Measuring the Benefits of Intercity Passenger Rail: A Study

More documents

Recommendations

Info

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW This chapter reports the findings of the literature review task of the study. A brief overview of intercity passenger rail service in the United States is provided for the purpose of background information. The chapter also gives additional details on state-supported intercity passenger rail corridors (the primary focus of this report), including a summary of past research studies of state-supported routes across the country. An overview of the planning environment for passenger rail along with a discussion of the methods used by planners to forecast passenger demand for new “conventional” and “high-speed” passenger rail lines is also provided. The chapter concludes with a review of relevant literature on the design of surveys for passenger rail and other transit properties, including an analysis of the design of survey instruments used in past research studies of state-supported intercity passenger rail routes. OVERVIEW OF INTERCITY PASSENGER RAIL IN THE UNITED STATES In the United States, the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (NRPC), better known as Amtrak, operates intercity passenger rail services. Amtrak’s nationwide passenger rail system includes more than 21,000 miles of routes with 500 destinations in 46 states (6). The following paragraphs provide a general overview of Amtrak, including the company’s history and a description of the components of the Amtrak system. History Amtrak was created by the United States Congress pursuant to Public Law 91-518, the Rail Passenger Service Act of 1970 (RPSA), which was enacted by Congress on October 30, 1970 (7). The passage of the RPSA and the subsequent creation of Amtrak were designed to relieve the freight railroads of their obligation to operate passenger services and the financial losses associated with these operations. Provisions of the RPSA included the following (8): • Participating freight railroads were allowed to transfer all passenger operations to Amtrak without receiving approval from the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC). Freight railroad companies paid Amtrak with cash or equipment equal to one-half their rail 7
Page 1: 1. Report No. SWUTC/10/169116-1 2.
Page 5: ABSTRACT In recent years, the polic
Page 8 and 9: LIST OF FIGURES Page Figure 3-1: He
Page 11 and 12: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION In i
Page 13 and 14: ail service along intercity corrido
Page 15 and 16: planning faces a variety of challen
Page 17 and 18: of travel (in the absence of rail s
Page 19 and 20: participate in the study. Throughou
Page 21 and 22: such as medical appointments or fun
Page 23 and 24: Heartland Flyer annually. Induced t
Page 25 and 26: Heartland Flyer identified in this
Page 27: DISCLAIMER The contents of this rep
Page 31 and 32: CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION In its Dece
Page 33 and 34: to Fort Worth intercity corridor wa
Page 35: • An overview of intercity passen
Page 39 and 40: Amtrak: The History and Politics of
Page 41 and 42: to New Haven; Washington, D.C., to
Page 43 and 44: took place almost immediately after
Page 45 and 46: The details provided in Table 2-2 d
Page 47 and 48: February 1995 report entitled Learn
Page 49 and 50: Washington The states of Washington
Page 51 and 52: problematic. This is likely to occu
Page 53 and 54: family or friends or for vacation/r
Page 55 and 56: service in the corridors where it i
Page 57 and 58: esidents in the communities served
Page 59 and 60: models used in this application wer
Page 61 and 62: travelers likely differ from those
Page 63 and 64: Discussion At the present time, a v
Page 65 and 66: obtaining more information and also
Page 67 and 68: others extended the question to ide
Page 69 and 70: No single trip purpose was provided
Page 71: provides the most clarity for the s
Page 74 and 75: Figure 3-1: Heartland Flyer Route 4
Page 76 and 77: Timetable Schedule Figure 3-2 shows
Page 78 and 79: two sections—I-35W (toward Fort W
Page 80 and 81: the two lines met in Purcell in Apr
Page 82 and 83: Oklahoma City-Fort Worth corridor t
Page 84 and 85: Oklahoma City and Tulsa are include
Page 86 and 87:
evidence of use during the Amtrak L
Page 88 and 89:
On the Heartland Flyer, the NPCU fa
Page 90 and 91:
that the right passengers depart th
Page 92 and 93:
on-time (as defined in the incentiv
Page 94 and 95:
Also reported in Table 3-3 is the a
Page 96 and 97:
across Thursday, Friday, and Saturd
Page 98 and 99:
the average scores for its peer gro
Page 100 and 101:
• Other Delays, 1,892 (8.1 percen
Page 102 and 103:
questions also reduce respondent bu
Page 104 and 105:
Stakeholders also provided guidance
Page 106 and 107:
Once the train had departed the ori
Page 108 and 109:
Table 4-1: Data Collection Details:
Page 110 and 111:
the passenger is “captive” on t
Page 112 and 113:
Survey Item Table 4-4: Treatment of
Page 114 and 115:
Survey Item Table 4-5: Treatment of
Page 116 and 117:
northbound train, suggesting that m
Page 118 and 119:
error cleaning used in this study a
Page 120 and 121:
During the data collection process,
Page 122 and 123:
sampling technique. A more efficien
Page 124 and 125:
analysis, as the sample appears to
Page 126 and 127:
travel mode from the alighting stat
Page 128 and 129:
Table 5-5: Passenger Travel Mode To
Page 130 and 131:
Table 5-8: Passenger Travel Distanc
Page 132 and 133:
Passenger Alternative Travel Mode O
Page 134 and 135:
Travel Duration Researchers evaluat
Page 136 and 137:
was approximately three times the p
Page 138 and 139:
items but rather estimated based up
Page 140 and 141:
Figure 5-1: Residential Zip Codes o
Page 142 and 143:
Party Size Tables 5-20 and 5-21 rep
Page 144 and 145:
epresented approximately 4 percent
Page 146 and 147:
Diverted and Induced Trips In this
Page 148 and 149:
Influences on Diverted and Induced
Page 150 and 151:
Table 5-29: Passenger Alternatives
Page 152 and 153:
ECONOMIC IMPACTS The economic impac
Page 154 and 155:
communities along the route ranged
Page 156 and 157:
sales tax and do not include hotel
Page 159 and 160:
CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSIONS This chapter
Page 161 and 162:
Heartland Flyer most closely resemb
Page 163 and 164:
passenger rail routes, particularly
Page 165:
Future research can also focus on i
Page 168 and 169:
19. Economic Development Research G
Page 170 and 171:
53. Robertson, H.D., J.E. Hummer, a
Page 173 and 174:
APPENDIX A: PROJECT PHOTOS Figure A
Page 175 and 176:
Figure A-5: Ardmore Amtrak Station
Page 177 and 178:
APPENDIX B: ON-BOARD SURVEY FORM 14
Page 179 and 180:
APPENDIX C: IRB DOCUMENTATION 149
show all

Measuring the Benefits of Intercity Passenger Rail: A Study

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?