How To Plan A Railroad Project

(1)

Presentation To

Hampton Roads

p

Transportation Planning

Organization

Tier II Service Development

p

Plan

February 10, 2010

(2)

Tier II Phase 1:

St d Obj

ti

th t

ill b

t

Study Objectives that will be met

1 Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization –

1. Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization –

Resolution 2009-05

The Hampton Roads TPO endorses –

designation of a “High-Speed Rail” corridor along the Norfolk

Southern/Route 460 corridor.

h

f h i

i

il

i

l

h

enhancement of the intercity passenger rail service along the

CSX/I-64 corridor.

2. USDOT FRA Public/Private Partnership Potential –

POSITIVE OPERATING RATIO

POSITIVE COST BENEFIT RATIO

1

(3)

A Highly Qualified Study Team

g y

y

Alexander E. Metcalf, PhD

– 30 years of Passenger Rail Business Planning in

North American and Europe. Chief Economist for British Rail, Program Manager:

MWRRI, Ohio, Duluth, Baltimore-Washington.

Edwin “Chip” Kraft, PhD

– 20 years of Operations/Capacity Planning. CSX and

UP operations departments. One of North Americas top specialist in Line and

Yard Capacity Analysis: MWRRI, Ohio, Duluth and Florida.

R

Th

PE

R

Th

PE

P f

i

l E

i

f

h

f Vi i i h

Ron Thompson, PE

– Professional Engineer for the state of Virginia has more

than 24 years of experience focusing on planning, design and implementation of

railroad infrastructure and transportation system improvements many with

railroad infrastructure and transportation system improvements, many with

sensitive environmental constraints. Boston-Portland, Northeast Corridor.

Brian Scales, PhD

,,

– TEMS’ Rail Technology Expert has more than 45 years

gy

p

y

experience in rail technology assessment and evaluation. MWRRI, Ohio, RMRA.

Brian McCann

– A highly gifted and respected Public Relations expert will lead

(4)

TEMS Study Team Qualifications

3

(5)

FRA Grants

TEMS

RightTrack™

was used to obtain significant FRA grants

i th R

d 1 ll

ti

i th R

d 1 ll

ti

in the Round 1 allocation

in the Round 1 allocation –

–

Chicago-St. Louis-Kansas City -

g

y

$1.33 Billion

$

–

Chicago-Twin Cities -

$0.823 Billion

–

Chicago-Detroit -

$0.244 Billion

$

–

Florida -

$1.250 Billion

(6)

The Tier II Phase 1 Study will be completed

i

th

using the….

Kick-Off Meeting Scope of Services Peer Review Panel

Business Plan

Public Outreach Data Assembly

Step 1

Databank

Development

Step 2

Service

Baseline Trip Tables

Ð Ð

Presentation & Review Meeting Service Scenarios Service Scenarios for Corridor

Six Step Process

“This Gives a

Interactive Analysis

Scenarios

Step 3

Interactive

Analysis

Presentation & Review Meeting Operating Strategies

& Fare Structures Presentation &

Review Meeting

Ð Ð

• Stated Preference Survey

This Gives a

Bigger Bang for

the Buck”

Ridership & Revenue Forecasts

Operating & Capital Costs

Step 4

System

Forecasts

& Outputs

Review Meeting Specific Infrastructure, Technology & Support

Requirements Identification of Preferred Alternatives Presentation & Ð Ð

• Stated Preference Survey

• Investment Grade

Ridership Forecasts

Financing & Funding Arrangements

Institutional Framework

Allocation of Costs & Revenues

Step 5

Institutional &

Financing

Plan

Presentation & Review Meeting Potential Private & Institutional Support

Structures Presentation &

Ð Ð

Financial & Economic Feasibility Analyses

• Computerized Track

Database

• Community Economic

Implementation Plan

Business Plan Documentation

Step 6

Business

Plan

Review Meeting Critical Path Work Plan Business Plan Report Ð

Development

• Implementation and

Business Plan

5

TEMS, Inc. PowerPoint Presentation Ð

(7)

T

he work will be efficiently completed by…

y

p

y

Using the

RightTrack™

Business

Planning System

An integrated set of

programs

allowing an

Interactive Analysis

y

of the specific

requirements for any

passenger rail

technology

(8)

HRTPO Tier II Study Corridors to be

evaluated

7

(9)

