text:
Arizona State
Rail Plan
March 2011
Arizona Department of Transportation
This page intentionally left blanki
The State Rail Plan was made possible by the cooperative efforts of the following individuals and organizations who
contributed significantly to the successful completion of the project:
Rail Technical Advisory Team
Chris Watson, Arizona Corporation Commission
Reuben Teran, Arizona Game and Fish Department
David Jacobs, Arizona State Historic Preservation Ofice
Gordon Taylor, Arizona State Land Department
Cathy Norris, BNSF Railway
Angela Mogel, Bureau of Land Management
Jack Tomasik, Central Arizona Association of Governments
Paul Johnson, City of Yuma
Jermaine Hannon, Federal Highway Administration
Katai Nakosha, Governor's Ofice
James Chessum, Greater Yuma Port Authority
Kevin Wallace, Maricopa Association of Governments
Marc Pearsall, Maricopa Association of Governments
Gabe Thum, Pima Association of Governments
Robert Bohannan, RH Bohannan & Associates
Jay Smyth, Southwest Rail Corridor Coalition
Zoe Richmond, Union Pacific Railroad
Carol Ketcherside, Valley Metro Rail
Serena Unrein, Arizona Public Interest Research Group
Freight and Rail Advisory Council
Tim Strow, Maricopa Association of Governments
Tim Terkelsen, Arizona Common Sense
Dave Mansheim, Bard Date Company
Maria Hyat, City of Phoenix
David Barry, Swift Transportation
Cathy Norris, BNSF Railway
Bonnie Allin, Tucson Airport Authority
Zoe Richmond, Union Pacific Railroad
Jane Morris, City of Phoenix – Sky Harbor Airport
Patrick Loftus, TTX Company
ADOT Project Team
Sara Allred, Project Manager
Kristen Keener Busby, Sustainability Program Manager
John Halikowski, Director
John McGee, Executive Director for Planning and Policy
Mike Normand, Director of Transit Programs
Shannon Scutari, Esq. Director, Rail & Sustainability
Jennifer Toth, Director, Multi-Modal Planning Division
Robert Travis, State Railroad Liaison
Jim Zumpf, Assistant Director, Systems Planning and
Consultant Project Team
Peggy Fiandaca, Partners for Strategic Action
Mike Kies, AECOM Project Manager
John McNamara, AECOM
Jackie Pfeifer, AECOM
Vijayant Rajvanshi, AECOM
Ethan Rauch, AECOM
A special thank you to all of the Metropolitan Planning Organizations and Council of Governments who helped
organize and host the Focus Group Meetings. The project team also appreciates everyone who took time from
their busy schedules to participate in the Focus Group discussions, and provided comments on the draft documents
throughout the development of this plan.
The Arizona State Rail Plan is one piece of a larger multimodal planning framework for the State of Arizona. This
document presents a series of issues and opportunities relative to the future of rail development in Arizona, including
a series of implementation directions and a discussion on funding options. The technical work to support this
document can be found in the Statewide Rail Framework Study, part of a broader 40-year multimodal transportation
vision for Arizona. This planning process has spanned the last three years, included intense interagency and
public involvement eforts, and was recently accepted by the State Transportation Board as part of the Statewide
Transportation Planning Framework Program. Additional information and technical reports can be found at:
Chapter 1. Introduction and Overview ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 1
1.1 Purpose of the Arizona Rail Plan �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 1
1.2 History of Railroads in Arizona ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 2
Chapter 2. Arizona Rail Vision, Goals and Objectives ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 5
2.1 A Vision of Rail Transportation in 2030 ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 5
2.2 Goals and Objectives ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 5
2.3 Benefits of Rail for Arizona ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 7
2.3.1 Congestion Mitigation ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 7
2.3.2 Economic Benefit �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 7
2.3.3 Air Quality ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 8
2.3.4 Land Use ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 9
2.3.5 Sustainability �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 9
2.3.6 Energy Consumption ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 10
2.4 Existing and Potential Rail Trafic ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 10
2.4.1 Commodity Flows ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 10
2.4.2 Freight Demand (2030 & 2050) �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 12
2.5 Positive Train Control ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 17
2.6 Purpose and Background of the State Rail Plan ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 18
2.7 Compliance with United States Code, Section 22102 ���������������������������������������������������������������������������� 18
2.8 Updates to this Rail Plan ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 19
Chapter 3. Issues and Opportunities ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 21
3.1 Passenger Rail System Issues and Opportunities ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 21
3.1.1 Intercity Passenger Rail System �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 25
3.1.2 Southwest U.S. High-Speed Rail Network (HSR) ������������������������������������������������������������������������� 32
3.1.3 Commuter Rail ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 35
3.1.4 Tourist Railroads ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 37
3.2 Rail System Network Issues and Opportunities ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 38
3.2.1 Transcontinental Rail Congestion � 38
3.2.2 Freight Rail Distribution Systems ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 41
3.2.3 Intermodal and Freight Logistic Centers ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 44
3.2.4 Class I Branch Lines and Short Line Railroads ����������������������������������������������������������������������������� 46
3.2.5 Rail Corridor Preservation ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 50
3.2.6 New Railroad System Development �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 52
3.3 Safety and Congestion Mitigation Issues and Opportunities ����������������������������������������������������������������� 56
3.3.1 Public Rail Grade Crossing Improvements ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 56
3.3.2 Wildlife Corridors ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 59
Table of Contents
Chapter 4. Proposed Rail Projects � � 63
4.1 Recommended Actions � 63
4.2 Arizona Spine Corridor � 65
4.2.1 Inventory of Existing Conditions � 66
4.2.2 Corridor Strategy � � 70
4.2.3 Passenger Rail Opportunities for the Arizona Spine � 70
4.2.4 Freight Network Opportunities for the Arizona Spine � 74
4.2.5 Recommended Actions for the Arizona Spine Corridor � � 75
4.2.6 Implementation � � 77
4.3 CANAMEX Corridor � 79
4.3.1 Inventory of Existing Conditions � 80
4.3.2 Corridor Strategy � � 82
4.3.3 Recommended Rail Actions for the Canamex Corridor � � 86
4.3.4 Implementation � � 88
4.4 Route 66 Corridor � � 91
4.4.1 Inventory of Existing Conditions � 92
4.4.2 Corridor Strategy � � 94
4.4.3 Passenger Rail Opportunities for the Route 66 Corridor � 96
4.4.4 Freight Rail Opportunities for the Route 66 Corridor � 96
4.4.5 Recommended Actions for the Route 66 Corridor � 98
4.4.6 Implementation � � 99
4.5 Sunset Route Corridor � � 100
4.5.1 Inventory of Existing Conditions � 101
4.5.2 Corridor Strategy � � 103
4.5.3 Passenger Rail Opportunities for the Sunset Corridor � 105
4.5.4 Freight Rail Opportunities for the Sunset Corridor � 106
4.5.5 Recommended Actions for the Sunset Corridor � � 108
4.5.6 Implementation � � 111
4.6 Recommended Statewide Opportunities � 113
Chapter 5. Funding of Proposed Rail Projects � 115
5.1 Federal Funding Programs for Rail � 115
5.1.1 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, 2009 � 115
5.1.2 Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act, 2008 � 115
