ONE REGIONAL TRANSIT AGENCY BOARD AND AMTRAK CONNECTIVITY

Chittenden County Transportation Authority (CCTA) and Rail Passenger Service—Apparently not a Priority

Visited Chittenden County Transportation Authority (CCTA) Board meeting and spoke at the beginning of the “public” item on the agenda June 18 where CCTA and many other public boards and commissions allow anyone wishing to speak a chance express their concerns and views.

After introducing myself and explaining I was a member of the National Association of Railroad Passengers (NARP) and concerned about lack of connectivity on Saturday and Sundays to the Amtrak Vermonter service at Essex (Monday through Friday connections are excellent), the overall reaction of the Board could not have been cooler.  No response to my concern or even acknowledgement the problem exists was offered.  Connectivity by Vermont’s regional transit agencies to all Amtrak stations is a major problem at a time when every additional Amtrak rider decreases needed State dollars—now budgeted $7 million a year. 

Even though CCTA receives the majority of its funding from State, federal and local tax dollars, CCTA leaders remain clearly unsympathetic to the overall needs of public transportation which includes rail passenger services, particularly in regard to integrated, coordinated scheduling.

The advent of service by Amtrak to Burlington now set for 2017 through extension of the Ethan Allen service from Rutland to Burlington also was stated to the CCTA Board and a flyer on a study of commuter rail feasibility which builds off the success of CCCTA Link, a ten year old commuter service from Burlington to Montpelier, Middlebury and St. Albans now serving about 500 commuters on 50 buses each workday—a clear indication that commuter rail service can be marketed to and from Burlington.  The Board reaction was that commuter rail would be good if it can be shown to be economic, an interesting thought in view of the fact that two-thirds of the CCTA budget comes from governmental sources and its stated mission is support of quality public transportation services.  The Board suggested that ideas about commuter rail be brought to the attention of the CCTA “management.”

It appears clear that federal and State agencies which fund public transit agencies in Vermont represent the only realistic avenue to assure coordination and integration of rail and bus transport services.  However a 2013 comprehensive statewide intercity bus service plan also contains no consideration of rail passenger services much less coordination of existing regional transit to access Amtrak intercity services.   So much for the multi-modal, integrated transportation system first called for at the beginning of the 1990s in both State and federal transportation law.

BURLINGTON, VT--NO NATIONAL TRAIN DAY TRAVEL!

MAY 11 NATIONAL TRAIN DAY—EXCEPT IN BURLINGTON AND WINOOSKI VERMONT

As a Burlington, VT resident and train enthusiast, got nice information on a free one-way May 11 trip on National Train Day to Bellows Falls, then an old fashioned train ride back to a ceremonial event in White River Jct., then on your own with a $12 Vermont special on the northbound Vermonter available—unless you live in Burlington and Winooski.

While lots of small cities and locations get connecting bus service from Amtrak City, not the Queen City in Vermont, just seven miles from the Essex Amtrak Station.  National Train Day on a May Saturday occurs when during weekends there is seriously deficient Chittenden Country Transportation Authority (CCTA) service on one of their busiest routes—Burlington-Winooski-Essex (Amtrak Station). 

The CCTA connection “problem” is a systematic issue relating to all regional transit agencies which provide limited or no connections at all stations stops of the two Vermont  Amtrak-supported trains which now cost $7 million in State dollars support yearly.  Every additional person who takes a trip on Amtrak in from a Vermont station directly reduces state dollars required to support the service. Yep, the mainline track in Vermont even got a $52 million upgrade to 80 mph operating speed level last year, a half hour cut from the timetable between St. Albans and Burlington to Brattleboro and Bellows Falls—but from Burlington to Amtrak at Essex on weekends, “you can’t get there from here.”   Well, you can, but the taxi fare with tip can amount to $20.  A taxi fare of $20 compares to about a 300-mile roundtrip Burlington-Brattleboro at the Vermont regular promotional rate of $24. 

(The Burlington-Amtrak connection compares, unfortunately, to connecting by taxi from North to South Station for about $15—you would think Amtrak would operate a shuttle service there.)

Now air travelers and bus travelers get far better treatment by CCTA.  Service to the airport operates at convenient times for most Greyhound bus connections seven days a week.  A traveler can connect on Saturdays to the airport from 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. and 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. on Sunday.  And for the mid-afternoon arrival and departure of Megabus service to Boston, CCTA provides easy connection at the UVM Davis Center on the University Mall route. 

