Hsr final report 08 feb 2011 v2

CASCADIA HIGH SPEED RAIL: LINES, TERRAINS AND TYPOLOGIES

University of Oregon, Fall 2010, Arch 507 Graduate School of Architecture, Portland

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The following people have been indispensable to the completion of this book. We especially thank our guests and presenters who helped expand our discussion and dialog. Thank you.

Course Instructors:

Lloyd Lindley, FASLA, Adjunct Professor

James Pettinari, University of Oregon Professor

Brad Perkins, Cascadia HSR Advocate Guest Participants:

Karen Mains

Rudy Niederer, Cascadia HSR Advocate Students: University of Oregon Graduate School of Architecture

Aaron Frease

Ashley Koger

Brett Santhuff

Eric Albright* (Portland State University)

Nicole Holt

Jim Lutzke

Sara Ruzomberka

Seth Dunn Guest Presenters:

Betsy Imholt, ODOT Rail Operations Manager

Brock A. Nelson, Union Pacific Railroad,

Director of Public Affairs

Guest Reviewers:

Senator Rod Monroe

Bill Burgel, HDR

Gustraf Kamp, Architect Cascadia High Speed Rail with Lloyd Lindley, Jim Pettinari, & Brad Perkins

Fall 2010

University of Oregon, Portland

INTRODUCTION Course Preface: During the late 1980’s and through the 1990’s High Speed Rail (HSR) in Oregon flourished with planning, funding and implementation of station and track improvements. In the mid 1990’s the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) in cooperation with AMTRAK and the Washington Department of Transportation began operation of the Mount Rainier Extension between Eugene, Portland and Seattle as a first step toward providing enhanced higher speed rail service between Eugene and Vancouver, British Columbia. Initial ridership exceeded expectations equaling 126 percent of projections. 1 While service improved comfort and access, and ridership increased, little progress to addressing the key issues of reliability and on time service resulted. Planning shifted to emphasize freight efficiencies and unscramble the traffic jamb consequences of the Union Pacific (UP) and Southern Pacific merger. Rail freight is the highest bulk shipping mode in the US with ocean borne shipping second at $375 billion on 467 million tons while rail freight tops out at $436 billion on1.8 billion tons. 2 As long as rail freight demand leads the nation in materials and product distribution, shared passenger rail will suffer poor reliability and an inability to expand service.

As citizens and agencies in the Oregon segment of the Cascadia High Speed Rail Mega-Region, and in particular the greater Willamette Valley from Vancouver, Washington to Eugene/Springfield, begin discussing HSR, the University of Oregon Graduate School of Architecture seminar on HSR began framing questions based on observations and case studies. Visiting speakers from ODOT, HSR advocates and Union Pacific, combined with the HSR Atlas from the 2010 Univeristy of Oregon Graduate School of Architecture summer seminar, and planning and historic background helped inform this seminar to identify alignments and station areas, evaluation criteria, opportunities, constraints and issues for future consideration in ODOT’s forthcoming Alternatives Analysis.

Foot notes 1. Salem Passenger Rail Station Study, Final Report, Salem/Keizer Area Transportation Study, Mid-Willamette Valley Council of Governments 2. SOURCES: U.S. Department of Transportation, Research and Innovative Technology Administration, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, based on data from Transport Topics Online, available at ttnews.com/tt100 as of Sept. 25, 2009. Association of American Railroads, available at www.aar.org as of Sept. 25, 2009.

3. HSR Atlas, Summer 2010 HSR Seminar, University of Oregon Graduate School of Architecture.

Cascadia High Speed Rail with Lloyd Lindley, Jim Pettinari, & Brad Perkins

Fall 2010

University of Oregon, Portland

Cascadia Corridor The Cascadia Corridor is home to over 8 million people. Population growth causes stress on physical, educational, social and cultural infrastructure. The “new regionalism,” conscious of a certain quality of life and growing within a restricted geography, will require a commitment to create stronger ties throughout the Northwest. A new series of “highways” is needed to efficiently connect the region’s government, businesses and people. One of those “highways” will be high-speed rail trains traveling over 110 miles/hr and connecting cities between Vancouver, BC and Eugene/Springfield, Oregon. Nothing could do more to make the movement of goods and people easier while at the same time preserving our livability by reducing congestion and air pollution.

The Cascadia Corridor from Eugene to Vancouver, BC has been designated as one of several potential high-speed rail passenger corridors in the country. Ideally, the system would be fully electrified on new double tracks mostly on a separate corridor as an alternative to the current AMTRAK system that operates in private freight train corridors. Such a system could effectively offer an energy saving alternative to both automobile and airplane travel for the given distances between Eugene, Portland, Seattle and Vancouver, BC. The system would become an economic development corridor that would link new business opportunities and other alternative modes of transportation in the region. However, there are challenges to meet in this and all alternatives.

Cascadia High Speed Rail with Lloyd Lindley, Jim Pettinari, & Brad Perkins

Fall 2010

University of Oregon, Portland

Greater Willamette Valley Participants questioned cultural and historic context, high speed rail station area development patterns compared to other transit oriented developments, and the supporting architecture and form based principles of building in a new way for the Willamette Valley region. Station areas in the Willamette Valley segment of the Cascadia High Speed Rail Corridor are as diverse as they are contextually complex. Exploration of the scale and diversity of Willamette Valley regional centers challenged students to investigate impacts on small, medium, and large communities and neighborhoods through architectural typologies, mixed use development, civic uses, transit, transportation, sustainability and livability. The seminar expanded upon the Willamette Valley High Speed Rail Atlas, developed by students during the 2010 summer term that identifies the mission, goals and technical background in preparation for this fall seminar.

The Cascadia Mega-Region is divided into three segments: • • •

Vancouver B.C. to Seattle, Washington Seattle, Washington to Portland, Oregon Portland, Oregon to Eugene/Springfield, Oregon

Focusing on the greater Willamette Valley between Vancouver, Washington and Eugene/Springfield, Oregon, a conceptual review of alignments within the valley terrain and city context, population, transportation and land use identified general differences between alignments and station locations within urban areas. The goal was to define Cascadia Mega-regional Centers especially in the context of the diverse range of City sizes, supportive land use and transportation systems. The range of urban form and context included the 1.3 million population metropolitan area of Portland/Vancouver, medium sized cities including the State Capital – Salem (300,000 population) and the Eugene/Springfield Metropolitan area (275,000 population) and the smaller agrarian cities of Albany/Corvallis, Tualatin, Woodburn and Oregon City (all approximately 50,000 population).

HSR would provide service in the Greater Willamette Valley to a total population of approximately 2.5 million people or 90 percent of the State’s population within the highest economic producing region of the state.

Cascadia High Speed Rail with Lloyd Lindley, Jim Pettinari, & Brad Perkins

Fall 2010

University of Oregon, Portland

The University of Oregon, Graduate School of Architecture, Cascadia High Speed Rail Seminar engaged in discussions and sketch evaluations of the three primary HSR alignments and two hybrid alternatives. Mapping, conceptual design criteria and statistical inventories from The High Speed Rail Atlas developed during summer term provided background and base information. Guest speakers from ODOT, Union Pacific and HSR advocates presented alignment and station location options.

A tour of the Union Pacific and Interstate-5 alignments between North Portland and Salem enabled participants to view “on the ground� alignment and station opportunities and constraints. Case studies of HSR Lines outside of the U.S. contributed to the critical process of comparing lines and station areas. The case studies and architectural typologies provided perspective and background research as a basis for comparing Cascadia HSR proposals with other working systems around the world.

Developing an illustrative terrain model enabled the seminar to visualize the alignments within their individual geographic context while mapping and considering infrastructure and supportive land use and transportation policies and infrastructure.

Resultant sketch alternatives evaluation criteria enabled the seminar to frame fundamental questions for further consideration during the ODOT Alternatives Analysis process. This report provides an objective look at the opportunities, constraints and issues associated with investing significant public and private funds into Oregon’s initial venture into HSR. Based on sketch evaluation criteria for alignments and station areas, and alternative analysis the objective of the seminar was to identify significant questions to be answered during the Alternatives Analysis process that will be conducted by the Oregon Department of Transportation Rail Division over the 2011/2012 biennium.

The concluding recommendation of this report is to challenge stakeholders to weigh the long term benefits of each alternative based on economic return on investment through jobs and new development, service reliability, speed and convenience.

Cascadia High Speed Rail with Lloyd Lindley, Jim Pettinari, & Brad Perkins

Fall 2010

University of Oregon, Portland

ECOREGION STATISTICS FOR THE CASCADIA MEGAREGION: Population 2000 (U.S. Portion): 7,400,532 Percent of U.S. Population: 3% Population 2025: 10,209,826 Projected Growth: 38% 2005 GDP: $337,405,000,000 Percent U.S. GDP: 3%

images from www.america2050.org

THE CASCADIA MEGAREGION ‘America 2050’ identifies the Cascadia Megaregion as the link between the major cities of Portland, Seattle, and Vancouver, BC. Cascadia is better defined by a dramatic landscape, mild climate, and a thriving biological diversity. In an ongoing study by Portland State University, Cascadia is appropriately referred to as an ‘Ecolopolis’ instead of a ‘megalopolis’ because its character is so deeply rooted in the ecology: the mountains, trees, and water that define Cascadia. The Cascadian Agenda, as seen by ‘America 2050,’ is defined by a vision to protect the area’s unique and pristine environment, as well as a commitment to environmental sustainability.

‘there’s a sense that people come here (Cascadia) and they want to start something new. The future is a very important part of the culture: what we are going to create that has never been seen before.’

-Douglas Todd, Vancouver Sun

Cascadia High Speed Rail with Lloyd Lindley, Jim Pettinari, & Brad Perkins

Fall 2010

University of Oregon, Portland

THE WILLAMETTE VALLEY This study more closely focuses on the Willamette Valley EcoRegion, which is defined as the southern portion of the Cascadia Megaregion and connects Eugene/Springfield up through Portland and to Vancouver, Washington. This land is defined by a fertile agricultural valley that is bordered by the Cascade Mountain Range to the East and the Oregon Coastal Range to the West. The Willamette River flows northward from Eugene, along the valley floor until it meets the Columbia River in Portland. The Willamette Valley contains the majority of Oregon’s population, industry, agriculture, and commerce. It is also the major north-south connection through the state.

DEFINING MEGAREGIONAL CENTERS When looking closely at transportation corridors and working to understand the future growth patterns within the Willamette Valley, the study of MegaRegional Centers and their relevance at the Willamette Valley scale became a key issue. We looked toward High Speed Rail in Europe and development patterns in order to better understand these growth trends. We also studied architecture typologies both at home in the Willamette Valley and in other megaregions in order to better understand how this growth might take shape.

These case studies can be found in the appendix of this document.

The EPA defines Ecoregion 3 as the Willamette Valley.

Cascadia High Speed Rail with Lloyd Lindley, Jim Pettinari, & Brad Perkins

Fall 2010

University of Oregon, Portland

HIGH SPEED RAIL CRITERIA A general cross section of High Speed Rail principles and guidelines helped frame the sketch evaluation process and formulate fundamental questions for each alignment. It is expected that expansion and more in depth technical research and compilation of criteria during the Alternatives Analysis and Environment Impact Study work will contribute to answering these questions and other issues surrounding the siting of HSR.

1. Consolidation and Grade Separation • •

Technology, Principles and Guidelines The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) tries to address prevention, mitigation, emergency management, and system safety integration.

The FRA is in the process of structuring a new, tiered approach to passenger operations, taking into account maximum operating speeds as well as right-of-way characteristics, safety technology, planning requirements, and the presence or absence of less compatible rail traffic (i.e., passenger equipment built to different standards or freight operations).

The state of California is in the process of developing its high speed rail network called HST Fly California. HST Fly California provides a valuable example to the criteria and principles necessary in evaluating the alignment and station locations in the Willamette Valley Eco-region and Cascadia High Speed Rail corridor.

FRA GUIDELINES ON SAFETY AND GRADE CROSSINGS FRA regulations provide minimum criteria for grade crossings on highspeed lines, including a prohibition of any at-grade crossings at speeds above 125 mph. The bullet points below describe additional steps that should be taken to reduce risk and enhance the quality of HSR service.

Support efforts to close crossings and limit the creation of new highway-rail crossings except where the public interest clearly provides justification.

Where there are more than three tracks, or where frequent lowspeed movements are expected, strong consideration should be given to closure or grade separation.

2. Safety Improvements at Private Crossings •

Because of the prevalence of heavy trucks and agricultural equipment, closing private crossings should be an integral part of the crossing safety strategy for any HSR corridor.

a - Public Access Crossings • Should be treated in the same manner as public grade crossing, and should be included in crossing consolidation programs. b - Industrial Crossings • Each of these crossings should be evaluated individually to ensure proper signage, adequate active warning, suitability of roadway approaches (including elimination of “hump” crossings capable of hanging up low-profile vehicles), adequate storage distance for longer combination vehicles between tracks and nearby traffic intersections, presence of traffic- calming devices approaching the crossing that are compatible with the road traffic, and effective barrier systems where required.

• Ongoing training and awareness efforts for drivers regularly using the crossing is also important to ensure familiarity with the crossing safety system.

