Presentation To

Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization:

Passenger Rail Task Force

March 1, 2013

Hampton Roads Passenger Rail Study Data Collection Summary

Phase 2A

Presentation By74

Transportation Economics & Management Systems, Inc.

2 TEMS, Inc.

Study Timeline

# Tasks1 Project Management

2 Monitor FRA Legislation and Executive Action

3 DRTP Coordination

4 Data Assembly

Market Database

Stated Preference Survey

Engineering Database

Technology Database

Environmental Database

5 Database Report

MEETINGSPRESENTATIONSMONTHLY PROGRESS REPORTS

M8 M13 M14 M15 M16M4 M5 M6 M7 M10 M11 M12

MONTHS

M1 M2 M3 M9

3 TEMS, Inc.

Database Assembly Work has been completed preparing the

data for four databases:

1. Market Database 2. Engineering Database 3. Technology Database 4. Environmental Database

4 TEMS, Inc.

1. Market Database:

The market database consists of four components: Origin / Destination Data – Traffic movements by mode and purpose

(business, commuter, and other).

Socioeconomic Data – Population, Employment and Income by zone.

Network Data – Comprehensive modal networks will be developed for each mode of intercity travel (air, auto, rail and bus).

Stated Preference Data – To obtain local corridor behavioral factors (Values of Time, Frequency, Access/Egress, etc.) to use in evaluating market potential for high-speed rail.

5 TEMS, Inc.

1. Market Database: Zone Map (333 zones) County Based and TAZ-based zones are developed for the Study area

6 TEMS, Inc.

1. Market Database: Socioeconomic Database Development The socioeconomic data that were developed for the study area have population, employment, and income information of county-level, TAZ-level, and community-level data from the following sources:

U.S. Census Bureau

Bureau of Economic Analysis

Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization

Richmond Regional Planning District Commission

Crater Planning District Commission

Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments

Baltimore Metropolitan Council

Woods & Poole Economics

7 TEMS, Inc.

1. Market Database: Networks

Networks were developed for four modes and three purposes

Source: Highway Networks from State and local Departments of Transportation highway databases and National highway databases, Bus Networks from bus service schedules (Greyhound, Megabus), Air Networks from airline schedules, the ten percent sample of airline tickets and OTP (on-time performance) data, and Rail Networks from Amtrak schedules and Amtrak OTP (on-time performance) data.

Modes

Auto

Bus

Air Access

Rail

= 12 Networks

Purposes

Business

Commuter

Other X

8 TEMS, Inc.

1. Market Database: Auto Network • Highway Networks from State and local Departments of

Transportation highway databases and National highway databases

Boston, MA

New York, NY

Washington, DC

Richmond, VA

HRTPO Area

Charlotte, NC

9 TEMS, Inc.

1. Market Database: O/D Trip Database Intercity travel database was developed for auto, rail, bus, and air modes from the following sources:

DB1B Air Ticket Database

T-100 Air Market and Segment Database

Greyhound and Megabus Schedules

Previous travel origin-destination surveys

State DOT highway traffic volume AADT data

Amtrak passenger rail ridership data

Amtrak station volume data

TEMS 2012 Virginia Travel Survey

10 TEMS, Inc.

1. Market Database: Stated Preference (SP) Survey Area

11 TEMS, Inc.

1. Market Database: Value of Time (VOT) and Value of Frequency (VOF)

VOT – the amount of money (dollars/hour) an individual is willing to pay to save a specified amount of travel time.

VOF – the amount of money (dollars/hour) an individual is

willing to pay to reduce the time between departures when traveling on public transportation.

12 TEMS, Inc.

1. Market Database: Results of VOT, VOF and VOA Matrices

VOA MATRIX Trip Purpose

Mode Business Commuter Social Bus - $8.89 $10.77 Rail $42.73 $29.15 $37.66

Air Access $62.91 - $47.94

VOT Matrix VOF Matrix Mode Trip Purpose Trip Purpose

Business Commuter Social Business Commuter Social Auto $19.42 $14.80 $16.88 Bus $11.07 $7.15 $8.54 $7.33 $6.50 $7.75 Rail $22.51 $18.80 $17.88 $18.58 $13.67 $16.13 Air

Access $44.45 _ $31.76 $28.81 _ $26.28

Note: Results are well within the range of previous studies such as Bay Bridge, and Rocky Mountain Rail Authority(RMRA).

13 TEMS, Inc.

1. Market Database: Purpose of Travel and Distribution W.R.T Income groups

169

384

164

77 41

1901

Commuting to/from Work Business Trip Site Seeing Travel to/from School Shopping Other

“Other” as indicated by the respondents include, visit family/friends, graduation, baseball game, etc.