Seems like a service on Saturdays should be possible—the train southbound a.m. is generally right on time about 9:20 a.m. now and returns—again with much better on time performance at 8:17 p.m.—17 minutes after the last CCTA departure from Amtrak to Burlington!   No problem on with three early bus runs in time to catch the southbound.  This suggests there could be a connection both ways on Saturday—perhaps one about 9 p.m. assuring accommodation of some northbound delay which a rider is willing to take a chance on—preferably just a dedicated bus which departs five minutes after the northbound train arrival.  Otherwise how many want to bet on making connection to a bus ride that costs a dollar or so versus a $15-20 taxi ride? 

On Sunday, no problem at all, no bus service at all by CCTA to Essex/Amtrak.  On Sunday a skeletal service—a single run in the a.m. to align with the southbound Vermonter, a noontime run to service local needs, and a third trip leaving within five minutes of scheduled Amtrak arrival. 

Meanwhile, I plan to celebrate National Train Day on the day before—Friday—with a day trip to Brattleboro.  Maybe CCTA could celebrate National Train Day…with a bus to Burlington from the northbound Vermonter!

CNN GOES DOWN THE WRONG TRACK--VERMONT COMMUTER RAIL READY

CNN TELEVISION GETS IT ALL WRONG—RAIL THE BEST TRANSPORTATION INVESTMENT TODAY

CNN TV News decided to ridicule a $52 million investment completed last year in Vermont in a lengthy “feature” segment.  The money upgraded track and bridges to a national standard for freight and for passenger operations at 80 mph up from the past 60 mph.

Having just finished a commuter rail policy paper for Chittenden County-Washington County commuter rail which requires less financial operating support per passenger mile (nine cents) than the “free” parking space a typical solo commuter enjoys, I can attest the investment in the roughly 180 mile corridor St. Albans to the Massachusetts border represents an outstanding and timely investment.  The Census numbers show of over 7,000 added workers in Vermont 2000-2010 less than 100 more--that’s right less than one hundred more–workers in Vermont drove or rode to work in a car. The car age ended about 20 years ago and now by the hundreds Vermont workers abandon car commuting each year to go to work on--yes!--on buses, or by walking, bicycling or working at home.  Now the time has arrived to add commuter rail passengers to the mix and the federal rail investments facilitates that action.   

The Burlington Link buses for commuters to Montpelier, St. Albans and Middlebury which began a decade ago and cost $4 each way now carry almost 500 commuters on 50 buses each workday.  And 50 more commuters jump on the Link service each year while maybe another 10 statewide choose to ride to work in a car. We need commuter rail now (and intercity too).  Of course we need to extend the Ethan Allen Amtrak train from Rutland to Burlington and the Vermonter to its original destination in Montreal.  Those projects move forward, though far too slowly.  The Vermonter starting from Washington was part of the reason for the continued investment by the U.S. in four states at the north end of the route to upgrade in order to sharply reduce schedule times and increase market share.    Amtrak knows a lot about market share as it recently hit 72 percent of the rail-air share of travelers between New York and Washington and topped 50 percent for the same group between New York and Boston.

We should look at the rail line upgrade--dwarfed by Vermont’s billion dollar highway capital expenditures each decade--as a truly fortunate development for Vermont and a catalyst for rapid rail passenger and freight services expansion.

Maybe CNN should take another look at the trends in Vermont and national transportation.  The rate of the under 30 crowd with driver licenses drop of 20 percent and the national car travel miles for all age groups has declined in the last decade.  But one must admit, a nice shot of an Amtrak train or an empty track is a far more enticing visual than a young American without a driver license or someone walking to work rather rather than in a the fancy car of a sponsor. 

REMEDY TH MISSING LINK OF VERMONT TRANSPORTATION: COMMUTER RAIL

THE WHY AND WHEREFORE--COMMUTER RAIL, THE MISSING LINK OF VERMONT TRANSPORTATON, AND THE SIMPLE REMEDY

With the truly overnight growth from 0 to 46 commuter buses radiating outward from Burlington, VT each workday the obvious question arises, why not adding commuter rail services to serve Vermont workers and employers?

