1-5 Trade Corridor Background presentation [01" the T-5 - PDF document

Rail Alternatives in the 1-5 Trade Corridor Background presentation [01" the T-5 Partnel"ship Task FOI"ce June 26, 2001 1-5 " llf llleTship 7(ut fl lrt 'j' J II III: 16, 100 1 Presentation Outline • Rail 101 a. Background b. Rail System Capacity Issues c. Types of Rail Service • Review of the RTC Commuter Rail Study • 1-5 Partnership Rail Capacity Analysis I·J J' lIr lll l! rs lli/ J nuk ,, ' OT( 'r J/I I/ I' 16. 1001

1. Rail 101 I-J I'flrillcrshi" Tr uk For et' Jllll e 16, 1001 a. Background I.J " Ufllll'fl '/lip Tusk Force Jill/I! 16, 2001 2

Current Situation in NW Corridor o Rail lines are owned by private railroads. o PortlandlVancouver region has the highest concentration of rail activity in Oregon, with 75% of st ate's rai I traffic either o ri gi nating, terminatin g, or pass in g through the area. o The region conta in s four major rail yards, and numerous lesser yards and port terminals. o The r eg ion 's rail system serves the state 's largest co ll ection of industrial customers. I-J "lIrllll!rs/tip Tru 'k For ce illIIl'16, 100/ Current Situation in NW Corridor (Continued) • The rail system accesses a major deep draft ocean port. o A major bottle neck is between Union Station and Vancouver Station. o Passenger service (Amtrak/Cascades) operates over private freight rail road tracks . • Expansion of passenger service requires agreements with freight r ai lroads. I-J /'flrtllcrsl!ip Tal 'k F'OT ef! JUI/e 26, 1001 3

. ~ · "il · lIrl"cr I BNSF and ,up Systems in POrtlan11 ! /Vancouver • 63 fr eight trains and 10 Amtrak trains per day cross the BNSF bridge • Freight trains projected to reach 90 per day in 20 years. • Passenger service projected to reach 26 per day. 1 -. ' 1 Jil.\k FIH( 'I! .1,1/1(' 16. lO(J/ 4

b. Capacity and freight interference issues I-S /' ( If(m :rship Tllsk F or c/' JIIII !' 2 6. 10()f Capacity: • The number of trains that can operate over a track segment or network in a given amount of time 1- ;; / 'ur flll mihip Ta sk Fm u J ll lle 16, 1001 5

. ~"i r fi Summary of Capacity Principles • Safety First • Pa ssenger trains have priority over freight (u sually) • Freight railroads (BNSF and UP) operate their systems to preserve freight capacity • Traffic control systems operate to prevent collisions and preserve capacity. / -5 1 'lIrflt' Tllsk "' or ce .IIII/(' 1(',1 0 01 Summary of Capacity Principles (Continued) • Things that use up capacity include: - Speed and length of trains - Differing priorities - Many types of facilities in the same area • Adding capacity may require: - Changes in operating practices - New investment in track, signals or other facilities I-J PI/filler . filil l 1ilsk FUf ce Jlllle 26, 2001 6

s _:~:;" \:,-.-~; ~ r s hiJl ·. I Basic Capacity Issues The Single Track Sidings A fTeet of different train speeds Affect of train leng th s , ., ; 1'(frflf 7i1 . d; For ce JIIIII! 16,100/ Double tracks solve many problem: The Crossover The Wye The Wye with double tracks ~ /' /trlllf!rsili/l Tnsk forct: Jill/ I! 26. ZOOI 7

T - 6~-.; Blocks and signals '·5 /'(/rllll!( . \'IIi/1 1iu'k "-o,er! . lflll l! 2r., 100f Vancouver Wye Columbia Slough and Fallbridge Subdivision Columbia River Bridg ""' ---" Two Swing Span Bridges North Portland Junction 1 -5 /' ltfll/Usbi" 1i, sk Foret! ),111(' 16, 2001 8

[Vancouver Wye [ Union Pacific Train 7,000 to 8,000 ft. Traveling 15 mphr'Y "" _ Train Blocks Both Tracks North Portland Junction I - ii Purl/len ip Tiu"!; For c /! .IUIII! 26, 1001 Fallbridge Subdivision [ Vancouver Wye [ North Portland Junction 1 -5 l'(lflfll!f . ffliI J Ttuk For e/! )1/1I1! 16, 1001 9

Vancouver Wye Even adding multiple additional tracks or crossovers doe s not solve problem, train continues to block all mainlines North Portland Junction 1 -5 I'lIrflll : r.l"ftip1il. fk ' '" or c/! JIIIII: 16, 20(JI c. Types of Rail Passenger Services 1 -5 i'lIrlflcrshi /J Tn , d: Poru Jlflll! 26, 100 1 10

jl/I Conventional Intercity Passenger Rail Service Amtrak/Cascades Dist in g ui shing fe ature s: Except in th e No rtheast Corridor, con ve ntional trains over tracks \. owned by the freight railroads [n Northeast Corridor sp ee ds reach 125-150 mph over dedicated tracks Typical speeds up to 79 mph 1-,\ l' llffllersllip Tusk Fl)f C C .I11111! 26. 2 001 Amtrak/Cascades Market • Intercity services for personal, bu s in ess and recreational traveL • Compe te s with air, intercity bu s and autos. • In the Northwest Corridor largest markets are Portland and Seattle with other service every 20 to 50 mile s. • Average trip leng th s of 150-200 mil es. I-J /'Ufr"cn'/Ii" Tusk For ce ~ 16, ]001 II