Purpose of Travel Responses Distribution of Average Number of

Households by Income Groups: Survey Response Vs. Survey Area Demographics*

16% 23%

33% 28% 11%

17%

29% 30%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

Less than$25,000

$25,000 – $49,999

$50,000 -$99,999

$100,000 ormore

0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

30.00%

35.00%

Survey Area Demographic DistributionSurvey Response Distribution

Above graph shows that all the income groups were effectively represented. *Unknown Income response was 12%.

14 TEMS, Inc.

1. Market Database: Survey Completed with help of following organizations

Business Person of Contact

Department of Motor Vehicles Mr. Richard D. Holcomb, Commissioner, Ms. Myrt Quinlan, Deputy Director of CSMA, and Thelma Drake, DRPT

Amtrak Mr. Paul Higgs,

Norfolk International Airport Mr. Charles W. Braden, Director if Market Development

Megabus Bryony Chamberlain, Director and Mr. Derrick Kazimierski, Operations Manager

Virginia Beach Vision, Inc. Ms. Martha S. McClee, Executive Director

Greater Williamsburg Chamber & Tourism Alliance Mr. Dick Schreiber

Hampton Roads Economic Development Alliance (HREDA) Steve Harrison, M.P.P., Research Director

U.S. Navy Rear Admiral T.G. Alexander and Ms. Wendy Vachet

15 TEMS, Inc.

2. Technology Database: Proposed System Development Steps

Steps Route Max Speed No. of Trains Infrastructure

Station

Step 1

I-64/CSXT 79 mph 2 Shared Track Schedule Enhancement

Main Street Newport News

(existing)

Route 460/ Norfolk Southern 79 mph 1-3 Shared Track

NS Staples Mill Only

Norfolk

Step 2 (FEIS)

I-64/CSXT

79 mph 3 Shared Track

Main Street Newport News

(existing)

Route 460/ Norfolk Southern 79-90 mph 6 Shared Track

V Line Main Street Bowers Hill

Step 3

I-64/CSXT 90 mph 4-6 Shared Track Main Street

Newport News Downtown/Airport

Route 460/ Norfolk Southern

110 mph 8-12 Dedicated Track

V Line Main Street Bowers Hill

Step 4

I-64/CSXT

110 mph 6-9 Dedicated Track

Main Street Newport News

Downtown/Airport Route 460/

Norfolk Southern

150 mph 12-16 Dedicated Electric Track V Line

Main Street Bowers Hill

DRP

T Fo

cus

Hig

h Sp

eed

Rail

Focu

s

*Norfolk Southern (NS) has restrictions on speed not permitting rail service above 79 mph for Shared tracks for Steps 1 and 23. However, Steps 3 at 110 mph and Step 4 at 150 mph are on a dedicated greenfield route.

16 TEMS, Inc.

2. Technology Database: Conventional Corridor Service Combine 1 Conventional Amtrak

Business Model of Conventional Amtrak corridor service Conventional Diesel Locomotives based on adapted Freight designs Non-Tilting Single or Bi-Level Passenger Cars Existing Freight Rail Lines with minimal geometric improvements Speeds generally 79-mph or less Corresponds to Steps 1 and 2

17 TEMS, Inc.

2. Technology Database: Range of Technologies Electric Incremental HST

Business Model of the

Proposed Midwest Regional Rail System Tilting Existing Freight Rail Lines

with some geometric improvements Speeds up to 110-mph on

tracks shared with freight trains* Corresponds to Step 3 * NS Policy limits passenger speeds to 79-mph on NS-owned tracks

Business Model of the

Existing Northeast Corridor (NEC) Speeds up to 150-mph on

tracks shared with freight trains Low Center of Gravity

Electric Locomotives Tilting Existing +New Alignment Short-term Option for Step 4

Business Model of

California HSR and proposed NEC Vision Plan Speeds up to 220-mph on

dedicated high speed tracks; Shared tracks in urban

areas, tracks may be shared* Integrated electric trains; Tilt may still be beneficial Step 4 long term

* Under existing regulation, this equipment cannot share tracks with freight trains except under temporal separation

Diesel HrST Electric Greenfield HST

18 TEMS, Inc.

3. Engineering Database

Establish Concept Engineering and Cost Data for the corridor.

Specific survey of right-of-way widths on existing railroads to determine the potential for developing Greenfield corridors.