5.1.3 SAFETEA-LU Funding Programs � 116
5.1.4 Surface Transportation Program � � 116
5.1.5 Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Management � 116
5.1.6 Transportation Enhancements Program � 116
iv5.1.7 Section 130 Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Program � � 116
5.1.8 HSR Corridor Development Program � � 117
5.1.9 Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing � � 117
5.1.10 Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act � 117
5.1.11 Tax Credits � � 117
5.2 Rail Funding Programs in Other States � � 118
5.2.1 California � � 118
5.2.2 North Carolina � � 118
5.2.3 Oregon � 118
5.2.4 Pennsylvania � 118
5.2.5 Tennessee � 119
5.2.6 Texas � � 119
5.2.7 Virginia � � 119
5.2.8 Wisconsin � 119
5.3 Existing Funding Sources � 120
5.3.1 Proposition 400 � 120
5.3.2 Arizona Section 130 Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Program � 120
5.3.3 Sample Arizona Projects Using Public Funds � 121
5.4 Conclusion � � 122
Appendix A. Inventory of Existing Conditions � A-1
Appendix B. Public and Stakeholder Involvement � A-33
Appendix C. Related Rail Planning Studies in Arizona � A-49
Appendix D. Summary of Operating Railroads in Arizona � A-51
List of Tables
Table 1 - Capacity Comparison for Freight Transportation Modes ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������7
Table 2 - Comparison of the Relative Efficiencies ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������10
Table 3 - Summary of Population Served by Potential Rail Passenger Corridors in 2050 ���������������������������������������������14
Table 4 - Summary of Comparable Amtrak Service ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������15
Table 5 - Summary 2050 Intercity Rail Annual Passenger Estimates ����������������������������������������������������������������������������15
Table 6 - Summary Selected Commuter Rail Corridors �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������16
Table 7 - Summary Commuter Rail Passenger Estimates ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������17
Table 8 - Existing Intercity and Commuter Rail Service in Arizona and Neighboring States �����������������������������������������27
Table 9 - Tribes having existing rail infrastructure on Native American lands ��������������������������������������������������������������62
Table 10 - Improvements identified near tribal lands ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������62
Table 11 - Summary of Existing Rail within the Arizona Spine Corridor �����������������������������������������������������������������������70
Table 12 - Arizona Spine Corridor Short-Term Implementation Actions (within 5 years) ���������������������������������������������77
Table 13 - Arizona Spine Intermediate Implementation Actions (within 10 years) ������������������������������������������������������78
Table 14 - Long-Term Implementation Actions (within 20 years) ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������78
Table 15 - Key Characteristics of Arizona Railroads along CANAMEX Corridor �������������������������������������������������������������81
Table 16 - Canamex Corridor Short-Term Implementation Actions (within 5 years) ����������������������������������������������������88
Table 17 - Canamex Corridor Intermediate Implementation Actions (within 10 years) �����������������������������������������������88
Table 18 - Canamex Corridor Long-Term Implementation Actions (within 20 years) ���������������������������������������������������89
Table 19 - Key Characteristics of Arizona Railroads along Route 66 Corridor ���������������������������������������������������������������94
Table 20 - Route 66 Corridor Short-Term Implementation Actions (within 5 years) ����������������������������������������������������99
Table 21 - Route 66 Corridor Intermediate Implementation Actions (within 10 years) �����������������������������������������������99
Table 22 - Long-Term Implementation Actions (within 20 years) ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������99
Table 23 - Sunset Corridor Short-Term Implementation Actions (within 5 years) ������������������������������������������������������111
Table 24 - Sunset Corridor Intermediate Implementation Actions (within 10 years) �������������������������������������������������112
Table 25 - Sunset Corridor Long-Term Implementation Actions (within 20 years) �����������������������������������������������������112
Table 26 - Section 130 Projects Fund Allocation Summary ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������120
Table C.1 - Related Rail Planning Studies in Arizona ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� A-49
Table D.1 - Summary of Operating Railroads in Arizona ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� A-51
List of Figures
Figure 1 - Carbon Dioxide Emissions by Transportation Mode �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 9
Figure 2 - 2005 Distribution of Rail Traffic in Arizona (by weight) ������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 11
Figure 3 - 2030 Distribution of Rail Trafic in Arizona (by weight) ������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 11
Figure 4 - 2050 Distribution of Rail Trafic in Arizona (by weight) ������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 11
Figure 5 - Inbound Rail Trafic – Intermodal ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 12
Figure 6 - Outbound Rail Trafic – Intermodal ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 12
Figure 7 - Through Rail Trafic – Intermodal ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 13
Figure 8 - Integrated Statewide Passenger Rail System ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 23
Figure 9 - Sun Corridor Megapolitan Region ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 26
Figure 10 - Freeway with Flexibility for Potential Intercity Rail (Typical Section) �������������������������������������������������������� 29
Figure 11 - Congressionally Designated High Speed Rail Corridors ����������������������������������������������������������������������������� 33
Figure 12 - Designated and Planned High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail Corridors �������������������������������������������������� 34
Figure 13 - UPRR Sunset Route ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 39
Figure 14 - BNSF Transcon Corridor ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 40
Figure 15 - Existing and Potential Support Yards ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 42
Figure 16 - Wellton Branch Rehabilitation Area ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 47
Figure 17 - BNSF Peavine Line ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 48
Figure 18 - Potential Phoenix-Las Vegas Multimodal Corridor ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 53
Figure 19 - Proposed Hassayampa Rail Corridor ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 54
Figure 20 - Proposed South Mesa Rail Line ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 55
Figure 21 - Arizona Wildlife Linkages Workgroup Assessment Map ���������������������������������������������������������������������������� 60
Figure 22 - Conceptual Integration of Wildlife Crossing Structure into a Rail Corridor ����������������������������������������������� 61
Figure 23 - Arizona's Corridors of Opportunity ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 64
Figure 24 - Arizona Spine Corridor ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 65
Figure 25 - BNSF Phoenix Subdivision ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 66
Figure 26 - Arizona Central Railroad ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 67
Figure 27 - Grand Canyon Railway ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 68
Figure 28 - UPRR Phoenix Subdivision ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 68
Figure 29 - UPRR Nogales Subdivision ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 69
Figure 30 - Copper Basin Railway �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 69