It goes without saying commuter rail with self-propelled vehicles handle upwards of 150 passengers per trip, reduce the need for the current 46 buses daily (though some would continue and new short link shuttle services added). Unlike buses, commuter rail serves the tourist, contain space for many bicycles, and set a backbone for an eventual in-state intercity rail passenger network.

The real reason for no commuter rail services lies in the American tradition of subsidizing cars only and failing to recognize governmental responsibility for assuring a multi-modal transportation system characterized by safety, efficiency, and sustainability in all senses of that word.

A Redington Blog dated June 8, 2012 describes transportation in terms of a Vermont household, i.e., basic consumer expenditures. It is no surprise that of the 16% of household expenditures devoted to transportation practically all—about 95%--gets gobbled up by moving around by car. Since Vermont median household income closely parallels the national figure, the ballpark figure for total ground transportation spending by Vermont households roughly comes to $1.986.

The June Blog outlines the proportion of funding as follows:

How does this $1.986 billion for Vermont consumer transportation expenditure annually break down in terms of public transportation, the car and “other” (primarily air but also intercity bus and rail)? The online “Urban Transportation Fact Book 2004 gives an indication urban breakdown which reflects a public transportation dimension: 94% “user operated” (best known as a car), 1.44% “purchased local transit” and 4.56% “purchased intercity.”

The key number involves expenditure on cars, 94%, translates to $1.87 billion for Vermont households spending on car transport. Since this number comes from an urban-based analysis, it understates somewhat the both the proportion and amount of Vermont households expenditures on cars. Using some data and making some guesstimates, here are the other ground transportation household expenditures by Vermont households along with associated government support:

                                                                             Vermont Transportaton

                                                           Household Expenditure             State/Federal/Local

                                                                                                             Support

                                                                                              (yearly)

Automobile                                                $1,986.0 million                  Over $100 million

Public transportation (bus services)               $16.0 million                 $39 million

Amtrak                                                           $15.0 million                    $4 million

Greyhound/Vermont Transit/Megabus           $25.0 million                  Substantial

Future Commuter Rail                                     $2.4 million                  $2.4 million

Several commuter rail plans dating back to 1989 provide the planning for operations, costs, schedules, etc. The next steps involve establishing the necessary rail authority, development of a short term plan for the first corridor, acquisition of equipment, preparation of stations, and startup of service.

Few would suggest erasing all local bus services in Vermont. Few would suggest ending Amtrak rail service. And private intercity bus services depend on infrastructure—highways, bridges, capital maintenance, etc.--funded by about 40% from non-highway user revenue sources. Commuter rail can easily serve far more Vermonter trips than Amtrak, rival commercial inter-city bus service trips, and also serve tourists and the tourist industry. The public cost of support for commuter rail—capital and operating--will be far less than current State expenditures for public transportation and somewhat more than Amtrak. (Note Amtrak support involve pure State tax dollars.) Also important much of the cost of installing new commuter rail service can be obtained from current federal transportation funding and likely special federal transportation appropriations.

In conclusion, consideration of commuter rail no longer needs to be a “vision” but as a task to be completed with the next two or three years. 

Notes:  1.  Public transportation expenditures/support based on multiplying Chittenden County Transportation Authority (CCTA) FY 2012 budget numbers by a factor of 4.

2.  Commercial bus expenditures a guesstimate

3.  Amtrak based on recent data annual passengers, 140,000, a typical ticket roundtrip to NYC at $106, and FY 2012 $4.5 million budget for the State cost share.

4.  See June Blog for additional sources of data.

5.  Future Commuter rail based on 200 day operation with about 3,000 trips daily (1,500 roundtrip commuters) or about three times the current year numbers on CCTA Link services.  Revenue roundtrip used is $7, a dollar less than current Burlington/Montpelier Link fares.   

VERMONT BUS COMMUTING, AMTRAK AND COMMUTER RAIL

BUSES WEEKDAYS SERVING COMMUTERS OUT OF BURLINGTON (VT) 46 —COMMUTER TRAINS 0: TIME TO SHIFT THOSE NUMBERS, TIME FOR COMMUTER RAIL PASSENGER SERVICES

Evidence mounts Vermont rail priorities place workers abandoning solo driving in second class status, literally stuck in buses with little financial support while the Amtrak lovers get millions of dollars of State subsidy with service expansions in the near future. Why don't Vermont workers doing the right thing by reducing congestion and cutting energy use and pollution deserve first class rail passenger service to and from their workplace?