The key to the Business Planning process

i th

I t

ti

A

l

i

is the

Interactive Analysis

Methodology for developing an optimized plan

Existing

Capital

Costs

Operating

Existing

Capital

Costs

Operating

g

Databases

• Market

• Engineering

Operating

Costs

Financial &

g

Databases

• Market

• Engineering

Operating

Costs

Financial &

• Operations

• Financial

• Economic

Engineering

Analysis

Operating

Plan

Ridership

& Revenue

Financial &

Economic

Analysis

Report

Optional as

Required

• Operations

• Financial

• Economic

Engineering

Analysis

Operating

Plan

Ridership

& Revenue

Financial &

Economic

Analysis

Report

Optional as

Required

Capacity

Analysis

Required

Capacity

Analysis

Required

Scenario Formulation

Train Routes and

S

d

Train Technology and

S

i

L

l

Fares, Stations, and

Q

lit

f S

i

Scenario Formulation

Train Routes and

S

d

Train Technology and

S

i

L

l

Fares, Stations, and

Q

lit

f S

i

Speed

Service Levels

Quality of Service

(10)

TRACKMAN™ will be used to create the

i

d t b

f

th Ti

II

engineering database for the Tier II:

A permanent library of routes and right of ways

This corridor track inventory and

assessment system analyzes track

infrastructure and estimates the cost

of upgrading for various scenarios.

TRACKMAN™

stores, on a milepost

by milepost basis data on: track

by milepost basis, data on: track

condition and track geometry such as

curvature, gradient, and turnouts;

structures such as bridges,

crossings, and stations; and

maximum operating speeds.

9

(11)

In TRACKMAN™ we will develop

detailed information on each route

K

i

t

K

i

t

S

d

Sample NS Petersburg Data

Key inputs:

Speeds,

curves, grades, rail

and highway

crossings and other

Sample NS Petersburg Data

crossings, and other

potential speed

restrictions such as

moveable bridges

moveable bridges.

All the data is being

captured in a

consistent

computerized

format, to facilitate

t

i

f

train performance

and future line

(12)

TRACKMAN™ will estimate the Engineering

Capital Costs for each Tier II alternative

Create TRACKMAN™ Database based on Railroad Charts FRA

Create TRACKMAN™ Database based on Railroad Charts, FRA

Grade Crossing Database and Satellite Imagery

Field Survey to Verify Conditions and Update TRACKMAN™ Track

Chart Data

Adjust Unit Costs to Local Engineering Conditions

Develop Specific Infrastructure Proposals and Cost Estimates for

each set of track or right of way

Speed Improvements

and

Line

each set of track or right of way

Speed Improvements

and

Line

Capacity Upgrades

11

(13)

LOCOMOTION™ will estimate Train Speeds

d Ti

t bl

and Timetables

LOCOMOTION™

generates optimized

timetables for given track

infrastructure, signaling systems, and

train technologies. It provides

milepost-by-milepost graphic output

of train performance based on track

characteristics and shows the effect

on timetables for improving the track,

using a different technology, or

changing stopping patterns. Because

it t k

t f th

it takes account of other passenger

and freight traffic using a right-of-way,

LOCOMOTION™

can develop

stringline diagrams and identify the

optimum train path for a new service.

(14)

Tier II Phase 1 Range of Rail Technologies

L

OCO

-H

AULED

B

I

-L

EVEL

C

OACHES

DMU

79-90

MPH

T

ALGO

T21

J

ET

T

RAIN

110-125

MPH

13

TEMS, Inc.

(15)

Comparative Train Acceleration Curves

140

120

140 100-mph

80

100 Talgo-21

P42/w4c

p

77-mph

Speed

(mph)

40

60 P42/w4c

P42/w6c

68-mph

(mph)

0

20

0

2

4

6

8

10

12 Miles

Miles

(16)

Comparative Running Times for a 155-mile Corridor

For Conventional versus High Speed Train Sets

5:00

4:00

5:00

e

3:00

d

ule

Tim

e

P42

T21

HST

2:00

Sc

h

e

d

T21

HST

1:00

40

50

60

70

80

90 100 110

120 130

40

50

60

70

80

90 100 110

120 130

Upgrade Speed

15

TEMS, Inc.