Cascadia High Speed Rail with Lloyd Lindley, Jim Pettinari, & Brad Perkins

Fall 2010

University of Oregon, Portland

c - Residential Crossings • Rule of thumb - 5 or more residences constitutes public access for a single crossing location.

• If train speeds exceed 90 mph at the location, flashing lights and gates should be provided in each case.

4. Warning Systems and Other Highway Traffic Control Devices

d - Agricultural Crossings • Systems that provide active warning, controlled opening of the crossing, and provide feedback when it is secured are very desirable.

This is particularly true when sight distances are limited. For many locations, an electronic lock with a timed release controlled through the signal or train control system may be more cost-effective and appropriate than a traditional arrangement with flashing lights and gates.

a - Interconnection and Supplementary Traffic Control • Special attention should be given to the interconnection of grade crossing warning systems with other traffic control systems to avoid “storage” of vehicles on the crossing (i.e., vehicles that are stopped on the crossing due to traffic that is queued because of the highway traffic signal). b - Presence Detection • For crossings where storage is a known possibility, and in the case of crossings on segments with train speeds above 100 mph, regardless of a prior history of storage, presence detection should be provided in connection with operation of the train control system.

3. Sealed Corridors

5. Train Control Integration

Definition of a sealed corridor: An extended rail corridor or segment thereof on which all public atgrade crossings are evaluated through an engineering diagnostic process to determine the appropriate level of safety improvement needed to decrease or eliminate violations. Safety improvements include closure/consolidation, enhanced warning devices, medians, and grade separation. The end result is that redundant and/or unsafe crossings are consolidated through closure and/or grade separation and all remaining public crossings are equipped as appropriate with four quadrant gates, median separators, and longer gate arms. Private crossings are also evaluated for closure, signal treatment and/or special signage.

• Sealed corridor treatments will be expected for all highway-rail grade crossings at locations where train speeds exceed 79 mph.

• Sealed corridor treatments are also appropriate at crossings with more than two tracks, regardless of speed, and particularly near passenger stations.

•

•

Train control systems provide information concerning route conditions ahead. FRA has in place existing train control requirements for operations above 79 mph. On July 21, 2009, FRA published a proposed rule on Implementation of Positive Train Control (PTC) systems. PTC will be required by law on all intercity and commuter passenger lines by December 31, 2015.

FRA will insist on integration of train control technology if any crossings are retained at speeds exceeding 110 mph.

Cascadia High Speed Rail with Lloyd Lindley, Jim Pettinari, & Brad Perkins

Fall 2010

University of Oregon, Portland

6. Barrier Systems

Right­-of-­Way Safety

•

Track Safety Standards require that, for Class 8 and 9 track (speeds exceeding 125 mph), the track owner must submit for approval a “rightof-way plan” for the prevention of: • Vandalism • Launching of objects from overhead bridges or structures into the path of trains • Intrusion of vehicles from adjacent rights-of-way

At speeds exceeding 110 mph, the railroad shall submit a complete description of the proposed barrier/warning system.

• Barrier systems, where required, need to meet the following tests to be effective: - Must operate in concert with the crossing warning system, and the combined system must provide critical information concerning system health and status in real time.

- Must be capable of stopping short of the crossing the heaviest motor vehicle operated on that roadway, taking into consideration the posted speed limit.

- Must include the capability to detect any object of significant obstruction (car, truck) that remains on the crossing after the barriers go into place.

- Must communicate to approaching high-speed trains the presence of any significant obstruction in time for the train to reduce speed or stop before reaching the crossing.

7. Pedestrian and Trespass Considerations •

•

Active warning directed at pedestrians should be provided, and warning system timing and the nature of the warning given should take into consideration special needs road users (e.g., the visually impaired or motorized wheelchair users).

Channelization of pedestrian traffic is recommended to ensure that warning is effectively delivered and pedestrian behaviors are adequately cabined.

The High Speed Rail Strategic Plan divides potential operations into four categories or generic descriptions (see Appendix for the FRA’s Potential Tier Structure for Passenger Systems) •

•

•

•

HSR – Express. Frequent express service between major population centers 200-600 miles apart, with few intermediate stops. Top speeds of at least 150 mph on completely grade-separated, dedicated rightsof-way. Intended to relieve air and highway capacity constraints.

HSR – Regional. Relatively frequent service between major and moderate population centers 100-500 miles apart, with some intermediate stops. Top speeds of 110-150 mph, grade-separated, with some dedicated and some shared track. Intended to relieve highway and, to some extent, air capacity constraints.

Emerging HSR. Developing corridors of 100-500 miles, with strong potential for future HSR Regional and/or Express service. Top speeds of up to 80-110 mph on primarily shared track, with advanced grade crossing protection or separation. Intended to develop the passenger rail market and provide some relief to other modes.

Conventional Rail. Traditional intercity passenger rail services of more than 100 miles with as little as 1 to as many as 7-12 daily frequencies; may or may not have strong potential for future high speed rail service. Top speeds of up to 79 mph generally on shared track. Intended to provide travel options and to develop the passenger rail market for further development in the future.

Cascadia High Speed Rail with Lloyd Lindley, Jim Pettinari, & Brad Perkins

Fall 2010

University of Oregon, Portland

HST FLY CALIFORNIA

Implementation of HST Station Area Development Guidelines

General Principles of HST Station Area Development

There will be more than 20 station locations in California’s high speed rail network. The following criteria explain the ways in which the Authority can help ensure that the HST system becomes an instrument for encouraging maximizing implementation of station area development principles.

The following are criteria chosen by HST Fly California to evaluate station locations for their high speed rail alignments. The goal of these principles is to maximize the development opportunities created by high speed rail alignments and to encourage increased density developments.

• • •

•

•

Higher density development in relation to the existing pattern of development in the surrounding area, along with minimum requirements for density.Bullet A mix of land uses (e.g., retail, office, hotels, entertainment, residential) and a mix of housing types to meet the needs of the local community.

A grid street pattern and compact pedestrian-oriented design that promotes walking, bicycle, and transit access with streetscapes that include landscaping, small parks, pedestrian spaces, bike lanes, and bike racks.

Context-sensitive building design that considers the continuity of the building sizes and that coordinates the street-level and upperlevel architectural detailing, roof forms, and the rhythm of windows and doors should be provided. New buildings should be designed to complement and mutually support public spaces, such as streets, plazas, other open space areas, and public parking structures.

Limits on the amount of parking for new development and a preference that parking be placed in structures. TOD areas typically have reduced parking requirements for retail, office, and residential uses due to their transit access and walkability. Sufficient train passenger parking would be essential to system viability, but this should, as appropriate, be offered at market rates (not free) to encourage the use of access by transit and other modes. Shared parking would be planned when the mix of uses would support it.

• • •

Select station locations that are multi-modal transportation hubs with a preference for traditional city centers Adopt HST station area development policies and principles that require TOD, and promote value-capture at and around station areas as a condition for selecting a HST station site.

Provide incentives for local governments where potential HST stations may be located to prepare and adopt Station Area Plans and to amend City and County General Plans that incorporate station area development principles in the vicinity of HST stations.

CASCADIA HIGH SPEED RAIL ALIGNMENT CRITERIA The following definitions explain the criteria used to rate the four alignments being considered for the Cascadia High Speed Rail corridor in the Willamette Valley Eco-region. These criteria were developed to assess the potential for each alignment to successfully operate as a true high-speed rail corridor. The rating system for each criteria was based on a scale of 1-5 points; 1 being the least favorable and 5 being the most favorable. Each potential alignment has been graded to help facilitate discussion of the potential benefits and challenges of each alignment choice.

Cascadia High Speed Rail with Lloyd Lindley, Jim Pettinari, & Brad Perkins

Fall 2010

University of Oregon, Portland

ALIGNMENT CRITERIA - DEFINITIONS DISTANCE Efficiency - The efficiency of an alignment relates to the distance between stops as the crow flies and the actual travel distance of track between each stop.

This accounts for alignments that contain more curves and a less direct path of travel.

VANCOUVER

FREIGHT & TRANSIT Conflict with Freight Systems – Measured as a percentage of the track that is on or adjacent to existing freight systems. 1=High Conflict 5 = Minimal Conflict Connection to Modal Interchange – Based on a 60-mile radius of service by express bus and light rail. Gives value to how well an alignment connects to existing transportation options.

PORTLAND

SUSTAINABILITY

OREGON CITY/ TUALATIN

Amount of Excavated Land (Carbon Footprint) – Accounts for the impact of adding parallel tracks, fly-overs, & grade crossing. This assumes that grade crossings are not mitigated because the UP & OE are not sealed, high speed corridors.

OPERATIONAL SALEM

Speed – Evaluated by the potential to achieve speeds greater than 110 mph Reliability – Reliability is based on what entity has primary control over the line and the existing freight operations on that line.

Frequency – Frequency is based on the existing freight operations on the line and the priority of freight travel over passenger travel.

ALBANY

Capacity – Capacity is based on the current trips per day made by existing freight and the control over the right of way.

IDENTITY Visibility – Visibility considers the alignment’s proximity to existing modes of transit and development.

DEVELOPMENT Land Availability – Availability of land is a function of whether or not the alignment operates on public, private, or a combination of right of way.

1=Private 3=Combination 5=Public

EUGENE/ SPRINGFIELD

Grade Crossings – Considers the number of existing or proposed grade crossings.

Cascadia High Speed Rail with Lloyd Lindley, Jim Pettinari, & Brad Perkins

Fall 2010

University of Oregon, Portland

ALIGNMENT ASSESSMENTS Opportunities and Constraints of Alignments Opportunities and constraints are based on observations from an alignment tour between Portland and Salem, land use, zoning, multi-modal transportation infrastructure and aerial mapping and photography, and terrain modeling.

UNION PACIFIC ALIGNMENT Land use: • • • • • •

Union Station development parcels are available near - CXd zone - Opp. Oregon City Relatively undeveloped (can be opportunity or constraint) Mixed Use Downtown zone - Opp. Limited access - Con. Salem surrounded by developed Institutional uses - CG zone - Con. Constrained access - Con. Albany Station isolated by High 99 / rail yards - LI - Con. Limited access Con. Eugene Station limited vacant development parcels - C-2 and I-2 with historic zoning with limited access - Con. North edge of Downtown - Opp. All stations are at existing stops near downtown centers - Opp.

Transportation • • •

In Portland, well connected to transit - Opp. Limited access - Con. In Salem and Albany both stations are constrained by highway and rail operations -Con. Eugene Station is ten blocks from express bus service - Con. Near limited bus service - Opp.

OREGON ELECTRIC ALIGNMENT Land use: • • • •

Tualatin Station Is surrounded by surface parking and low density development - ML CC and CG zoning - Opp. With good access - Opp. Salem Station in Central Business District zone - Opp. Flood Plain Con. Albany Station - RR and MUR zoning - Opp. Eugene Station limited vacant development parcels - C-2 and I-2 with historic zoning with limited access - Con. North edge of Downtown - Opp.

Transportation: • • •

Salem Station well connected transportation and Bus - Opp. Albany stop well connected to transportation - Opp. Limited transit - Con. All stations are near downtowns centers - Opp.

I-5 ALIGNMENT Land use: • • • • •

Rose Quarter development parcels are available near by - CXd zone - Opp. Tualatin Station Is surrounded by surface parking and low density development - ML CC and CG zoning - Opp. Good access - Opp. Salem Station area - Retail Commercial zone - Opp. Good access - Opp. Albany Station area - RC and LI - Opp. Good access Opp. Distant from Downtown - Con. Eugene Station at University of Oregon - Special Area zoning - Opp. Good access - Opp. Equal distance between Eugene and Springfield CBD’s - Opp.

Transportation • • • • • •

In Portland, well connected to other transportation - Opp. Tualatin is at a full interchange - Opp. Salem Station full Interchange at Market Street - Opp. Limited access at State Street Con. Full interchange at Santiam Highway Opp. Albany Station at a full interchange - Opp. Eugene Station on Eugene/Springfield Express Bus line - Opp. Dedicated corridor allows for efficiency/capacity - Opp.

HYBRID ALTERNATIVE ALIGNMENT

(Starts in Portland on UP alignment/1-5 alignment, follows 1-5 alignment towards Tualatin, meets up with OE alignment until Salem, and then follows 1-5 alignment all the way to Eugene)

Land use: • • • • •

• • • • • • • •

Union Station development parcels are available near - CXd zone - Opp. Tualatin Station Is surrounded by surface parking and low density development - ML CC and CG zoning - Opp. Good access - Opp. Salem Station at Waterfront , CBD zone - Opp. Flood Plain - Con. Albany Station area - RC and LI - Opp. with good access - Opp. Distant from Downtown - Con. Eugene Station at University of Oregon - Special Area zoning Good access Opp. Equal distance between Eugene and Springfield CBD’s - Opp.

Transportation:

In Portland, well connected to transit - Opp. Limited access - Con. Tualatin is at a full interchange - Opp. Salem Station area - Retail Commercial zone - Opp. Good access - Con. Albany Station area - RC and LI - Opp. Good access Opp. Distant from Downtown Con. Eugene Station at University of Oregon - Special Area zoning Good access Opp. Equal distance between Eugene and Springfield CBD’s - Opp. Mostly dedicated corridor allows for efficiency/capacity - Opp. Will have some existing freight on OE alignment to schedule around - Con.

