Measuring the Benefits of Intercity Passenger Rail: A Study

More documents

Recommendations

Info

across Thursday, Friday, and Saturday all returning on Sundays. Among Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday, there appears to be very little difference between ridership on the two train runs. Table 3-4 reports the total ridership activity at Heartland Flyer stations for FFY 2007, 2008, and 2009. Ridership activity at a given station consists of the count of passengers boarding trains at the station plus the count of passengers alighting trains at the station. In FFY 2009, the busiest station for the Heartland Flyer was Fort Worth, with more than 61,000 passengers boarding or alighting at the station. This is not surprising as Fort Worth is the largest city served by the Heartland Flyer and also the point of connection to other services in the Amtrak nationwide passenger rail network. The busiest station in Oklahoma is Oklahoma City, with more than 48,400 passengers served in FFY 2009. Consistent with nationwide ridership trends, FFY 2009 ridership activity at Heartland Flyer stations were lower than FFY 2008 except for in Ardmore, which increased 5.7 percent during FFY 2009. Table 3-4: Heartland Flyer Station Boardings and Alightings, FFY 2007-2009 Station Ridership Percent Change FFY 2009 FFY 2008 FFY 2007 vs. FFY 2008 vs. FFY 2007 Oklahoma City 48,434 55,015 43,293 -12.0 +11.9 Norman 12,573 13,414 11,033 -6.3 +14.0 Purcell 2,073 2,086 2,801 -0.6 -26.0 Pauls Valley 5,393 5,942 6,357 -9.2 -15.2 Ardmore 9,094 8,607 9,642 5.7 -5.7 Gainesville 8,108 9,249 9,589 -12.3 -15.4 Fort Worth 1 61,181 67,190 53,588 -8.9 +14.2 1 Only activity attributed to the Heartland Flyer; total activity in Fort Worth also includes Texas Eagle Sources: Amtrak Government Affairs, Oklahoma and Texas State Fact Sheets Activity at Purcell, Pauls Valley, and Gainesville was lower in FFY 2008 as well as FFY 2007, suggesting a general downward trend of demand at those stations. Compared to FFY 2007, station activity at Oklahoma City, Norman, and Fort Worth increased in FFY 2009. Note that the station activity in Fort Worth reflects only Heartland Flyer passenger activity at the station; station activity in Fort Worth can also be attributed to the Texas Eagle. Figures indicate that Heartland Flyer activity represents about 60 percent of the total activity in Fort Worth. Among the 73,564 Heartland Flyer passengers in FFY 2009, Table 3-5 reports the five highest station-pairs by ridership. Collectively, the five city pairs reported in Table 3-5 represent more than 80 percent of the total demand. The city pair with the highest ridership, not 66
surprisingly, is Oklahoma City-Fort Worth, the route endpoints. This city pair accounted for more than half of all passenger trips on the Heartland Flyer in FFY 2009. Table 3-5: Five Largest Heartland Flyer City Pairs by Ridership, FFY 2009 City Pair Ridership % of Total Fort Worth-Oklahoma City 40,875 55.6 Fort Worth-Norman 9,358 12.7 Fort Worth-Ardmore 3,935 5.3 Oklahoma City-Gainesville 3,292 4.5 Fort Worth-Pauls Valley 2,586 3.5 All Other City Pairs 13,518 18.4 Source: TTI Analysis of ridership data provided by ODOT Customer Satisfaction Amtrak measures customer satisfaction on all its routes using a scoring system known as the CSI, which stands for Customer Satisfaction Index. Amtrak measures CSI by using a mailbased customer survey that rates the service during a specific trip. Customers are asked to rate 38 service elements on an 11-point scale (0 to 100 by 10). Table 3-6 presents CSI scores for the Heartland Flyer and a comparison with other state-supported and short-distance routes for FFY 2004 to FFY 2009. Table 3-6: Heartland Flyer CSI Scores, FFY 2004-2009 Year (FFY) Average Overall CSI Score Heartland Flyer All Routes Percent Very Satisfied 1 Heartland Flyer All Routes 1 2004 91 83 93 78 2005 90 83 89 78 2006 88 83 87 79 2007 86 84 83 79 2008 92 86 91 83 2009 94 88 94 85 1 Composite group score for Amtrak State-Supported and Short-Distance Corridors Source: Amtrak In Table 3-6, the “Average Overall CSI Score” is the average CSI rating across all 38 survey items and the “Percent Very Satisfied” is the percentage of responses that are “very satisfied,” defined as scores of 80, 90, or 100 on a survey item. Based on the Amtrak CSI measure, Heartland Flyer passengers are very satisfied with the level of service quality and other service elements on-board the train. Scores on the Heartland Flyer are consistently higher than 67