Figure 31 - Sun Corridor Megapolitan Region ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 72
Figure 32 - Arizona Spine Corridor of Opportunity ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 73
Figure 33 - CANAMEX Corridor ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 80
Figure 34 - FRA HSR Map ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 82
Figure 35 - Potential Phoenix-Las Vegas Multimodal Corridor ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 84
Figure 36 - Proposed Hassayampa Rail Corridor ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 87
Figure 37 - CANAMEX Corridor of Opportunity ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 90
Figure 38 - Route 66 Corridor �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 91
Figure 39 - BNSF Transcon Corridor ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������92
Figure 40 - BNSF Coronado & Springerville Subdivision ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������93
Figure 41 - Apache Railway ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������93
Figure 42 - Black Mesa & Lake Powell Railroad ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������94
Figure 43 - Route 66 Corridor of Opportunity ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������95
Figure 44 - Sunset Route Corridor ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������100
Figure 45 - Union Pacific Sunset Route Mainline ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������101
Figure 46 - Arizona Eastern Railroad ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������102
Figure 47 - San Pedro & Southwestern Railroad � 103
Figure 48 - Sunset Route Corridor of Opportunity �����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������104
Figure 49 - Wellton Branch �����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������110
Figure 50 - Conceptual Integration of Wildlife Crossing Structure into a Rail Corridor ���������������������������������������������114
Figure A.1 - Existing Arizona Railroads ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� A-3
Figure A.2 - BNSF "Transcon Corridor" ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� A-7
Figure A.3 - Phoenix Subdivision �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� A-8
Figure A.4 - Coronado & Springerville Subdivision ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� A-9
Figure A.5 - Union Pacific Sunset Route Mainline ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� A-11
Figure A.6 - Phoenix Subdivision ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ A-12
Figure A.7 - Nogales Subdivision ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ A-13
Figure A.8 - Apache Railway ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� A-15
Figure A.9 - Arizona & California Railroad ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� A-15
Figure A.10 - Arizona Central Railroad ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� A-16
Figure A.11 - Arizona Eastern Railroad ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� A-17
Figure A.12 - Figure 12 - Copper Basin Railway �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� A-18
Figure A.13 - San Pedro & Southwestern Railroad ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� A-19
Figure A.14 - Port of Tucson ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� A-20
Figure A.15 - Camp Navajo Railroad ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� A-20
Figure A.16 - Black Mesa & Lake Powell Railroad ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� A-21
Figure A.17 - Freeport McMoRan Morenci Mine Industrial Railroad ����������������������������������������������������������������������� A-22
Figure A.18 - Freeport McMoRan Sierrita Mine Industrial Railroad ������������������������������������������������������������������������� A-22
Figure A.19 - Magma Arizona Railroad ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� A-23
Figure A.20 - San Manuel Arizona Railroad �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� A-23
Figure A.21 - Tucson, Cornellia and Gila Bend Railroad Company ���������������������������������������������������������������������������� A-24
Figure A.22 - Yuma Valley Railway ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� A-25
Figure A.23 - Grand Canyon Railway ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ A-26
Figure A.24 - Amtrak Routes through Arizona ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� A-27
AA Alternatives Analysis
AAR Association of American Railroads
ACC Arizona Corporation Commission
ADOT Arizona Department of Transportation
APA Apache Railway Company
APS Arizona Public Service
APSX APS Cholla Power Plant/Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station Plant Railroad
AZCR Arizona Central Railroad
ARRA American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
ARZC Arizona & California Railroad
ASARCO American Smelting and Refining Company
ATSF Atchison, Topeka, and Santa Fe Railway
AZCR Arizona Central Railroad
AZER Arizona Eastern Railway, Inc.
AGFD Arizona Game and Fish Department
BIA Bureau of Indian Affairs
BLKM Black Mesa & Lake Powell Railroad
BNSF BNSF Railway
BqAZ Building a Quality Arizona
BRT Bus Rapid Transit
CAAG Central Arizona Association of Governments
CBRY Copper Basin Railway
CMAQ Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Management
CTC Centralized Trafic Control
CWR Continuous Welded Rail
DOT Department of Transportation
DSC Drake Switching Company
DTC direct trafic control
EIS Environmental Impact Statement
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
FMPO Flagstaf Metropolitan Planning Organization
FRA Federal Railroad Administration
FRAC Freight and Rail Advisory Council
FTA Federal Transit Administration
FTZ foreign trade zone
FXE Ferromex
GCRX Grand Canyon Railway
GVGN Gila Valley Globe and Northern Railway
HSR High-Speed Rail
HUD Housing and Urban Development
HURF Highway User Revenue Fund
ICR intercity rail
ISTEA Intermodal Surface Transportation Eficiency Act of 1991
KCSM Kansas City Southern de Mexico
LPA Locally Preferred Alternative
LRT Light Rail Transit
LRTP State Long Range Transportation Plan
MAA Magma Arizona Railroad
MAG Maricopa Association of Governments
MP Milepost
mph Miles per hour
MPOs metropolitan planning organizations
NAFTA North American Free Trade Agreement
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
PAG Pima Associations of Governments
PDOX Phelps Dodge Morenci Mine Industrial Railroad
PFE Pacific Fruit Express
POLA/POLB Ports of Los Angeles/Long Beach
PRIIA Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act
PTC Positive Train Control
RSIA Rail Safety Improvement Act
RTA Regional Transportation Authority
SAFETEA-LU Safe Accountable, Flexible and Eficient Transportation Equity Act: a Legacy for Users
SMA San Manuel Arizona Railroad
SP Southern Pacific
SPSR San Pedro and Southwestern Railroad
SR State Route
SRFS Statewide Rail Framework Study
SRP Arizona State Rail Plan
STFS Statewide Transportation Framework Study
TCG Tucson, Cornelia and Gila Bend Railroad Company
TCIF Trade Corridor Improvement Fund
TEA-21 Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century
TEP Transportation Enhancements Program
TEUs Twenty Foot Equivalent Units
TIFIA Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act
TIGER Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery
TWC Track Warrant Control
UPRR Union Pacific Railroad
USDOT United States Department of Transportation
USG/YVR Yuma Valley Railway
VRE Virginia Railway Express
WHSRA Western High Speed Rail Alliance
YMPO Yuma Metropolitan Planning Organization
Glossary of Terms
Alternatives Analysis: Alternatives Analysis focuses
on a specific transportation need (or set of needs) in a
corridor or subarea, identifies alternative actions to meet
these needs, and generates the information necessary
to select a preferred project for implementation. These
activities are often collectively called "alternatives
analysis" and address such issues as potential corridors,
corridor characteristics, costs, benefits, environmental
and community impacts, and financial feasibility.
