Oceanside-Escondido Rail Line 1.011 Final Project Presentation John R. VelascoMay 12 th, 2003.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
West Michigan Transit Linkages Study Wednesday, June 4 th, :00 a.m. Grand Valley State University Kirkhof Center Conference Room 2266.
Advertisements

CENTRAL CORRIDOR TRANSIT ACCESS STUDY Citizens for Modern Transit March 27, 2014.
City of Omak Central Avenue Bridge Replacement Project Prepared by Highlands Associates Photos by FlyBy Photos.
Northwest Rail Update Nadine Lee, Northwest Rail Project Manager Regional Transportation District March 21, 2012.
OHIO & LAKE ERIE REGIONAL RAIL CLEVELAND HUB STUDY Ohio Rail Development Commission TMACOG Annual Transportation Summit September 29, 2003.
OCBC Infrastructure Committee April 8, 2014 LOSSAN Rail Corridor Update Jennifer Bergener – Managing Director, LOSSAN JPA.
1 Corey W. Hill Chief of Public Transportation May 20, 2008 May 20, 2008.
Status of the SEMCOG E6 Travel Model SEMCOG TMIP Peer Review Panel Meeting December 12, 2011 presented by Liyang Feng, SEMCOG Thomas Rossi, Cambridge Systematics.
Passenger Rail Development Activities AASHTO Annual Meeting October 18, 2013 Serge Phillips, MnDOT Federal Relations Manager.
Presentation to the AMP Leadership Team Moving forward. April 17, 2013.
Public Expenditure Analysis May 4, 2007 Cost-Benefit Analysis: Seattle Link Light Rail, Initial Segment Your presenters: Annie Gorman Hazel-Ann Petersen.
California Passenger Rail Summit April 29, 2015 LOSSAN Pacific Surfliner Rail Service Update.
North Corridor Commuter Rail The Case For Tax Increment Financing Mecklenburg County May 2007.
San Diego County: Towards a Reliable and Sustainable Public Transportation System Franco Boscolo Research Associate, Global Energy Network Institute (GENI)
Randy Wade TRB Intercity Passenger Rail Committee Tuesday January 25, 2011 Washington, DC.
M IAMI F ORT L AUDERDALE W EST P ALM B EACH O RLANDO Addresses Florida’s demand for express, intercity rail travel. Is designed to serve tourists, business.
Anaheim – Los Angeles Project EIR/EIS California High-Speed Rail Authority HIGH-SPEED TRAINS IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA Orange County Business Council- Infrastructure.
Public Transit in Sacramento
June 2011  Route  Operations & Riders  Benefits  Construction  Operations & Maintenance  Potential System Manager  Next Steps & Conclusion Overview.
Rapid Transit Investment Plan David Armijo, CEO March 19, 2010.
TRB Transportation Planning Applications Conference Houston, Texas May 2009 Ann Arbor Transportation Plan Update-- Connecting the Land Use & Transportation.
Orange County Business Council Infrastructure Committee December 14, 2010 Draft Long-Range Transportation Plan Destination 2035.
Trains are better for our environment than other modes of travel.
Performance Analysis Presentation to the National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board (NCR-TPB) November 28, 2012 Adopted: July 18, 2012 Item.
CCJPA Sacramento to Roseville 3 rd Track Project Sacramento Stakeholder Advisory Committee (SAC) Meeting #1 HDR Office Tuesday, May 20, :00 - 9:00.
Presentation to ***(group) on ***(date) 1.  Cities - 11  Highway districts – 3  Ada and Canyon Counties  School districts – 2  Valley Regional Transit.
1 Comprehensive Strategic Operating and Capital Plan FY15 Update April 2, 2014 RELATED TO AGENDA ITEM 7.
: Research Question: Would ridership needs in the area of the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project be better Served by the implementation of a Bus Rapid.
Portland North Small Starts Alternatives Analysis Coordination Meeting June 16, 2009.
1 TRANSIT PERFORMANCE REVIEW Balancing Transit Service with Travel Demand and Available Resources.
California High-Speed Train Project California High-Speed Rail Metro Bus Operations Subcommittee January 2010.
West Phoenix / Central Glendale Transit Corridor Study Public Meetings May 2013.
1 Senate Transportation & Housing Committee December 13, 2005 Orange County Transportation Authority.
David B. Roden, Senior Consulting Manager Analysis of Transportation Projects in Northern Virginia TRB Transportation Planning Applications Conference.
Cal y Mayor y Asociados, S.C. Atizapan – El Rosario Light Rail Transit Demand Study October th International EMME/2 UGM.
LYNX FY2013 Budget Presentation Orange County Board of County Commissioners John M. Lewis, Jr. LYNX Chief Executive Officer July 17, 2012.
Portland North Small Starts Alternatives Analysis Coordination Meeting June 15, 2009.
Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority Overview of Metro’s Transportation Program Pam O’Connor Metro Chair July 25, 2007.
Morgan County Transit Discussion UTA Corporate Staff Presentation November 19, 2013.
Implementing Quality and Efficiency in Transit Planning Mike Summerlin Former Chairperson Raleigh Transit Authority.
The Purple Line Transit Connecting Bethesda, New Carrolton, and the Washington Metro Presented by- Nick Flanders Rose Ryan Anupam Srivastava.
Tom Norton, Executive Director Colorado Department of Transportation American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials September 9, 2003.
Weighing the Scenarios: The Costs and Benefits of Future Transit Service Produced for MTDB by The Mission Group © 2000 by The Mission Group. 1 Dave Schumacher.
TRB/APTA 2004 Bus Rapid Transit Conference The Results of Selected BRT Projects 2:00 – 3:20 p.m. Walt Kulyk Director, FTA Office of Mobility Innovation.
APC University: San Diego’s Use of APCs on Three Six Modes from Three APC Vendors Brian Lane Senior Transit Planner San Diego Association of Governments.
Business Logistics 420 Public Transportation Lecture 17 Transportation Planning Overview.
THE EL MONTE HOV / BUSWAY: A Policy Driven Experiment in Congestion Management Frank Quon Division of Operations Deputy District Director HOV LANES IN.
San Diego Trolley. Current Current/future expansion Propose extension.
Getting & Using Transit Data John Semmens Laissez Faire Institute & Arizona Transportation Institute.
Overview Presentation Fall 2015 Gainesville-Haymarket Extension Study.
Briefing for Transportation Finance Panel Nov 23, 2015 Economic Analysis Reports: 1.I-84 Viaduct in Hartford 2.I-84/Rt8 Mixmaster in Waterbury 3.New Haven.
Northern Lights Express Minneapolis-Duluth/Superior Passenger Rail Alliance December 16, Northern Lights Express Minneapolis-Duluth/Superior Passenger.
Company LOGO Georgia Truck Lane Needs Identification Study Talking Freight Seminar March 19, 2008 Matthew Fowler, P.T.P Assistant State Planning Administrator.
Orht I-5 North Coast Corridor Project CA Transportation Planning Conference – New Directions in Planning Integrating Resource and Infrastructure Plans.
City of Joliet - Sustainability City of Joliet Sustainability Initiatives American Planning Association National Conference April 16, 2013.
Commuter Rail Studies Summary of MAG High Capacity Transit Study June 2003 Commuter Rail Summary.
GRTC Bus Rapid Transit Project July 17, Agenda 1.BRT Concept 2.Project Goals 3.Project Benefits 4.Project Corridor 5.Proposed Multimodal Access.
Northern Lights Express Minneapolis/Duluth-Superior Passenger Rail Alliance February 24, Northern Lights Express Minneapolis/Duluth-Superior Passenger.
Regional Transportation Plan Draft Hybrid Scenario Transportation Policy Committee 7/22/03.
Los Angeles – San Diego – San Luis Obispo Rail Corridor Update
Regional Roads Committee
D Line Station Plan Overview
RELATED TO AGENDA ITEM W1
D Line Station Plan Overview
D Line Station Plan Overview
D Line Station Plan Overview
D Line Station Plan Overview
LRT, GRT, PRT Comparison Peter Muller, PE Ingmar Andreasson, Ph. D.
D Line Project Overview
Chicago to Council Bluffs-Omaha
Presentation transcript:

