership forecast to 2030, assuming three round trips per weekday. Off-peak service would be provided by existing Pacific Surfliner trains. It also included estimation of revenue and operating and capital costs. Capital costs assumed various capacity enhancements in the Union Pacific Railroad’s Coast Line, which were validated with its state-of-the-art Rail Traffic Controller (RTC) operations simulation program. Costs were minimized by assuming the service would be operated by Metrolink (the Los Angeles regional commuter rail carrier), which already serves Ventura County, and by use of existing Metrolink and Pacific Surfliner rail stations. The study evaluated the potential for using self-propelled diesel multiple unit (DMU) rolling stock for the service. Since this study, Caltrans and SBCAG and other agencies have been working toward modifying Surfliner schedules to allow for AM peak period train serving Santa Barbara bound commuters.
Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Commission (Metro) Multicounty Goods Movement Action Plan / Rail Element – (Wilbur Smith Associates with G.R. Fetty and Associates, 2007.) This work was a review of freight and passenger train operations on the major freight and passenger main lines in the greater Los Angeles area. The review included passenger and freight trains on the LOSSAN Corridor. The work included a description of existing track configurations, yards and train volumes on the lines. The work also included forecasts of future freight and passenger train volumes on the lines. The passenger volume forecast referenced SCRRA’s Metrolink Commuter Rail Strategic Assessment. The freight train forecasts were based on multiple sources, including input from the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach and the BNSF Railway and the Union Pacific Railroad. The work referenced other planning studies discussing present and future freight and passenger volumes, including the Los Angeles-Inland Empire Railroad Main Line Advanced Planning Study, sponsored by the Los Angeles Economic Development Corporation in 2002, and the Inland Empire Railroad Main Line Study, sponsored by SCAG in 2005.
DMU Technical Feasibility Study – (LTK Engineering Services with Wilbur Smith Associates, Ongoing.) This study is to investigate the potential for service by self-propelled rail car trainsets known as diesel multiple units (DMU) operating trackage owned by Metro. This trackage includes parts of LOSSAN Corridor, specifically between LAUS and the Ventura County Line. The DMU services would offer riders in the corridors within LA County more travel options.
Orange County Transportation Authority OCTA Commuter Rail Strategic Assessment – (Wilbur Smith Associates, June 2004.) This study developed alternative operating scenarios for new commuter rail services offered by Metrolink, the Los Angeles area commuter rail operator. The study developed schedules for new trains on three Metrolink lines running through Orange County. All lines run on the Burlington Northern and Santa Fe (BNSF) Transcon main line. The effort produced a set of new trains on the lines to handle commuter demand for Metrolink services in Orange County in Year 2010 and ultimately in 2025. The work effort also entailed forecasting of ridership, analysis of operations, interface with the BNSF, and calculation of operating costs and capital improvements. Orange County, Riverside County, San Bernardino County, Los Angeles County, Metrolink, and Caltrans were project partners. This study was accepted by the OCTA Board and lead to further implementation efforts for the Fullerton to Laguna Niguel 30-minute service.
102102 LOSSAN CORRIDOR QUICK IMPROVEMENTS STUDY WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES Page 27 43 Fullerton to Laguna Niguel 30-Minute Service Planning – (Parsons Brinckerhoff, Ongoing.) This effort is focusing on the planning and engineering of improvements to support a minimum of 30-minute headways between Fullerton and Laguna Niguel. The 30-minute service would be sponsored by OCTA, sharing track with Metrolink and Amtrak trains as well as BNSF freight service. The study includes rail operations simulation modeling to identify the improvements required to support the expanded service. It also includes cost estimates for the capital improvements, including track and structures, and new rolling stock. Full details of study remain confidential at the time of this writing.
102102 LOSSAN CORRIDOR QUICK IMPROVEMENTS STUDY WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES Page 28 44 TABLE 1 GOLETA TO SAN DIEGO SOUTHBOUND WEEKDAYS
Train 100 102 104 106 108 768 110 112 774 114 116 784 118 798 11 796 Days m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f
Goleta ------6 30 -- -- 9 03 -- -- 1 45 -- 4 15 -- 6 45 Santa Barbara ------6 45 -- -- 9 21 -- -- 1 59 -- 4 29 6 17 6 58 Carpinteria ------7 01 -- -- 9 37 -- -- 2 15 -- 4 45 -- 7 14 Ventura ------7 22 -- -- 9 58 -- -- 2 40 -- 5 06 -- 7 35 Montalvo -- 5 27 6 05 6 44 ------Oxnard -- 5 42 6 20 6 59 -- 7 37 -- -- 10 12 -- -- 2 57 -- 5 20 7 08 7 49 Camarillo -- 5 52 6 30 7 09 -- 7 47 -- -- 10 23 -- -- 3 08 ------8 00 Moorpark 5 07 6 03 6 41 7 20 -- 8 06 8 26 -- 10 34 11 05 2 30 3 21 4 57 6 15 -- -- Simi Valley 5 19 6 15 6 53 7 32 -- 8 20 8 39 -- 10 51 11 17 2 42 3 36 5 09 6 29 7 38 8 35 Chatsworth 5 30 6 26 7 04 7 43 8 25 8 35 8 51 10 45 11 03 11 28 2 53 3 49 5 24 6 44 -- 8 47 Northridge 5 36 6 32 7 10 7 49 8 31 -- 8 58 10 51 -- 11 34 2 59 -- 5 30 ------Van Nuys 5 44 6 40 7 18 7 57 8 39 8 50 9 05 10 59 11 18 11 42 3 07 4 15 5 48 6 57 8 05 9 04 Burbank Airport 5 51 6 47 7 25 8 04 8 46 8 59 9 13 11 06 11 27 11 49 3 14 4 25 5 55 7 06 -- 9 13 Burbank Downtown 5 55 6 51 7 30 8 08 8 50 -- 9 17 11 10 -- 11 53 3 18 -- 5 59 ------Glendale 6 01 6 57 7 36 8 14 8 56 9 10 9 23 11 16 11 39 11 59 3 24 4 37 6 05 7 18 -- 9 25 Los Angeles 6 15 7 12 7 50 8 28 9 10 9 25 9 3712 1110 30 12 20 3 40 4 55 6 20 7 40 9 00 9 45
Train 700 803 805 562 702 807 682 564 809 600 566 851 572 811 704 853 578 684 602 813 686 582 706 604 688 708 606 608 590 592 Days m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f f m-f
Los Angeles 5 45 6 05 6 25 6 45 7 20 8 00 8 30 9 4012 11 2510 12 45 2 00 2 25 3 20 3 50 4 10 4 20 4 30 4 50 5 10 5 25 5 40 6 30 7 00 8 20 10 10 Commerce------3 34 4 04 -- -- 4 44 ------5 54 ------Norwalk 6 06 -- 6 46 7 06 -- 8 21 ------1 06 -- 2 46 3 44 4 14 -- 4 41 4 54 5 11 -- 5 46 6 04 6 51 ------Buena Park 6 12 -- 6 52 7 12 -- 8 27 ------1 12 -- 2 52 3 50 4 20 -- 4 47 5 00 5 17 -- 5 52 6 10 6 57 ------Fullerton 6 19 6 37 6 59 7 19 7 52 8 34 9 02 10 1212 11 5742 1 19 2 32 2 59 3 57 4 27 4 42 4 54 5 07 5 24 5 42 5 59 6 17 7 04 7 32 8 51 10 42
Anaheim Stadium from Riverside from Riverside 6 46from Riverside from Riverside 7 27 8 01from Riverside 8 42 9 from Riverside11 10 from23 Riverside 11 511 06 from Riverside 2 41 3 07 4 05 4 35 4 51 5 15 5 32 5 51 6 25 7 12 7 41 9 01 10 51 Orange 6 02 6 32 -- 7 07 7 31 -- 8 17 8 46 9 15 -- 11 41 --12 35 -- 2 01 2 45 3 11 4 09 4 18 4 39-- 5 19 536 -- 6 29 7 16 ------Santa Ana 6 07 6 37 6 55 7 12 7 36 8 10 8 22 8 51 9 21 10 3212 1100 46 12 40 1 15 2 06 2 51 3 16 4 14 4 23 4 44 5 00 5 24 5 41 6 00 6 34 7 21 7 50 9 10 11 00 Tustin 6 13 6 43 -- 7 18 7 42 -- 8 28 8 57 -- -- 11 52 --12 46 -- 2 12 -- 3 22 4 20 4 29 4 50 -- 5 30 5 47 -- 6 40 7 27 ------to Riverside to Riverside to Riverside to Riverside to Riverside Irvine 6 20 6 55 7 06 7 25 7 49 8 24 8 35 9 04 9 32 10 4312 1113 59 12 53 1 26 2 19 3 02 3 29 4 27 4 45 5 00 5 11 5 37 5 54 6 13 6 46 7 34 8 04 9 21 11 11 Laguna Niguel 6 29 -- -- 7 40 8 05 -- 8 50 9 13 9 41 -- 12 08 -- 1 02 -- 2 28 3 11 3 45 4 36 ------5 46 6 10 -- 6 56 7 43 ------San Juan Capistrano 6 34 -- 7 20 -- -- 8 42 -- 9 18 9 4812 11 13 02 12 27 1 13 1 40 2 33 3 17-- 4 41 -- -- 5 25 5 51 -- 6 27 7 01 7 48 8 18 9 37 11 25 San Clemente Metrolink 6 43 ------9 27 -- -- 12 22 ------2 42 -- -- 4 50 ------6 00 -- -- 7 10 7 57 ------San Clemente Pier ------9 59 11 12 ------Oceanside 7 15 -- 7 57 -- -- 9 14 -- 9 55 10 2412 11 55 34 1 00 -- 2 13 3 10 3 48 -- 5 18 -- -- 5 56 6 32 -- 6 58 7 41 8 28 8 49 10 08 11 56