Amtrak: Trade name of the National Railroad Passenger
Corporation, established in 1971 to take over intercity rail
passenger service from private railroads that no longer
wished to provide such service.
Branch: A rail track which connects into a railroad trunk
line. Rules and instructions pertaining to subdivisions
apply on branches.
Class I railroad: As defined by the Association of
American Railroads, a railroad with an operating revenue
exceeding $319.3 million per year. The U.S. has seven
such railroads, including BNSF and Union Pacific.
CANAMEX: The CANAMEX Trade Corridor, as defined
by Congress in the 1995 National Highway Systems
Designation Act, is a High Priority Corridor connecting
Nogales, Arizona, through Las Vegas, Nevada, to Salt Lake
City, Utah, to Idaho Falls, Idaho, to Montana, to Canada.
Class II railroad: These railroads are considered by the
Association of American Railroads as "Regional Railroads"
and are typically at least 350 miles in length with more
than $40 million in annual operating revenues.
Class III railroad: These railroads are defined as having
annual operating revenues of less than $40 million or
are switching/terminal railroads. Class III railroads are
typically local short line railroads, serving a very small
number of towns or industries. Many Class III railroads
were once branch lines of larger railroads that were spun
of, or portions of mainlines that had been abandoned.
Classification yard: A railroad yard used to separate
railroad cars on to one of several tracks, building new
trains in the process. Cars are first taken to a track, called
a lead or a drill track, and then sent through a series
of switches, called a ladder, to the classification tracks.
Larger yards tend to put the lead on an artificial hill, called
a hump, so that gravity may propel the cars through the
ladder. There are three types of classification yards: flat-shunted
yards, hump yards, and gravity yards.
Commuter rail: Passenger rail service that operates
within a metropolitan area—also called metropolitan
rail, regional rail or suburban rail—or between two
nearby metropolitan areas (e.g., San Francisco and San
Jose). Commuter Rail most often connects a central city
with its suburbs, and typically operates on track that is
part of the general railroad system.
Deep-water port: Has more than one definition; perhaps
the most pertinent is a port capable of accommodating
the largest freight container ships that can pass through
the Panama Canal.
Division: A geographical unit used by railroads to divide
their operations for administrative purposes.
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS): As required by
Section 102 of the National Environmental Policy Act; a
detailed statements assessing the environmental impact
of, and alternatives to, major federal actions significantly
afecting the environment. Such a statement is called an
Flyover: A grade-separated crossing of two transportation
facilities, where one line is physically elevated over the
other. Also called an underpass or overpass.
Fracture zone: Areas of reduced permeability between
habitat blocks.
Greenfield corridor: A corridor, to be used for
development/transportation projects, whose previous
use (if any) was vacant undeveloped land or agriculture.
Habitat block: An area of land that consists of important
wildlife habitat and can reasonably be expected to
remain wild for at least 50 years. Habitat blocks are
primarily comprised of lands within National Forests,
National Parks, National Wildlife Refuges, large military
reservations, tribal lands, and lands managed by
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) or Bureau of Land
Reclamation (BLR).
High-speed rail: A mode that provides frequent passenger
service between major population centers typically 100
to 600 miles apart, routinely achieves operating speeds of
110 mph or more, and may use shared tracks if equipped
with positive train control (PTC) technology. According
to the FRA, "service... is time-competitive with air and/
or automobile travel in a given intercity corridor." Top
speeds of 125 mph or more generally require completely
grade-separated tracks and dedicated right-of-way. The
FRA defines three levels of high-speed rail: express
(with top speeds of at least 150 mph), regional (with top
speeds of 110 to 150), and emerging (with typical speeds
of 90 to 110).
Industrial Lead: A relatively short length of privately
operated and maintained rail track, originating from a
rail line and serving industrial uses.
Inland port: An inland intermodal terminal directly
connected by road or rail to a seaport, and operating
as a center for the transshipment of sea cargo to
inland destinations. In addition to its role in cargo
transshipment, it may contain facilities for storage and
consolidation of goods, maintenance for road or rail
cargo carriers, customs clearance services. An inland
port may also be located in a foreign trade zone (FTZ)
that contains adjacent land beyond the inland port, often
encompassing manufacturing facilities located in close
proximity to the port to take advantage of its intermodal
transportation benefits.
Intercity rail: Refers to rail passenger service connecting
cities approximately 100 miles or more apart. In the U.S.,
top speeds may range from 79 mph to approximately 90
mph. It generally operates on track shared with freight
trains, commuter rail or both.
Intermodal: Refers to the movement of freight by more
than one mode of transportation. The railroad industry
applies the term to container and trailer on flat car
transportation only.
Linkage zone: A portion or subset of the fracture zone
or habitat block identified as an area critical to wildlife
Mainline: A railroad's principal trunk route between two
points; it usually has sidings, spurs, and yards at a number
of locations to serve customers, and to hold freight cars.
Metropolitan area (formally, Metropolitan Statistical
Area or MSA): An area that contains at least one
urbanized area of 50,000 or more inhabitants. An MSA
"central county" has at least 50 percent of its population
residing in urban areas of 10,000 or more population, or
contains 5,000 or more people living in a single urban
area of at least 10,000. An MSA "outlying county" has
at least 25 percent of its employed residents working in
the central county or counties of the MSA, or has at least
25 percent of its employment accounted for by workers
who reside in the central county or counties.
Panamax: Refers to large ships that currently do not
fit through the Panama Canal (carrying over 5,000
twenty thousand-foot equivalent units [TEUs]), until
completion of the canal's lock expansion project which
will accommodate cargo capacity up to 13,000 TEUs.