(17)

We will estimate Rail Operating Costs

Framework resulted from previous multi

Framework resulted from previous multi--year, multi

year, multi--state planning efforts

state planning efforts

(

MWRRI

d Fl

id B

i

Pl

)

(

MWRRI

d Fl

id B

i

Pl

)

(e.g., MWRRI and Florida Business Plans)

Drivers

Cost Categories

E

i

t M i t

Train Miles

Equipment Maintenance

Energy & Fuel

Train & Engine Crews

OBS Crews

O

t

P fit

Operator Profit

Passenger Miles

Insurance Liability

Ridership

1 Sales & Marketing

Station Costs

Fi

d C

t

Service Administration

T

k & ROW M i

two costs can be considered fixed for practical purposes

Fixed Cost

Track & ROW Maintenance

Feeder Bus

Station costs as well as sales and marketing are only affected weakly by ridership, so these

1

(18)

TEMS Benchmark Comparisons vs.

Amtrak Actual Costs

$60.00

$50.00

Downeaster 2006:

Illinois Zephyr 2006:

$38.85/TM for 186,792 miles

Heartland Flyer 2006:

$39.90/TM for 150,380 miles

$40.00

e

r TM

Downeaster 2006:

$34.11/TM for 312,400 miles

Chicago-St Louis 2006:

$36.48/TM for 442,810 miles

$20 00

$30.00

Avg Cost p

e

Amtrak 2006 Dubuque Prop:

$33.08/TM for 134,320 miles

Illinois Zephyr 2007

$31.66/TM for 330,756 miles

$10.00

$20.00

Downeaster 2005:

$29.45/TM for 312,400 miles

Chicago-St Louis 2007:

$30.38/TM for 723,347 miles

KC-St Louis 2006

$29.41/TM for 350,381 miles

KC-St Louis 2007

$27.15/TM for 366,485 miles

$0.00

0 100000

200000

300000

400000

500000

600000

700000

800000

900000

17

TEMS, Inc.

Train Miles

(19)

An Investment Grade tool will be used to

d

l

Rid

hi

d R

F

t

develop Ridership and Revenue Forecasts

COMPASS™

is a comprehensive strategic policy planning tool

to assist rail, highway, air, and transit management in planning

their systems. It generates ridership and revenue forecasts

for any set of socioeconomic, network, and competitive mode

conditions Outputs include traffic forecasts; revenue

conditions. Outputs include traffic forecasts; revenue

estimates; and rail, highway, air, and transit market shares

over a given timeframe for a variety of conditions.

The

COMPASS™

model consists of a three-step analysis

process that estimates:

Total market growth

by mode (air, rail, bus, auto) and travel

purpose

Induced demand

due to changes in quality of service offered

by any mode

y

Modal Split / Route Split

for estimating market or route

shares using a hierarchical mode choice analysis.

A key metric of the

COMPASS™

model is "generalized cost."

The generalized cost function allows time cost frequency

The generalized cost function allows time, cost, frequency,

and service attributes to be combined into a single metric that

can show how changes in speed, frequency, or fare will affect

the use and market share of any mode

.

(20)

In Phase II: We will carry out a Stated

Preference Survey

1

2

5 Cost ($)

1

2

5

30

1

30

40 Time

(min)

9

40

50 (min)

19

TEMS, Inc.

(21)

We will build a Sound and Comprehensive

D t b

Database

O h

Business

Commuter

Other

“Using MPO

and Stated

Preference Data

1

2

3 Preference Data

to create a

sound

behavioral

3

4

5 behavioral

database for

passenger rail

l

i

”

5

6

7 planning”

7

8

9

(22)

We will use Investment Grade Methodology

Base Year

Socio-Four-Mode

Transport

Socio

COMPASS™ Model Structure

Economics

Demand

_{Base Year}

Transport

Network

Trip

Stated

Preference

Survey

Model

Calibration

Base Year

Matrix

Origin-Destination

Data

Trip

Matrices

Survey

Data

Economic

Scenarios

Rail

Strategies

Travel

Demand

Model Run

Financial

Analysis

Forecast

Year Trip

Matrices

Revenue

Analysis

User

Benefit

Analysis

Economic

Rent

Analysis

21

TEMS, Inc.

