CHICAGO SUBURBAN RAIL SUMMARY (COMMUTER RAIL, REGIONAL RAIL)

Similar documents
Developing Africa: Toward Customer Oriented Urban Transport Policy. Wendell Cox, Demographia CODATU XV Addis Abeba 23 October 2012

IN THEOR Y, PUBLIC INVESTMENTS IN MASS TRANSIT CAN MAKE URBAN

Overview of the Travel Demand Forecasting Methodology

Transportation Alternatives

TCRP Report 153: Guidelines for Providing Access to Public Transportation Stations. Part 2: Station Typology and Mode of Access Planning Tool

Transit Technology Alternatives

COMPETITIVE TENDERING OF PUBLIC TRANSPORT

A Review of Transit Technology Specifications

Passenger Rail Service

March 2015 Prepared by the Department of Finance & Performance Management Regional Peer Review PERFORMANCE MEASURES

TOKYO-YOKOHAMA: UNIQUE AND SUPERLATIVE

Appendix J Santa Monica Travel Demand Forecasting Model Trip Generation Rates

PREPARED BY WENDELL COX WENDELL COX CONSULTANCY FOR THE TEXAS PUBLIC POLICY FOUNDATION

In 1992, the US Congress authorized the Moving to Opportunity (MTO) housing voucher

Metropolitan Setting l

6 REGIONAL COMMUTE PATTERNS

REINVENTING TRANSIT FROM A SOCIAL SERVICE TO A CRITICAL PUBLIC UTILITY

Feasibility of Car-Sharing Service in Hangzhou, China

What is Smart Growth and the New Urbanism??? Smart Growth and Sustainable Cities:

Public Transportation and Petroleum Savings in the U.S.: Reducing Dependence on Oil

STOP CONSOLIDATION TRANSIT STRATEGIES

30 Years of Smart Growth

a GAO GAO MASS TRANSIT Bus Rapid Transit Shows Promise Report to Congressional Requesters United States General Accounting Office

Chicago s Business Climate

Measuring the High-End Seniors Housing Market PCBC. Adam Ducker June 24, 2011

Sustainable urban mobility: visions beyond Europe. Brest. Udo Mbeche, UN-Habitat

Econ 137 Urban Economics Lecture Notes III

Improved Public Transit

d r a f t Division Street: 15.4 du/a Damen Avenue: 14.1 du/a Western Avenue: 12.8 du/a

Downtown Tampa Transportation Vision

Memo. Date: January 18, StarTran Advisory Board. From: Brian Praeuner. Review of Peer Transit Systems

GTA Cordon Count Program

What will the Christchurch Mayor and CEO learn about light rail in the US?

Even though it ranks among the

14,449. Atlanta / Beaumont / Lufkin / Paris / Tyler Region. How was the survey taken? Do you own or lease a personal vehicle?

Executive Summary. Does a Streetcar Make Sense in Anaheim

When is BRT the Best Option? 1:30 2:40 p.m.

Transit Service Design Guidelines. Department of Rail and Public Transportation November 2008

Article. Commuting to work: Results of the 2010 General Social Survey. by Martin Turcotte

Transportation Resources

IV. Market Analysis. A. Executive Summary. The Economy. The Site

Creating Bar Graphs and Pie Charts

2017 CONCESSIONS RFP

Houston Economic Outlook. Presented by Patrick Jankowski Vice President, Research

5. URBAN AND SOCIOECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS OF CHICAGO AND BARCELONA

MAKING TRACKS. A Primer for Implementing Transit Fixed Guideway Projects

Use of Automated Vehicle Location and Passenger Counters in Planning and Scheduling at Pace Suburban Bus

Transportation Breakout Session. Curvie Hawkins Mark Rauscher Mike Sims Paul Moore

walkable Station spacing is key to successful, equitable bike share

Planning and Design for Sustainable Urban Mobility

Light Rail Transit in Phoenix

These draft test specifications and sample items and other materials are just that drafts. As such, they will systematically evolve over time.