Cascadia High Speed Rail with Lloyd Lindley, Jim Pettinari, & Brad Perkins

Fall 2010

University of Oregon, Portland

UNION PACIFIC ALIGNMENT ALIGNMENT CRITERIA

UNION PACIFIC +1 TRACK

EFFICIENCY BETWEEN STOPS • Track long enough for most efficient speed

1.5

FREIGHT & TRANSPORTATION • Conflict with freight systems • Modal interchange (60+ miles)

3 2.5

PORTLAND

TUALATIN SUSTAINABILITY • Amount of excavated land (impact of parallel tracks) OPERATIONAL • Speed/travel time (potential for going 110 mph) • Reliability • Frequency (potential) • Capacity

OREGON CITY 2.5

SALEM

.5 .5 .5 .5

ALBANY

IDENTITY • Visibility

2

DEVELOPMENT • Public vs. private • Grade crossings

1 1 15.5

Criteria scored from 1-5. 1 = least desirable, 5 = most desirable Cascadia High Speed Rail with Lloyd Lindley, Jim Pettinari, & Brad Perkins

EUGENE Fall 2010

University of Oregon, Portland

OREGON ELECTRIC ALIGNMENT ALIGNMENT CRITERIA

OREGON ELECTRIC +1 TRACK

EFFICIENCY BETWEEN STOPS • Track long enough for most efficient speed

1.5

FREIGHT & TRANSPORTATION • Conflict with freight systems • Modal interchange (60+ miles)

2 3

PORTLAND

TUALATIN SUSTAINABILITY • Amount of excavated land (impact of parallel tracks) OPERATIONAL • Speed/travel time (potential for going 110 mph) • Reliability • Frequency (potential) • Capacity

OREGON CITY

2.5

SALEM

1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5

ALBANY

IDENTITY • Visibility

1.5

DEVELOPMENT • Public vs. private • Grade crossings

1 1 18.5

Criteria scored from 1-5. 1 = least desirable, 5 = most desirable Cascadia High Speed Rail with Lloyd Lindley, Jim Pettinari, & Brad Perkins

EUGENE Fall 2010

University of Oregon, Portland

I-5 ALIGNMENT ALIGNMENT CRITERIA

1-5 EXCLUSIVE CORRIDOR

EFFICIENCY BETWEEN STOPS • Track long enough for most efficient speed

3

FREIGHT & TRANSPORTATION • Conflict with freight systems • Modal interchange (60+ miles)

1 3

PORTLAND

TUALATIN SUSTAINABILITY • Amount of excavated land (impact of parallel tracks) OPERATIONAL • Speed/travel time (potential for going 110 mph) • Reliability • Frequency (potential) • Capacity

OREGON CITY 1

SALEM

3 3 3 3

ALBANY

IDENTITY • Visibility

3

DEVELOPMENT • Public vs. private • Grade crossings

3 3 29

Criteria scored from 1-5. 1 = least desirable, 5 = most desirable Cascadia High Speed Rail with Lloyd Lindley, Jim Pettinari, & Brad Perkins

EUGENE Fall 2010

University of Oregon, Portland

HYBRID ALTERNATIVE ALIGNMENT ALIGNMENT CRITERIA

HYBRID ALTERNATIVE

EFFICIENCY BETWEEN STOPS • Track long enough for most efficient speed

3

FREIGHT & TRANSPORTATION • Conflict with freight systems • Modal interchange (60+ miles)

1.5 3

PORTLAND

TUALATIN SUSTAINABILITY • Amount of excavated land (impact of parallel tracks) OPERATIONAL • Speed/travel time (potential for going 110 mph) • Reliability • Frequency (potential) • Capacity

OREGON CITY

1.5

SALEM

2.5 3 3 3

ALBANY

IDENTITY • Visibility

2.5

DEVELOPMENT • Public vs. private • Grade crossings

2 2.5 27.5

Criteria scored from 1-5. 1 = least desirable, 5 = most desirable Cascadia High Speed Rail with Lloyd Lindley, Jim Pettinari, & Brad Perkins

EUGENE Fall 2010

University of Oregon, Portland

STATION ASSESSMENT - PORTLAND AREA Rose Quarter Station Location Zoning

PORTLAND AREA Rose Quarter Union Station Tualatin Oregon City

-Central Commercial -Central Multi-Dwelling Residential

Union Station Station Location Zoning -Central Commercial -Central Employment

Oregon City Station Location Zoning -Mixed Use Downtown

Tualatin Station Location Zoning -Central Commercial -Office Commercial Cascadia High Speed Rail with Lloyd Lindley, Jim Pettinari, & Brad Perkins

Fall 2010

University of Oregon, Portland

STATION ASSESSMENT - SALEM

Downtown Station Location Zoning -Central Commercial -Office Commercial

SALEM Downtown I-5

I-5 Station Location Zoning -Retail Commercial -Residential/Agriculture

Cascadia High Speed Rail with Lloyd Lindley, Jim Pettinari, & Brad Perkins

Fall 2010

University of Oregon, Portland

STATION ASSESSMENT - ALBANY

Downtown Station Location Zoning -Central Commercial -Historic Downtown

ALBANY Downtown I-5

I-5 Station Location Zoning -Residential -Regional Commercial

Cascadia High Speed Rail with Lloyd Lindley, Jim Pettinari, & Brad Perkins

Fall 2010

University of Oregon, Portland

STATION ASSESSMENT Criteria Definitions Integration

Location of station to existing amenities eg. housing, jobs, transit, tourism opportunities City Growth

Potential for development within city limits or along transit corridors Development

Opportunities and constraints for development within city limits or along tranist corridors Sheet1 Station Scoring STATIONS STATION CRITERIA INTEGRATION ● Current proximity to other modes of transport ● Potential for future connections to transportation systems ● Proximity to existing job markets ● Proximity to major events areas CITY GROWTH ● Opportunity for progressive development ● Population to support infrastructure ● Interruption of historic context DEVELOPMENT ● Land Availability ● Compatible land use/zoning ● Affordability

TOTALS

Rose Quarter

Union Station

Oregon City

Tualatin

Salem Downtown

Salem I-5

Albany Downtown

Albany I-5

5

5

1

3

5

3

3

2

3

2

5

4

3

3

3

1

2

3

5

3

4 5

3 3

1 1

5 1

5 4

5 3

5 2

1 2

3 4

1 2

5

3

2

3

2

5

5

5

1

3

5

5

1

3

4

3

3

1

4

3

5

3

3

5

2

5

1

5

3

5

3 3 2

1 5 1

5 5 5

5 5 3

1 3 2

3 5 1

1 1 3

5 5 5

1 3 2

3 2 4

42

33

27

36

31

34

26

34

29

28

Cascadia High Speed Rail with Lloyd Lindley, Jim Pettinari, & Brad Perkins

Fall 2010

Eugene Eugene Campus Springfield

University of Oregon, Portland

ISSUES OF AN OREGON ELECTRIC ALIGNMENT The following questions frame issues, opportunities and constraints that influence the selection of a High Speed Rail (HSR) alignment between Vancouver, Washington and Eugene/Springfield, Oregon.

1. The Oregon Electric line may have additional capacity with flexibility to increase priority passenger service for dedicated HSR. However, mixed traffic causes delays and reduces reliability. Consistent delays and undependable passenger service because of freight significantly impacts business and commuter ridership. How will adding additional HSR passenger service improve reliability?

2. HSR is classified by trains that operate at speeds above 110 to 150 miles per hour. In today’s freight line environment where travel speeds are restricted to between 90 and 100 miles per hour is it prudent to make significant expenditures to accommodate passenger service that is not HSR? If so should Oregon abandon planning and development of HSR. If HSR is abandoned in the foreseeable future, how can improving freight safety and reliability increase passenger service and ridership, and to what extent?

3. How would using OE capacity to develop and expand HSR service preclude future freight service in the Willamette Valley region?

4. How does utilizing the existing Oregon Electric alignment and mixing passenger and freight service contribute to Oregon’s 2050 carbon reduction goals?

5. Other than ride quality, what are the benefits to HSR by improving track maintenance?

6. Station locations are within generally highly constrained areas that are either highly developed (Portland’s Union Station), industrial (Albany) or in transitional mixed institutional, commercial and industrial lands (Salem and Eugene stations). However, Tualitin is the exection with significant development and redevelopment opportunities. In all cases, heavy infrastructure (bridges, highways, rail yards) constrain access and development opportunities. Given that studies have shown that HSR stations require 2,000 to 3,000 parking spaces (in Oregon perhaps 1,000 to 2,000 parking spaces depending on market area and ridership), where and how can parking of this magnitude find accommodation within the potential existing or proposed new station areas? Does the existing transportation system in each station area have the capacity to accommodate regional traffic access to HSR service? Is there significant development potential in existing station areas to encourage adjacent new employment, housing and commercial uses to support HSR?

Cascadia High Speed Rail with Lloyd Lindley, Jim Pettinari, & Brad Perkins

Fall 2010

University of Oregon, Portland

ISSUES OF AN UNION PACIFIC ALIGNMENT The following questions frame issues, opportunities and constraints that influence the selection of a High Speed Rail (HSR) alignment between Vancouver, Washington and Eugene/Springfield, Oregon.

1. Union Pacific representatives have stated that no additional capacity or priority will be dedicated to HSR. Consistent delays and undependable service because of freight priority significantly impacts business and commuter ridership. How will adding additional trains to the Cascades and AMTRAK service improve reliability?

2. Union Pacific indicated that freight traffic is nearing capacity and that in some cases freight trains are operating at higher speeds to gain small capacity increases. As the economy recovers and freight traffic increases how can HSR increase travel market share and overall general ridership without significantly improving reliability especially where reliability is influenced by capacity constraints?

3. HSR is classified by trains that operate at speeds above 110 to 150 miles per hour. In today’s freight line environment where travel speeds are restricted to between 90 and 100 miles per hour is it prudent to make significant expenditures to accommodate passenger service that is not HSR? If so should Oregon abandon planning and development of HSR. If HSR is abandoned in the foreseeable future, how can improving freight safety and reliability increase passenger service and ridership, and to what extent?

4. How does utilizing the existing Union Pacific alignment and mixing passenger and freight service contribute to Oregon’s 2050 carbon reduction goals?

5. Other than ride quality, what are the benefits to HSR by improving track maintenance?

6. Station locations are within generally highly constrained areas that are either highly developed (Portland’s Union Station), industrial (Albany), environmental zones (Oregon City in 100 year flood plain), or in transitional mixed institutional, commercial and industrial lands (Salem and Eugene stations). In all cases, heavy infrastructure (bridges, highways, rail yards) constrain access and development opportunities. Given that studies have shown that HSR stations require 2,000 to 3,000 parking spaces, where and how can parking of this magnitude find accommodation within the existing AMTRAK station areas? Does the existing transportation system in each station area have the capacity to accommodate regional traffic access to HSR service? Is there significant development potential in existing AMTRAK station areas to encourage adjacent new employment, housing and commercial uses to support HSR?

Cascadia High Speed Rail with Lloyd Lindley, Jim Pettinari, & Brad Perkins

Fall 2010

University of Oregon, Portland

ISSUES OF AN EXCLUSSIVE / I-5 ALIGNMENT The following questions frame issues, opportunities and constraints that influence the selection of a High Speed Rail (HSR) alignment between Vancouver, Washington and Eugene/Springfield, Oregon.

1. In Florida, Washington DC, Portland, Oregon and other cities, passenger rail (heavy commuter rail and light rail transit) are located within or along side interstate highway rights-of-way. How can FHWA and FTA collaborate to enable a freeway/HSR facility between Vancouver, Washington and Eugene/Springfield, Oregon utilizing the I-5 corridor? What are the legislative steps and cost necessary to gain shared usage?

2. What is the cost and benefit of making a greater investment in exclusive HSR guideway compared to investments in a shared facility (freight and passenger rail on the UP or OE).

3. What are the consequences of using I-5 right-of-way for HSR on the interstate highway system including commuter, interstate travel and motor freight service?

4. How does utilizing the I-5 alignment with all electric technology contribute to Oregon’s 2050 carbon reduction goals?

5 What are the transportation, land use and development opportunities and constraints of locating HSR stations in the I-5 corridor?

Cascadia High Speed Rail with Lloyd Lindley, Jim Pettinari, & Brad Perkins

Fall 2010

University of Oregon, Portland

SUMMARY AND NEXT STEPS Actions and Policy: Following this analysis of the Cascadia Eco Region and its effects on rail alignments, station locations, and criteria development, there are several next steps needed to further develop the High Speed Rail selection process: 1. A environmental impact study of each rail alignment and possible station location and its effects on animal migration, erosion, pollution, etc.

2. A cost/benefit analysis of the proper distance between stations to maximize speed and efficiency.

3. A study of economic models to best fund the development of High Speed Rail.

4. A study of specific major construction projects needed for each alignment to facilitate High Speed Rail including fly overs, cut and covers sections, tunnels, etc.