Positive Train Control (PTC): Refers to technology
that can prevent train-to-train collisions, overspeed
derailments, and casualties or injuries to railway workers
operating within their limits of authority as a result of
unauthorized incursion by a train. PTC can also prevent
train movements through a switch left in the wrong
position. PTC systems vary widely in complexity and
sophistication, based on their level of automation, the
system architecture, the wayside system on which they
are based (e.g., non-signaled, block signal, cab signal),
and the degree of train control they can assume. The
federal Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008 mandates
the widespread installation of PTC systems by December
Quiet zone: A segment of track, typically in an urbanized
area, in which an agreement between local government
and the railroad removes the requirement of sounding
train whistles or horns, at least during specified hours.
In return, the local jurisdiction may pay for and install
additional safety measures, such as grade-separated
road crossings or four-quadrant gates to enhance safety.
Section 130: An FHWA-administered program that
provides funding to states for use in highway-rail grade
crossing safety improvement projects.
Section 403(b): As part of the National Railroad Passenger Service Act of 1970, federal Amtrak legislation allows under Section 403(b) for a state or states to apply to Amtrak to establish rail service within their state(s) if they agree to pay at least 45 percent of the first year operating costs and 65 percent in the years thereafter.
Short line railroad: As defined by the Association of American Railroads (AAR), short lines consist of (1) line-haul railroads operating less than 350 miles of road and earning less than $40 million of annual operating revenue, and (2) switching and terminal railroads, which are either jointly owned by two railroads for the purpose of transferring cars between railroads, or operate solely within a facility or group of facilities.
Subdivision: A railroad division may be divided into a number of subdivisions for ease of operations.
Switch: As a noun, refers to track equipment that allows cars to move, or cross over, from one track to another. The verb refers to shuffling or moving rail cars, usually within a yard (also called marshaling).
Team Track: A rail siding for general usage by freight shippers, named for the teams of horses that once pulled the wagons to fetch the freight.
Trackage rights: An agreement between two railroads whereby one buys the right to run its trains on the tracks of the other.
Train spot: To switch a freight car to a specific location, usually for loading or unloading.
Transit-oriented development (TOD): A specialized case of mixed-use, moderate-to-high-density development that is located within walking distance of a fixed guideway transit stop. The proximity to fixed guideway transit allows for reduced parking requirements; the mixed-use aspect encourages a reduced demand for trips by bringing housing, jobs, community facilities, and goods and services close together so that the need for travel beyond the immediate vicinity is less than in typical developments. TOD developments typically emphasize walkable streetscapes, moderate to high density housing, office, and supporting retail, focused public spaces, and integrated design that offer the ambience of traditional neighborhoods.
Transloading: The transfer of a shipment from one mode of transportation to another.
Value-added: The enhancement added to a product or service by a company before the product is offered to customers.
Wye: A triangular shaped arrangement of railway tracks with a switch at each corner. In mainline railroads, this is used at a railway junction, where two railways join, or cross over. It can also be used as a stub for turning railway equipment. By performing the railway equivalent of a three-point turn, the direction of a locomotive or railway vehicle can be reversed.
Yard: A system of tracks, other than main tracks and sidings, used for making up trains, storing cars or other purposes.
Yard limits: A portion of main track designated by yard limit signs and by timetable, train order Form T or track bulletin, which trains and engines may use.Chapter 1. Introduction
and Overview
Arizona has experienced several decades of extraordinary
growth, and during that time has built modern, vibrant
cities and towns. These cities are built on a foundation
of well-planned freeway networks integrated into an
extensive roadway system generally organized in a
grid patern that has supported a vehicle dominated
transportation system throughout the State. The land
use paterns which have developed from these decades
of growth has tended to be characterized as suburban
development with large, single family home subdivisions
separated from commercial and employment centers.
The latest economic downturn has vividly demonstrated
that unfocused growth is not the path to stable long-term
prosperity. Like all Sunbelt states, Arizona is
confronting a serious recession and is faced with limited
funding for transportation infrastructure. Transportation
investments over the next several decades must
be strategically utilized to leverage the maximum
economic benefits for the State of Arizona. Investment
in rail infrastructure has been demonstrated to provide
economic stimulation during the implementation phase,
and maximizes benefits through direct linkages with
private land development along rail corridors once
constructed. This can foster urgent job growth needed
for the state to navigate a successful recovery from the
current economic conditions.
The highly connected grid of highways and local streets
which currently exist in the state represent the first half
of an eficient multi-modal transportation system which
will support the emerging Sun Corridor Megapolitan, and
expanding rural areas. The second half of the system is
envisioned to be an integrated transit system designed
in harmony with the roadway system, and will include
intercity passenger rail, commuter rail, high capacity bus
rapid transit, light rail, and street car systems. These
multi-modal transportation components will expand the
new development models emerging within the state.
These new approaches integrate horizontal and vertical
mixes of land uses with higher density residential sites,
including a wide variety of multi-family building types.
In order to economically compete globally the State will
need to provide educated workers, suficient capital
to fund research and entrepreneurs, while nurturing
promising new homegrown companies. The recession
has awakened a sense of urgency to restructure the
economy of our State to atract a more sustainable mix
of industries and the jobs they ofer. A key cornerstone
for creating a sustainable economy is an eficient multi-modal
transportation system which can support an
additional six million people in Arizona within the next
50 years. A multi-modal transportation system which
includes a strong rail component can help to promote a
compact land use development patern in the State of
Arizona that could have the following benefits;
1. Save over 800 square miles of open desert and
agricultural lands from development
2. Eliminate the need for as many as 30 million
miles of driving each day, reducing the amount
of greenhouse gas emissions and our reliance on
foreign energy sources
3. Provide an estimated savings of over $10 B in
transportation capital costs, as opposed to an
auto-dominated transportation system.
Arizona's economy needs an eficient and competitive rail
network. A healthy rail network must provide a reliable,
accessible, and cost efective service to shippers and
customers across the State. In addition, a fast, frequent
and reliable passenger rail service between population
centers and tourist destinations that is competitive with
automobile and air travel times, is important to the
State's economic and environmental well-being.
1.1 Purpose of the Arizona Rail Plan
In the next 20 years, the State of Arizona will face great
challenges in managing and developing its transportation
system. With a rapidly growing population and expanding
business sector, the transportation network will have to
accommodate significant increases in passenger and
freight movements.
Arizona State Rail Plan 1
March 2011
Arizona State Rail Plan
2 Arizona State Rail Plan
March 2011
The reality is that much of this demand will stress an
already overburdened highway system, and investment
in Arizona's rail system may provide some relief to future
highway congestion. There is an opportunity to divert
passenger and freight demand from highway facilities to
the rail network. Through collaborative planning, Arizona
can build a rail system that will move people and goods in
a safer, sustainable, and in a cost efective way.