Oceanside-Escondido Rail Line Final Project Presentation John R. VelascoMay 12 th, 2003

The SPRINTER – 2005 North San Diego County Transit District Service Area

The SPRINTER – 2005 History & Background

The SPRINTER – 2005 OVERVIEW PUBLIC OPINION: 78% of North County residents recently surveyed believe traffic on Highway 78 is a major issue. FACTS: Heavily traveled with moderate to severe congestion Currently 145,000 vehicle trips/day 74% increase in North County population by 2015 No plans to widen - not economically feasible

The SPRINTER – 2005 Background 1987 SANDAG Highway 78 Corridor Study (determined rail service in corridor is feasible) 1987 TRANSNET 1/2% sales tax approved 1992 SANDAG Transit Corridor Evaluation (determined DMU’s most cost- efficient) 1992 NCTD (with MTDB) purchases 84 miles of track, including The SPRINTER line for $90 million Keeps project costs down

The SPRINTER – 2005 Problems & Issues

The SPRINTER – 2005 Problems & Issues Cal State San Marcos Loop at Highway 78 Overcrossing 37 grade crossings in 22 miles Short-term construction traffic Local outreach and notification Continuing Freight Rail operations during construction Traffic Control Plan to meet Caltrans requirements Implementation of Traffic Control Plan will reduce impacts to less than significant