5. A development of several station design concepts that offer a vision for the future of High Speed Rail.

6. A study to determine the best way to phase a hybrid alignment.

7. A study of the economic benefits for communities adjacent to a High Speed Rail Line.

8. An individual study of each city and community to determine the best location for a High Speed Rail station.

In addition to these next steps, there are several questions that should be answered before any next decisions can be made: 1. Can an I-5 alignment be secured with the Federal Highway Administration (FTA)?

2. Can a rail alignment be secured, grade separated and guaranteed either through contracts with UP, OE, or a public owned line?

3. Can a commuter High Speed Rail Line successfully coexist with freight on a mixed corridor policy?

4. Are there any new hybrid alignments/ station locations worth consideration?

5. Which are the communities most inclined and what incentives are needed to facilitate High Speed Rail?

6. What are the benefits for UP, OE for allowing High Speed Rail on their property?

7. What added amenities are needed to facilitate the new developments and activity brought by High Speed Rail?

8. What are the right of way widths and owner requirements of a UP, OE, I5 or hybrid line?

9. What is the best path for connecting a Oregon High Speed Rail line to the one already in development in Washington?

10. What political steps are needed to develop friends and advocates for a high speed rail line in Oregon?

The Cascadia Region has been targeted as an important location for the development of High Speed Rail by the Department of Transportation. Its development is an important catalyst to drive higher density, mixed-use growth, spur business and technological expertise, and address environmental concerns. It is our hope that this study has offered a clear guide for the process needed to bring Oregon’s High Speed Rail into development. Together we can create a 21st century infrastructure and long-term vision worthy of this great state.

Cascadia High Speed Rail with Lloyd Lindley, Jim Pettinari, & Brad Perkins

Fall 2010

University of Oregon, Portland

APPENDIX Typologies Shows architectural typologies that are supportive of High Speed Rail. These include employment, residential, mixed use and commercial.

Case Studies Case Studies of High Speed Rail lines outside the U.S. contribute to the critical process of comparing lines and station areas. The Case Studies provide background research as a basis for cpmparing Cascadia HSR proposal with other working systems around the world.

Background Cascadia High Speed Rail Atlas.

Resources Useful information about organizations relevant to High Speed Rail.

Bibliography

Cascadia High Speed Rail with Lloyd Lindley, Brad Perkins, & Jim Pettinari Cascadia High Speed Rail with Lloyd Lindley, Jim Pettinari, & Brad Perkins

Fall 2010 Fall 2010

University of Oregon, Portland University of Oregon, Portland

ARCHITECTURAL TYPOLOGY LOCATIONS

Cascadia High Speed Rail with Lloyd Lindley, Brad Perkins, & Jim Pettinari

Fall 2010

University of Oregon, Portland

ARCHITECTURAL TYPOLOGIES MEGA-REGIONAL CENTERS High Speed Rail offers opportunities for new architectural typologies and development. These projects represent examples of mixeduse, residential, workplace, and commercial typologies.

Mosler Lofts - Mithun: Seattle, WA The Mosler Lofts in Seattle are a 12story residential tower with 6,000 sf of retail space and promotes a 24/7 live/work community. High speed rail could support development of this density and scale for urban stop locations.

8 House - BIG : Copenhagen, Denmark This mixed-use housing project in the Orestad area of Copenhagen is 10 story development located near the local train station. The project combines 476 residential units and 100,000 sf of commercial and retail space. Copenhagen and Portland are similar in population and metro area.

Transbay Transit Center & Tower - Pelli Clarke Pelli: San Francisco, CA Project Green - Mithun: Austin, TX The proposed high speed rail station is truly a multi-modal transit hub that provides access Project green is a transit oriented development planned for the riverfront of to 10 of the area transit options. The adjacent commercial high-rise is an example of Austin that includes 2.5 million square feet of office, hotel, residential, and retail commercial architecture associated with high speed rail. space. The project intends to be both water and carbon neutral.

Aaron Frease Cascadia High Speed Rail with Lloyd Lindley, Brad Perkins, & Jim Pettinari Fall 2010 University of Oregon, Portland

Metro Center at Owings Mills, outside of Baltimore, MD. 47.5 acre mixed use build-out. Currently under construction. Includes office, residential, retail, restaurants, a public library, a community college, hotel, and over 11,000 parking spaces.

The Commons, Portland, OR. A low income senior housing development located nearby to existing transit.

EMPLOYMENT

COMMERCIAL

MIXED USE

RESIDENTIAl

ARCHITECTURE TYPOLOGIES

The Laura Street Transfer Station , an office and retail TOD in Downtown Jacksonville, Florida. The project will have an 11,000 sq. ft class “A” office building and 2,500 sq. ft retail building.

Transit-oriented shopping near the Subway Station in Lausanne , Switzerland.

Ashley B. Koger

Cascadia High Speed Rail with Lloyd Lindley, Brad Perkins, & Jim Pettinari

Fall 2010

University of Oregon, Portland

EMPLOYMENT STATION OFFICE TOWERS ..

Projects: Transbay Terminal San Francisco, CA Vienna Bahnhof City - Austria Linz Hauptbahnhof - Austria

RESIDENTIAL / HOTEL CONVERTED GRAIN SILOS Sturdy industrial buildings may offer opportunites for adaptive reuse such as these silos converted to housing and hotels Projects:

Gruenerloekka, Oslo - Norway Silo Point, Baltimore, MD - USA Salamanca Place, Hobart - TAS

SUBJECT TITLE

silolodging Quaker Square Inn Akron OH

RESIDENTIAL / HOTEL SUBJECT TITLE Body of Text

Projects:

Silo Point, Baltimore, MD - USA Quaker Square Inn, Akron, OH

(REPLACE W/ IMAGES)

HOUSING THORNTON CREEK, SEATTLE - HABITAT RESTORATION Redevelopment of an under utilized surface parking lot adjacent to a regional mall, an exisiting bus transit station and near a future light rail stop. This project included day-lighting a long hidden creek.

Project included townhouses, apartments atop retial and a cineplex on the corner adjacent to the mall.

Project:

Thornton Creek, Seattle, WA - USA

HOUSING THORNTON CREEK, SEATTLE - HABITAT RESTORATION

ARCHITECTURAL TYPOLOGIES UN Plaza, San Francisco, CA Business Structures have public space adjacent to or in between.

East Rutherford, NJ This “transit village” has retained its character but is within walking distance of a transit stop.

Jim Lutzke

Cascadia High Speed Rail with Lloyd Lindley, Brad Perkins, & Jim Pettinari

Fall 2010

University of Oregon, Portland

ARCHITECTURAL TYPOLOGIES Ballston Metro stop, Arlington, VA Dense urban area with diversity of building functions and users

Sixteenth Street Mall, Denver, CO Attractive shopping area tha tis busy all day and night has transit at its core.

Pedestrian Mall- Utrecht, Netherlands MIXED-USE

Pedestrian mall that combines both commercial and residential uses. http://www.pedbikeimages.org/ pubdetail.cfm?picid=67

Buildings can be designed to incorporate bus stops or other transit amenities into the facade of the building itself to enhance connections to transit. http://www.planning.dc.gov/planning/frames.asp?doc=/planning/LIB/planning/ documents/pdf/Trans-Principle1.pdf Nicole Holt

Cascadia High Speed Rail with Lloyd Lindley, Brad Perkins, & Jim Pettinari

Fall 2010

University of Oregon, Portland

Redmond Commercial Center - Redmond, Washington

COMMERCIAL

On-street parking and pedestrian bridge allow for a walkable area around commercial centers. h t t p : / / w w w. p e d b i k e i m a g e s . o r g / pubdetail.cfm?picid=551

Nicole Holt

Cascadia High Speed Rail with Lloyd Lindley, Brad Perkins, & Jim Pettinari

Fall 2010

University of Oregon, Portland

Songdo International Business District, Kohn Pedersen Fox - South Korea RESIDENTIAL

Mass transit lines move easily through the layout of parks and buildings, while high density residential areas are balanced with open spaces. In addition to creating a lush environment, the large green spaces help control storm water retention and reduce the urban heat island effect. http://www.archdaily.com/34289/ songdo-ibd-kohn-pedersen-fox/

Nicole Holt

Cascadia High Speed Rail with Lloyd Lindley, Brad Perkins, & Jim Pettinari

Fall 2010

University of Oregon, Portland

Schematic Circle Center, Kevin Barbee - Indianapolis, IN EMPLOYMENT

Circle Center is a multi-block urban redevelopment of downtown Indianapolis. The three million square foot mixeduse project consists of a new retail center, office towers, hotels, and entertainment zone. Circle Center is a necklace of interior spaces, linked by the datum of a curved wall, in the format of existing blocks, respecting existing facades, height lines, and historical context. http://www.kevinbarbee.com/exp_jerde.htm

Nicole Holt

Cascadia High Speed Rail with Lloyd Lindley, Brad Perkins, & Jim Pettinari

Fall 2010

University of Oregon, Portland

Architectural Typologies

Commercial: Tama Plaza Station by LaguradaLow Architects incorporates retail and shopping above a train terminal. It is located in Tama, Japan.

Mixed Use: Howard Station by GTM Architects is a mixed use development located in Baltimore, MD. It attempts to preserve the historic nature of the city.

Employment: Pushing Slab is an office building designed by MVRDV. Proposed for Paris, France, it would be one of the most energy efficient office buildings in the city. Construction is expected to start in 2011.

building in Portland, OR. It is designed by Mithun Architects.

Seth Dunn

Cascadia High Speed Rail with Lloyd Lindley, Brad Perkins, & Jim Pettinari

Fall 2010

University of Oregon, Portland

HSR ARCHITECTURAL TYPOLOGIES

COMMERCIAL - Gare MontParnasse, Paris France

MIXED USE - Gresham, OR

This commercial space offers a hotel as well as commercial shopping underground and above.

This mixed space offers shops, services, amenities, jobs and homes located at the Gresham Station Crossing.

HSR ARCHITECTURAL TYPOLOGIES

EMPLOYMENT - Palatine, IL

RESIDENTIAL - Rio Vista West, San Diego, CA

This employment zone was created after the metra line was put in. It is in walking distance and easily accessible from the metra.

This residential area was the first transit oriented development in San Diego. In Rio Vista West the homes are closer together, streets are narrower, stores are closer, and everything is centered around a village square; with a park, a trolley stop and a bus station.

HIGH SPEED RAIL CASE STUDY LOCATIONS

Cascadia High Speed Rail with Lloyd Lindley, Brad Perkins, & Jim Pettinari

Fall 2010

University of Oregon, Portland

ROME to NAPLES-ITALY FAST FACTS Distance Max Speed Average Speed Time Trips/Day Track Type Min. Curve Radius Electrification Rail Company

218 km (135 miles) 300 km/h (186 mph) 186 km/h (115 mph) 1 Hr 10 Minutes 40 Connections Daily Dedicated High Speed Line 5,500 m (18,000 ft) 25 kV AC Electrification Trenitalia

ROME TO NAPLES HIGH SPEED RAIL LINE The Rome to Naples Line is one link in the numerous lines that makes up Corridor 1 of the European Union’s “Trans-European High Speed Rail Network”. Corridor 1 connects Berlin, Germany to Palermo, Italy. Construction of this line finished in December 2009. The line utilizes 25 kV AC electrification; allowing the ETR-500 trains to operate at speeds of 300 km/h (186 mph). Trains reached a maximum speed of 347 km/h (215 mph) during testing of the track prior to opening the lines.

The distance from center line to center line of the tracks is 5m (16 ft) and the line is designed so that trains traveling in either direction can use the tracks to maintain optimum efficiency on the line. A European Train Control System keeps the line operating safely and efficiently. The Rome to Naples line is a passenger only line and does not have grade crossings. The longest tunnel on the route goes through the Alban Hills and is 6,725 m (4 miles) long.

Aaron Frease

Salerno

Corridor 1: Trans-European High Speed Rail Network

Cascadia High Speed Rail with Lloyd Lindley, Brad Perkins, & Jim Pettinari

Fall 2010

University of Oregon, Portland

ROME to NAPLES-ITALY ROMA TERMINI Roma Termini is the main train station in the heart Rome and one of the largest train stations in Europe. The terminal has 29 platforms, and serves 480,000 people per day for an annual rate of more than 150 million people a year. Roma Termini is an important transportation hub for Rome because it is the location of stops for both Metro lines A & B, and there is a bus station at the adjacent Piazza dei Cinquecento

NAPOLI CENTRALE Napoli Centrale is the main railway in Naples, and the 6th largest in Italy in terms of passenger flow. This terminal serves 137,000 people per day for an annual rate of 50 million people per year. Its 26 tracks serve about 390 trains daily, and it is also a subway stop for Naples Metro. The terminal is currently under construction for renovation to Pier Luigi Nervi’s original design, and it is located in Piazza Giuseppe Garibaldi.` SALERNO RAIL STATION

SALERNO, ITALY The Naples-Salerno High Speed Rail line continues the high speed line of Corridor 1 and frees up the local Naples-Salerno coast line. This new dedidcated passenger line frees up some of the congestion on the coast line due to freight and passenger rail service. The current rail station accomodates high speed rail and conventional rail lines. Salerno, Italy is similar in population to Eugene, Oregon and has about half the land area.