High Speed Rail True hi gh speed rail has speeds over 150 mph . • Examples are the Japanese bullet trains and the French TGV • Currently true high speed rail in the US is limited to areas of the Northeast Corridor. I- .'i "Uff llcrsltil' Tt l xk f oret' .I1111t'16,lOO} High Speed Rail Markets • High Speed Rail provides intercity service to large metropolitan markets. • Typically competes with airlines and intercity bus and autos. • Typical trip lengths over 150 miles. I -J l'flffll cr. \'lIip Tt,. d l. Ftlr(;e J llll e 26, 200/ 12

. ~IiJl . ~,. Tt , High Speed Rail in the No.·thwest • "Was hington State High Speed Ground Transportation Study" identified alternatives between POJ11and and Seattle • Found that most of the benefits of true High Speed rai I were captured at speeds lower than 125 mph. • At speeds of 18 5 mph ridership would double , but capital costs would be more than 10 times that of conventional 125 mph r ai l. For et' / -; 1'/lrflt·r Jllll e 16, 1001 Pacific Northwest Rail Corridor Plan • Both states have adopted passenger rail plans based on providing improvements to existing trackage. • Plans are designed to achieve increased frequencies and higher speeds in conjunction with freight rail service. 1-5 Part"ership Task Fora ! 16, ]001 JIllIf 13

Pacific Northwest Rail Corridor Plan • Pl a nning on in cremental incr eases in se rvi ce from cu rre nt 4 ro undtrip s per da y to 13 round trips per da y between Portland and Seatt le by 20 18 . • In cremental incr ease s in spee ds - up to I 10 mph. I·J 1'''''"l!f, rllip Task Force .I1111 t! 16,1001 Commuter Rail • Urban/Suburban services provided over conventional railroad s. • Typica ll y sma ll er tr a in sets than intercity service. • Current service in the Nor th west includes the Sounder in Seattle and the West Coast Express in Vancouver, BC. • Planned service from Wil sonville to Beaverton .; ""fflll'rslfip TllSk f orce / • .! 26. 2001 JIIIII 14

~"il Commuter Rail Market • Comm ut e and personal trips o rt en at peak periods o nl y Ty pi ca ll y competes with urban trans it services and automobiles. Operation over conventional tracks reduces costs, but limits market to existing track loca ti ons. • Station spacing at 4 to 10 miles wi th commute di stance longer th an li g ht rail. 1·5 1'l/r/I/ CHlti " TlI!;k I- ar e!! .I'1I1f: 26, 100/ Light Rail • MAX: Light weight electric powered vehicles operate in urban areas on dedicated tracks • Speeds up to 55 mph with many stops • Ca nnot mix with heavy rail • Stations spaced at Y, mile to 3 mile s. 1 _. 1 I '(/rfle' T(l sk Forct' .1'/1/ /' 16, 100 1 15

Light Rail Markets Light rail is a form of urban mass trans it serv in g commuters and o th er urban tr ip s Competes with buses, commuter ra il and automobiles Need for separate tracks and ri ght of way increases costs but a ll ows service to be tailored to th e market. 1 _. 1 /'f/rfllI'f, \' fli" TII, d; FOr("t' .l1I1Il'16. 2QIJI 3. RTC Commuter Rail Feasibility Study: I -!i /'Ufrllcr, rhip Tllsk ' ;' orce Jllile 16, 1001 1 6

, • Ptoposed Cotrmut ... \ Rail Alternati ves '-'" N"' · ... .. • ... ·-. .. ·, • N o.." II ... t .... b . .. ... 10<4 ... . ......... . • ..... h c ... ' '-------' \' /; Foret. ' I· .. f' lIr tlll :r ship1f I, .11111(' 16, 2aOI Commuter Rail Service Alternatives All D ay Peak Direction T rip s Be/ wee n R ye Betwee ll Fisher's Alt er nat ive alld Uuion Stalio ll Lallding alld U lli o ll S lati o ll 6 0 Low 4 Me dium 4 6 Hi gh 6 1 -,; j'urlller sf ,ip Task ror Cl' Jill/ I! 26, 2001 17

.~ l;u on l Ul1a Commuter Rail Ridership* High Low A1ediuIIl 2{JlJ.i 1 ,036 1 ,0 63 1,1 82 21117 2,062 2, 11 3 2,336 :!O I 7 r-. '1crlllpolllall Ilan~p Plnn IH g hw<lY project s ; md limited COll1l11ute r bus service a ss um ed f- . ' I'lIrTlwnfliJi · 1i1 . 1/" Furn ' .Ill11t' 16, H/f ll Commuter Rail Costs* Alternative Capital Costs Op erating Costs Cost per Rider L olV $36.6 M $2.7 MI year $10.02 Medium $53.1 M $3.3 MI year $1 1. 94 lli gh $430 M - $750 M $4. 1 M J year $ 13.34 A ll Alternatives Require Dedicated A li gnment in 20 17 • I 'J9H do /-5 "U f( III!r!illip Task For ce ./"", -16,2 001 18