Analysis

(23)

Comparison of Population and Distance for

Boston Portland and Washington Hampton Roads

Boston-Portland and Washington-Hampton Roads

4.5

5 Boston-Portland

Washington

Boston

3

3.5

4 ll

ions

Washington-Hampton

Roads

Boston

2

2.5

3 u

la

ti

o

n

in

M

i

Hampton

Roads

1

1.5 Po

p

u

Fredericksburg

Richmond

P

tl

d

Roads

0

0.5

0

50

100

150

200

250 Fredericksburg

_Portland

Petersburg

Mileage

(24)

Boston-Portland Ridership and Population (2008)

0.9

0.7

0.8 6 4 millions

Trip per Captia

= 0.068

0 5

0.6 M

illio

n

s

Population

6.4 millions

0 3

0.4

0.5 e

rs

hi

p i

n

_440,000

_Ridership

0.2

0.3 Ri

d

e

0

0.1

23

TEMS, Inc.

Boston-Portland (2008)

(25)

Comparison of Boston-Portland Benchmark

with DEIS Ridership Estimates (2025)

2 DEIS Estimate

Benchmark Estimate

1.88 million

*

1.5 M

illio

n

s

1.147 million

1.88 million trips equals 14

400 t t i

f

th t

1 d

er

sh

ip

i

n

400-seat trains for the two

corridors

0.5 Ri

d

0

1

(26)

FEDERAL FACILITIES – BIG PICTURE*

Colonial National

Camp Peary

Army Corps of

Engineers

Naval

Weapons

Station

Plum Island

National Wildlife

Refuge

M iti

Ad i i t ti

National Park

Historic Park

US District

Court

Naval

Station

Naval Support

Activity

Cheatham

Annex

Yorktown National

Cemetery / Battlefield

Hampton

National

SSA

USCG

Training Center

VA

Rehabilitation

Services

Maritime Administration

National Defense

Reserve Fleet

Colonial

National

Historic Park

J i t F

Camp Elmore /

Camp Allen

National

Cemetery

Animal & Plant

Health

Inspection

Service

_DEA

GSA

SSA

VA

Medical

Center

FT Monroe

Customs &

Border

Protection

A

NASA

Langley

Jamestown

National

Historic Site

Little Creek Amphibious

Base

Joint Forces

Staff College

EEOC

Ft Eustis

US

District

Court

& Cemetery

Animal &

Plant Health

Inspection

Service

Protection

Customs &

Border

Protection

Jefferson

Laboratory

Army

Research

Lab

USCG Maintenance

& Logistics

Command

Langley

Research

Center

Cape Henry

Memorial

Ft Story

Lafayette

River

FBI

EEOC

GAO

OPM

GSA

Veteran’s

Center

Service

Numerous

other NOAA

sites &

offices

NOAA Marine

Ops Center

Atlantic

USCG

Integrated

Support

Command

Langley

AFB

_{Hampton Roads}

Naval Museum

USCG 5

th

District HQ

Navy

Exchange

Command

USJFCOM Joint

Warfighting Center

River

Annex

ATF

OPM

GSA

Animal & Plant

Health

Inspection

Service

Secret

Service

NAS Oceana

DEA

offices

Maritime

Administration

South Atlantic

Region

Fentress OLF

Craney Island

Back Bay

National

Wildlife

R f

SSA

Service

Norfolk

Maritime

Administration

DOL Area

Office

Dam Neck

Annex

USCG

Atlantic

Area HQ

Region

25

TEMS, Inc.

Fentress OLF

Naval Support Activity

Northwest Annex

Naval Medical

Center

Great Dismal

Swamp National

Wildlife Refuge

Refuge

Farm

Services

Agency

Center

GSA

SSA

Norfolk

Naval

Shipyard

_Services

Farm

Agency

Center

(27)

RENTS™ will determine what technology

d

t

fi

i l

d

i

ll

and routes are financial and economically

feasible and meet FRA requirements

RENTS™

uses output from the

COMPASS™

Demand Forecasting

System to estimate the financial and

economic benefits of a project. This

includes the financial return (Operating

Ratio NPV and IRR) economic return

Ratio, NPV and IRR), economic return

(Gross and Net Consumer Surplus,

NPV, and Cost-Benefit Ratio), and

Economic Rent, i.e., community

benefits (changes in household income,

employment by sector, property values,

and population) that result from

infrastructure and technology

improvements or timetable and fare

modifications.