Population Land Area

EUGENE, OR 154,620 People 40.54 Square Miles

SALERNO, ITALY 146,045 People 22.4 Square Miles

Sources: - Ferrovie Dello Stato. Gruppo Ferrovie. http://www.ferroviedellostato.it/homepage.html (accessed October 4, 2010).

- Wikipedia contributors, “High-speed rail in Italy,” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=High-speed_rail_in_Italy&oldid=392953509 (accessed October 4, 2010).

- Wikipedia contributors, “Rome–Naples high-speed railway,” “Salerno, Italy,” “Eugene, Oregon,” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, http://en.wikipedia.org (accessed October 4, 2010).

LYON TO AVIGNON, FRANCE FAST FACTS Distance Maximum Speed Average Speed Travel Time Trips/Day Track Type Rail Company Electrification

276 km (127 miles) 279 km/h (173.5 mph) 199 km/h (124 mph) 1:01 27 Weekdays, 18 Weekends LGV TGV 25 kV 50 Hz AC

TRAIN ROUTE: Avignon TGV Valence TGV Lyon Part Dieu

CITY POPULATION: 89,769 63,864 472,317

TGV: THE FRENCH HIGH SPEED NETWORK TGV runs most of its trains throughout France. TGV began in the 1970’s, and was the 4th commercial high speed train service and the 3rd standard gauge high speed train service. The network now extends throughout France and into Belgium and Switzerland, serving 40,000 passengers daily.

WHAT ARE THE ADVANTAGES OF TGV TRAINS? TGV trains are able to travel on both LGV tracks and conventional tracks, at the maximum safe speeds on those tracks. This gives the TGV system advantages over other systems, as the TGV trains can tie in to existing infrastructure and serve city-center stations.

Ashley B. Koger

image from www.eurail.com

The full TGV rail network extends into Belgium and Switzerland.

Cascadia High Speed Rail with Lloyd Lindley, Brad Perkins, & Jim Pettinari

Fall 2010

University of Oregon, Portland

LYON TO AVIGNON, FRANCE FAST FACTS: VALENCE TGV STATION Opening Date: 2001 Distance from Central Valence: 10 km (6.2 miles) 20 minutes by shuttle Tracks 6 (4 TGV, 2 commuter) TGV Stops 30 stops per day Parking 812 spaces Amenities Rental Car Service Shuttle to Central Valence THE TGV STATION IN VALENCE, FRANCE The Valence TGV station is a bi-level station with six total tracks. It serves as a cross-roads for the TGV network and the commuter train line. The two tracks on the upper level serve TER trains, France’s national commuter train line. The 4 tracks on the lower level are reserved for TGV service. The outer two tracks are for trains stopping in Valence, and align with the platforms.

The inner two tracks allow trains that are not stopping in Valence to pass through the station at full speed.

The main station area is buried under grade to allow the TER trains to pass above. The orientation of the station allows for expansive views of the Vercors Mountains.

The opening of the Valence TGV station has re-routed traffic from Valence’s main train station and greatly decreased travel times for TGV Mediterranean services passing through Valence.

Ashley B. Koger

TGV Train

The station plan to the left illustrates the close connection the Valence Station has to the freeway. The station is 6 miles from central Valence. Much area is dedicated to parking, providing 812 spaces and allowing commuters to drive to the station and leave their car while traveling. The diagram also shows how the commuter train tracks and TGV tracks intersect at the station.

Sources: Maillard, Mechel. “Three New French TGV stations,” www.jrtr.net/jrtr28/pdf/f26_mai.pdf RailEurope.com www.bonjourlafrance.com

Cascadia High Speed Rail with Lloyd Lindley, Brad Perkins, & Jim Pettinari

Fall 2010

University of Oregon, Portland

Railjet: Munich - Salzburg - Vienna - Budapest FAST FACTS Distance Speed Time Trips/Day Track Type Rail Company

564 km (351 mi) 200-230 km/h (125-143 mph) 6 h 45 min 5 | Vienna - Munich (4 h 15 min) 7 | Vienna - Budapest (2 h 30 min) Dedicated /Combination Austrian Federal Railways (ÖBB)

Flying on Austria’s new Railjet The Railjet is the new high speed train of the Austrian Federal Railways (ÖBB), which was introduced with a timetable change in 2008-2009 and operates at speeds of up to 200 km/h (124 mph), with a planned increase to 230 km/h (143 mph) by 2013. ÖBB has opted for locomotive-hauled push-pull high-speed trains, rather than Electrical Multiple Unit (EMU) such as the ICE3 or Shinkansen designs. A Railjet train set consists of seven individual coaches that are permanently coupled with airtight between-coach interconnections but with normal screw couplings on the outer ends of the set of 7 coaches. This design allows them to be hauled by existing conventional locomotives, and for this role the ÖBB chose locomotives from their large fleet of Taurus locomotives (a varient of which, the ÖBB Class 1216 or Taurus 3, holds the current world speed record for an electric locomotive at 357 km/h (222 mph)). The coach furthest from the locomotive acts as the control car.

Railjet has taken over most of the long-distance services from Vienna to Salzburg.

This railway is the central component of ÖBB’s plans for high speed operation, and already more than 100 km is cleared for trains to run at 200 km/h. Currently intensive work is being made to permit maximum speed over most of the line by 2012. this will reduce travel times from Vienna to Salzburg from 2 h 40 min at the moment to approximately 2 h 15 min. Ultimately, ÖBB will have around 250 km of route where railjets will be able to operate at high speed. Most track in Austria, including this route, is state owned allowing the government to manage and opptimize passanger and rail traffic.

Of the 408 seats in each formation, 16 are in Premium class, 76 in Business class and 316 in Economy. Electronic passenger information displays feature throughout the train, and each set has 80 screens to inform passengers about the next station stop and available connections using real-time data transmitted to the train by GPRS. Between stations the screens display the train’s speed and its location on a map.

Provision is being made for a media server to be installed, allowing a digital video service of short films or tourist information to be offered in the future. www.bahnindustrie.net

Brett Santhuff

( REPLACE W/ IMAGES / MAPUniversity OF LINE) Cascadia High Speed Rail with Lloyd Lindley, Brad Perkins, & Jim Pettinari Fall 2010 of Oregon, Portland

Railjet: Munich - Salzburg - Vienna - Budapest ROUTES The first route Munich - Vienna - Budapest started operating in December, 2008, with the second route Vienna - Salzburg - Bregenz/Zurich following in December, 2009.

LONG-TERM PLANS 2010-12 2010-12 2013

2010-15

Vienna - Graz - Maribor - Ljubljana ( + Zagreb) Vienna - Villach - Vience / Lienz Improved frequency for Vienna - Innsbruck - Bregenz/Zurich New Vienna Hauptbahnhof (Central Station) and assocaited transit oriented development. This improvement will allow trains to continue through on travel in the city - further improving rail effeciency and travel times.

macht schnell | macht Spaß

Vienna - Linz

The rail segment from Vienna to the Linz follows the lengh of the Danube River valley, an area of vineyards and orchards, villages and forested hillsides.

www.hauptbahnhof-wien.at | area of new development and Vienna’s new train station

Linz, with a population of 190,000, is Austria’s third-largest city and in size is equivelant to Eugene, Oregon. Linz experiences a rail ridership of 30,000 per day. In 2004 the city began modernizing and rebuilidng its 1950s train station to create both a revitalized transportiaon hub and an economic center for the city. Railjet makes one stop between Vienna and Linz at about the halfway point in the city of St. Pölten, population 51,000.

The Trip of 184 km (114 mi) takes 1 hr 30 min total time, representing average speeds of 123 km/h (76 mph). Cost is for an Economy Ticket is 31.20 Euro.

SOURCES:

Linz’s new revitalized Hauptbahnhof. Above projects underway in Vienna.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railjet; www.seat61.com/railjet.htm www.hauptbahnhof-wien.at; www.railwaygazette.com www.eurail.com/eurail-high-speed-railjet

www.seat61.com

(REPLACE W/ IMAGES)

wikimedia comons

KOLN (COLONGE), DE - FRANKFURT, DE FAST FACTS Distance Speed Time Trips/Day Track Type Rail Company

177 km, 110 miles 166 km/h, 103mph - fastest avg.

1:04 with 1 stop 4 trips with varing stops rated 300km/h, 186 mph Deutsche Bahn AG

OVERVIEW Deutsche Bahn has been providing high speed rail through its Intercity-Express (ICE) since 1991. ICE covers all of Germany and has connections into five of Germany’s neighbors. In 1999 ICE introduced tilting technology to its system. This technology works by tilting the cars as the train moves along curved track.

By allowing an upto 8 degree inward angle the the ICE trains can travel 30% faster around curves with no affect to the passengers. Tilting technology can accomadate maximum speeds at 143mph 230km/h on shared tracks. The downside is that the ICE isn’t the fasest train in Europe. Much of the ICEs routes are shared tracks and much of Germany’s rails have scattered tunnels which limit speed. Tunnels help to eliminate grade crossings through existing urban areas but because of the high pressurization differential between the tunnel air and the train windows can be blown out if the trains don’t reduce speed in tunnels.

MAP OF LINE Jim Lutzke

Cascadia High Speed Rail with Lloyd Lindley, Brad Perkins, & Jim Pettinari

Fall 2010

University of Oregon, Portland

KOLN (COLONGE), DE - FRANKFURT, DE SAFETY Since its introduction to Europe, high speed rail had a near perfect record [no deaths and few derailment accidents] until June 3rd 1998. The train, running on a conventional track at about 125mph 200kmh, is believed to have impacted a fallen car and crashed into a bridge near Eschede killing 102 people and injuring hundreds. Interestingly high speed had nothing to do with the crash (the train was on a conventional track).

High speed rail is actually tha safest mode of transport, with 102 deaths in Germany in almost 20 years (5 a year) is well below the fatality rate of any other form of transportation.

tear from collision with garbage truck LIMBURG AN DER LAHN, DE Limburg an der Lahn has about 18,000 people, over 36,000 including its outliying area. The population and the river that flows through the town are very similar to features of Albany, OR (40,000 people). Both towns have an expressway, where the Limburg line runs, close to town. Limburg is now connected with 2 major urban centers a short trip away. Albany and extending to Corvalis would benifit simialrly. Residents would be able to travel up to Portland and back, even work a regular 9-5 and be back in time for dinner. sources: http://www.bahn.com http://www.wikipedia.org http://www.bild.de/BILD/news/bild-english/world-news/2010/08/17/traincrash-horror-in-germany/ice-slashed-open-by-garbage-truck-15-injured.html

Limburg an Der Lahn, DE

Albany, OR

Rhine-Rhone High Speed Line: Eastern Branch - Dijon to Mulhouse, France FAST FACTS Rail Company Type Distance Speed Construction Gauge Max. Tolerances Voltage Opening Date Cost

Réseau Ferré de France (RFF) TGV 190km total (118 miles) 320km/h (200mph) Continuous welded rails (CWR) on reinforced concrete sleepers 1,435 mm 5mm 25kV AC (50 Hz) 2011 (planning since 1992) 2,312 billion euros

LOCATION

While the Rhine-Rhone Line is designed to reach 200mph, which is faster than Oregon’s target speed for high speed rail, it does share similarities for target track length and size of cities with sub-stations.

•

• • •

The Rhine-Rhone Line will be the first province-to-province High Speed Line project in France. The route followed will bring France closer to major economic and population centres in the Rhine basin and Benelux countries, and will give these regions easier access to economic and urban centres in the Mediterranean, Italy and Spain.

The line will also help to secure France’s position in the centre of a Europe progressively expanding to the East.

12 of the 21 mainland French regions will benefit from the project.

At European level, the plans will in particular affect Germany, Switzerland, Great Britain, Belgium and the Mediterranean.

More than 1.1 million passengers per new station are expected to use the line each year.

Nicole Holt

JOURNEY TIMES (IN HOURS) Dijon>>

Mulhouse

Strasbourg

Zurich

2005 2h 40 3h 50 4h 30

2012 1h 05 1h 35 2h 25

Mulhouse>>

Marseille

Paris

Lyon

2005 5h 40 3h 10 3h 45

2012 4h 40 2h 40 2h 25

Cascadia High Speed Rail with Lloyd Lindley, Brad Perkins, & Jim Pettinari

Fall 2010

University of Oregon, Portland

Rhine-Rhone High Speed Line: Eastern Branch - Dijon to Mulhouse, France Two sub-stations are planned to feed the 140 km of the Rhine-Rhone East Branch: - The first is located along the line Devecey, on the town of Besancon. It will be connected to the station RTE Palente and feed the 2 / 3 west of the line by walking on railway property.

- The second, located on the town of Hericourt in the area of Belfort-MontbĂŠliard, will supply a third of the railway to the east Perrigny Line Connection

To preserve the time savings of a new line, the fluidity of the connection must be ensured. The connection Perrigny facilitate direct routing of trains on the TGV to the south and simplify the circulation of the North-South route.

Devecey Line Connection

COMPARISONS BESANCON, FRANCE City Area 47 sq mi (122 km2) (1999) - Population 134,376 (1999) Metro area 638 sq mi (1,652 km2) (1999) - Population 222,381 (1999) Density 4,590 /sq mi (1,774 /km2) Since the 1990s, the town has developed a reputation as one of France’s leading centres of technology in all fields, including telecommunications and biotechnology.