The SPRINTER – 2005 PROJECT ENGINEERING HIGHWAY 78 Existing Conditions Looking west bound

The SPRINTER – 2005 PROJECT ENGINEERING HIGHWAY 78 Post Development Conditions Looking west bound

The SPRINTER – 2005 Costs & Benefits

The SPRINTER – 2005 Costs Total Construction Costs$205,969,000 Total Non-Constr. Costs$107,062,000 Project Contingency$ 16,400,000 Project Escalation$ 22,069,000 Total Project Budget$351,500,000

The SPRINTER – 2005 Costs--In perspective “Highly Recommended” Project by FTA $16.1 million/mile ($40-50 M National Avg.) 55% locally funded High potential use Annual operating cost for Oceanside - Escondido Rail Project: $12.2 million in first full year of operation Estimated 40-50% farebox recovery rate - consistent with national average

The SPRINTER – 2005 Benefits Potential addition of 4,884 full-time jobs during construction with 6,667 secondary or indirect jobs for the region Addition of 170 on-site jobs for operation and maintenance of the system when it is up and running with 304 indirect jobs generated Improved air quality…Fewer emissions from vehicles on Highway 78 (25-30% decrease in auto traffic) Increased travel capacity in the corridor...You don’t have to use transit to benefit from transit Increased mobility for North County residents: Link to COASTER / AMTRAK / Metrolink Link to BREEZE Link to Interstate 15 and future Bus Rapid Transit Provide bike trail in corridor More access to local schools, jobs and shopping

The SPRINTER – 2005 SERVICE TO STUDENTS Cal State University San Marcos Currently has 8,000 students plus 800 faculty & staff 11,000 students projected by ,000 students projected by 2020 Palomar College 20,000 students currently attend San Marcos campus Mira Costa College 13,616 students by 2005

The SPRINTER – 2005 CSU SAN MARCOS STATION

The SPRINTER – 2005 Potential Ridership

The SPRINTER – 2005 RAIL SERVICE Passenger service every 30 minutes from 5 a.m. to 10:30 p.m. 64 train trips/day Max speed: 50 mph Flat fares proposed $1.50/trip Freight service will continue 2-3 times a week at night Projected daily ridership: 12,000 in ,000 in 2020 Transit riders in corridor: 9,800 on Routes 302, 318 and 320 **Fastest growing ridership in system**

The SPRINTER – 2005 POTENTIAL RIDERS Ridership throughout the day, connections to shopping important 0%20%40%60%80% Work 21% School 12% Shopping 68% Visit friends 51% Other 49%

The SPRINTER – 2005 Diesel Multiple Unit Technology (DMU)

The SPRINTER – 2005 WHY DMU? Ability to operate in existing right-of-way Bi-directional operation Designed for light-density, regional service to heavily-used urban and inter- city rail lines and Bus Rapid Transit Modular design / “building block” approach Multiple - unit capability Lightweight material Self-propelled diesel - no catenary required

The SPRINTER – 2005 Financial Analysis

The SPRINTER – 2005 Financial Analysis Land/Right-of- Way Project ManagementDesignConstruction Final Setup Total Expenses Original Costs Net Present Value (Base) Net Present Value (Scenario #1) Control Panel (all periods in months) Length of Project Planning/Design Period 58 (16) Length of Final Preparation Period 2 (2) Length of Construction Period 22 (14) Total Length of Project 82 (32) Interest Rate (monthly).83% (1.17%) Interest Rate (yearly) 10% (14%)

The SPRINTER – 2005 Scenario Analysis OriginalInterest Rate10% Format( 5.5=5:30 AM, 22.25=10:15 PM) Start time:5.5# Trips/Hr2Fare/person/trip$1.50 Stop time:22Total Trips/Day33Total Daily Riders12,375 Total time (hrs)16.5Train Capacity375Total Daily Revenue$18, Total Yearly Revenue $6,775, NewInterest Rate14% Format( 5.5=5:30 AM, 22.25=10:15 PM) Start time:7# Trips/Hr2Fare/person/trip$1.50 Stop time:17.5Total Trips/Day21Total Daily Riders5,250 Total time (hrs)10.5Train Capacity250Total Daily Revenue$7, Total Yearly Revenue $2,874,

The SPRINTER – 2005 Conclusions

The SPRINTER – 2005 Review State Route 78 Inadequate to carry increasing traffic Total Construction Costs: $350 M Avg. Cost/Mile= $16.1 M (National Avg. $45-60 M) 40-50% Farebox Recovery Rate 12,000+ daily rider when opens in 2005 State-of-the-art DMU Technology Environmentally Friendly, Efficient, Cheap!