Train 630 632 634 636 638 640 644 652 654 656 Days m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f
Oceanside 5 18 6 03 6 42 7 15 7 42 7 57 9 14 9 23 10 24 11 00 11 34 1 00 2 13 3 35 3 48 4 55 5 30 5 56 6 58 8 49 10 08 11 56 Carlsbad Village 5 22 6 07 6 49 7 19 7 47 -- -- 9 28 -- 11 05 ------3 40 -- 5 00 5 35 ------Carlsbad Poinsettia 5 28 6 14 6 55 7 25 7 53 -- -- 9 34 -- 11 15 ------3 46 -- 5 06 5 41 ------Encinitas 5 34 6 20 7 03 7 31 7 58 -- -- 9 40 -- 11 22 ------3 52 -- 5 15 5 47 ------Solana Beach 5 40 6 26 7 08 7 38 8 03 8 15 9 29 9 46 10 39 11 27 11 49 1 19 2 28 3 57 4 08 5 20 5 52 6 18 7 13 9 04 10 23 12 11 Sorrento Valley 5 49 6 36 7 17 7 49 8 13 -- -- 9 56 -- 11 35 ------4 07 -- 5 31 6 03 ------Old Town 6 08 6 55 7 37 8 08 8 36 -- -- 10 15 -- 11 56 12 16 -- -- 4 26 -- 5 51 6 28 ------12 38 San Diego 6 16 7 03 7 42 8 15 8 42 8 55 10 10 10 22 11 2012 03 12 25 1 55 3 10 4 35 4 50 5 59 6 35 7 00 7 50 9 40 11 05 12 50
Blue indicates Amtrak Service Yellow indicates Coaster Service Green indicates Metrolink Service Arrow indicates connectionwithin 30 minutes Boldface indicates PM Times
102102 LOSSAN CORRIDOR QUICK IMPROVEMENTS STUDY WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES Page 29 45 TABLE 2 SAN DIEGO TO GOLETA NORTHBOUND WEEKDAYS
Train 763 631 565 633 567 769 635 573 775 639 579 643 583 785 647 649 651 589 653 655 595 597 Days m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f f
San Diego 6 10 6 33 7 05 7 45 8 10 9 30 9 4512 10 00 50 12 45 1 25 2 15 3 00 4 00 4 22 4 52 5 22 5 55 6 10 6 46 8 20 9 15 Old Town -- 6 38 -- 7 50 -- -- 9 50-- -- 12 50 -- 2 20 -- 4 07 4 27 4 57 5 27 -- 6 15 6 51 -- -- Sorrento Valley -- 6 58 -- 8 13 -- -- 10 11-- -- 1 10 -- 2 40 -- 4 49 5 17 5 49 -- 6 38 7 11 -- -- Solana Beach 6 46 7 07 7 39 8 25 8 44 10 03 10 2012 11 33 23 1 20 1 58 2 50 3 33 4 34 4 57 5 27 6 00 6 28 6 48 7 21 8 53 9 48 Encinitas -- 7 13 -- 8 30 -- -- 10 24-- -- 1 27 -- 2 55 -- -- 5 04 5 33 6 06 -- 6 53 7 26 -- -- Carlsbad Poinsettia -- 7 19 -- 8 36 -- -- 10 31-- -- 1 33 -- 3 01 -- -- 5 09 5 38 6 12 -- 6 59 7 32 -- -- Carlsbad Village -- 7 29 -- 8 42 -- -- 10 37-- -- 1 39 -- 3 08 -- -- 5 14 5 45 6 18 -- 7 05 7 38 -- -- Oceanside 7 02 7 33 7 55 8 46 9 00 10 18 10 4512 11 49 39 1 45 2 13 3 14 3 52 4 52 5 20 5 50 6 23 6 43 7 12 7 45 9 08 10 03
Train 681 601 701 603 605 703 683 607 850 687 800 852 802 705 804 609 806 689 808 707 810 Days m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f
Oceanside -- 4 43 5 20 5 50 -- 6 41 7 02 7 30 -- 7 55 -- 9 00 10 18 10 3512 49 11 39 -- 2 13 -- 3 35 3 52 -- -- 4 45 4 52 -- 6 43 9 08 10 03 San Clemente Pier ------San Clemente Metrolink -- 5 04 5 41 6 11 -- 7 02 -- 7 50 ------10 55 ------3 56 4 13 -- -- 5 06 5 16 ------San Juan Capistrano -- 5 13 5 50 6 20 -- 7 11 7 32 7 59 -- 8 30 -- 9 30 10 49 1112 04 10 1 22 1 48 2 47 -- 4 05 4 23 -- -- 5 15 5 29 -- 7 25 9 42 10 39 Laguna Niguel 4 10 5 19 5 56 6 26 -- 7 17 -- 8 05 8 25 8 35 9 05 9 35 -- 1112 10 15 -- 1 54 -- 4 00 4 11 ------5 21 -- 6 30 -- Irvine 4 19 5 29 6 06 6 36 7 05 7 27 7 46 8 14 8 34 8 45 9 14 9 4512 11 2605 11 1 3619 2 03 3 03 4 10 4 20 4 37 4 55 5 10 5 30 5 41 6 39 7 44 9 56 10 53 Tustin 4 25 5 35 6 12 6 42 7 11 7 33 -- 8 20 8 --40 9 20 -- -- 11 25 -- -- 2 09 -- 4 16 4 26 -- 5 01 5 16 5 36 -- 6 45 ------Santa Ana 4 32 5 42 6 19 6 49 7 18 7 40 7 57 8 25 8 47 8 56 9 26 9 5612 11 38 17 11 1 49 32 2 15 3 14 4 22 4 33 4 48 5 07 5 23 5 42 5 52 6 51 8 00 10 09 11 06 Orange 4 37 5 47 6 24 6 54 7 23 7 45 -- 8 32 8 52 9 01 9 32 10 01-- -- 11 38 -- 2 21 -- 4 28 4 38 -- 5 13 5 28 5 48 -- 6 57 ------
Anaheim Stadium 4 41 5 51from Riverside 6 28from Riverside 6 58 7 27 7 49 8 06 8 56 9 06 10 0612 11 47 26 1from Riverside58 3 23 4 42 4 57from Riverside 5 32 6 01 8 09 10 18 11 15 Fullerton 4 49 5 59 6 18 6 36 7 06 7 18 7 35 7 57 8 15 9 04 9 15 10 1512 11 5736 2 08 3 11 3 34 4 50 5 08 5 40 6 10 6 36 8 18 10 27 11 24 Buena Park 4 55 6 05 6 25 6 42 7 12 7 25 7 41 8 03 -- 9-- 10 ------3 16 -- 4 56 -- 5 46 -- 6 41 ------to Riverside Norwalk 5 03 6 13 6 33 6 50to Riverside 7 20 7 33 7 49to Riverside 8 11 --to Riverside 9-- 18 --to Riverside -- to Riverside ---- to Riverside to3 Riverside 24 -- 5 04 -- 5 54 -- 6 49 ------Commerce ------7 00 7 30 -- -- 8 21 ------Los Angeles 5 30 6 40 7 05 7 20 7 50 8 05 8 15 8 40 8 50 9 45 9 1250 15 10 50 1 35 2 40 4 00 4 05 5 30 5 45 6 20 6 45 7 25 8 55 11 05 11 59
Train 101 103 799 105 107 14 109 111 113 115 117 119 Days m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f m-f
Los Angeles 6 50 7 15 7 30 8 50 9 05 9 50 10 15 12 30 1 10 2 55 3 35 4 26 5 10 5 47 6 40 7 00 Glendale 7 00 7 25 7 41 9 01 9 16 10 00 -- 12 42 1 20 3 07 3 45 4 36 5 20 5 57 6 50 7 12 Burbank Downtown 7 06 7 31 7 47 9 07 -- 10 06 -- -- 1 26 -- 3 52 4 42 5 26 6 03 6 56 -- Burbank Airport 7 10 7 35 7 52 9 12 9 28 10 11 -- 12 54 1 30 3 19 3 55 4 46 5 30 6 08 7 00 7 24 Van Nuys 7 22 7 42 8 01 9 21 9 37 10 19 10 47 1 03 1 37 3 28 4 01 4 53 5 37 6 17 7 07 7 33 Northridge 7 30 7 55 8 09 9 28 -- 10 26 -- -- 1 44 -- 4 09 5 01 5 45 6 24 7 15 -- Chatsworth 7 36 8 05 8 16 9 35 9 50 10 36 -- 1 16 1 50 3 41 4 16 5 07 5 52 6 30 7 21 7 46 Simi Valley 7 51 -- 8 45 9 47 10 02 -- 11 23 1 28 2 01 3 59 4 28 5 18 6 02 6 41 7 32 7 58 Moorpark 8 05 -- 8 57 10 02 10 15 -- -- 1 42 2 20 -- 4 45 5 30 6 14 6 57 7 44 -- Camarillo -- -- 9 08 -- 10 26 -- -- 1 54 -- 4 21 -- 5 43 6 27 -- 7 55 8 27 Oxnard -- -- 9 20 -- 10 40 -- 11 55 2 06 -- 4 35 -- 5 55 6 39 -- 8 14 8 38 Montalvo ------6 10 6 55 -- 8 35 -- Ventura -- -- 9 34 -- 10 54 -- -- 2 19 -- 4 49 ------8 57 Carpinteria -- -- 9 54 -- 11 14 -- -- 2 45 -- 5 10 ------9 18 Santa Barbara -- -- 10 13 -- 11 33 -- 12 48 3 04 -- 5 33 ------9 38 Goleta -- -- 10 22 -- 11 55 -- -- 3 20 -- 5 47 ------9 55
Blue indicates Amtrak Service Yellow indicates Coaster Service Green indicates Metrolink Service Arrow indicates connection within 30 minutes Boldface indicates PM Times
102102 LOSSAN CORRIDOR QUICK IMPROVEMENTS STUDY WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES Page 30 46 47 48 49 50 Los Angeles – San Diego – San Luis Obispo (LOSSAN) Rail Corridor Agency JOINT POWERS BOARD
May 7, 2008 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 6
Action Requested: ACCEPT FOR DISTRIBUTION
LOSSAN CORRIDOR ON-TIME PERFORMANCE File Number 4000100 ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Introduction
At its September 13, 2006, meeting, the Board of Directors established an ad hoc committee of Board and staff members to learn more about the current state of on-time performance in the corridor and develop possible strategies for improvements. This Committee has met eight times and has reviewed recent trends in on-time performance (OTP), reasons for declining OTP, and possible strategies for improvements.