(28)

We will provide

Pro forma Financial

Pro forma Financial Analysis

7.5 Pro

forma

Cash

Flows

Th

f

h fl

h

i E hibit 7 7

d E hibit 7 8 Th

t th f

t d t t l

d

ti

j ti

The

pro

forma

cash

flows

are

shown

in

Exhibit

7.7 and

Exhibit

7.8. These

present

the

forecasted

total

revenues

and

operating

expense

projections

for

2012

through

2040.

Since

these

projections

are

based

on

the

Back

Loaded

capital

plan,

operations

can’t

start

before

2012.

This

plan

includes

two

years

of

revenue

ramp

up

at

50%

and

90%

factors

for

the

first

and

second

years,

respectively,

so

the

first

year

of

full

operations

occurs

in

2014*.

Exhibit

7.7 Minneapolis

to

Duluth

110 ‐

mph

Rail

Service:

8 ‐

Train

Base

Plan

‐

Preliminary

Operating

Statement

Thousands of 2006 $ Total Thousands of 2006 $ Total to 2040 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Revenues Ticket Revenue $1,080,230 $13,567 $25,107 $28,659 $29,422 $30,185 $30,948 $31,711 $32,474 $33,236 $33,999 On Board Services $86,418 $1,085 $2,009 $2,293 $2,354 $2,415 $2,476 $2,537 $2,598 $2,659 $2,720 Express Parcel Service (Net Rev) $54,011 $678 $1,255 $1,433 $1,471 $1,509 $1,547 $1,586 $1,624 $1,662 $1,700

Total Revenues $1,220,660 $15,331 $28,371 $32,385 $33,247 $34,109 $34,971 $35,833 $36,695 $37,557 $38,419

Train Operating Expenses

Energy and Fuel $75,081 $2,013 $2,013 $2,013 $2,013 $2,013 $2,013 $2,013 $2,013 $2,542 $2,542 Train Equipment Maintenance $204,890 $5,494 $5,494 $5,494 $5,494 $5,494 $5,494 $5,494 $5,494 $6,937 $6,937 Train Crew $96,367 $3,323 $3,323 $3,323 $3,323 $3,323 $3,323 $3,323 $3,323 $3,323 $3,323 On Board Services $80,631 $1,833 $2,295 $2,437 $2,467 $2,498 $2,528 $2,559 $2,589 $2,620 $2,650 Service Administration $147,171 $5,075 $5,075 $5,075 $5,075 $5,075 $5,075 $5,075 $5,075 $5,075 $5,075

T t l T i O ti E $604 139 $17 738 $18 200 $18 342 $18 372 $18 403 $18 434 $18 464 $18 495 $20 497 $20 527

Total Train Operating Expenses $604,139 $17,738 $18,200 $18,342 $18,372 $18,403 $18,434 $18,464 $18,495 $20,497 $20,527

Other Operating Expenses

Track & ROW Maintenance $114,663 $3,954 $3,954 $3,954 $3,954 $3,954 $3,954 $3,954 $3,954 $3,954 $3,954 Station Costs $40,547 $1,398 $1,398 $1,398 $1,398 $1,398 $1,398 $1,398 $1,398 $1,398 $1,398 Sales & Marketing $51,009 $643 $1,190 $1,358 $1,394 $1,429 $1,465 $1,501 $1,536 $1,572 $1,607 Insurance Liability $43,345 $549 $1,015 $1,158 $1,188 $1,218 $1,248 $1,278 $1,308 $1,338 $1,368

Total Other Operating Expenses $249,564 $6,544 $7,557 $7,868 $7,934 $7,999 $8,065 $8,130 $8,196 $8,262 $8,327

Total Operating Expenses $853,703 $24,283 $25,757 $26,210 $26,306 $26,402 $26,498 $26,594 $26,690 $28,758 $28,854

Cash Flow From Operations $366,957 ($8,952) $2,614 $6,175 $6,941 $7,707 $8,473 $9,239 $10,005 $8,799 $9,565

Operating Ratio 1.43 0.63 1.10 1.24 1.26 1.29 1.32 1.35 1.37 1.31 1.33

27

TEMS, Inc.

