NTRAC Final Study - Nebraska Department of Roads - State of ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

CHAPTER 5 – COMMUTER RAIL PLAN REVENUE Chapter 3 contained forecasts for ridership for the commuter rail option in 2010. Ridership appeared in a range of between 129,500 passenger trips (rounded to the nearest 100) and 184,600 passenger trips in that year. These figures were based on the percentage of work trips between Lancaster and Douglas/Sarpy Counties (Lincoln-Omaha riders) that a commuter rail service with roughly 45-minute frequencies could capture. To these totals, the Gretna-Omaha work trip capture (as a Gretna station is assumed) and special event traffic need to be added; Gretna- Lincoln riders are included in the Lancaster-Douglas/Sarpy totals. This analysis applied fares common to commuter rail agencies today to estimate revenue. The resulting revenue numbers appear in Table 5-6 below. Fares are rounded to the nearest tenth of a dollar, riders to the nearest 100, and revenue to the nearest $1,000. Table 5-6: Revenue for Lincoln-Omaha Commuter Rail Service in 2010 Markets Fares Riders Revenue Revenue Low-side Lancaster-Douglas/Sarpy Riders $5.50 129,500 $715,000 Special Event Riders 7.10 9,300 66,000 Gretna-Omaha Riders 2.50 1,800 5,000 Total 140,700 786,000 Revenue High-side Lancaster-Douglas/Sarpy Riders $5.50 184,600 $1,019,000 Special Event Riders 7.10 11,700 82,000 Gretna-Omaha Riders 2.50 2,300 6,000 Total 198,600 1,107,000 Source: Wilbur Smith Associates Given 123,041 annual train miles (weekdays plus special events), revenue per train mile ranges from a low of $6.38 to a high of $9 per train mile. The fare charged to the Lancaster-Douglas/Sarpy riders is a blend of cash, 10-ride and monthly pass fares. The latter two are discounted tickets popular with commuters. At 10 cents per train mile, the blend is weighted heavily toward the discounted fares. Special event riders (Cornhusker football fans riding between Omaha and Lincoln) will pay full cash fares of almost 13 cents per train mile. Gretna-Omaha commuters pay a proportionally higher fare per train mile than the inter-county riders do. This is because shorter trips typically have higher per mile fares. There are Transportation Demand Management (TDM) tools to be explored that could strengthen ridership and revenue. These include free or subsidized fares (by either the State or the University of Nebraska) that would encourage use of alternative travel modes, including commuter rail. For example, the Maryland Transit Administration offers the College 33 Pass, which provides college students lower fares on local and express/commuter buses. Metrochecks and Commuter Choice Maryland Vouchers result in lower fares to business employees on the Maryland Rail Commuter Service (MARC). 384180 NEBRASKA TRANSIT CORRIDORS STUDY Page 5 - 6 WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES
CHAPTER 5 – COMMUTER RAIL PLAN FARE BOX RECOVERY AND REQUIRED SUBSIDY The calculations of operating costs and revenue allow for the calculation of fare box recovery, which is the proportion of operating costs covered by fare revenue. The fare box recovery ratio is a common measure of transit operations to judge the relative “profitability” of services. (Transit services rarely are profitable per se; the question posed by this measure is really, how close to profitable are they? As the measure can be changed one way or another by changes in fares, fare box recovery is not a measure of efficiency.) These ratios vary widely. For example, in the initial years of The Coaster commute rail service in San Diego County, fare box recovery was about 20 percent of operating costs; this ratio increased to about 30 percent in 2001. In 2001, Metra in Chicago generated a 46 percent fare box recovery, and New Jersey Transit enjoyed a fare box recovery ratio of 56 percent. On the other hand, Shore Line East in southern Connecticut has a 14 percent fare box recovery. The ratios for 14 commuter rail operations in the United States for 2001 appear in Table 5-7 below. These systems produced an average fare box recovery ratio of 44 percent. Table 5-7: 2001 Financial Performance of Various U.S. Commuter Rail Services Operating Service Service Area Fare Box Recovery Cost per Train Mile Revenue per Train Mile Subsidy per Train Mile Caltrain Bay Area 54% $48.62 $26.25 $22.37 Long Island Railroad New York 47% 103.95 48.86 55.09 MARC Baltimore 42% 54.67 22.96 31.71 MBTA Boston 49% 47.53 23.29 24.24 Metra Chicago 46% 64.98 29.89 35.09 Metrolink Los Angeles 48% 40.41 19.40 21.01 Metro North NY-CT 59% 79.28 46.78 32.50 New Jersey Transit Northern NJ 56% 53.42 29.92 23.50 The Coaster San Diego 30% 56.90 17.07 39.83 SEPTA Philadelphia 41% 30.52 12.51 18.01 Shore Line East Southern