The Committee developed two goals for its work:
1. Identify strategies that will directly improve OTP of trains, including capital and operational improvements. 2. Identify strategies to improve the rail experience for passengers including better and more- timely passenger information.
The Committee last met on April 15, 2008. As a result, staff has made revisions to the issues paper currently under development by the Committee (Attachment 1).
Recommendation
The OTP Ad Hoc Committee recommends that the Board of Directors accept the issues paper for distribution to corridor agencies.
51 Attachment 1
LOSSAN CORRIDOR ON-TIME PERFORMANCE ISSUES AND STRATEGIES
LOSSAN On-Time Performance Ad Hoc Committee May 2008
www.lossan.org
52 LOSSAN Rail Corridor Agency – Corridor On-Time Performance Issues and Strategies – Page 53
Introduction
The LOSSAN coastal rail corridor between San Diego, Los Angeles, and San Luis Obispo is the second-busiest passenger rail corridor in the nation. Amtrak operates Pacific Surfliner service along the entire 351-mile corridor and carries more than 2.7 million passengers annually. The corridor is shared with Metrolink and COASTER trains, which provide commuter rail service, and BNSF Railway and Union Pacific (UP) also operate an increasing number of trains along this corridor—a key segment being BNSF-owned track between Fullerton and Los Angeles. Amtrak’s Coast Starlight provides long-distance passenger service between LA and Seattle. Figure 1 is a map of the corridor. Each of the three passenger operators has experienced record ridership over the past few years. The Pacific Surfliner service has experienced records in 10 of the past 12 months as of March 2008.
Since 2005, the on-time performance (OTP) of Pacific Surfliner trains has remained below the state’s goal of 85 percent. Figure 2 shows recent OTP for both intercity and commuter trains.
Objectives
In September 2006, the LOSSAN Board of Directors formed an ad hoc committee comprised of Board and Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) members to research the corridor’s OTP issues and develop possible strategies for improvements. The Committee has focused efforts on two main objectives:
(1) Identify strategies that will directly improve OTP of trains, including capital and operational improvements.
(2) Identify strategies to improve the rail experience for passengers including better and more- timely passenger information.
Background
On-Time Performance As late as October 2004, Pacific Surfliner OTP exceeded 90 percent. Since early 2005, monthly OTP has been well below the state goal of 85 percent, and, at times, has fallen in the 65-69 percent range (Figure 2). Recent capital projects such as double-tracking in Camp Pendleton and Orange County will improve OTP.
53 LOSSAN Rail Corridor Agency – Corridor On-Time Performance Issues and Strategies – Page 54
Figure 1 LOSSAN CORRIDOR
54 LOSSAN Rail Corridor Agency – Corridor On-Time Performance Issues and Strategies – Page 55
Figure 2 RECENT ON-TIME PERFORMANCE- LOSSAN CORRIDOR
100%
90%
80%
70%
60% Dec-05 Feb-06 Apr-06 Jun-06 Aug-06 Oct-06 Dec-06 Feb-07 Apr-07 Jun-07 Aug-07 Oct-07 Dec-07 Feb-08
Amtrak Metrolink (Orange Co) Coaster
55
LOSSAN Rail Corridor Agency - Corridor On-Time Performance Issues and Strategies - Page 56
There are differences between the LA to San Luis Obispo section of the corridor and the LA to San Diego section as track conditions, dispatching, ownership, and train volumes differ. For example, for February 2008, OTP for the North segment was 79 percent and 77 percent for the South segment. Figure 3 compares the North and South segments since January 2007. OTP is higher for trains operating in the North corridor in nine of the past 14 months.
Table 1 shows OTP for individual trains last fiscal year, with peak commuter periods highlighted. One observation is that weekend OTP is generally lower than weekday, primarily due to the fact there is shorter recovery times at the terminal.
OTP for Coast Starlight trains has improved over the past year. For several months in 2006, OTP was 0 percent. In November 2007, the Starlight was on-time 52 percent of trips. In January 2008, the Union Pacific (UP) was impacted by a 3,000-foot mudslide north of Chemult, Oregon. The slide, which is 20 feet deep in some areas, is anticipated to take weeks to clear. As a result, Amtrak has temporarily suspended Coast Starlight service between Los Angeles and Seattle. In February, service was restored between Los Angeles and Sacramento and extended to Klamath Falls, Oregon, in April.
For FY 2006, COASTER trains ran on-time 88 percent of the time. However, monthly performance has improved in FY 2008 to date to 97 percent. For the last 13 months, Metrolink system OTP has been consistent; between 92 and 95 percent. For Orange County trains in particular, OTP for the past 13 months has ranged from 90 to 95 percent, with January 2007 showing an average OTP of 97 percent for inbound and outbound trains (Figure 2).
On-Time Performance Calculation
Amtrak calculates OTP for intercity service based on a particular distance (Attachment 1). For example, the endpoint tolerance for trains between Los Angeles and San Diego is 10 minutes, meaning a train is not considered late until 10 minutes from the scheduled arrival time. For Metrolink and COASTER, endpoint tolerance is five minutes.
Cancelled trains are included in the Surfliner OTP calculation if they are cancelled less than four hours before the scheduled departure time. Trains that are cancelled four hours or more from departure are considered as “Do Not Count,” or DNC, and are not considered in the OTP calculation. DNC events are rare and occur on average less than one train per month. An example is the October 2007 wildfires in San Diego. DNC trains are dropped from the Amtrak reservation system and are not available to customers. For Metrolink trains, annulled or cancelled trains (trains that are pulled from service for any reason) are not included in calculating OTP.
Table 2 shows the difference in calculations between corridor operators.
Causes for Delay
Amtrak records detailed data for the causes of delays. The main causes for Pacific Surfliner train delays are consistently interference with other intercity, commuter, or freight trains. For example, Table 3 shows the main causes of delay for Pacific Surfliner trains in FY 2007.
56 LOSSAN Rail Corridor Agency – Corridor On-Time Performance Issues and Strategies – Page 57
Figure 3 RECENT ON-TIME PERFORMANCE- LOSSAN NORTH AND SOUTH SEGMENTS 100%
90%
80%
70%
60% Jan-07 Mar-07 May-07 Jul-07 Sep-07 Nov-07 Jan-08 North Corridor South Corridor
57 LOSSAN Rail Corridor Agency – Corridor On-Time Performance Issues and Strategies – Page 58
Table 1 TRAIN STATUS FOR PACIFIC SURFLINER SERVICE - FY2007 (Oct 2006 - Sept 2007) Train Start Schedule Departs Dir OTP # Time 562 M-F LA SB 6:05a 89% 763 Daily SD NB 6:15a 75% 768 Daily SB SB 6:45a 55% 774 Daily SLO SB 6:45a 89% 565 Daily SD NB 7:05a 82% 564 Daily LA SB 7:20a 87% 567 M-F SD NB 8:10a 75% 566 Daily LA SB 8:30a 71% 769 Daily SD NB 9:30a 73% 573 M-F SD NB 10:50a 74% 572 Daily LA SB 11:10a 84% 775 Daily SD NB 12:00p 56% 579 M-F SD NB 1:25p 77% 784 Daily SB SB 1:59p 71% 578 Daily LA SB 2:00p 89% 583 Daily SD NB 3:00p 88% 785 Daily SD NB 4:00p 68% 582 Daily LA SB 4:05p 79% 798 Daily SLO SB 4:25p 69% 792 Daily SB SB 4:29p 83% 589 M-F SD NB 5:50p 87% 799 Daily LA NB 7:30p 48% 595 Daily SD NB 8:20p 82% 596 Daily LA SB 10:10p 65% 590 FrSaSu LA SB 7:00p 88% 597 FrSaSu SD NB 9:15p 79% 571 SaSu SD NB 10:35a 63% 577 SaSu SD NB 12:55p 50% 580 SaSu LA SB 3:00p 82% 587 SaSu SD NB 5:20p 40% 591 SaSu SD NB 6:20p 71%
58 LOSSAN Rail Corridor Agency – Corridor On-Time Performance Issues and Strategies – Page 59
Table 2 CALCULATING ON-TIME PERFORMANCE ON LOSSAN CORRIDOR SERVICES
Amtrak – Type of Delay Metrolink COASTER Pacific Surfliner Late/Lost Trains Yes Yes Yes Defined as trains delayed 10-15 Defined as trains arriving at Defined as trains delayed 6 minutes minutes* or more the terminal station more or more than 5 minutes late. Canceled/Annulled in Yes Yes No Route These are classified as “Terminated Trains,” and are considered late if the train is more than 5 minutes late at the point of termination. Canceled/Annulled Yes No No Within 4 Hours of Departure Canceled/Annulled More No No No Than 4 Hours Prior to Categorized as Do Not Count Departure (DNC) Trains
*Amtrak endpoint schedule tolerance varies depending on distance traveled.
59 LOSSAN Rail Corridor Agency – Corridor On-Time Performance Issues and Strategies – Page 60
The top reason, 28 percent of the time, was interference or meets with other intercity passenger trains. Another 17 percent of the time delays were caused by interference with commuter trains, and another 9 percent of the time delays were caused by interference with freight trains.