2015 NFL Annual Selection Meeting R P O CLUB PLAYER POS COLLEGE ROUND 2

5.0 FINANCIAL ANALYSIS AND COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES

PE O P L E O F T E N C O M P L A I N A B O U T T R A F F I C I N L O S A N G E L E S,

Transit in the United States 3. Operating Costs and Performance Measures 13. Quality of Transit Service 19. ADA Compliance Bus 28

Best Practices in Transit Service Planning

Evergreen Line Rapid Transit Project Business Case Executive Summary. February Reviewed by

City of Rockville Regional Development Impacts: Transportation Capacity Analysis. June, 2013

Public. A history of public transit in Portland. trimet.org/history. Hilary Pfeifer. Meredith Dittmar. Melody Owen. Mark Richardson Smith

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about DART

How To Plan A City Of Korea

2030 DISTRICT PERFORMANCE METRIC BASELINES

Doing More with the Same: How the Trinity Railway Express Increased Service without Increasing Costs

for the National Capital Transportation Element

VAN START / SAVE PROGRAM FOR VANPOOLS

Transport planning in the Stockholm Region

R-06: Innovation and Technology Fund

High Mileage Moms - The Report

PROVIDENCE: LEAST SPRAWLING METROPOLITAN AREA: COLORADO SPRINGS SPRAWLS LESS THAN PORTLAND. By Wendell Cox

ROAD INJURIES &FATALITIES

APPENDIX B: THE PORTLAND METROPOLITAN REGION S CASE FOR ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION

Philadelphia County. Land Use and Growth Management Profile

What Millennials Want

FINAL DRAFT FINAL DRAFT

Reveal Management Services, Inc. Case Study / Johnson County Transit (JCT) This Case Study has been client approved as published.

Multifamily Housing: Sustainable Development in Efficient, Walkable Communities

Bus Users in Sydney. Transport Data Centre ISSUES PAPER 2002/02 DECEMBER 2002 ISSN ISBN

Intelligent Transport for Smart Cities Conference. Bruce McCuaig, President and CEO, Metrolinx

Questions and Answers about the Orange Bus/Rail Investment Plan

Department of Transportation

Eagle Commuter Rail Denver, Colorado Final Design (Based upon information received by FTA in November 2010)

By Anthony Downs Senior Fellow The Brookings Institution. March 19, 2002

Rapid Transit Backgrounder

Journey to Work Patterns in the Auckland Region

Passenger Transport Mode Shares in World Cities

The number of jobs filled by telecommuters could grow nearly

PRRIA PASSENGER RAIL REFORM AND INVESTMENT ACT OF 2014 TRANSPORTATION & INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE

Urban Transport Issues in Egypt

The Role of Land Use and Transportation in Building Successful Sustainable Cities City of Vancouver

NCHRP 8-84/Report 735: Long-Distance and Rural Transferable Parameters for Statewide Travel Forecasting Models

Wilmington to Newark Commuter Rail Improvement Project

THE IMPLICATIONS OF ALTERNATIVE GROWTH PATTERNS ON INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS

School-related traffic congestion is a problem in

TAMPA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT

Journal of Environmental Protection and Ecology 13, No 2, (2012)

Ne w J e r s e y Tr a f f i c Co n g e s t i o n :

Q Utility Rebate Report. Fort Worth, TX

History of the Interurban Railway System and Monroe Shops. Dallas Area Rapid Transit

GLOBAL RETAIL TRENDS IMPLICATIONS FOR COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE

Transcription:

CHICAGO SUBURBAN RAIL SUMMARY (COMMUTER RAIL, REGIONAL RAIL) October 2003 The Chicago commuter rail service area consists of 8.3 million people, spread over 2,100 square miles at an average population density of 3,900 per square mile. Public transport s share of travel is below four percent. Public transport operates at 22.9 miles per hour, below the 27.9 mile per hour automobile speed. Approximately four percent of the urban land area is at pre-automobile population densities (above 15,000 per square mile), while 24 percent (2.0 million) of the population lives in this area. The Chicago central business district is the nation s second largest, with nearly 500,000 jobs. 1 This represents 13 percent of the metropolitan area s employment. Further, few new jobs have been created downtown. From 1960 to 1990, more than 96 percent of the new jobs in the metropolitan area were created outside downtown. 2 Chicago has the nation s second largest commuter rail system, with approximately 75 million boardings annually (300,000 daily), which is approximately 0.5 percent of travel in the area (Figure 12). There are more than 300 miles of route and 250 stations on 11 routes. There are 0.12 stations per square mile of urban land (one station for each 8.5 square miles). Most service terminates at stations on the periphery of downtown. Transfers can be made at these stations to elevated rail services or buses. There is, however, no through running of commuter rail trains on elevated or subway routes. and no commuter rail trains run through the central business district. The commuter rail system is operated by government agencies, and receives operating subsidies. All capital costs are subsidized. 1 US Census Bureau, 1990. 2 Calculated from Kenworthy & Laube.