SALEM, OREGON City Area 46.4 sq mi (120.1 km2) -Population 154,510 (2008) Land Area 44.8 sq mi (118.4 km2) -Metro Population 383,100 Density 2,994.0/sq mi (1,156.1/km2) Nicole Holt

BELFORT, FRANCE City Area 6.60 sq mi (17.10 km2) Population 52,342 (2006) Density 7,930 /sq mi (3,061 /km2) Belfort is a trading centre for wine and grain and its industries include chemicals, engineering, plastics and textiles. Belfort is also the hometown of Alstom where the first TGVs (Trains Grande Vitesse) were produced. As well as of the GE Energy European headquarter and centre of excellence for the manufacturing of gas turbines.

OREGON CITY, OREGON City Area 8.1 sq mi (21.1 km2) -Population 31,826 (2009) Land Area 8.4 sq mi (21.6 km2) Density 3,163.9/sq mi (1,221.6/km2)

Cascadia High Speed Rail with Lloyd Lindley, Brad Perkins, & Jim Pettinari

Fall 2010

University of Oregon, Portland

Rhine-Rhone High Speed Line: Eastern Branch - Dijon to Mulhouse, France CONSULTATION From the start of the project RFF involved local elected representatives, residents and agricultural organizations in all stages of the process.

This approach made it possible to choose a route which limited the impact on farming activities and on the natural and built environment.

PRESERVING THE ENVIRONMENT • The environmental challenges were taken into account since the project started. The decision to avoid housing as much as possible made it easier to integrate the line in terms of noise and environmental impact. The project avoids sensitive natural habitats and protects animal species in the areas affected by preserving their migration routes by means of suitable constructions. Water resources have been respected in accordance with the applicable laws as well as efforts to re-create and develop 125 hectares of wetland.

• A carbon inventory was conducted at the start of the project. The findings showed that the Rhine-Rhone high-speed line project will be ‘carbon positive’ after 12 years of operation.

OTHER INFO

Sources: • http://www.rff.fr/en/railway-network/projects/new-railways-lines-2916/ rhin-rhone-high-speed-line • http://est.lgvrhinrhone.com/english.php • http://est.lgvrhinrhone.com/medias/pdf/medias79.pdf • http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belfort • http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Besançon

40% of rail line through forests 37 underpasses for animals, artificial lakes, etc.

85 municipalities concerned 6,000 new jobs created 160 bridges > 13 viaducts > 1 tunnel > 400 km of fencing nd

The route followed by the Eastern Branch of the Rhine-Rhône high-speed line

st

Section A

nd

Section B

Section C

to Strasbourg

Legends New stations High-speed line layout - 1st tranche High-speed line layout - 2nd tranche Connection to the existing network Existing network Civil engineering structures Tunnel âle

Municipalities crossed

to B

• • • • •

Maintenance depot Works depot Water courses Motorway

N

Eurostar (LGV Nord and High Speed 1)- London to Paris FAST FACTS Distance

LGV Nord: 108 km (67 miles) Channel Tunnel: 50 km (31 miles) High Speed 1: 108 km (67 miles) 300 km/hr (186 miles/hr) 118 km/hr (73 miles/hr) 2:15 19 Dedicated except for Channel Eurostar

Speed Average Speed Time Trips/Day Track Type Rail Company Overview Eurostar is a high speed rail line servicing the Channel Tunnel connection between London and Paris.

The line consists of three mainline routes: The High Speed 1, the Channel Tunnel, and the LGV Nord. High Speed 1 runs 67 miles and connects London to the beginning of the Channel Tunnel.1 LGV Nord also runs 67 miles and connects the Paris end of the Channel Tunnel with a stop in Lille.2 Like the proposed Cascadia Line, Eurostar stops at many cities such as Kent and Calais.

The Channel Tunnel is a 31 mile line which connects Britain and France. It utilizes two rail lines with a servicing tunnel between the two. The Channel Tunnel is owned by a separate company Eurotunnel which for its use.3 Eurotunnel was able to pay for the operation through investment by stockholders as well as a ÂŁ8 billion debt. This negated the need for government investment.4 This may be a valuable option due to a lack of political force behind the cascadia line.

Eurostar began its service to Paris in 1994 however High Speed 1 was not completed until 2003.1 The Eurostar line now serves 9 million people per year.5 Seth Dunn

London to Paris

Cascadia High Speed Rail with Lloyd Lindley, Brad Perkins, & Jim Pettinari

Fall 2010

University of Oregon, Portland

Eurostar (LGV Nord and High Speed 1)- London to Paris

Britain Rail Class 373 The Britain Rail Class 373 is the fastest train in the United Kingdom’s High Speed Rail line. Started in 1993, it can operate at 300 km/hr on high speed rail lines however it is limited to 160 km/hr in the Channel Tunnel due to restraints such as air resistance and scheduling with other trains in the tunnel.6 The train is powered by two power cars each utilizing third rail pickup shoes or overhead power. In the case of the Eurostar route, overhead power is used. Along with the two power cars, each train consists of 18 couches and is able to carry 750 people. These can either be Standard 7 In its 17 years in existence, there has been only one accident.

While the train derailed, it stayed upright and no one was killed.8 St Pancras Station, London St Pancras Station in London was built for Midland Railway in 1868. It Victorian style makes it a beautiful piece work of architecture. Unfortunately by the 1960s, Plans were underway to tear it down. Due to strong opposition, this never happened. With the help of a £800 million renovation in 2007, the international expansion was created.9 This was in part to Eurostar’s newly created High Speed 1 line. The roof, pictured opposite was constructed using the beams from the original train shed. The Station is centrally located in London and within walking distance of a variety of amenities. Across the street from the station is the British Library. Also located nearby is Kings Cross Central

Britain Rail Class 373

Two trains at St Pancras Station, London

TGV Thalys-Brussels to Amsterdam (via Rotterdam) FAST FACTS Distance Speed Time Trips/Day Track Type Rail Company

226 km (140mi) 220 km/h (136mph) 1:53 11 Dedicated SNCF (Societe Nationale des Chemins de fer Francais)

TGV and Rotterdam The TGV is one of the fastest commercially operating conventional trains in the world. Under test conditions, the TGV has reached speeds of 515.3 km/h (320.2 mph), and setting a world record in 1990. The TGV network in Belgium is seen as an integral part of the future European High Speed railway network, which is designed to provide a total of some 29000 kilometers of through routes suitable for operation at 250 km/h or more between major cities by 2010.

Rotterdam is one of four stops on the route to Amsterdam, and shares several similarities with Portland. The population of the city is roughly 600,000 and it is located geographically on a large river, the Nieuwe Maas which divides the city into a north and a south. Rotterdam is well connected within the Dutch rail system, but Thalys is the only high speed train that runs through it. Like most European cities, the inner city public transit utilizes a metro system as well as busses and water taxis.

TGV in Brussels

Stops City Population Brussels 1,800,000 Anvers 1,190,769 Rotterdam 603,425 Den Haag 458,818 Schiphol NA Airport Amsterdam 2,158,372

TGV Thalys-Brussels to Amsterdam (via Rotterdam) TGV Tracks and Stations The TGV runs on dedicated tracks known as LGV (ligne à grande vitesse, or “high-speed line”), allowing speeds of up to 320 km/h (200 mph) in normal operation on the newest lines. TGV trains can also run on conventional tracks, only at slower speeds. A strong point of the TGV in comparison to magnetic levitation trains is that older tracks may be used without special improvements. This is especially important when serving railway stations inside city centers.

Rotterdam’s high speed station is located in the center of the city which subsequently connects to the rest of the town. The train crosses over the waterway, turns to stop in the Central Station then continues north towards Amsterdam.

Rotterdam Central Station and Thalys Line

TGV Thalys Thalys operates services via Brussels between Paris and Amsterdam or Cologne. So far, these reach their top speed of 300 km/h (186 mph) only on the run between Brussels and Paris Nord, which is scheduled to take 1h20m up to 26 times daily in each direction. There are also daily Thalys services between Paris and the main cities of Flanders and Wallonia, and four daily between Brussels and Marne-la-Vallée-Chessy for Disneyland Paris via Paris CDG airport, one of which continues through to Geneva, and the corresponding return workings.

Proposed Portland Station at Rose Quarter

Cascadia High Speed Rail Atlas Joe Holm and Emily Steen with Lloyd Lindley, Brad Perkins, and Jim Pettinari University of Oregon-Portland Campus Summer, 2010

Cascadia High Speed Rail Atlas Introduction Preface 3

Objectives & Goals 4 Background 5 Why Oregon? 7 Alignment Evaluation Criteria 9 Urban Evaluations Vancouver, WA 12 Portland 16 Oregon City 20 Salem 24 Albany/Corvallis 28 Eugene/Springfield 32

Logistics Tunneling 37

Catenary 38

Integrating HSR with Light Rail 39 The Value of Time 41

Speed & Station Spacing 42

Accessibility & Platform Height 43 Appendix Criteria for Funding 45 Future Goals 46 Sources 48

2

Preface As architects, and as members of the University of Oregon, we have a special responsibility to seek sustainable solutions that accommodate human needs. In the past 50 years, consumer transit demand has quickly outpaced supply, and the U.S. has continued to build infrastructure for minimally sustainable means of getting from place to place. Automotive and air travel receive billions of dollars per year in federal subsidies, create billions of tons of carbon emissions, and have now made commuting a major portion of our workday.

While creating green buildings is very important, we must also keep an eye toward creating sustainable communities around these buildings. Using high-speed rail routes as a guide, you have the potential to create built infrastructure that fosters the necessary growth of new, future-proofed, sustainable communities that are connected through multiple modes of green transit.

Before we throw a basket of figures at you, let’s go with a couple of quick facts.

FACT: High speed rail (HSR) is fast.

FACT: HSR is safe.

FACT: HSR uses less fuel and creates less carbon emissions than automobile or air travel.

FACT: HSR has the potential to build sustainable communities connected by numerous means of green transit.

As a quick reference, here are a few acronyms we’ll be throwing around: HSR - High Speed Rail ODOT - Oregon Department of Transportation USDOT - United States Department of Transportation FRA - Federal Rail Administration UP or UPRR - Union Pacific Railroad, owner of much of Amtrak’s rail line BNSF - Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad, another owner of much of Amtrak’s rail line OE - Oregon Electric, another owner of rail line with another alternate route EIS - Environmental Impact Statement, which is needed to establish any new rail line or station I-5 - Interstate 5, a possible route alignment along the median of I5 ARRA - American Recovery and Restoration Act We wish you all the best of luck, and are happy to be of help as you find new, creative solutions for transit problems.

Sincerely, Emily Steen & Joe Holm

3

Objectives & Goals 1.

Objective

Goal

subgoal

subgoal subgoal sub-subgoal

Find the best alignment for HSR from Eugene to Vancouver, WA Evaluate 4 alignments - OE, Exclusive Corridor (I-5 median, Eastbank, Lake Oswego), Amtrak/UP/BNSF, and a hybrid approach1 Prepare evaluation criteria grid Figure out existing HSR dynamic envelope Find crossings and alternatives - quantity per alignment Crossing over grade vs. tunneling (costs)

2.

Objective Goal Goal Goal

Make the University of Oregon an essential part of future HSR planning Establish a course description for future studios Lay groundwork for studios to begin with minimal site research Build framework for & create an easy-to-understand booklet

3.

Objective Goal

Explore options for HSR stations Analyze/Model HSR station locations and areas

subgoal subgoal subgoal subgoal subgoal subgoal

Find curves - radii ratings @ 70/80/90/110/150 mph Find isochrons - 15 min vs 30 min car/bike/walk commute Map inter and inner city transport Map zoning in area of stations and isochrons Map destinations: short-term, long-term, episodic Map employment centers: 1k to 5k, 5k to 10k, 10k to 20k

1 Hybrid alignment to be determined and analysed by students taking the Fall 2010 HSR Seminar

4

Background Why High Speed Rail?

In April of 2009, as a part of the American Recovery and Restoration Act (ARRA), the US Department of Transportation’s Federal Railroad Administration released a Strategic Plan for High Speed Rail in the United States. It mapped 6 strategic corridors across the US, one of them linking Eugene, Oregon to Vancouver, BC, Canada (fig. 1.1).

In addition to time savings, safety, and reliability, HSR most importantly provides a significantly low carbon means of travel.

Funding from a number of other sources, including US DOT’s TIGER program and Amtrak, as well as possible provisions in future transportation legislation on national and local levels, has the United States pledging billions of dollars to investment in high speed rail corridors.

In the interest of more reliable and effective service along the Cascadia corridor, Oregon and Washington’s DOT were awarded with $598 million dollars of the $8 billion available from the ARRA. $8 million went to Oregon, $590 million went to Washington. Here’s where that money went: Seattle to Portland: -Two more daily round trips added between Seattle and Portland, for a total of 6 -Travel time will be reduced by at least 5% -On-time performance will increase substantially, from 62% to 88% -Major construction projects: -bypass tracks to allow for increased train frequency -multiple upgrades to existing track and signal systems -grade separations, improved train control, seismic for King Street Station.