One important note in these calculations is how a particular event is recorded as its impact cascades through the train schedule. One train may be delayed for a particular reason, which impacts another train’s schedule, but the cause of delay for the second train is not recorded as the original reason. For example, a trespasser may interfere with a particular southbound train and the cause for delay of this train is Trespasser Interference. However, this event caused a northbound train to be delayed, but the cause of delay for the second train was recorded as interference with another intercity train. Therefore, some causes of delay may be larger issues than is recorded in the calculation.
Table 3: TOP CAUSES OF DELAY FOR PACIFIC SURFLINER TRAINS – FY 2007
Responsibility Percent of Cause Delays
Intercity train interference (e.g., meets) Host 28% Commuter train interference (meets, overtakes) Host 17% Freight train interference (meets, overtakes, bad signals known to be Host 9% caused by freight trains, holds due to freight derailments)
Temporary speed restrictions (slow orders) Host 9% Signal delays (false detectors, defective road crossing protection, bad Host 6% signals, power switch or CTC system failures) Passenger-related holds (baggage, disabled passengers, disorderly) Amtrak 6% Routing (crossover moves, manual/spring switches) Host 4% Initial terminal delay (late-arriving inbound train) Amtrak 4% Engine failure Amtrak 2%
Miscellaneous (unable to make normal speed, heavy train, engine Amtrak 2% isolated for fuel conservation, person pulling emergency cord) Maintenance Of Way Work Host 2% Other (8 other causes represent 1% each, 10 other causes represent 11% <1% each)
100%
60 LOSSAN Rail Corridor Agency – Corridor On-Time Performance Issues and Strategies – Page 61
Corridor Conditions that Influence OTP
There are several reasons for the decline in On-time Performance (OTP) of Pacific Surfliner trains. These include:
Lack of Capacity. The large segments of single-track railway, particularly in the northern and southern portions of the corridor, impact OTP of Pacific Surfliner trains. Overall, 66 percent of the corridor is single-track. Furthermore, there are obvious chokepoints along the corridor including the BNSF-owned segment between Los Angeles and Fullerton, south Orange County (single-track), areas of single-track in San Diego County, and single-track and unusable sidings between San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara.
Increase in Freight Traffic. In the last two years there have been considerable increases in freight traffic, particularly from the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach that impact Pacific Surfliner and Metrolink trains, particularly between Los Angeles and Fullerton. Union Pacific (UP) views the Coast route as a backup to the Central Valley route, but use has also increased in recent years.
Priority of Host Railroads. Much has been publicized recently of the OTP issues with the Coast Starlight, Amtrak’s long-distance service between Los Angeles and Seattle. Slow orders and delays related to freight activity have caused the Starlight to run at 0 percent on-time for several months in 2006, although the situation has improved. What is seen as a priority corridor for passenger service may not be seen as a priority corridor for the host, which impacts OTP.
Incentives to Host Railroads. Agreements between Amtrak and host railroads include performance incentives. However, these payments are often not significant compared to other income sources. Within the last four years, Amtrak has provided these payments to BNSF, but not to UP.
Dispatching. Even with increasing the capacity of the railway and making other improvements to the corridor, priority will remain with the corridor’s commuter rail operators, COASTER and Metrolink, along those publicly-owned segments.
Variation in Freight Schedules. Variations in freight train departure times also can impact the ability to manage the dispatching and therefore impact on-time performance. In the case of the COASTER corridor, freight train windows are known but actual departure times may vary within that window. This can impact on-time performance.
Passenger Information
It also is important to understand how delays are reported to customers. Sources currently used by riders include the 1-800-USA-RAIL reservation and information system (commonly referred to as “Julie”), www.amtrak.com Web site, station personnel, and, in the future, electronic message signs at stations. The latter is particularly important at unstaffed stations in the northern portion of the LOSSAN corridor. Through the ad hoc committee’s discussions it has been learned that up-to-date train status information poses some challenges.
Amtrak conducts a survey nationwide of customer opinions on broad topics which can be broken down as far as the corridor level (e.g., Pacific Surfliners). These Customer Satisfaction Scores (CSIs)
61 LOSSAN Rail Corridor Agency – Corridor On-Time Performance Issues and Strategies – Page 62
ask overall satisfaction as well as questions on specific aspects of service. Attachment 2 shows the scores from Pacific Surfliner passengers. Overall, 84 percent rated service as “Good” for the past year.
The survey does not ask questions about customer satisfaction on such areas as digital information displays, staff help, or on-train or on-platform announcements. Surveys are conducted by telephone and they rank satisfaction from a level of 1-100. Comments are not recorded on these surveys.
Caltrans regularly commissions on-board surveys and other market research in cooperation with Amtrak. In response to the Committee’s questions, Amtrak conducted a series of focus groups along the LOSSAN corridor to gather rider and employee opinions on train status and other passenger information in April 2007. The major findings were summarized by Amtrak below. Attachment 3 contains more detailed information
Three areas of concern were identified by customers. Among customers there is a lack of awareness of the information resources available. For example, many customers do not know that they can obtain train status information by calling Amtrak’s 800 number or accessing Amtrak.com. Unstaffed stations and platforms at major stations are isolated from information. However, even at staffed stations such as Solana Beach, where platforms are below grade, there is a sense of isolation. While available signage notes “for information and reservations call . . .” there is no mention of train status. With no information, customers are unable to use the rest room, buy food, etc., for fear of missing their train. Finally, customers feel that existing information resources are underutilized. The current PA system, electronic signs, etc., do not provide information about delays until the train is close to departure. This deprives the customer of the option of using delay time productively.
Customers suggest that signage should highlight that train status is available via Amtrak’s 800 number as well as the Web site. Efforts should be undertaken to improve the “real-time” status of information provided by Julie, Amtrak.com, and electronic signage. Customers seek personalized flow of information direct from Amtrak with text messages on the status of their train. This would allow them to productively use their time or seek travel alternatives if there is a delay. Customers expect Amtrak employees to recognize that delays are stressful and help reduce the uncertainty. Even if there is no information or no new information, customers expressed a desire to be updated every 15 minutes.
Employees expressed frustration with the lack of information and the resulting stressful interaction with customers. They also suggested that improvements or expansion of existing information technologies/systems would aid them in their efforts.
62 LOSSAN Rail Corridor Agency – Corridor On-Time Performance Issues and Strategies – Page 63
Electronic Message Signs
For the past several years, the LOSSAN TAC has received updates from Amtrak on the status of the readable message signs at stations. These signs will provide current train status information to passengers and are particularly important at unstaffed stations in the northern part of the corridor. Metrolink also is nearing implementation of similar signs at its stations.
In February 2008, Amtrak initiated a two-month testing period at 12 Pacific Surfliner stations. A number of technical issues were diagnosed during the period. As of mid-April 2008, the signs were operational at most intercity station. Maintenance and monitoring is conducted at Amtrak’s Oakland, California, facility.
Since 2003, the Capitol Corridor’s passenger information display (PID) project has been in operation. The Oakland facility is the central operator. The current system uses GPS transponders on trains complimented with the PID estimated time of arrival (ETA) message system implementing audio/text information. If a train is running 15 minutes late, Oakland staff inputs the train delay data, which is pre-coded and displayed on the message sign. An independent contractor oversees maintenance and administers the system while Amtrak deals solely with the trains.
Next Steps/Recommendations
Monitoring the corridor’s on-time performance will be an ongoing effort by LOSSAN and its member agencies. As improvements are made, both to capacity and customer information, LOSSAN will evaluate the benefit to OTP in the corridor.
A number of strategies have been identified, including short-, mid-, and long-term efforts that could improve the corridor’s on-time performance (work completed or underway is noted).
Issue: Lack of Capacity
Short-Term Strategies:
• Implement planning studies that identify chokepoints along the corridor and planned improvements. (completed and underway)
The LOSSAN North (2007) and LOSSAN South Strategic Business Plans (2004), as well as the Programmatic Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement for the LOSSAN South corridor (2007), have identified the corridor chokepoints.
OCTA and Caltrans are leading efforts to: (1) develop a set of short-term improvements that can be implemented at minimal cost such as better customer information at stations and potential service changes, and (2) conduct a comprehensive strategic assessment to better integrate services in the corridor. Both studies will have an impact on the corridor’s on-time performance.
63 LOSSAN Rail Corridor Agency – Corridor On-Time Performance Issues and Strategies – Page 64
• Implement Key Capacity Projects and Advocate for Funding (underway)
LOSSAN member agencies have recently completed capacity projects along the corridor such as double-tracking in Orange County and Camp Pendleton, and other projects such as the Oceanside Double-Track Project are now under construction.
LOSSAN has worked to ensure that Proposition 1B funds specifically earmarked for the Intercity Rail Program have been allocated. Specifically, the FY 07/08 state budget contains bond funds for corridor projects including $150 million for new rolling stock, pending completion of an intercity rail program audit by the state Department of Finance.
In March 2008, the Federal Railroad Administration announced guidelines for the first federal rail capital matching program. Congress set aside $30 million nationwide to begin this program. Caltrans will submit candidates’ projects.
• Continue to work jointly with the Capitol Corridor, San Joaquins, and Coast Rail Coordinating Council to preserve and increase rail funding (underway)
The state’s intercity rail agencies are monitoring efforts at the state level that could further impact the Public Transportation Account and are developing ways to ensure that intercity rail funds are maintained. With a project $14 billion state deficit, cuts first enacted to the PTA account in FY 2008 could continue in FY 2009.