Recently this blog decried the “forced busing” of commuters on the then 18 buses a weekday along the Burlington-Montpelier corridor:

           Feel “transportation discrimination”? Well be a commuter in or out of Burlington,

           VT exercising “commuter choice” by abandoning the car and what do you 

           get?--second-class transportation in the form of a stuffy, jammed and sometimes 

           standing room only bus (and room for only two bicycles). Welcome to the 

           transportation quality of service typically found in less developed nations!

Now with June additions of a commuter bus from Montpelier to Winooski center (Vermont Student Assistance Corporation [VSAC]) and a second from Montpelier to IBM the total bus numbers each week day jump to 22. Projecting the Montpelier Link numbers into the next service year starting in this July, a 20% growth in numbers of commuters comes to about 260 by next June, and individual trips annually reach 119,000. Recent actual passengers per Montpelier Link bus run reached about 22, and the increase in passengers recorded for the nine months ending in March hit 40%--a definite surge.

The success of the Burlington-Montpelier Link (Montpelier Link) bus services—now 22 buses scheduled each workday— proves without doubt a simple commuter rail service long overdue in the 40 mile corridor serving, among others, the largest private and public employers—IBM at its main parking area, and the State complexes located in Burlington, Waterbury and Montpelier. Other Burlington corridors with commuter Link services are in order of market potential: St. Albans-IBM-Burlington (once IBM's first choice), Middlebury-Burlington which hosted a commuter rail demonstration service, and the Route 116 Commuter to Bristol/Middlebury.

          Comparing Montpelier-Burlington Commuter Rail Service to Amtrak Numbers

With the announcement this month of $8 million in federal funds to upgrade trackage from St. Albans north to the Canadian border, the rumor of Amtrak service extension to Montreal within the next two years gains increasing credibility. How do Amtrak numbers compare to the expected Burlington-Montpelier 119,000 trips in the coming year? (Note the Burlington to Middlebury and Burlington to St. Albans commuter corridors bus runs total 24 additional trips each weekday.) The best estimate for the current year of Amtrak numbers for the two train services—the Ethan Allen Express from Rutland to New York City, and the Vermonter from St. Albans to Washington—comes to 140,000 passengers. Numbers last year were below potential because of using buses in place of trains during scheduled track improvements and repairing the unscheduled damage from hurricane Irene. Clearly the three corridor commuter route total passengers number--Burlington-Montpelier alone at 119,000-- already surpasses Vermont Amtrak users but obviously commuters taking much shorter trips.

The importance of the commuter corridor services at this point comes from the fact that about 90 percent of users are in fact commuting to and from work and that practically all users are adult Vermonters—Amtrak users includes sizable proportions of tourists, retirees and students. Increasingly the current Vermont commuter bus services attract those wishing to access services and the growing mid-day numbers reflect this expansion of usage.

But there are cost and subsidy issues here. The 140,000 Amtrak users cost $4.5 million yearly in State dollars, about $32 per passenger—and this subsidy has been decreasing as each year public transportation passenger numbers increase. While public transportation grows routinely at high single digit and even double digit rates, car travel New England-wide growth shrivels, a tiny 3.2% growth 2000-2010, the lowest decade growth number since the advent of the car. New England car travel may well decline this decade and in Vermont as well.

One reason for the rapid growth of the Burlington “Link” commuter services has been the users, mostly paying $4 a trip which covers a high percentage of operational costs. This allows expansion of bus runs based on demand. Commuter rail also can be expected to pay a substantial portion of its operating costs. The original Eugene Skoropowski proposal of 1989 (he now heads Florida's high speed rail authority) calls for 18 trains weekdays in the Burlington-Montpelier corridor in addition to Amtrak services. It is reasonable to expect a majority of initial operating costs—but not capital costs—to be paid by commuters.

The eventual expansion of the commuter train operations to additional corridors would increase efficiencies all around. The ultimate goal remains a statewide commuter/intercity network serving businesses, tourists, commuters and connecting major Vermont cities and towns.

While a train to Montreal would be nice, don't Vermont workers and citizens deserve rail-based service too starting with commuter routes out of Burlington—right now?