Develop route database in TRACKMAN™ program

The TRACKMAN™ Track Management System will provide a milepost-by-milepost record of the

− rail gradients,

− track geometry and characteristics of the track (double track, crossings, etc.) and

− right-of-way.

Field review of routes

Develop engineering cost data

19 TEMS, Inc.

3. Engineering Database: TRACKMAN™ develop detailed information on each route

Key inputs: Speeds, curves, grades, rail and highway crossings, and other potential speed restrictions such as moveable bridges.

All the data is being captured in a consistent computerized format, to facilitate train performance and future line capacity evaluation.

Sample NS Petersburg Data

20 TEMS, Inc.

3. Engineering Database Library of HSR Unit Costs

Extensive development for RMRA (Rocky Mountain) and MWRRI (Midwest)

Peer Reviewed Peer Panels Freight Railroads Contractors

Validation

Washington, DC to Richmond, VDRPT, 2006

CAPITAL COST CATEGORIES

Land and right-of-way Sub-grade, structures and guideway Track Rolling stock Signals and communications Electrification Demolition Stations Maintenance and facilities Highway and railroad crossings Farm and animal crossings Pedestrian crossings Fencing

21 TEMS, Inc.

3. Engineering Database Double Track on Existing Right-of-Way

$3.29 M/mi

22 TEMS, Inc.

3. Engineering Database Greenfield Rail Corridor

Rural – Flat $19.8 M/mi Rural – Hilly $37 M/mi

23 TEMS, Inc.

3. Engineering Database: Double Track Retained Earth

Source: Reinforced Earth Company

$17.5 M/mi

24 TEMS, Inc.

3. Engineering Database: Contingency and Soft Costs – 58% Design and Construction Contingency 30%

Design Engineering 10%

Insurance and Bonding 2%

Program Management 4%

Construction Management & Inspection 6%

Engineering Services During Construction 2%

Integrated Testing and Commissioning 2%

Erosion Control and Water Quality Mgt 2%

25 TEMS, Inc.

4. Environmental Database: Service NEPA- Planning Document

Purpose: − Evaluate revised routes

Steps to complete for Service NEPA − Route analysis − Environmental Analysis − Public Involvement Process (Stakeholders)

Difference between NEPA and Service NEPA: − Service NEPA steps are same as NEPA but with landscape level

of data collection and analysis.

26 TEMS, Inc.

4. Environmental Database: Service NEPA

Service NEPA is the LANDSCAPE LEVEL data collection, followed by TIER I with site-specific impact analysis.

Uses Tier I EIS and direct route survey to evaluate the information required for the Environmental Review and Assessment needed for the Service Development Plan and Vision Plan.

Sources: • Service NEPA Environmental Assessment Chicago-Detroit/Pontiac Rail Corridor

Improvements From Chicago, Illinois to Pontiac, Michigan by Michigan DOT.

• NEPA Guidance: Compliance With The National Environmental Policy Act In Implementing The High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail Program.

• US Census Bureau 2009 TIGER/ Line Shapefiles, Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Fish and Wild life Service, Natural Heritage, Virginia Department of Forestry, etc.

27 TEMS, Inc.

4. Environmental Database: Service NEPA - Data Collection List Data Element

• Geographic Boundaries of: State, County, Census tract, Census Block Group, City, MPO, MSA, Congressional Districts, Community Facilities

• Cultural Resources: Parks, Wildlife Refuge, Heritage preserves, Archaeology resources, Historical resources, Federal lands, etc.

• Ecology: Wetlands, Hydric Soils, Streams, Waters of US, State waters, Federally protected species, State protected Species, Critical stream habitats, Migratory bird habitat, floodplain encroachment/impacts, coastal zone encroachments

• Existing land use: Number of cities, towns and communities, Environmental Justice Impacts, Land cover, Farmland

• Hazardous Materials

• Natural Resources: Energy Use (BTU), Mines/geological features

• Potential Relocations: Residential, Commercial/Industrial, Institutional

• Crossings: Utilities, Road, Stream, Rail

• Railroad impacts and air quality, Noise/Vibration, Transport system interactions and impacts, Utility and related services interactions and impacts

28 TEMS, Inc.

4. Environmental Database: Conservation Lands Expand ……………………….

29 TEMS, Inc.

Conclusion

Database has been developed in Phase 2A that will provide HRTPO and DRPT with the level of documentation needed for an Official Project Description (OPD) and for public information and institutional bodies. This will allow – • Project to meet FRA requirements for Service

Development Plan (SDP) • Provide database documentation needed to begin

Public Private Partnership (PPP) discussions • Provide input for Public Outreach program.

30 TEMS, Inc.

Thank You