Issue: Priority of Host Railroads
Short-Term Strategies:
• Continue to work with the host railroads to make improvements to the corridor (underway)
• Support the Coast Daylight service (underway)
Long-Term Strategies:
• Reconsider incentive payments to BNSF and UP
Issue: Passenger Information
Short-Term Strategies:
• Review the results of recent OTP focus groups and decide on further research (underway)
• Implement Amtrak electronic message signs at Surfliner stations (underway)
Build upon lessons learned from the Capitol Corridor’s experience and successes as well as other rail agencies that have implemented similar projects.
Coordinate with Metrolink’s Passenger Information Delivery System.
Ensure adequate monitoring and maintenance of the system. Request periodic status reports.
64 LOSSAN Rail Corridor Agency – Corridor On-Time Performance Issues and Strategies – Page 65
• Periodically evaluate the effectiveness of these near-term strategies.
Mid-Term Strategies:
• Design and implement additional signage at stations to inform riders where to go/who to call for additional information.
• Identify necessary steps to provide text messages to riders, consult with COASTER, Metrolink, and BART staff on similar efforts.
65 LOSSAN Rail Corridor Agency – Corridor On-Time Performance Issues and Strategies – Attachment 1
NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION 530 Water Street 5th Floor, Oakland, CA 94607 Tel. 510.238.2671 Fax. 510.238.4397 (ATS: 764)
Date September 1, 2006 From Jonathan Hutchison
To LOSSAN Board Members Department Government Affairs
Subject On-time Performance Calculations
cc
Message Of the multitude of measurements Amtrak utilizes, few are more important than on-time performance (OTP). Amtrak’s methodology for calculating OTP varies depending on the miles a train travels, and is based on standards set by the Interstate Commerce Commission. The definitions for on-time operation based on endpoint arrival times are below:
Distance Traveled Endpoint Schedule Tolerance 0-250 miles 10 mins. 251–350 miles 15 mins. 351-450 miles 20 mins. 451-550 miles 25 mins. >551 miles 30 mins.
These tolerances reflect the reality that the longer a train is on the railroad, the more likely it is to be delayed by routine operational issues, such as meeting other trains, slowing for track work, and passenger issues that can result in longer station dwell times.
In the case of extraordinary circumstances that cause interruptions in Amtrak service, such as washouts, derailments, etc., Amtrak’s contracts with the host railroads generally includes the performance of the first train impacted by the event in OTP statistics, but excludes subsequent trains impacted by the same event. For example, if a washout prevents Pacific Surfliner #582 from August 1st from operating to San Diego, that train’s performance (aka- delays) would be included in the month’s OTP statistics, but the performance of train #582 from Aug. 2nd impacted by the same washout would not be included.
66
Periodically, host railroads know they’ll need to engage in planned trackwork that will affect the velocity of all trains operating on the route. Amtrak understands that a well- maintained railroad is in the interests of all users, and tries working cooperatively with its host railroad partners. For this reason, host railroads have the ability to “buy time” from Amtrak in order to accommodate these planned maintenance events. In other words, if BNSF Railway is engaging in a major track project near Fullerton that will delay all trains using the alignment by ten minutes, they can “buy” ten additional minutes’ tolerance from Amtrak. Therefore, the endpoint arrival time of train #582 that originally had to arrive within 10 minutes of the scheduled time to be considered on-time, could actually be on- time if it arrived within 20 minutes of the scheduled time.
As you can tell, the matter of calculating OTP is complex, but in addition to being significant to Amtrak passengers, OTP calculations are also important to Amtrak and its host railroads. Practically each of Amtrak’s contracts with its twenty-three host railroads includes the opportunity for the railroad to earn an incentive payment for endpoint OTP of eighty percent or above, as well as penalty clauses for endpoint OTP below seventy percent. The specifics of each contract’s incentive and penalty clauses are proprietary, but the overall goal is to encourage host railroads to deliver Amtrak trains on-time.
I hope this overview of OTP calculations is useful; please let me know if you need additional information.
67 LOSSAN Rail Corridor Agency – Corridor On-Time Performance Issues and Strategies – Attachment 2
68 Attachment 3 LOSSAN Rail Corridor Agency – Corridor On-Time Pe On-Time Corridor – Agency LOSSAN RailCorridor
Amtrak Caltrans On-Time Performance Exploratory Attachment 3 – IssuesandStrategies rformance
Prepared for: Amtrak
June 2007
69 Greener Group . P.O. Box 379 . Fort Montgomery, NY 10922 . 914-671-2700 Table of Contents
Page # Executive Summary 1
Background and Purpose 2
Method 3
Summary of Findings On-Time Performance – Overview 4 Customer Perceptions of System Delays 5 System Gaps and Problems 6 Potential Solutions – Customer Perspective 10 Potential Solutions – Employee Perspective 15
Appendix
70 Executive Summary Depending on the type of trip, there are varying degrees of tolerance for delays among Amtrak California corridor customers. Amtrak California customers who take Amtrak for leisure travel or for infrequent business trips are fairly tolerant of the minordelays. They prefer the train to driving and feel that the benefits offset the inconveniences. Regular Amtrak travelers in both northern and southern California, as well as MetroLink Rail-2-Rail commuters, were much less tolerant of the frequency and length of the delays, as well as the way they are handled. The daily delays customers experience on Amtrak are usually relatively minor; however, they impact customers in a negative way by causing uncertainty and stress that are exacerbated when they cannot get information and they perceive a lack of concern. Occasionally, customers experience crippling delays that stick in their minds and cause residual anger. Amtrak seems to handle both minor and major delays as if they are an Amtrak issue first rather than a customer concern. Customers identify three broad problem areas that need attention:
• Lack of awareness of information resources – Many customers do not know that they can obtain current train status information by calling 1-800-USA-RAIL. Even fewer customers know they can use Amtrak.com as a resource in the case of delays.
• Isolation from information – The platform, at major stations and at unstaffed stations, is the weakest link in the information system. Customers feel isolated and trapped during delays and often rely on each other as the major source of information.
• Underutilization of information resources – Many existing resources, from the PA system to electronic message boards, are seriously underleveraged in the case of delays. Delays are often not posted until the train is due to leave so customers are unable to use the waiting time productively.
Customers offer solutions and ideas that fall into three broad categories:
• Maximization of existing resources – Customers believe that Amtrak could better use existing information resources such as 1-800-USA-RAIL, Amtrak.com, and platform signage to be more proactive in anticipating customers’ needs for information and accommodating them during delays.
• Mobilization of technology – Customers do not understand why technological advancements, particularly text messaging in this day when everyone carries a cell phone, have not been mobilized to help them better manage their time.
• Employee rededication to customer service – Employees in the station and on board need to be more empathetic with customers’ anxiety and uncertainty and more proactive in delivering focused and relevant information and reassurance in the case of delays. 71 Background and Purpose
The Amtrak system in California often experiences some inevitable delays. These delays may be only minutes, or they may be many hours long. Caltrans and other stakeholders are interested in maintaining customer satisfaction even when customers’ trains are delayed. Past research has repeatedly shown that it is important to provide delayed customers with accurate and up-to-date information.
The purpose of this research was to:
• Understand customers’ experiences with delays and their perception of how well the delays were handled by Amtrak. • Understand the emotional and functional impact of delays experienced by customers before they arrive at the station, in station, and on board, as well as customers’ perceptions of the role Amtrak did and should take in each. • Assess Amtrak strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities in a range of unaided and aided delay scenarios according to customer location as well as the duration of the delay. • Explore customers’ usage of technologies and how they may be mobilized in the event of delays (e.g., voicemail, email, Blackberries, etc.) • Understand the perspective of conductors and in-station personnel regarding ways in which the handling of the various types of delays could be more effective in station as well as on the train.
72 Method
A total of 15 one-hour focus groups were conducted on April 23-26, 2007 in major California markets: San Diego, Irvine, Los Angeles, Santa Barbara, Fresno, and Oakland.
All customer groups consisted of 3-4 respondents who:
• Considered on-time performance to be important • Had experienced delays on Amtrak • Believed that the information system in the case of delays could be improved.
Groups with Amtrak customers were conducted in each market. In Irvine and Los Angeles, one or two customer groups were conducted with MetroLink monthly ticket holders who had used Amtrak through the Rail-2-Rail program. In addition, interviews were conducted with Amtrak personnel in San Diego and Los Angeles.
Additionally, all respondents were qualified as follows:
• All had made 6+ trips on Amtrak in past 6 months. • Mix of ages from 25-60. • All worked full-time. • All had at least some college education. • Some minority respondents were represented in each group. • HHI: $35K+; limit of 2 under $60K.
73 SummarySummary ofof FindingsFindings
74 On-Time Performance – Overview Delays are seen as inherent in the Amtrak system
Customers and commuters have routinely experienced delays on Amtrak. Typically the delays were minor; however, they did impact them in a negative way. Customers and commuters said that:
• The uncertainty they experience while deciding whether they should wait for a delayed train, choose the commuter rail, or drive their car raises stress levels that could be merely annoying or ruin their day. When the train was late, some felt forced to drive in highly stressful freeway traffic, which impacted their mood and productivity for the day. • At the end of the day, late trains caused some to miss important connections, lengthening their already long work day. They resented missing precious family and personal time. • Leisure travelers felt they had to take earlier trains than they wanted or risk missing an event, flight, or cruise. Those who waited for the late trains during peak times/holidays often felt further aggravation when the train finally arrived only to be so packed with customers that they had to stand or found no space for luggage.
Customers believed that Amtrak could be more proactive in anticipating customers’ needs for information and accommodating them during delays. They felt that Amtrak sees delays as internal problems rather than a source of inconvenience and stress for customers.
Anxiety about minor delays was highest on the platform and in the station. Because Amtrak was seen as weak in providing customers with accurate and up-to-date information, customers often relied on fellow passengers for updates on the status of delayed trains so they could decide what to do. Once on board, customers felt there were no more options to consider so they could relax or focus on work.