Chicago Travel Market Automobile Other Transit Commuter Rail Figure 1 Like New York, commuter rail in Chicago is principally a downtown oriented system. Autocompetitive service is provided to the central business district from throughout the urban area. In the downtown area, commuter rail carries 23 percent of commuters (Figure 13), the highest downtown commuter rail share in the nation. More than 120,000 commuter rail riders converge on the three square mile central business district, without which it is likely that traffic would be much worse (36,000 per square mile). However, little auto-competitive service is available in the rest of the area, which is reflected by commuter rail s much smaller share at 0.3 percent outside downtown. Outside downtown only 11,000 commuters are spread among destinations throughout more than 1,500 square miles. 3 It is estimated that there are approximately 250 daily passenger miles of commuter rail ridership not oriented to downtown. 4 This compares to 58,000 daily vehicle miles per square mile (93,000 person miles) of road travel in the Chicago area. The scant level of suburban to suburban automobile competitive public transport services is illustrated by a review of suburban to suburban commuting in the Chicago area. The average trip time, not including walking to and from the public transport stops was 2:39. This is more than three times the average public transport work trip (most of which are either to downtown or within the city of Chicago) of 49.7 minutes. It is also more than 5.5 times the average work trip length for non-public transport trips (mostly automobile) in the Chicago area. 5 The shortest work trip was 43 minutes, while the longest was 3:56. 6 3 1990 data. 4 1990 data. 5 2000 Census data. 6 This analysis used the Regional Transportation Authority (http://tripsweb.rtachicago.com/) trip planner for work trips from the suburban Orland Mall area to approximately 60 suburban locations built into the trip planner.

Chicago s commuter rail system provides a automobile competitive service to the downtown area. But, as the analysis above indicates, there is little automobile competitive service within the suburban areas, which account for approximately 65 percent of both residences and jobs. Chicago CBD Work Trip Market Share Automobile Walk Commuter Rail Other Transit Figure 2 APPENDIX TABLES Appendix Table A International Pre-Automobile Commuter Rail Systems Tokyo Osaka Nagoya Paris London Sydney DEMOGRAPHICS Population (000) 31,200 15,250 8,050 9,650 12,230 3,539 Urban Area (Square Miles) 2,030 1,050 1,090 1,060 1,600 811 Population Density 15,369 14,524 7,385 9,104 7,644 4,365 Gross Product/Capita 1999 $28,327 $25,376 $28,535 $32,343 $27,365 $25,643

Compared to Tokyo 0.0% -10.4% 0.7% 14.2% -3.4% -9.5% CENTRALIZATION % Population>15,000 Density 71% 70% 24% 56% 23% 1% % Land>15,000 Density 46% 43% 9% 18% 8% 0% Core Population Share 26% 17% 27% 22% 59% 15% Suburban Population Share 74% 83% 73% 78% 41% 85% CBD (Downtown) Employment Share 16% 18% 13% 17% 16% 11% Outside CBD Employment Share 84% 82% 88% 83% 84% 89% Employment in CBD (000) 2,434 1,380 500 891 1,099 175 PUBLIC TRANSPORT SYSTEM Public transport Market Share 56.7% 59.5% 24.6% 24.1% 17.1% 13.6% Public transport/auto Speed 1.6 1.5 COMMUTER RAIL Commuter Rail Market Share 39.5% 36.4% 12.0% 7.2% 3.7% 5.6% Compared to New York 59.9 53.3 18.2 11.0 5.6 8.5 Miles of Route 1,779 1,095 528 1,012 2,260 1,273 Stations 1,243 1,065 843 540 940 306 Station Density 0.61 1.01 0.77 0.51 0.59 0.38 Operating Subsidy? No No No Yes Yes Yes Capital Subsidy No No No 100% 100% 100% Share with Freight? No No No Little Little Little HIGHWAYS Traffic Density (Vehicle Miles/Sq.Mi.) 118,854 83,462 Compared to Tokyo 0.0% -29.8% EXTENT OF AUTO COMPETITIVE PUBLIC TRANSPORT SERVICE Within Core HIGH HIGH HIGH HIGH HIGH HIGH Suburbs to Core HIGH HIGH HIGH MIDDLE MIDDLE MIDDLE Within Suburbs HIGH HIGH HIGH LOW NIL NIL DEMOGRAPHICS Appendix Table B United States Pre-Automobile Commuter Rail Systems New York Chicago Boston Philadelphia