CO2 emmissions by mode of transit (grams of CO2 per seat per kilometer)

200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0

HSR

LRT

Bus

Air

Auto

(source: Alberta High Speed Rail: www.albertahighspeedrail.com/hsrBenefits.html)

Portland to Eugene: -Upgrades to Portland’s Union Station -Engineering and environmental work for track and signaling projects Although it is not “high-speed” the State of Oregon has sponsored the Amtrak Cascades between Eugene and Portland since 1994. This service is paid with fees generated from the sale of custom license plates. Current service includes two round trips per day, a two hour and 35 minute trip each way. The Federal government has recently made unprecedented levels of funding available for capital investments to improve service to “high-speed” meaning speeds of at least 110 miles per hour. Before Oregon can qualify for the federal funding, several criteria must be met including completing environmental analyses and determining service improvement goals.

Draft Goals Oregon’s DRAFT service improvement goals include reducing one-way travel time to under two hours, increasing round trips to six per day and increasing on-time performance to 95%.

The Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) recently held 11 open house meetings regarding Oregon’s DRAFT goals for high-speed rail between Eugene and Portland. Over 600 people attended these meetings held in Portland, Milwaukie, Lake Oswego, Oregon City, Tualatin, Wilsonville, Woodburn, Salem, Albany, Junction City and Eugene providing ODOT will with valuable feedback.

ODOT has received over 2000 completed surveys on the DRAFT goals.

5

Vancouver

Seattle

Trans-American Passenger Network

Cascadia

Portland Montreal

Minneapolis

Pacific Ocean

Toronto

Milwaukee

Great Lakes Salt Lake City

CHICAGO

Detroit Cleveland

NEW YORK

Pittsburgh

Philadelphia

Omaha

Sacramento

NorCal

SAN FRANCISCO

Boston

Northeast

Denver

WASHINGTON

Cincinnati Kansas City

Front Range

St. Louis

Atlantic Ocean

Las Vegas

Socal Piedmont

Oklahoma City

LOS ANGELES Phoenix

San Diego

Albuquerque

Charlotte

Memphis

ATLANTA Arizona Sun Corridor

DALLAS El Paso

Texas Triangle Incremental High-speed rail Highspeed rail

Megaregion Long Distance/ Corridor

Bus

Florida

50K 250K +

San Antonio

HOUSTON Tampa

Top airport Metro of 3 million+

Amer ica2050.org

Jacksonville

Gulf Coast

City Population 10-50K

Gulf of Mexico

Miami

Megaregion boundary

Fig 1: Trans-American Passenger Network

6

Why Oregon?

We live in a rapidly growing state. In the next 20 years, the population of Oregon is expected to grow at a rate of 1% per year. While this may not sound like much, please consider that every new citizen is a machine that creates 12 tons of carbon dioxide emissions per year, and that each new residents will likely reside in one of Oregon’s Western hub cities, which means they will need a means of getting from place to place.

As architects, and as members of the University of Oregon, we have a special responsibility to seek sustainable solutions that accommodate these new residents.

In the past 50 years, consumer transit demand has quickly outpaced supply, and we continue to build infrastructure for minimally sustainable means of getting from place to place. Automotive and air travel receive billions of dollars per year in federal subsidies, create billions of tons of carbon emissions, and have now made commuting a major portion of our workday.

High speed rail has the potential to provide a quicker, less expensive, and cleaner commuting and travel option for Oregon’s residents. As architects and creative problem solvers, we possess the skills that will help lay new infrastructure for this new, more efficient means of movement in Oregon.

Oregon Electric’s routes, now being considered for a new alignment, once connected the Wilamette Valley.

7

Cascadia Megaregion

8

Alignment Evaluation Criteria Below is a matrix of significant factors in the consideration of each alignment. Each has significant pros and cons.

I-5 ALIGNMENT -Tunneling and flyovers will be kept to a minimum as a result of zero at-grade crossings.

HOWEVER -Significant tunneling may be necessary in the Portland area, estimated to cost nearly $1 billion per mile for a 2-track bored tunnel.

AND -Each mile of the 120 required will ring in at a ballpark cost of $40-$80 million per mile.

Existing track (Amtrak/OE) -Track has already been laid and rail-ready infrastructure exists.

HOWEVER -Almost 200 grade crossings must be eliminated by either tunneling or flyover.

AND -Many slow or non-navigable curves must be corrected in order to run smooth service, at speed.

OWNERSHIP # AT-GRADE CROSSINGS MILES OF TUNNEL # AERIAL STRUCTURES TOTAL MILAGE

AMTRAK

OREGON ELECTRIC

EXCLUSIVE CORRIDOR

BNSF/UP

OE

PUBLIC/PRIVATE

197

185

0

1

1

1

32

25

12

138

142

135

9

VANCOUVER PORTLAND

OREGON CITY

SALEM

ALBANY/CORVALLIS

EUGENE/SPRINGFIELD Amtrak Alignment

Alignment Overview | Vancouver, WA to Eugene, OR

Oregon Electric Alignment Exclusive Corridor Alignment

URBAN ANALYSIS

Vancouver, WA

AMTRAK

OREGON ELECTRIC

EXCLUSIVE CORRIDOR

# AT-GRADE CROSSINGS

1

1

0

# AERIAL STRUCTURES

5

5

1

# MILES OF TUNNELS

0

0

1.5

-

-

-

Auto, Bike, Bus

Auto, Bike, Bus

Auto, Bike, Bus

Industrial

Industrial

Commercial & Mixed Use, Industrial

# MILES STATION TO STATION TYPES OF INTERMODAL TRANSPORTATION LAND USE ZONING

POPULATION JURISDICTIONS SERVED

165,809 Vancouver, Camas, Battle Ground, Scappoose, Ridgefield, St. Helens, Woodland, La Center, Amboy, North Bonneville, Stevenson, Kelso, Longview

12

Vancouver Public Schools

Bonneville Power Administration

Vancouver Public Schools

Clark County Elections Clark County Clerk Clark County District Court Bonneville Power Administration Confluence Project

Amtrak Station Oregon Electric Station Exclusive Corridor Station

1/2 Mile Walk | Vancouver, WA

Destination Major Employer [ over 1000 employees ]

Fred Meyer Bonneville Power Administration

Vancouver Public Schools SW Washington Medical Ctr. Vancouver Public Schools Downtown CBD Clark College Vancouver Public Schools Confluence Project Fort Vancouver Pearson Air Museum Waterfront Development

Amtrak Station Amtrak Station Oregon Electric Station Exclusive Corridor Exclusive Corridor Station Station

2 Mile Bike Ride | Vancouver, WA

Destination Destination Major Employer Employer [[ over ] over1000 1000employees employees ]

WSU Clark County Amphitheater Vancouver Public Schools Vancouver Public Schools

Fred Meyer Georgia Pacific

City of Vancouver HP SEH America Evergreen Schools SW Washington Medical Ctr. Fred Meyer Vancouver Public Schools SW Washington Medical Ctr. Georgia Pacific

Amtrak Station Amtrak Station Oregon Electric Station Exclusive Corridor Exclusive Corridor Station Station

25 Mile Car Ride | Vancouver, WA

Destination Destination Employer Major Employer 15 [[ over ] over1000 1000employees employees ]

Portland, OR

AMTRAK

OREGON ELECTRIC

EXCLUSIVE CORRIDOR

16

n/a

0

# AERIAL STRUCTURES

4

n/a

4

# MILES OF TUNNELS

1

1

0

VAN-PDX 9

VAN-PDX 9

VAN-PDX 9

Air (connect), Auto, Bike, Bus, Light Rail

Air (connect), Auto, Bike, Bus, Light Rail

Air (connect), Auto, Bike, Bus, Light Rail

Commercial

Commercial

Industrial

# AT-GRADE CROSSINGS

# MILES STATION TO STATION TYPES OF INTERMODAL TRANSPORTATION

LAND USE ZONING

POPULATION JURISDICTIONS SERVED

566,141 Beaverton, Hillsboro, Forest Grove, Aloha, Sherwood, Tigard, Tualatin, Lake Oswego, Milwaukie, West Linn, Clackamas, Greshman, Troutdale, Boring, Sandy

16

Kaiser Rose Garden

Bridgeport Brewery Kaiser PNCA

Convention Center

USPS

Metro KB Pipeline Chinese Gardens

PICA Art Institute

Museum of Contemporary Craft

Portland Center Stage Powell’s Books

University of Oregon Saturday Market

Amtrak Station Amtrak Station Oregon Electric Station Exclusive Corridor Exclusive Corridor Station Station

1/2 Mile Walk | Portland, OR

Destination Destination Major Employer Employer [[ over ] over1000 1000employees employees ]

Adidas

Legacy Emanuel Hospital

NW 23rd

Lloyd Center BPA

Pearl District

Washington Park Japanese Gardens

Regence Blue Cross PGE Park Regence Blue Cross Portland Center for Performing Arts

Tom McCall Waterfront Park Standard Insurance StanCorp

City Hall PSU

OMSI

Amtrak Station Amtrak Station Oregon Electric Station Exclusive Corridor Exclusive Corridor Station Station

2 Mile Bike Ride | Portland, OR

Destination Destination Major Employer Employer [[ over ] over1000 1000employees employees ]

Astoria

PDX Forest Park PCC

PCC

Boeing

Cannon Beach

Providence Medical

Columbia River Gorge

Providence Medical Techtronix Nike

Providence Medical OHSU

Regence Blue Cross VA Medical

PCC Fred Meyer TriMet

PCC Structural PCC

Mt. Hood National Forest

Providence Medical

Amtrak Station Willamette Valley

Amtrak Station Oregon Electric Station Exclusive Corridor Exclusive Corridor Station Station

25 Mile Car Ride | Portland, OR

Destination Destination Major Employer Employer 19 [[ over ] over1000 1000employees employees ]

Oregon City, OR

AMTRAK

OREGON ELECTRIC

EXCLUSIVE CORRIDOR

10

8 (Tualatin, not Oregon City)

0

# AERIAL STRUCTURES

5

3 (Tualatin, not Oregon City)

3 (Tualatin, not Oregon City)

# MILES OF TUNNELS

0

0

0

PDX-OC 15

PDX-OC 14

PDX-OC 16

Auto. Bike (limited)

Auto. Bike, Bus (Tualatin)

Auto. Bike, Bus (Tualatin)

Mixed Use Downtown

Mixed Use Downtown

Mixed Use Downtown

# AT-GRADE CROSSINGS

# MILES STATION TO STATION TYPES OF INTERMODAL TRANSPORTATION LAND USE ZONING

POPULATION JURISDICTIONS SERVED

31,826 West Linn, Clackamas, Canby, Aurora, Gladstone, Milwauke, Damascus, Riverside, Estacada

20

Oregon City Shopping Center

End of the Oregon Trail Interpretive Center

Amtrak Station Amtrak Station Oregon Electric Station Exclusive Corridor Exclusive Corridor Station Station

1/2 Mile Walk | Oregon City, OR

Destination Destination Major Employer Employer [[ over ] over1000 1000employees employees ]

West Linn

Oregon City CBD Oregon City Elevator Providence Medical

Amtrak Station Amtrak Station Oregon Electric Station Exclusive Corridor Exclusive Corridor Station Station

2 Mile Bike Ride | Oregon City, OR

Destination Destination Major Employer Employer [[ over ] over1000 1000employees employees ]

Tillamook Willamette Falls

Mt. Hood National Forest

Amtrak Station Amtrak Station Oregon Electric Station Exclusive Corridor Exclusive Corridor Station Station

25 Mile Car Ride | Oregon City, OR

Destination Destination Major Employer Employer [[ over ] over1000 1000employees employees ]

Salem, OR

AMTRAK

OREGON ELECTRIC

EXCLUSIVE CORRIDOR

53

43

0

# AERIAL STRUCTURES

7

5

0

# MILES OF TUNNELS

0

0

0

OC-SAL 42

OC-SAL 41

OC-SAL 38

Auto, Bike, Bus

Auto, Bike, Bus

Auto, Bike, Bus

General Commercial

Central Business District

Public Health, Industrial Park

# AT-GRADE CROSSINGS

# MILES STATION TO STATION TYPES OF INTERMODAL TRANSPORTATION LAND USE ZONING

POPULATION JURISDICTIONS SERVED

152,239 Keizer, Hayesville, Stayon, Monmouth, Dallas, Willamina, Amity, McMinnville, Mt. Angel, Silverton

24

Chemeketa Community College

State of Oregon State of Oregon Salem Conference Ctr. Willamette University

Amtrak Station Oregon Electric Station Exclusive Corridor Station

1/2 Mile Walk | Salem, OR

Destination Major Employer [ over 1000 employees ]

WalMart

Oregon State Fairgrounds

Salem Hospital

Roth’s Your Family Market

WalMart Amtrak Station Oregon Electric Station Exclusive Corridor Station

2 Mile Bike Ride | Salem, OR

Destination Major Employer [ over 1000 employees ]

Chemeketa Community College

Mt. Angel NorPac Foods

Spirit Mountain Casino Roth’s Your Family Market

Keizer Stadium GE Security Roth’s Your Family Market Chemeketa Community College

Chemeketa Community College Lincoln City

Chemeketa Community College Wells Fargo Customer Contact Center Salem Municipal Airport Roth’s Your Family Market NorPac Foods Roth’s Your Family Market GE Security T-Mobile Calling Center WalMart