Anxiety about major delays was high both in the station and on board. Customers impacted by these delays were actively seeking transportation options such as bus services, commuter rail, or rental cars that could eventually get them on their way. They expected Amtrak to facilitate their transition to alternative modes if necessary.
75 Customer Perceptions of System Delays Minor delays are defined in minutes; major delays in ½ hour+ increments
Customers were asked to define and describe the difference between a minor and major delay.
Minor Delays Major Delays Less than 10 minutes More than half an hour • Minor delays were defined in minutes. • Major delays were defined in half hours and hours. • Commuters, who had the lowest threshold for delays, • Commuters, whose usual trip was approximately one defined minor delays as being a mere 2-3 minutes up hour, considered a delay of ½ hour to be major. to 10 minutes. • Some leisure travelers defined a major delay as ½ hour, • Some leisure travelers and less frequent business 45 minutes, an hour, or more. travelers had a higher tolerance for delays but still • Major delays of ½ to one hour were not uncommon; defined a delay in minutes, usually under 30 minutes. however, they were not expected and could wreak havoc • Minor delays were an expected, and to a certain extent with customers’ business appointments or leisure activities. tolerated, part of the Amtrak experience. Nearly all Such delays experienced by customers included: customers had experienced a range of minor delays: • The cumulative impact of extended freight train • Slow customer boarding. congestion. • Waiting for a customer who is running for the train. • Mechanical failures to trains, tracks, or signals. • Peak-time boarding delays caused by increased • Brush fires. volume of customers. • Mudslides, flooding, earthquakes, and other acts of • Customers boarding with excessive baggage. God. • Loading provisions for the café car. • Personal injury or health problems of passengers on the • Pulling aside to give freight trains the right-of-way. train. • Weather delays. • The train hitting a car, person, or animal. • Minor mechanical delays, e.g., a door not closing • Bomb scares due to unattended baggage. properly. • A raised drawbridge. • Conductors who appeared to be slow in expediting departure. 76 System Gaps and Problems
Customers identified three broad problem areas that need attention.
Lack of Awareness Isolation Underutilization of Information from of Information Resources Information Resources
77 Lack of Awareness of Information Resources Low awareness/effectiveness of existing information resources leads to unnecessary frustration There was relatively low awareness of existing Amtrak information resources. Customers said they often found themselves in a delay situation and did not know how to get information:
• Many customers did not know that they could obtain up-to-date arrival and departure information by calling 1-800-USA-RAIL. Although aware of the number, most associated it primarily with reservations.
• The Capitol Corridor number, 1-877-9-RIDECC, also had low awareness.
• Although many customers booked their travel on Amtrak.com, hardly any used it to obtain train status information. Moreover, those few who had used it found it unreliable; the 1-800 number was considered more up-to-date and accurate. Customers did not understand why, in this high-tech era, they did not have access to real-time information on the website.
• In larger stations they would look at the boards where the delayed train was often listed as “delayed” with no time estimate or explanation.
• In some stations, customers had to stand on line to get train status information, which caused lines that led some ticket buyers to miss their trains.
• Many had been annoyed to find no information available on the platform.
• On board, they waited for a PA announcement, asked other passengers, or waited for the conductor to come through their car.
78 Isolation from Information The platform is the weakest link in the information system Many customers complained that they were unable to obtain train status information when waiting on the platform in both large and small, unstaffed stations.
• In stations such as Solana Beach and Los Angeles, where the platform and station building are far apart, customers often went straight to the platform to wait for their train and then felt isolated and helpless when their train was delayed. They were afraid to go to check the train status in the station because they might miss their train.
• Further, there was no signage in the station or on the platforms directing them to call 1-800-USA-RAIL for train status. Instead the signage that customers noted were “for information and reservations call 1-800-USA-RAIL.”
• Even in Union Station in Los Angeles, customers felt isolated from information once they reached their platform. If their train was delayed, they desperately wanted to know for how long so they could pursue other options, such as choosing MetroLink, using the bathroom, or buying a snack or drink. They felt stuck.
• Even in stations equipped with electronic message boards on the platform, customers felt Amtrak did not make optimal use of the boards. The updates were often not posted until the train was due to arrive. Automated updates changed minute by minute rather than indicating the train was 10 minutes late. Customers believed that Amtrak could update them earlier, which would allow them to use the bathroom or pick up a newspaper/cup of coffee in the station rather than watch the board/wait for the train anxiously. Further, some updates merely said the train was "delayed" without offering a estimated time frame or a reason for the delay. With all of the advancements in technology, customers believed that Amtrak was being either lazy, inept, or uncaring in not using the boards more effectively.
In the case of all delays, but especially progressive delays, customers said they wanted to know the cause of the delays as well as the best estimate of when they would arrive/depart. Further, even when Amtrak has no information, customers need to know they have not been forgotten and that Amtrak “is on top of the situation.” Amtrak should provide updates every 15 minutes, even if only to say there is no new information, so that customers can choose to strategize their travel options and manage the impact of the delay on their personal and professional lives.
79 Underutilization of Information Resources Customers see many opportunities for optimizing existing information resources
Customers said that there were many resources already in place that were not being used to post information for them in the case of delays.
• Customers were frustrated because they have seen electronic message boards in the station, on the platform, and on the trains that were used to communicate relatively unimportant information such as the day and time.
• Customers were further frustrated when delays were posted at the time the train was due, not as soon as Amtrak became aware of them. They felt that in many cases, Amtrak was either too uninterested in its customers to post the information or was deliberately withholding information to keep them from pursuing other options such as driving.
• They criticized public-address announcements for being infrequent and/or unintelligible. Many did not understand why PA announcements did not reach the platforms or unstaffed stations.
• Some felt that employees “disappeared” during delays as a way of avoiding stressful customer interactions, causing other employees embarrassment because their position made them less able than other employees to resolve the customer’s problems.
80 Potential Solutions – Customer Perspective
Customers identified three broad solution themes.
Maximization of Existing Mobilization of Employee Rededication Information Resources Technology to Customer Service
81 Maximization of Existing Information Resources Increase satisfaction by using existing resources more proactively and productively
Customers had many ideas for ways in which existing resources could be better used in the case of delays.
• Customers suggested that the electronic signs that are in station, on the platforms, and on board could be used to quietly provide up-to-date information about the status of the trains.
• Some suggested that Amtrak could create on-the-spot awareness of 1-800-USA-RAIL and 1-877-9-RIDECC as a resource by posting signs in the station, on the platforms, or on the trains that say “for train status, call_____.” Because “everyone has a cell phone,” this seemed an obvious partial solution that would give the customer some sense of control by reducing uncertainty.
• Customers further suggested that Amtrak increase awareness of its website as a resource for train status information as long as the information posted was up-to-date with a time stamp to instill confidence.
• They suggested that Amtrak look to the airline sites to see how a more user-friendly information window appears and operates.
• Some suggested a pop-up window at the time of online purchases could remind customers of ways to check the status of their train.
• Customers asked that Amtrak make sure all AC outlets were in working order so customers can use their phones and laptops in the event of an extended delay. Further, they expressed impatience with Amtrak’s out-of-date PA systems and/or employees who did not give relevant and focused messages.
82 Mobilization of Technology Embrace the empowerment of technology All customers, especially commuters, were enthusiastic about having the option of receiving text messages on their cell phones when their train was delayed.
• They envisioned filling out a request/travel profile on the internet that would allow them to customize their messages as to the train and length of delay needed to mobilize the text message.
• The automated text message would give them the status of their requested train and any service advisories for the route.
• They said they would want a text message to be sent as far in advance as possible when their train was delayed 10-15 minutes. That way they could stay home or in the office, or run an errand on the way to the station.
Other ideas included:
• A system-wide state-of-the-art PA system that reaches all points in the stations and especially the platforms.
• Installing free, direct to 1-800-USA-RAIL telephones in stations and on platforms.
• They suggested that Julie offer the option of entering a code associated with the route to request more detailed service advisories.
• A countdown clock installed on the platform showing when the train is expected would alleviate anxiety.
• Rolling out Wi-Fi so customers can check train status and stay productive or entertained.
• Working with cellular phone companies to eliminate drop zones so travelers can access 1-800-USA-RAIL on board or call ahead to those they are meeting. 83 Mobilization of Technology (cont’d) Embrace the empowerment of technology
In the case of indeterminate delays or cancellations, customers asked that a situation-aware service support center be available via phone or online to handle customer needs, including:
• Re-bookings on another Amtrak train.
• Market-specific information about all other public and private transportation options, including buses, cabs, town cars, rental cars, and hotels if needed.
• A customer service rep to meet and provide face-of-the-brand reassurance, information, and resources to passengers on severely delayed or cancelled trains. Airlines were cited as being particularly adept at handling delays and cancellations.
84 Employee Rededication to Customer Service Employees should do everything to reduce uncertainty and stress for their customers
Amtrak customers believe that employees can really make all the difference in how they experience a delay. Amtrak personnel can, though their attitude, attention, and professionalism, add to or alleviate customers’ stress in the case of delays.
Customers would like Amtrak employees to be more proactive in the case of delays by:
• Recognizing that all delays are stressful to the customer. • Realizing that customers look to them to provide information and reassurance that the situation is being handled. • Providing accurate information in a timely and professional manner. • Providing best-guess estimates based on past experience but clearly indicating that these are estimates based on past experiences vs. being based on situation-specific information. • Staying in regular communication even when they do not have new information to share. • Anticipating and meeting customer needs in the case of protracted delays. • Dispatching a representative to the platform where people are waiting for a train that is delayed in order to manage their expectations, reduce stress, or direct customers to alternatives such as MetroLink or BART. • Making a gesture that shows that Amtrak cares about its customers’ time and comfort—e.g., provide AGR points, a drink coupon, or a discount on future travel in the case of extreme delays and cancellations.