The Arizona State Rail Plan (SRP) is the first comprehensive
assessment of the State's rail needs and was initiated in
response to the increasing involvement by the Arizona
Department of Transportation (ADOT) in freight and
passenger rail issues. The SRP serves to identify the
current rail system, determine infrastructure needs, and
to have rail projects included in the State's long-range
planning processes to improve regional and statewide
safety and mobility. The principle purpose is to convey
the magnitude of rail needs in the State and set forth a
policy framework through which strategic actions can be
taken to realize the full potential of passenger and freight
rail transportation.
1.2 History of Railroads in Arizona
Railroads came to Arizona in the late 1800s and had a
profound influence on the development of the State.
The cornerstones of early Arizona commerce (catle,
citrus, copper, climate and coton) would not have been
possible without the transportation provided by the
railroad industry.
Before the railroad reached Yuma, practically all of the
supplies for the State were shipped by steamer from San
Francisco down the coast, around Lower California and
up the Sea of Cortez to Port Isabel, where the cargoes
were shifted to light draft stern-wheel boats, and the
journey continued up the Colorado River to points in
Arizona. Most of this river trafic was carried by the
Colorado River Steamer Navigation Company, which was
purchased by the Southern Pacific in 1877.
In July 1866, Congress passed a law incorporating the
Atlantic and Pacific Railroad, the company was given the
mission to build near the 35th parallel from Springfield,
Missouri west to the Pacific. In exchange for its completion,
the railroad would receive land grants along its route. In
1880, the Atlantic and Pacific Railroad began laying track
westward from Albuquerque on its way to California. On
August 1, 1882 the railroad reached Flagstaf, and was
completed across the State in August 1883. At the time
of its completion the Atlantic and Pacific Railroad was a
subsidiary of the Atchison, Topeka, and Santa Fe Railway
(ATSF). The 209-mile 'Peavine', that connects Williams
Junction to Phoenix through Wickenburg, was originally
built in 1893-1895 by ATSF, and originally provided service
to Prescot. The Peavine has had no passenger trains
since 1969, and the Prescot Branch was abandoned in
the 1980s. However, the current alignment through Skull
Valley is a major freight rail connection between Phoenix
and the Transcon Corridor.
The Territorial Act of 1877 called for another main
line route to enter into southern Arizona at Yuma, and
continue eastward across the southern part of the State
into New Mexico at Lordsburg. Southern Pacific (SP) was
given the charter for constructing the southern route. By
1879, SP's operations extended from Yuma to Maricopa
Wells and later that same year to Tucson. It was another
three years before service was opened to Lordsburg.
In the early 1900s, the other segments of the historic
Southern Pacific system (Phoenix Loop, Nogales, Douglas,
Globe, Hayden and Clifton lines) were added. Most of
the significant railroading activities occurred at the end
of the 19th and the first half of the 20th Century. Few
rail development activities occurred in the second half
of the 20th Century. The construction of the interstate
and defense highways and the increased regulation of
railroads, made the automobile the preferred choice for
personal mobility and increased the trucking industry's
share of freight movements.
The Staggers Rail Act of 1980 is a federal law that
deregulated the American railroad industry to a
significant extent, and replaced the regulatory structure
that existed since the 1887 Interstate Commerce Act.
Deregulation provided for the rebirth of railroads by
reversing the historic loss of trafic to the trucking
industry, and increasing railroad industry profits.
Today, the Arizona rail network provides an important
link to the national system. The two Class I railroads in
"The time will come when
people will travel in stages
moved by steam engines
from one city to another,
almost as fast as birds can
fly. A carriage will start from
Washington in the morning,
the passengers will breakfast
at Baltimore, and supper in
New York in the same day." -
Oliver Evans, 1800.
Arizona Department of Transportation
Arizona State Rail Plan 3
March 2011
Arizona, BNSF Railway Company (BNSF) and Union Pacific
Railroad (UPRR), facilitate the coast-to-coast movement
of various commodities. The two Class I railroads are
the result of mergers between the Burlington Northern
Railroad and the ATSF, and another merger of SP and
UPRR. BNSF, created in 1995, operates 33,500 route
miles in 28 states and 2 Canadian provinces. The UP-SP
merger occurred in 1996 and the railroad now operates
36,000 miles in 23 states. These railroads provide a "rail-bridge"
between California and Midwestern industrial
and distribution areas.
In addition, thirteen active regional and short line
railroads are located in Arizona. Many serve the natural
resource industries, such as mining for which they were
originally constructed. These Arizona railroads are
addressed more extensively in the following sections of
this document.
Until the early 1970s, the two Class I carriers provided
passenger as well as freight service in Arizona. Amtrak
was created in 1970 via the federal act titled 'Rail
Passenger Service Act', and began service on May 1, 1971.
Currently, Amtrak operations through Arizona are part
of a long-distance, coast-to-coast service which follows
the two Class I carrier mainlines through northern and
southern Arizona, and represent the existing intercity
rail service for the State. In the late 1980s, the tourist
railroad industry began operating in Arizona. Currently,
Arizona has three tourist railroads.
This page intentionally left blankChapter 2. Arizona Rail Vision, Goals and Objectives
2.1 A Vision of Rail Transportation in 2030
A safe, secure, efficient and cost-effective passenger and freight rail network forms an integral part of Arizona's multimodal transportation system. Arizona railroads promote economic opportunities and environmental sustainability that reflect the high value Arizonans place on their unique southwestern lifestyle.
Intercity passenger rail, a new and reliable mode for Arizonans, is well connected to commuter rail and local transit systems. Through coordinated land use decisions and wise investments in multimodal facilities, the State is now a showpiece of compact sustainable growth patterns served by an efficient and seamless transit system. Passenger rail has competitive travel times and is the preferred option for many trips both locally and regionally.
The State has a freight rail system that carries long-distance cargo in an energy-efficient manner, with intermodal connections that permit seamless distribution of local deliveries. A robust economy including a greater proportion of manufacturing and entrepreneurship industries is served by a freight system comprised of both Class I railroads and short line operations.
The Sun Corridor has become a model megapolitan within the United States; the focused growth patterns have preserved much of the desert environment and promoted a lifestyle emulated by the rest of the country. The multi-modal transportation system supporting the state has proven to be a key cornerstone of achieving an economy which supports all walks of life and has attracted employers to the state in new and exciting industries.