(29)

We will measure USDOT FRA approved

economic benefits

(30)

Will estimate supplyside community

benefits

Economic

Rent

Factor

110/4

125/4

110/8

125/8

State

of

Minnesota:

Employment

(#

productivity

jobs)

5,647

6,409

13,114

13,876

Income (2006$)

$252 mill

$285 mill

$583 mill

$616 mill

Income

(2006$)

$252

mill

$285

mill

$583

mill

$616

mill

State

Income

Tax

2006$)

$10.6

mill

$12.0

mill

$24.5

mill

$25.9

mill

Federal

Income

Tax

(2006$)

$28.5

mill

$32.3

mill

$66.0

mill

$69.7

mill

Property

p

y

Value

(2006$)

$722

mill

$817

mill

$1,672

mill

$1,767

mill

Property

Tax

(2006$)

$

8.4 mill

$

9.5 mill

$

19.5 mill

$

20.6 mill

Average

Household

Income

(2006$)

$167

$189

$384

$406

State

of

Wisconsin:

Employment

(#

productivity

jobs)

305

351

719

765 Income

(2006$)

$15

mill

$17

mill

$34

mill

$37

mill

State

Income

Tax

(2006$)

(

)

$0.5

mill

$0.6

mill

$1.2

mill

$1.3

mill.

Federal

Income

Tax

(2006$)

$1.5

mill

$1.7

mill

$3.5

mill

$3.8

mill

Property

Value

(2006$)

$45

mill

$52

mill

$106

mill

$113

mill

Property

Tax

(2006$)

$

0.8 mill

$

0.9 mill

$

1.8 mill

$

2.0 mill

29

TEMS, Inc.

(31)

Cincinnati Station Development

-Joint

Joint

Development

Potential = $450

Million

(32)

We will develop an Implementation Plan

Ohio-Cleveland Hub

$ 1000's of

2002$)

Year1

Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

Year 6

Year 7

Year 8

Year 9

Year 10

3-C Corridor

$1,090,801

PE

Final Design

Construction

Operation

Cleveland-Detroit

$387,101

PI

PE

Final Design

Construction

Operation

Cleveland-Pittsburgh

$487,624

PI

PE

Final Design

Construction

Operation

Cleveland-Toronto

$803,996

PI

PE

Final Design

Constrution

Operation

Year1

Year 2

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

Year 6

Year 7

Year 8

Year 9

Year 10

Planning and Implementation (PI)

$173,095

Preliminary Engineering (PE)

$242,333

Final Design

$276 952

$54,540

$73,895

$43,736

$64,581

$40,200

Total Investment Costs by Year

$50,250

$30,477

$45,600

$24,194

$45,815

$68,175

$69,275

$54,011

$11,725

$15,908

Final Design

$276,952

Construction

$2,077,142

Total Infrastructure

$2,769,522

Total Land

$233,209

Total Rolling Stock

$322,000

Total Investment

$3,324,731

$54,540

$73,895

$43,736

$64,581

$40,200

$342,978

$130,616

$272,222

$93,469

$130,616

$70,756

$57,930

$47,351

$57,172

$407,306

$438,643

$226,124

$84,083

$445,341

$497,665

$367,106

$226,124

$543,088

$601,018

$701,822

$544,977

$519,143

$80,500

$84,083

$93,469

$306,624

$573,971

$80,500

$102,263

Key to Operation Phases:

Phase 1

Phase 2

Phase 3

Phase 4

Construction

Final Design

Preliminary Engineering

Project Development

Key to Implementation Stages

Use these numbers for Fin Plan

31

TEMS, Inc.

Phase 4

Construction

(33)

We will write a Business Plan/Service

Development Plan

Feasibility Study Business Plan Report Layout

--- Executive Summary Summary of the Business Plan for reference by senior decision-makers

Chapter 1 Rocky Mountain Corridor Intercity Rail Services

Summary of the overall systems to be developed

Chapter 2 Target Markets and Proposed Service Offerings

Detailed description of target markets, market segments, associated rail service offerings, fare structures, and proposed ancillary services

services

Chapter 3 Projected Equipment and Capital

Investment Needs Summary of equipment and capital investment needs for both the rail service itself and ancillary services

Chapter 4 Operating Arrangements and Responsibilities

Proposed operating arrangement and responsibilities including cooperative agreements, with freight railroads, private sector participation and public/private partnerships

Chapter 5 Project Market Penetration,

Patronage and Annual Revenues Estimated market penetration by city pair and target market segment, estimated annual patronage and annual revenues for the rail system and associated services

Chapter 6 Estimated Operating Costs Projected annual costs including rail service and ancillary operating, equipment, capital and debt service costs

Chapter 7 Financing Plan and

Innovative Financing Options Proposed financing plan including projected private sector contributions. Proforma Financial Statements