85 OTP Problems and Solutions – Employee Perspective Use training and technology to better serve customers during delays Station attendants and conductors also expressed frustration with delays. They were on the front line dealing with anxious and irritated customers seeking information and options. Their frustrations included:
• Not being updated by the dispatchers on a timely basis. • Receiving conflicting information from Amtrak operations and dispatchers. • Incomplete or out-of-date train status reports. • Not having the phone number for conductors on incoming trains to alert them of situations that could become delays if not handled, e.g., disabled traveler, multiple passengers with a excess baggage, etc.
Some of their suggestions included:
• Training in-station personnel to properly use the walkie-talkies and the PA system, both in terms of their operation as well as how to deliver a message to fellow employees and customers. • Make sure that all station employees understand the system and the peculiarities of the various stations so they can troubleshoot and answer questions. • Provide radios to in-station personnel so they can listen to the dispatchers and thus understand the status of the trains when they are not getting calls on a timely basis. • Provide walkie-talkies to Red Caps so they can be mobilized in advance of the trains’ arrival and avoid delays caused by searching for them. • Have a radio- and laptop-equipped travel clerk in the lobby of the larger stations who can keep up-to-date on delays and make announcements over the PA system, freeing the ticket counter clerks to sell tickets. • Empower conductors and station agents to provide upgrades to customers who are seriously delayed. • Break the “pass the buck down the line” mentality where employees, to avoid dealing with service problems, do not communicate with each other and customers, which ultimately delays the trains further. • Creating scripted dialogues for use when employees have no information about a situation. This would help mitigate the employee’s concerns/embarrassment about the lack of information.
86 Los Angeles – San Diego – San Luis Obispo (LOSSAN) Rail Corridor Agency JOINT POWERS BOARD
May 7, 2008 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 8
Action Requested: DISCUSSION/POSSIBLE ACTION
RELEVANT STATE LEGISLATION File Number 4000100
There are a number of bills at various stages in the State Legislature that may have potential impacts to the LOSSAN Corridor or member agencies. Attachment 1 includes the Board’s current program of legislative goals from 2006/2007 along with potential updates. Each year the Board of Directors reviews its legislative and advocacy goals. Staff uses these goals over the next several months as a guide for action related to relevant state and federal legislative efforts. The Board may wish to update these at this time.
Attachment 2 is a list of relevant state bills, including staff’s proposed action for the Board’s consideration. (Please note the Technical Advisory Committee has not reviewed this item as a group.)
Attachments: 1. Proposed 2008/2009 LOSSAN Legislative Program 2. List of Relevant State Bills
87 Attachment 1
PROPOSED 2008/2009 LOSSAN LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM Updates Shown in Italics
GOAL PRIORITY POSITION FED STATE LOCAL
Ensure the LOSSAN corridor is properly defined in HIGH SUPPORT X SAFETEA-LU Technical Corrections Bill.
Support Caltrans efforts to apply for federal rail capital HIGH SUPPORT X matching program funds for projects.
Funding for LOSSAN Priority Projects. HIGH SUPPORT X X X
Ensure continued and expanded federal support for Amtrak and specifically a stable, adequate, multi-year funding HIGH SUPPORT X source for operations.
Expand efforts on joint activities with the Capitol, HIGH SUPPORT X X San Joaquins, and Coast Rail corridors.
Strengthen efforts to advocate for the LOSSAN Corridor. HIGH SUPPORT X X X
Mechanisms and funding providing for the implementation of the LOSSAN Corridorwide Strategic Business Plan, HIGH SUPPORT X X Caltrans 10-year Rail Plan, Amtrak 5-year Strategic Business Plan, and other rail improvement plans.
Support member agency funding requests; consistent with HIGH SUPPORT X X LOSSAN policy.
Generation of new revenue sources; maximize flexibility in HIGH SUPPORT X X use of federal and state funds.
Legislation promoting rail safety and rail security. HIGH SUPPORT X X X
Secure Homeland Security funds for rail system protection HIGH SUPPORT X X and passenger protection projects.
Goods movement proposals that have a positive impact on HIGH SUPPORT X X X passenger rail systems
Lower the current 2/3rds voter requirement for special purpose taxes, such as transportation and quality of life MED SUPPORT X improvements, to a simple majority vote.
Legislation that supports smart growth and transit-oriented development, mixed-use development, and joint MED SUPPORT X X X` development opportunities.
Efforts that would reduce transportation funding. HIGH OPPOSE X X
88
2008 RELEVANT STATE LEGISLATION Bill # Author Recommended Description Status and Title Position
AB 633 Requires the Public Utilities Commission and the Department of Transportation to In Senate Support (Galgiani) issue a joint public report to the appropriate policy and fiscal committees of the Transportation & Rail Safety and Legislature to include, among other things, an evaluation of the grade separation Housing Cmte. Traffic Mitigation project funding program and recommendations for establishing a hardship Bond Act application process allowing for the adjustment or deferral of local financial participation in severe circumstances. (Amended 3-25-07)
AB 901 Allocates Proposition 1B Transit funds in accordance with STA fund formulas, limits In Senate Support (Núñez) eligibility to capital projects Would require that transit projects funded under Appropriations Proposition 1B Proposition 1B be consistent with the sponsoring entity's most recently publicly Cmte. Transit Funding adopted short-range transit plan. Requires that Caltrans administer the funds, in coordination with the State Controller. Would also require the department, on a quarterly basis, to provide the Controller with instructions regarding funds to be allocated to each sponsoring entity and would require the Controller to allocate those funds accordingly. (Amended 6-1-07)
AB 1221 Allows a city or county that prepares a transit village plan, with the agreement of In Senate Local Support (Ma) every government agency that receives property taxes within the jurisdiction of the Govt. Cmte Transit Villages: Tax- transit village development area and at least one government agency that owns and Increment Financing operates a transit station in the transit district, to engage in tax increment financing Hearing Date (TIF) to fulfill the goals of a transit development plan. Increases the area included in 5/7/08 a transit village plan to include up to 1/2 mile of the exterior boundary of the parcel on which is located a transit station. Requires that at least 20 percent of the gross revenue from the application of the TIF be used to increase, improve and preserve affordable housing units within the district. Further requires that the amount of very low, low- and moderate-income housing shall be in compliance with Community Redevelopment Law. (Amended 6-20-07) Attachment 2
89
2008 RELEVANT STATE LEGISLATION Bill # Author Recommended Description Status and Title Position
AB 1350 Requires $1 billion in transit security and disaster response funds to be allocated to In Senate Support (Núñez) transit operators for eligible projects, as defined, based on the State Transit Assistance Appropriations Proposition 1B formula, with 75 percent of funds being allocated to operators in counties with a Cmte. Transit Security population greater than 250,000, and 25 percent to operators in counties with a Funding Report smaller population. Requires funds to be allocated by the Office of Emergency Services in consultation with the Office of Homeland Security. Applicant would be required to annually advise the Office of Emergency Services of the applicant's need for funding in the following year. (Amended 6-1-07)
AB 1351 States that it is the intent of the Legislature to give priority to self-help counties In Senate TBD (Levine) that have passed local sales tax measures in the State-Local Partnership Program Appropriations Proposition 1B: created by Proposition 1B. Provides a $25 million minimum project cost threshold Cmte. State-Local for the program and restricts matching funds to voter approved sales tax measures. Partnership Program Provides that only highway projects and fixed-guideway projects may be eligible to receive funding. Requires the appropriate policy committees and budget subcommittees of the Assembly and Senate to hold an annual joint legislative hearing on the status of the implementation of Proposition 1B.
AB 3034 (Gagiani) Makes various revisions to the $10 billion bond measure in November 08. Would Assembly Support revise descriptions of the route segments and make the additional LOSSAN corridor Appropriations Safe, Reliable High segments from Los Angles to Anaheim and from University City to Downtown San Cmte. Speed Passenger Diego eligible for high-speed rail bond funding. Not more than 10% on bond Bond Act proceeds would be used for environmental studies, planning or engineering. $950 million remains in the measure for urban feeder rail services such as the Pacific Surfliners, Metrolink, and COASTER.
90
2008 RELEVANT STATE LEGISLATION Bill # Author Recommended Description Status and Title Position
SB 445 Authorizes specified regional transportation agencies to impose a greenhouse gas In Assembly Support (Torlakson) mitigation fee on vehicles subject to registration within the jurisdiction of the Transportation Greenhouse Gas agency implementing the fee. The bill would require the fee to be implemented Cmte Mitigation Fee pursuant to a plan, which would be required to contain an expenditure plan describing specified transportation projects and programs to be funded from fee revenues. The fee would be subject to majority approval of the governing board of the implementing agency and majority voter approval of a ballot measure containing the expenditure plan and the proposed fee in the jurisdiction where the fee is to be imposed. The fee would be collected by the Department of Motor Vehicles. The greenhouse gas mitigation and funding fee plan shall include an expenditure plan describing the specific projects and programs that will be eligible for funding from revenue from the fee.
SB 716 Specifies requirements for an eligible project sponsor to receive an allocation of In Assembly Support (Perata) funds appropriated from the $4 billion Public Transportation Modernization, Appropriations Proposition 1B Improvement, and Service Enhancement Account (PTMISEA) included in Prop. 1B, Cmte. Eligibility for Transit which was created to invest funds in projects of transit operators in California, Funding including rail transit, commuter rail, bus, and waterborne transit operators, for rehabilitation, safety, or modernization improvements, capital service enhancements or expansions, new capital projects, bus rapid transit improvements, and rolling stock rehab or replacement, with $400 million allocated by Caltrans for intercity rail, including $125 million for rolling stock, with the remaining $3.6 billion dispersed according to the STA formula
91
2008 RELEVANT STATE LEGISLATION Bill # Author Recommended Description Status and Title Position
SB 974 Requires the ports of Los Angeles, Long Beach, and Oakland to collect a user fee In Assembly TBD (Lowenthal) on the owner of container cargo moving through their respective ports at a rate Third Reading Container Fee for not to exceed $30 per twenty-foot equivalent unit. Requires the ports to transmit file Congestion Relief & half of the funds derived from the fees to Congestion Relief Trust Funds, which the Environmental bill establishes in the State Treasury to be available, upon appropriation, for Mitigation expenditure by the California Transportation Commission exclusively for the purposes of funding projects that improve the flow and efficiency of container cargo to and from those ports, and funding the administrative costs of this program.