2.2 Goals and Objectives
Goal I: Improve mobility and accessibility, create a multi-modal transportation system where the existing roadway network is complimented by efficient passenger and freight rail service.
• Develop safe, reliable and affordable transportation choices that strive to reduce highway congestion, and leverage additional capacity on the State's transportation system.
• Become a catalyst for smart growth community planning that includes multimodal connections and choices, transit oriented development, and economic growth opportunities.
• Improve the efficiency of passenger and freight movements within the State, in partnership with private carriers.
Goal II: Support economic growth, create a passenger rail network which fosters more livable communities that attract new employers to the State, and help enhance the State's global competitive position through strategic freight rail initiatives.
Arizona State Rail Plan 5
March 2011
• Support regional, tribal and local economic development plans, priorities, goals, and objectives.
• Support growth of traditional and non-traditional rail-related and rail-supported industries to increase global competitiveness.
• Improve economic competitiveness through reliable and timely access to passenger rail connections between economic and employment centers.
Goal III: Promote sustainable transportation and land use coordination, develop a multi-modal transportation system that enables a compact mixed use development pattern which becomes a sustainable method for accommodating a growing population.
• Improve Arizona's sustainability through coordination of rail transportation, land use, and economic development planning activities.
• Encourage land use patterns connected by multiple modes of travel that support rail and transit access and encourage pedestrian mobility, reduce energy consumption and green house gas emissions, improve air quality and promote public health.
• Foster collaboration between federal, State, regional and local public agencies to plan a seamless multimodal transportation system.
• Planning efforts related to new rail corridors or improvements to existing corridors should be coordinated with local land use plans and the State Land Department conceptual plans to help promote rail as a community asset.
Goal IV: Preserve the environment, natural and cultural resources, move passengers and freight in a socially and environmentally responsible manner which will promote preservation of the State's natural environment.
• Provide seamless and energy-efficient intermodal rail connections from origin to destination.
• Avoid degradation of existing environmental resources, wildlife habitat blocks and movement corridors, and equitably mitigate impacts.
• Protect and maintain wildlife movement corridors.
• Promote rail as an environmentally friendly and sustainable alternative to other modes of travel.
Goal V: Provide safety and security; protect people, cargo, and infrastructure.
Arizona State Rail Plan
6 Arizona State Rail Plan
March 2011
• Enhance the safety of passenger movements and connections between major activity hubs within the State and to the national passenger rail system.
• Strengthen the security of freight movements.
• Provide parallel or alternative transportation routes and services to facilitate emergency access, including evacuation.
• Promote energy security by reducing the state's reliance on petroleum products, particularly from foreign sources.
2.3 Benefits of Rail for Arizona
Arizona's railroads have historically played a crucial role in the State's transportation system, and continue to do so today. Passenger rail service, although mostly serving tourists today, could provide an alternative mode of travel for Arizonans in the future, and may help focus growth to achieve more sustainable development patterns enhancing the livability choices within Arizona communities. Commuter rail, conventional intercity rail, and ultimately high-speed rail will all have roles to play in Arizona's multimodal transportation system.
Strategic investments in railroad facilities, related industries and ancillary services can also open new opportunities for economic growth and development. Moving freight by rail is more energy efficient as compared to other modes of travel, and in most cases is at a reduced cost. Capturing a larger proportion of future freight movements on the rail system can help promote a more sustainable economy for Arizona.
Investment in passenger and freight rail infrastructure has been demonstrated to provide economic stimulation. The State will benefit from the engineering and construction activities required to implement improvements to the rail system, and
Table 1 - Capacity Comparison for Freight Transportation Modes
Boeing 747 Cargo Aircraft
100-Car Containerized Train
Average Capacity (Tons)
Equivalent Truck Units
Source: AECOM 2010once implemented an efficient rail system will attract corporations and manufacturing industries needed to create a sustainable economy for the future.
2.3.1 Congestion Mitigation
During 2006, railroads carried freight equivalent to more than 12 million truckloads across the country. A typical 100-car containerized unit train is equivalent to approximately 385 freight trucks on the State's highways. Planning for greater freight movements on railroads along multimodal corridors can reduce the cost of maintaining existing roads and the pressure to build costly new ones. Freight rail avoids additional overcrowding on highways, making roads safer and promoting economic growth.
Class I railroad lines run parallel to most major Interstate highways in the State, such as I-8, I-10, I-19 and I-40. These corridors represent multi-modal thoroughfares providing freight movements by rail and truck, and passenger movements by intercity rail, bus and personal vehicles. In general, a class I mainline has an approximate capacity of 216 million annual tons. Assuming rail operations on each mainline at full capacity, the class I railroads in Arizona could move the equivalent of approximately 8.3 million truckloads annually or 23,000 daily. Table 1 compares the capacity of the three principal freight transportation modes in Arizona.
2.3.2 Economic Benefit
Passenger rail can work as a catalyst for more sustainable land use by focusing growth surrounding multimodal transportation nodes while providing cost savings and efficiency gains. Indirect benefits include congestion
Arizona Department of Transportation
Arizona State Rail Plan 7
March 2011
reduction, infrastructure cost savings, consumer savings, reduced crash damage, improved air quality and public health. These economic savings and efficiency benefits filter through the economy as savings to consumers, businesses and governments, making a region more sustainable and competitive (Source: Victoria Transport Policy Institute. 2009. Rail Transit in America: A Comprehensive Evaluation of Benefits). Passenger rail can boost the economy by creating direct and indirect jobs, and spur economic growth by making travel between major cities easier.
The economic benefits of rail begin with direct job creation in construction of the rail facilities, while economic growth surrounding a freight distribution center or passenger station create indirect jobs, and finally there are benefits to the broader economy.
Rail facilities require vast amounts of labor to create, from professional services to pouring of concrete and laying of rails. The biggest source of job creation is in the actual construction of the rail system. At the peak of construction the Channel Tunnel, linking England and France together, employed over 10,000 workers just on the English side of the project. Hong Kong's high speed rail line is projected to create over 5000 jobs during construction and another 10,000 during the operation phase.
Passenger Rail station locations bring with them the potential for economic development serving as an attractive location for stores and offices. A passenger rail
In 1812, Colonel John Stevens published a pamphlet about the superiority of railways and steam carriages over canal navigation and stated that he could "see nothing to hinder a steam carriage moving on its way with a velocity of 100 miles an hour."station is envisioned to raise property values in the near vicinity, by creating a bustling and economically vibrant part of a community.