Innovative Financing Options contributions. Proforma Financial Statements

Chapter 8 Legal, Regulatory and Institutional

Requirements Assessment of critical legal, regulatory and institutional issues, including recommendations for potential action

Chapter 9 Potential for Added Revenue

and Cost Reduction Identification of potential innovative service arrangements, ancillary service offerings and potential operating procedures designed to either enhance revenue or reduce costs

Ch 10 S i I l i Pl D i i f h d il i i l i b

Chapter 10 Service Implementation Plan Description of the proposed rail service implementation program, by year and region together with the marketing program, institutional arrangements, and legal and financial agreements

Chapter 11 Business Plan Comprehensive Business Plan assessment of the proposed rail system, and assessment of the risk associated with its implementation

---- Appendices pp Detailed data tabulations supporting individual chapters pp g p

(34)

Study Time Scales are realistic and achievable

Task 1 Study Design Task 2 Data Assembly

Month 14 Month 15 Month 16 Month 17

PHASE 2: Long-Range Rail Plan

Month 6 Month 7 Month 8 Month 9 Month 10 Month 11 Month 12 Month 13 Month 5

Month 1 Month 2 Month 3 Month 4

PHASE 1: Service Development Plans

Tasks

Step 1. Study Databank

Task 2 Data Assembly

Market Database Stated Preference Survey Sensitivity Data Engineering Database Technology Database

Task 3 Service Scenarios

Step 2. Service Scenarios

Task 4 Interactive Analysis

Demand Analysis Sensitivy and Risk Analysis Rail Service Analysis

Task 5 Ridership and Revenue Forecasts Task 6 Operating and Capital Costs

Step 3. Interactive Analysis

Step 4. System Forecasts and Outputs

Task 6 Operating and Capital Costs

Task 7 Financial and Economic Feasibility Analysis

Financial Analysis

Economic Analysis of User / Non-User Benefits

Task 8 Financing and Funding Arrangements Task 9 Institutional Framework

Task 10 Allocation of Costs and Revenues

Step 5. Institutional and Financing Framework

Task 11 Implementation Plan

Task 12 Business Plan and Long-Range Rail Plan Documentation Task 13 Service Development Plans

MEETINGS PRESENTATIONS

MONTHLY PROGRESS REPORTS

Step 6. Business Plan

MONTHLY PROGRESS REPORTS

33

(35)

Thank You

Contact Information:

Dr. Alexander Metcalf / President

301 846 0700

How To Plan A Railroad Project

Presentation To

Hampton Roads

p

Transportation Planning

Organization

Organization

Tier II Service Development

p

Plan

February 10, 2010

February 10, 2010

Tier II Phase 1:

St d Obj

ti

th t

ill b

t

Study Objectives that will be met

1 Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization –

1. Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization –

Resolution 2009-05

The Hampton Roads TPO endorses –



designation of a “High-Speed Rail” corridor along the Norfolk

Southern/Route 460 corridor.

h

f h i

i

il

i

l

h



enhancement of the intercity passenger rail service along the

CSX/I-64 corridor.

2. USDOT FRA Public/Private Partnership Potential –



POSITIVE OPERATING RATIO



POSITIVE COST BENEFIT RATIO

1

A Highly Qualified Study Team

g y

y



Alexander E. Metcalf, PhD

Alexander E. Metcalf, PhD

– 30 years of Passenger Rail Business Planning in

North American and Europe. Chief Economist for British Rail, Program Manager:

North American and Europe. Chief Economist for British Rail, Program Manager:

MWRRI, Ohio, Duluth, Baltimore-Washington.



Edwin “Chip” Kraft, PhD

Edwin “Chip” Kraft, PhD

– 20 years of Operations/Capacity Planning. CSX and

UP operations departments. One of North Americas top specialist in Line and

Yard Capacity Analysis: MWRRI, Ohio, Duluth and Florida.

R

Th

PE

R

Th

PE

P f

i

l E

i

f

h

f Vi i i h



Ron Thompson, PE

Ron Thompson, PE

– Professional Engineer for the state of Virginia has more

than 24 years of experience focusing on planning, design and implementation of

railroad infrastructure and transportation system improvements many with

railroad infrastructure and transportation system improvements, many with

sensitive environmental constraints. Boston-Portland, Northeast Corridor.