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 38 and 39:
passenger deficit for the year 1969
Page 40 and 41:
In April 2009, the Federal Railroad
Page 42 and 43:
conditions across the United States
Page 44 and 45:
Table 2-2: State-Supported Routes i
Page 46 and 47: Oklahoma and Texas support service
Page 48 and 49: conducted by the Southeastern Wisco
Page 50 and 51: Discussion of State-Supported Rail
Page 52 and 53: • The 1993 Illinois Passenger Rai
Page 54 and 55: INTERCITY PASSENGER RAIL PLANNING T
Page 56 and 57: Data Needs for Intercity Passenger
Page 58 and 59: supported routes. The following par
Page 60 and 61: • Third, the total non-business r
Page 62 and 63: demand model varies, Horowitz and F
Page 64 and 65: Survey Design Literature Deploying
Page 66 and 67: Table 2-4: Elements Included in On-
Page 68 and 69: question. This pattern is consisten
Page 70 and 71: a particular corridor. For example,
Page 73 and 74: CHAPTER 3: DESCRIPTION OF HEARTLAND
Page 75 and 76: • After passing through Davis, th
Page 77 and 78: minutes early. A later section of t
Page 79 and 80: corridor. Table 3-1 shows a snapsho
Page 81 and 82: enefits resulting from the route’
Page 83 and 84: state of Oklahoma (71). This action
Page 85 and 86: served by the route are Pauls Valle
Page 87 and 88: Figure 3-4: Typical P42DC Locomotiv
Page 89 and 90: during non-peak times when the usua
Page 91 and 92: effect during this research study w
Page 93 and 94: HEARTLAND FLYER SERVICE DATA The fo
Page 95: Examining the 10-year monthly avera
Page 99 and 100: Figure 3-9: Heartland Flyer On-Time
Page 101 and 102: CHAPTER 4: DATA COLLECTION The main
Page 103 and 104: amenities that could increase rail
Page 105 and 106: pool be increased to 3,000. The IRB
Page 107 and 108: Summary of Data Collection Tables 4
Page 109 and 110: Ineligible Passengers Several group
Page 111 and 112: QUALITY CONTROL After completing th
Page 113 and 114: For the access mode to station ques
Page 115 and 116: One question on the survey asked th
Page 117 and 118: trip). However, researchers determi
Page 119 and 120: eporting how far passengers were fr
Page 121 and 122: CHAPTER 5: DATA ANALYSIS This chapt
Page 123 and 124: survey item by the total number of
Page 125 and 126: Comparing the total column in Table
Page 127 and 128: Tables 5-5 and 5-6 display another
Page 129 and 130: Heartland Flyer Market Area Researc
Page 131 and 132: Table 5-9: Passenger Trip Purpose,
Page 133 and 134: PASSENGER CHARACTERISTICS Passenger
Page 135 and 136: is entirely possible that a passeng
Page 137 and 138: In both April and July, the two mos
Page 139 and 140: Table 5-19: Passenger State of Resi
Page 141 and 142: Figure 5-2: Residential Zip Codes o
Page 143 and 144: Gender Table 5-22 reports passenger
Page 145 and 146: Household Income Table 5-26 reports
Page 147 and 148:
In FFY 2009, the Heartland Flyer ra
Page 149 and 150:
Table 5-28: Passenger Alternatives
Page 151 and 152:
Urban and Rural Mobility Another co
Page 153 and 154:
passenger was approximately $120 in
Page 155 and 156:
if the service did not exist (appro
Page 157:
This study measured the mobility im
Page 160 and 161:
questions on the passenger’s boar
Page 162 and 163:
made is related to the similarity b
Page 164 and 165:
valuable insight on the design of f
Page 167 and 168:
REFERENCES 1. National Surface Tran
Page 169 and 170:
35. Corey, Canapary & Galanis Resea
Page 171:
74. Able Consulting. Tier 1 Environ
Page 174 and 175:
Figure A-3: Purcell Amtrak Station
Page 176 and 177:
Figure A-7: Fort Worth Amtrak Stati
Page 178 and 179:
148
Page 180:
150
show all

Measuring the Benefits of Intercity Passenger Rail: A Study

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?