CT 14% 37.94 5.31 32.63 Trinity Rail Express Dallas-Fort Worth 47% 42.80 20.12 22.68 Tri-Rail Miami 27% 36.14 9.76 26.38 Virginia Rail Express Washington DC 49% 59.28 29.05 30.23 Average 44% $54.03 $24.37 $29.66 Source: Wilbur Smith Associates On the high side, a commuter rail service operating between Lincoln and Omaha should generate a fare box recovery ratio of about 22 percent, which is about what The Coaster did in 1996. In the same way also, this figure can be expected to grow over time as riders are attracted to the train. The low side fare box recovery ratio is about 16 percent, but this should grow as well. While fare box recovery for the Lincoln-Omaha service is on the lower side of the range experienced nationally, another key measure shows the service near the average experienced by the 14 other services. This measure is the subsidy per train mile, i.e. operating costs less fare revenue stated on a train mile basis. Per Table 5-8, the average for the 14 systems is about $30. In 2010, assuming high side ridership and revenue, the Lincoln-Omaha service will be close to that, as shown in Table 5-8 below. The reasons seem to be 1) passengers riding comparatively 384180 NEBRASKA TRANSIT CORRIDORS STUDY Page 5 - 7 WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES
Page 3:
Nebraska Transit Corridors Study Co
Page 6 and 7:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY between 141,000 a
Page 9 and 10:
TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary
Page 11 and 12:
TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 8 Financi
Page 13 and 14:
Chapter 1 STUDY PURPOSE AND METHODO
Page 15 and 16:
CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION Table 1-1
Page 17:
CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION services,
Page 21:
North Platte Lexington Kearney Gran
Page 25:
NEBRASKA CORRIDORS STUDY Figure 2-2
Page 29: NEBRASKA CORRIDORS STUDY Figure 2-4
Page 32 and 33: EXISTING CONDITIONS TRAVEL PATTERNS
Page 34 and 35: EXISTING CONDITIONS Table 2-3: Summ
Page 36 and 37: EXISTING CONDITIONS changing lanes,
Page 39: NEBRASKA CORRIDORS STUDY Figure 2-5
Page 42 and 43: EXISTING CONDITIONS expressway. Als
Page 44 and 45: EXISTING CONDITIONS CORRIDOR RAIL L
Page 46 and 47: EXISTING CONDITIONS airports, which
Page 49 and 50: Chapter 3 RIDERSHIP POTENTIAL INTRO
Page 51 and 52: CHAPTER 3 - RIDERSHIP POTENTIAL the
Page 53 and 54: CHAPTER 3 - RIDERSHIP POTENTIAL Gre
Page 55 and 56: CHAPTER 3 - RIDERSHIP POTENTIAL Tab
Page 57 and 58: CHAPTER 3 - RIDERSHIP POTENTIAL 2.
Page 59 and 60: CHAPTER 3 - RIDERSHIP POTENTIAL SUM
Page 61 and 62: Chapter 4 TECHNOLOGY OPTIONS INTROD
Page 63 and 64: CHAPTER 4 - TECHNOLOGY OPITONS Sit
Page 65 and 66: CHAPTER 4 - TECHNOLOGY OPITONS Sit
Page 67 and 68: CHAPTER 4 - TECHNOLOGY OPITONS subu
Page 69 and 70: CHAPTER 4 - TECHNOLOGY OPITONS Tabl
Page 71 and 72: CHAPTER 4 - TECHNOLOGY OPITONS Trai
Page 73: CHAPTER 4 - TECHNOLOGY OPITONS FIND
Page 76 and 77: CHAPTER 5 - COMMUTER RAIL PLAN MINI
Page 78 and 79: CHAPTER 5 - COMMUTER RAIL PLAN for
Page 82 and 83: CHAPTER 5 - COMMUTER RAIL PLAN long
Page 84 and 85: CHAPTER 5 - COMMUTER RAIL PLAN The
Page 86 and 87: CHAPTER 5 - COMMUTER RAIL PLAN stri
Page 88 and 89: CHAPTER 5 - COMMUTER RAIL PLAN OPER
Page 90 and 91: CHAPTER 5 - COMMUTER RAIL PLAN Stre
Page 93: Chapter 6 EXPRESS BUS PLANS INTRODU
Page 97 and 98: CHAPTER 6 - EXPRESS BUS PLANS Expre
Page 99 and 100: CHAPTER 6 - EXPRESS BUS PLANS Table
Page 103 and 104: CHAPTER 6 - EXPRESS BUS PLANS Five
Page 107 and 108: Chapter 7 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL
Page 109 and 110: CHAPTER 7 - ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIA
Page 111 and 112: CHAPTER 7 - ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIA
Page 113 and 114: Chapter 8 FINANCIAL AND ECONOMIC AN
Page 115 and 116: CHAPTER 8 - FINANCIAL AND ECONOMIC
Page 131 and 132:
CHAPTER 8 - FINANCIAL AND ECONOMIC
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Chapter 9 NEXT STEPS TOWARD IMPLEME
Page 139 and 140:
CHAPTER 9 - NEXT STEPS TOWARD IMPLE
Page 141:
APPENDICES
Page 144 and 145:
APPENDIX A - RIDERSHIP COMPARISONS
Page 147:
Appendix B COMMUTER RAIL COSTS Appe
Page 150 and 151:
Coffee and water per month 100 Annu
Page 152 and 153:
Advertising per month 4,000 Telecom
Page 154 and 155:
Table B-2b Omaha Suburban Station E
Page 156 and 157:
Table B-2d Lincoln at N. 48th St. S
Page 158 and 159:
Table B-3a Lincoln Maintenance Faci
Page 160 and 161:
Table B-4a Melia Siding Description
Page 162 and 163:
Table B-4c Chalco Siding Descriptio
Page 165 and 166:
Table C-1 Fremont Park-and-Ride Cos
Page 167:
Appendix D NTRAC MEMBERS The follow
show all

NTRAC Final Study - Nebraska Department of Roads - State of ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?