SB 1363 Extends the deadline provided under existing law by which the Department of In Senate Support (Perata) Transportation and regional transportation agencies may enter into up to four Transportation Project Development comprehensive development lease agreements with public and private entities for & Housing Agreements transportation projects primarily designed for improvement of goods movement Cmte. that may charge users of those projects tolls and user fees from January 2012 to January 2013. Projects eligible for these agreements include planning, design, development, finance, construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, improvement, acquisition, lease, operation, or maintenance of highway, public street, rail, or related facilities supplemental to existing facilities currently owned and operated by Caltrans or regional transportation agencies
92
2008 RELEVANT STATE LEGISLATION Bill # Author Recommended Description Status and Title Position
SB 1760 (Perata) Creates the Climate Action Team (CAT), consisting of representatives from specified In Senate Support Greenhouse Gas state agencies, that would be responsible for coordinating the state's overall Environ. Quality Reduction climate policy as required by the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 Cmte. which requires the State Air Resources Board to adopt regulations to require the reporting and verification of emissions of greenhouse gases and to monitor and enforce compliance with program, and requires the state board to adopt a statewide greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions limit equivalent to the statewide GHG emissions levels in 1990 to be achieved by 2020. The CAT, on or before January 1, 2010, and biennially thereafter, would be required to prepare and adopt a climate change impact adaptation and protection plan that includes specified information. The bill would require research, development, and demonstration funds that are administered by the Department of Transportation.
93 Los Angeles – San Diego – San Luis Obispo (LOSSAN) Rail Corridor Agency JOINT POWERS BOARD
May 7, 2008 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 9
Action Requested: DISCUSSION
RECENT VISIT WITH FEDERAL DELEGATION File Number 4000100
Federal Legislative Briefings
On Thursday, March 13, 2008, LOSSAN Board Member Julianne Nygaard (North County Transit District) conducted a corridor briefing in Washington, DC, along with staff from the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) and Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro). Staff from five congressional offices out of the corridor’s 21 representatives attended. In attendance were staff from the offices of Congresswomen Capps (Santa Barbara) and Davis (San Diego), Congressmen Filner (San Diego), Roharbacher (Huntington Beach), and Berman (Los Angeles). Each was provided with a folder of information including fact sheets and the California Intercity Rail video. The handout reviewed in the briefings is included as Attachment 1.
Visits also were made to Senator Feinstein’s staff and John Drake, House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee staff. Telephone briefings also have been completed with Congressman Filner (D-San Diego) and Senator Boxer’s staff. Special thanks to Metro and the Santa Barbara County Association of Governments (SBCAG) for sending special invitations on these briefings.
On June 12, 2008, LOSSAN has been invited to participate in Metro’s quarterly federal legislative briefing. An informational folder also will be provided to the remaining corridor representatives.
Current Status of Federal Legislation
Attachment 2 includes the current status of Amtrak’s FY 09 appropriations request and reauthorization efforts. In addition to these efforts, LOSSAN also continues to monitor these efforts:
SAFETEA-LU Technical Corrections Bill
H.R. 3248 makes a number of technical corrections to SAFETEA-LU, the nation’s surface transportation program. The House approved the bill August 1, 2007, while the Senate stalled on the bill near the end of the year, due to the inclusion of a number of earmarks. In March, the Senate reintroduced their version, which was unexpected heading into the November 2008 elections. The LOSSAN Corridor definition is one of these technical corrections. We were encouraged recently when holds which had been placed on the bill because of earmarks were removed. However, the Bush Administration subsequently informed Congress that they would consider a veto of the bill if earmarks remained.
94
FAA Reauthorization
The Federal Aviation Administration reauthorization bill includes provisions for intercity rail bond funds. Leaders of the Senate Finance and Commerce committees late April 25 announced an agreement on a tax package to boost funding for the Federal Aviation Administration and ensure solvency for the Highway Trust Fund. One billion dollars in tax credit bonds for rail infrastructure is included in the current version of the bill.
Attachments: 1. Handout 2. Current Status of Amtrak’s FY 09 Appropriations Request and Reauthorization
95 Attachment 1
Los Angeles–San Diego–San Luis Obispo Rail Corridor Agency
March 2008
LOSSAN Corridor
Amtrak’s Pacific Surfliner Route
96 LOSSAN Corridorwide • Track/Signal Strategic Business Plan upgrades (20-year improvement plan) • Sidings
•Curve Realignments • LA Run Thru Tracks •Triple Track •4th Main
• Bridge Replacements
• Double Track
• Tunnel alternatives
97 Federal Efforts • FRA $30 million capital matching program • SAFETEA-LU Technical Corrections • Amtrak Appropriations and Reauthorization • FAA Reauthorization
State/Local Efforts • Proposition 1B (intercity and goods movement) • Local Sales Tax Measures
QUESTIONS?
98 Attachment 2
NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION 530 Water Street 5th Floor, Oakland, CA 94607 Tel. 510.238.2671 Fax. 510.238.4397 (ATS: 764)
Date April 30, 2008 From Jonathan Hutchison To LOSSAN Members Department Government Affairs Subject Amtrak Update cc
The following is an update on issues related to the Pacific Surfliner and Coast Starlight, along with general information about Amtrak. Message Pacific Surfliner Performance
In January, Pacific Surfliner ridership was 203,394, which was +7.6% above the previous year. Passenger revenue was $3,453,094, which was an increase of +16.8% compared to 2007. Endpoint OTP was 81.9% (84.8% North; 81.6% South); delays primarily resulted from: passenger train interference, commuter train interference, communication and signal problems, speed restrictions, and freight train interference.
February ridership was 204,237, which was +11.6% above last year; revenue was $3,294,191, which represented a +14.8% increase over the previous year. Endpoint OTP was 74.9% (79.0% North; 76.7% South). Delays primarily resulted from: passenger and commuter train interference, signal problems, slow orders, and freight train interference.
March Surfliner ridership was 248,808, which was a +9.4% increase compared to last year, and revenues ($4,166,311) were also up +16.3% compared to the previous year. Endpoint OTP was 71.6% (80.6% North; 72.5% South).
Coast Starlight Performance
January Coast Starlight ridership was 19,596, which was -11.4% below last year; revenue was $1,512,762, which was -9.7% less than 2007. Endpoint OTP was 34.7%. February ridership was 4,928, which was -75.3% below last year, and passenger revenues of $169,892 were also down -87.5% compared to 2007. February endpoint OTP was 82.2%. Not surprisingly, March saw the Starlight being one of only two trains nationwide that saw decreases in ridership (11,630) and revenue ($422,488) of -53.1% and -77.3%, respectively. March OTP was 78.7%.
99
Coast Starlight Update
On January 19, a mudslide severed the Coast Starlight’s route north of Chemult, Oregon. On February 1, Amtrak began operating an abbreviated service between Los Angeles and Sacramento. Starting Feb. 29, Amtrak augmented this “stub train” by offering overnight motorcoach service between Sacramento and Portland. Amtrak began full-amenity Coast Starlight service from Los Angeles to Klamath Falls, OR on April 15; April 16 southbound. Passengers will be bused between Klamath Falls and Eugene, where they will board a stub train for service north to Seattle. Currently, UP has resumed limited freight operations through the area of the slide and full Coast Starlight service will be restored starting with train #14 on May 6 and train #11 on May 7.
Amtrak’s FY09 Grant and Legislative Request
On February 20, Amtrak submitted its FY09 Grant and Legislative request to Congress, which outlines the Corporation’s funding needs for the upcoming Fiscal Year. Amtrak’s base FY09 request is $1.671B ($525M operations; $801M capital; $345M debt service). This amount is ~$141M more than Amtrak’s base request for FY08. Amtrak also informed Congress that it will need an additional $114M for the Presidential Emergency Board-authorized 60% back wage payment. The remaining 40% will be addressed during FY08 using available resources.
Also in February, the Administration issued its FY09 budget, which proposed $800M for Amtrak, plus $100M in federal capital matching. This is the same amount the Administration proposed for FY08; the Amtrak funds are insufficient to maintain national operations.
Demonstration Federal Capital Matching Program
On February 19, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) released guidelines states are to follow in order to apply for the $30M in intercity rail capital matching funds. These funds are separate from, and not managed by, Amtrak. The dollars are available on a 1:1 basis (50/50), and the FRA began accepting applications on March, 18.
Amtrak Reauthorization
Amtrak understands that within the next 1-2 weeks, the leadership of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee will likely introduce an Amtrak reauthorization bill.
CA Intercity Rail Day
Amtrak participated in the recent Intercity Rail Day in Sacramento with the state’s four corridor agencies. In addition to Government Affairs, Amtrak had representatives from its Strategic 100
Partnerships and Business Development group, along with Amtrak’s Chairman of the Board, Donna McLean. Amtrak appreciates the corridor agencies’ work in support of this important effort.
National Train Day
Amtrak has designated May 10, as National Train Day in honor of the role rail transportation has in the United States, and the importance of rail factoring prominently in America’s future. Amtrak will host celebrations in New York, Washington DC, Chicago, and Los Angeles; the latter location will feature a concert by Drake Bell. Al Roker will serve as the national spokesperson; Wheel of Fortune and MasterCard are also participating. More details can be found at the event’s website www.NationalTrainDay.com.
101