Population (000) 20,253 8,307 4,032 5,149 Urban Area (Square Miles) 4,711 2,123 1,736 1,799 Population Density 4,299 3,913 2,323 2,862 Gross Product/Capita 1999 $43,805 $39,384 $40,301 $36,025 Compared to Tokyo 54.6% 39.0% 42.3% 27.2% CENTRALIZATION % Population>15,000 Density 44% 24% 20% 22% % Land>15,000 Density 5% 4% 2% 3% Core Population Share 40% 35% 15% 29% Suburban Population Share 60% 65% 85% 71% CBD (Downtown) Employment Share 19% 13% 13% 14% Outside CBD Employment Share 81% 87% 87% 86% Employment in CBD (000) 1,733 485 280 351 PUBLIC TRANSPORT SYSTEM Public transport Market Share 9.0% 3.6% 3.8% 2.9% Public transport/auto Speed 0.9 0.8 0.6 COMMUTER RAIL Commuter Rail Market Share 0.7% 0.5% 0.4% 0.3% Compared to New York 1.0 0.7 0.6 0.4 Miles of Route 979 333 328 304 Stations 404 250 116 176 Station Density 0.09 0.12 0.07 0.10 Operating Subsidy? Yes Yes Yes Yes Capital Subsidy 100% 100% 100% 100% Share with Freight? Little Little Little Little HIGHWAYS Traffic Density (Vehicle Miles/Sq.Mi.) 63,312 57,968 43,350 57,168 Compared to Tokyo -46.7% -51.2% -63.5% -51.9% EXTENT OF AUTO COMPETITIVE PUBLIC TRANSPORT SERVICE Within Core HIGH HIGH HIGH HIGH Suburbs to Core MIDDLE MIDDLE MIDDLE MIDDLE Within Suburbs NIL NIL NIL NIL

DEMOGRAPHICS Appendix Table C United States Automobile Era Commuter Rail Systems and Lines Washington- Baltimore Los Angeles San Diego Miami Dallas-Fort Worth Seattle Population (000) 6,010 14,000 2,674 4,919 4,146 2,712 Urban Area (Square Miles) 1,840 2,299 782 1,116 1,407 954 Population Density 3,266 6,090 3,419 4,408 2,947 2,843 Gross Product/Capita 1999 $41,316 $33,486 $34,495 $31,261 $40,306 $38,928 Compared to Tokyo 45.9% 18.2% 21.8% 10.4% 42.3% 37.4% CENTRALIZATION % Population>15,000 Density 10% 23% 3% 7% 2% 2% % Land>15,000 Density 1% 6% 2% 2% 0% 0% Core Population Share 20% 26% 46% 7% 29% 21% Suburban Population Share 80% 74% 54% 93% 71% 79% CBD (Downtown) Employment Share 19% 2% 6% 2% 6% 12% Outside CBD Employment Share 81% 98% 94% 98% 94% 88% Employment in CBD (000) 444 167 73 41 112 171 PUBLIC TRANSPORT SYSTEM Public transport Market Share 3.3% 1.4% 1.5% 1.3% 0.5% 1.8% Public transport/auto Speed 0.8 0.4 0.5 COMMUTER RAIL Commuter Rail Market Share 0.05% 0.02% 0.02% 0.03% 0.01% 0.01% Compared to New York 0.08 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.02 0.01 Miles of Route 191 415 43 71 35 34 Stations 56 48 9 19 9 7 Station Density 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.01 Operating Subsidy? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Capital Subsidy 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 0% Share with Freight? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes HIGHWAYS Traffic Density (Vehicle Miles/Sq.Mi.) 74,798 104,970 85,687 109,613 68,077 60,936 Compared to Tokyo -37.1% -11.7% -27.9% -7.8% -42.7% -48.7%

EXTENT OF AUTO COMPETITIVE PUBLIC TRANSPORT SERVICE Within Core HIGH HIGH HIGH HIGH HIGH HIGH Suburbs to Core MIDDLE MIDDLE MIDDLE MIDDLE MIDDLE MIDDLE Within Suburbs NIL NIL NIL NIL NIL NIL Note: Washington-Baltimore CBD data is for Washington and Baltimore.