Silver Falls State Park

NorPac Foods

Amtrak Station Oregon Electric Station Exclusive Corridor Station

25 Mile Car Ride | Salem, OR

Destination Major Employer 27 [ over 1000 employees ]

Albany/Corvallis, OR

AMTRAK

OREGON ELECTRIC

EXCLUSIVE CORRIDOR

34

34

0

# AERIAL STRUCTURES

3

7

0

# MILES OF TUNNELS

0

0

0

SAL-ALB 25

SAL-ALB 25

SAL-ALB 22

Air (connect), Auto, Bus, Bike

Air (connect), Auto, Bus, Bike (limited)

Air, Auto, Bus, Bike

Light Industrial

Central Business District

n/a

# AT-GRADE CROSSINGS

# MILES STATION TO STATION TYPES OF INTERMODAL TRANSPORTATION LAND USE ZONING

POPULATION JURISDICTIONS SERVED

48,770 Corvallis, Phillomath. Newport, Waldport, Lebanon, Sweet Home, Sisters, Bend, Jefferson

28

Albany Municipal Airport

Greater Albany Public Schools

Greater Albany Public Schools

Amtrak Station Oregon Electric Station Exclusive Corridor Station

1/2 Mile Walk | Albany, OR

Destination Major Employer

Wah Chang

Greater Albany Public Schools

Greater Albany Public Schools

Greater Albany Public Schools

Greater Albany Public Schools

Greater Albany Public Schools Amtrak Station

Greater Albany Public Schools

2 Mile Bike Ride | Albany, OR

Oregon Electric Station Exclusive Corridor Station Destination Major Employer

Greater Albany Public Schools

Greater Albany Public Schools

Newport

Greater Albany Public Schools Hewlett Packard

Linn Benton Community College

Corvallis Oregon State University Lebanon

Sisters/Bend Amtrak Station Oregon Electric Station Exclusive Corridor Station

25 Mile Car Ride | Albany, OR

Destination Major Employer

31

Eugene/Springfield, OR

AMTRAK

OREGON ELECTRIC

EXCLUSIVE CORRIDOR

# AT-GRADE CROSSINGS

7

7

0

# AERIAL STRUCTURES

5

5

2

# MILES OF TUNNELS

0

0

0

ALB-EUG 47

ALB-EUG 51

ALB-EUG 45

Auto, Bus, Bike

Auto, Bus, Bike)

Auto, Bus, Bike

Light Industrial, Commercial

Light Industrial, Commercial

Public Land, Special Area

# MILES STATION TO STATION TYPES OF INTERMODAL TRANSPORTATION LAND USE ZONING

POPULATION JURISDICTIONS SERVED

146,356 Springfield, Creswell, Cottage Grove, Oakridge, Junction City, Florence, Reedsport, Sutherlin, Roseburg

32

5th Street Market

Saturday Market WOW Hall Lane County Government

Hult Center

Sacred Heart Medical Ctr.

University of Oregon

Amtrak Station Oregon Electric Station Exclusive Corridor Station

1/2 Mile Walk | Eugene, OR

Destination Major Employer

Bi-Mart

Bi-Mart

Bi-Mart

Autzen Stadium Alton Baker Park

Lane Community College Amtrak Station Oregon Electric Station Exclusive Corridor Station

2 Mile Bike Ride | Eugene, OR

Destination Major Employer

Bi-Mart

Monaco RV

McKenzie River

Eugene Airport

Florence

Bi-Mart Oregon Country Fair Hynix Semiconductor

Bi-Mart Bi-Mart Mt. Pisgah Arboretum Spencer’s Butte Fall Creek State Park Bi-Mart

Bi-Mart Cottage Grove

Crater Lake N.P.

Amtrak Station Roseburg / Medford / Ashland / Grants Pass

Oregon Electric Station Exclusive Corridor Station

25 Mile Car Ride | Eugene, OR

Destination Major Employer

35

LOGISTICS

Tunneling

CalTran Precedent: Possible Solution for Rose Quarter Station

Relative Tunnel Size Cross-section

37

Catenary

Headspans vs. Poles: Poles are the more preferable option based upon neighborhood visual preferences.

38

Integrating HSR with Light Rail

39

Integrating HSR with Light Rail

Example Cross-section of Intermodal Transit Station

40

The Value of Time While the costs of new rail infrastructure may seem staggering, one must keep in mind that every improvement made to rail infrastructure today is contributing to more efficient service for tomorrow. Rebuilding curves and tunneling strategically will help save time, and thus, money.

SPEED

MINIMUM RADIUS

RECOMMENDED

100 MPH

4,000 ft

5,900 ft

125 MPH

6,300 ft

9,200 ft

150 MPH

7,300 ft

10,500 ft

CURVE TAKEN AT

LOSS OF TIME*

LOSS OF $**

115 MPH

3s

$3 million

105 MPH

7s

$7 million

95 MPH

13 s

$13 million

85 MPH

21 s

$21 million

75 MPH

31 s

$31 million

65 MPH

43 s

$43 million

*using accel/decel rate of 0.5 m/s^2 **and a cost of 1 second = $1 mil to HSR passengers 41

Speed & Station Spacing

Practical Maximum Speed as a Function of the Station Spacing

MPH 220 155 140 125 90 5

50

100

150

200

Miles between Stations (Source: HDR)

42

Accessibility & Platform Height Recent regulations from Amtrak and the FRA require a level boarding height with no more than a 5/8� gap for maximum accessibility.

43

APPENDIX

Criteria for Funding From US DOT “Federal High Speed Rail Vision for America” US DOT FRA HSR American Reinvestment and Recovery Act

FEDERAL GRANTS: In order to meet the goals of the Recovery Act while initiating a transformational new program, we propose to advance three funding “tracks”: • Projects: Provide grants to complete individual projects that are “ready to go” with preliminary engineering and environmental work completed.

• Corridor programs: Enter into cooperative agreements to develop entire phases or geographic sections of corridor programs that have completed corridor plans and environmental documentation, and have a prioritized list of projects to meet the corridor objectives; this approach would involve additional Federal oversight and support.

• Planning: Enter into cooperative agreements for planning activities using non-ARRA appropriations funds, in order to create the corridor program and project pipeline needed to fully develop a highspeed rail network.

AWARDED UPON: • Public Benefits: The extent to which the project or corridor program provides specific, measurable, achievable benefits in a timely and cost-effective manner, including: (1) contributing to economic recovery efforts, (2) advancing strategic transportation goals (outlined above), and (3) furthering other passenger rail goals articulated in the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008.

• Risk Mitigation: The extent to which the project or corridor program addresses critical success factors, including: (1) fiscal and institutional capacity to carry out projects, (2) realistic financial plans for covering capital and operating costs, (3) formal commitments from key stakeholders (e.g., railroads and participating States), and (4) adequate project management oversight experience and procedures.

45

Future Goals OPPORTUNITIES -Search for opportunities for alternate station locations and hybrid alignments ALIGNMENTS -Find more economical ways of planning alignments and innovative means of using existing infrastructure for increased savings ARCHITECTURE -Research and explore means of contextually respectful architecture for station locations -Create studio to explore station options and alignments FUNDING -Find potential sources of funding of research, including public/private options and grants -Research federal funding sources for high speed rail research PARTNERSHIPS -Look to sources outside of the University of Oregon for strategic alliances in research and grants -Create partnerships between urban planners, architects, and landscape architects at PSU and University of Oregon to explore design options

46

SOURCES

Sources 1. http://caltrain-hsr.blogspot.com/

14. cityofvancouver.us

2. http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/RAIL/Passenger_Rail.shtml

15. portlandmaps.com

3. Government Accountability Office, Report to Congressional Requesters: High Speed Passenger Rail: Future Development Will Depend on Addressing Financial and Other Challenges and Establishing a Clear Federal Role.

Document GAO-09-317, March 2009.

16. orcity.org

4. Oregon Department of Transportation: Why Rail? ODOT Documents, 2009.

5. Oregon Department of Transportation: What is High Speed? ODOT Documents, 2009.

6. Oregon Department of Transportation: Routes? ODOT Documents, 2009.

7. Oregon Department of Transportation: Goals-Draft, ODOT Documents, 2009.

8. USDOT TIGER and Recovery.gov: High Speed Intercity Passenge 9. Rail Program, Summary of Corridor Investment, Eugene-Portland-SeattleVancouver, B.C. 10. ODOT GISU: Oregon Amtrak Passenger Routes With Intercity Bus Routes, 2002-2003. US DOT Project No. 468, 2004.

11. U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration, Office of Railroad Safety and Office of Railroad Development: HighwayRail Grad Crossing Guidelines for High-Speed Passenger Rail Version 1.0, November 2009.

17. cityofsalem.net 18. cityofalbany.net 19. eugene.or.gov 20. albanyvisitors.com 21. salemchamber.org 22. www.mkt-place.com/bigcos.shtml 23. US Census Bureau 24. Red Robinson, Shannon & Wilson, 206 695.6794 (office), 206 949.3988 (cell), rar@shanwil.com 25. Nora Friend, Talgo Trains, 202 438.1253 26. Bill Burgel, HRD, 503 789.4147, bill.burgel@hdrinc.com 27. Jonathan Hutchison, Amtrak Gov. Affairs, HutchiJ@amtrak.com

12. U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Railroad Administration, USDOT TIGER, and Recovery.gov: Vision for High Speed Rail In America, April 2009.

13. HDR, accessed through Washinton State DOT

48

APPENDIX

Appendix B: Potential Tier Structure for Passenger Systems

FRA - POTENTIAL TIER (Note: Common corridor issues handled within ROW Safety Plan review) STRUCTURE FOR PASSENGER SYSTEMS

Tier

IB

IC

II

III

IV

V

25

Regional rail

Conventional

Emerging HSR

HSR Regional

HSR Mixed Operations

HSR Mixed Passenger

HSR Dedicated

HSR Express

Speed Range mph

0-65

0-79

0- 80/110

0- 111/125

0-126/150

0-150

0-150

0-200/220

Other traffic on same track

None (or temporally separated)

Mixed passenger and freight

Mixed passenger and freight

Mixed passenger and freight

Mixed passenger and freight

Conventional passenger only

None

None

Track class

- Class 4

- Class 4

- Class 5/6

- Class 7

- Class 8

- Class 8

- Class 8

- Class 9

Signals, train control

Traffic control

PTC

PTC; vital and perimeter protection above 90

PTC; vital and perimeter protection above 90

Per IC and ROW safety strategy integrated

Public highwayrail grade crossings

Automated warning; supplementary measures where warranted

Automated warning; supplementary measures where warranted

Sealed corridor; evaluate need for presence detection and PTC feedback

Barriers above 110, see §213.247; Presence detection tied to PTC above 110

See IC

See IC

None above 125

None above 125

Private highway-rail grade crossings

Automated warning or manually locked gate preferred; cross-buck and stop or yield sign where conditions permit

Automated warning or locked gate with signal interlock

None or as above

None above 125

None above 125

ROW safety plan

System Safety Program / Collision Hazard Analysis

SSP/CHA and specific approval process for new service similar to 236.361

MOW safety management plan

Address within SSP framework; no separate approval required

Separate plan approval; integrate with SSP/CHA

Equipment

CEM – end frame strength dynamic test

Present Tier I plus Cab End Frame Strength, or equivalent safety (including option for alternative to buff strength)

Present Tier II (including option for alternative to buff strength)

See Tier IA-C

Define

Occupied car forward

OK

OK

Prohibited

Up to 125 mph only

OK

System Safety Programs

IA

Description

On-board emergency systems

0

None at any speed

None at any speed

None at any speed

None at any speed

Define

Prohibited

Per Parts 238 and 239 (including glazing, emergency egress and rescue access, lighting, signage, etc.)

Required; Review is for completeness; Audits for follow through

Integrate Subpart G, Part 238

Cascadia High Speed Rail with Lloyd Lindley, Jim Pettinari, & Brad Perkins

Required; FRA reviews management decisions and may disapprove

Fall 2010

University of Oregon, Portland

RESOURCES FRA - Federal Rail Administration http://www.fra.dot.gov/ High Speed Passenger Rail Safety Strategy http://www.fra.dot.gov/downloads/safety/HSRSafetyStrategy110609.pdf

Grade Crossing Guidelines for High-Speed Passenger Rail http://www.fra.dot.gov/downloads/safety/ HwyRailXingGuidelinesreprint110609.pdf

HST Fly California http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/

BIBLIOGRAPHY 1. Salem Passenger Rail Station Study, Final Report, Salem/Keizer Area Transportation Study, Mid-Willamette Valley Council of Governments 2. SOURCES: U.S. Department of Transportation, Research and Innovative Technology Administration, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, based on data from Transport Topics Online, available at ttnews.com/tt100 as of Sept. 25, 2009.

Association of American Railroads, available at www.aar.org as of Sept. 25, 2009.

3. HSR Atlas, Summer 2010 HSR Seminar, University of Oregon Graduate School of Architecture.

Cascadia High Speed Rail with Lloyd Lindley, Jim Pettinari, & Brad Perkins

Fall 2010

University of Oregon, Portland