Freight distribution centers attract rail served companies which tend to employ large numbers of people in manufacturing and fabrication industries. Arizona's vision of a new economy including a vibrant renewable energy sector, aerospace and defense, and technology can provide numerous industrial opportunities which would be attracted to efficient rail service.
Recent research suggests that the non-transportation economic benefits of rail investments are as important as the transportation benefits received from construction of the system. Passenger rail and other rail investments put more people and businesses in closer connection to one another with potentially significant gains in productivity. Economists have long studied the gain in productivity that result from concentrations of industries or people, which shows that industries benefit in many ways from locating near other similar businesses, which is envisioned surrounding freight rail logistic centers or transit nodes.
2.3.3 Air Quality
Of all modes of transportation, railroads cause the least air pollution per unit of freight carried which can reduce the amount of green house gas emissions within the state and improve public health. Aircraft take-offs and landings require a large amount of fuel, producing high emissions of CO2 per passenger. A train uses up to 70 percent less energy and causes up to 85 percent less air pollution than a jet aircraft. Intercity trains provide similar benefits to the environment compared to the equivalent journey by automobile (Figure 1).
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimates that for every ton-mile carried, a typical truck emits roughly three times more nitrogen oxides and particulates than a locomotive. The emissions from a jet aircraft are even higher.
Arizona State Rail Plan
8 Arizona State Rail Plan
March 2011
Figure 1 - Carbon Dioxide Emissions by Transportation Mode
Source: Californians for High Speed Rail
The two major international airports in the State, Phoenix Sky Harbor International and Tucson International, face capacity expansion challenges as Arizona grows. The Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport is emerging as a regional airport that will ease the congestion at Phoenix Sky Harbor. New airports typically involve high capital costs, and complicated processes for clearances and approval. Rail can provide an environmentally cleaner option for movement of both freight and passenger traffic, while reducing the pressure on available aviation infrastructure.
2.3.4 Land Use
Passenger railroads tend to attract compact development near destinations that they serve. This can lead to a reduction in combined transportation and housing costs in urban and rural areas, which tend to provide location efficiency benefits, more efficient public infrastructure, and improved multimodal accessibility. Rail can act as a catalyst for redevelopment and infill that promotes pedestrian mobility and help reduce automobile traffic volumes in focused growth areas by limiting sprawl development patterns.
In communities across the State, scattered development is resulting in increased traffic and increased transportation needs, diminished local resources and reduction in the amount of open spaces. Development of rail can support communities that wish to offer diverse transportation and mobility options, supporting livable choices and a better quality of life. Transit oriented development patterns include pedestrian activity as the highest priority with a train station as a prominent feature of the community center. This land use pattern would include high density development within a 10 minute walk circle around a multimodal node including a mixture of office, residential, retail, and civic opportunities to provide a healthy and sustainable transportation system.
2.3.5 Sustainability
As the State of Arizona continues to grow in population there will be a need for urban and rural communities to expand their existing transportation systems to support the expanded population. There is a desire to use transportation infrastructure as a tool to focus growth and plan for more sustainable built communities that incorporate all transportation modes. The rail system within Arizona can contribute to a multimodal transportation system that connects population and employment centers and more efficiently distributes freight within the state and beyond.
Nationally, the HUD, DOT, and EPA Interagency Partnership for Sustainable Communities have been formed to coordinate federal housing, transportation, and other infrastructure investments to protect the environment, promote equitable affordable development, and increase transportation choices. This newfound partnership will help guide the distribution of federal grants sponsored by HUD, DOT, and EPA in the near future. Planning for a sustainable transportation and land use choices will enhance Arizona's competitive position for a share of this federal funding.
An efficient passenger and freight rail system will encourage infill development and revitalization of existing communities which promotes focused growth patterns surrounding multimodal transportation nodes. This change in development patterns can create location efficiencies within Arizona communities by providing a higher concentration of mixed use development which allow people to work and play within the same neighborhoods which they reside.
Arizona Department of Transportation
Arizona State Rail Plan 9
March 2011
The overall benefit of using transportation as a tool to focus growth is a reduction in the number of trips and improved location efficiency. This will alleviate traffic congestion on the state's highway system, and contribute to more livable communities which promote context sensitive solutions that help to preserve the natural environment.
Compact neighborhoods with walkable streets, access to rail transit, a wide variety of commercial development and employment have high location efficiency. They require less time, money, and green house gas emissions to meet everyday travel requirements. Transportation costs can consume over 30% of total household income for inefficient locations, compared to about 15% of household income in location efficient communities. By reducing the transportation costs, citizens can save a larger portion of their income which can be used to enjoy the benefits of living in the State of Arizona, while reducing the amount of greenhouse gas emissions, and lowering overall costs of construction and maintaining transportation infrastructure.
2.3.6 Energy Consumption
Trains are three times more fuel-efficient than trucks, and in the past 25 years freight trains have increased their fuel efficiency by 80 percent. Because of a train's greater fuel efficiency, shifting just 10 percent of long-haul freight from trucks to rail would reduce fuel consumption in the U.S. by more than one billion gallons a year reducing reliance on petroleum products and enhancing national security.
Rail provides a cost-effective and efficient mode of transportation (Table 2) for moving large quantities of freight over long distances. Freight rail is convenient for many industries, especially where it provides point-to-point delivery of cargo, often for half the cost of shipping by truck.
2.4 Existing and Potential Rail Traffic
2.4.1 Commodity Flows
A review of 2005 and forecasted 2050 rail traffic forecasts clearly shows that most of the rail traffic passes through the State with only about one-fifth of the total traffic destined for Arizona (Figures 2 to 4). Outbound rail traffic accounts for only two percent indicating the gross mismatch between inbound and outbound freight on rail. The State lacks a strong manufacturing industry base, resulting in lost opportunity for balanced freight exports and a diverse economy. Currently most freight trains going out of the Phoenix metropolitan area carry only waste and scrap metal.
The State can take the opportunity to develop a mix of industries to strengthen the State economy, generate employment opportunities, and increase outbound commodity flows in order to make the most efficient use of existing freight rail infrastructure.
Table 2 - Comparison of the Relative Efficiencies
Fuel Consumption
Infrastructure Capacity
Cost (to users)
Crash History
455 ton-miles per gallon
216 million annual tons per mainline track
2.7 cents per ton-mile
0.61 fatalities per billion ton-miles; 12.4 incidents* per billion ton-miles
105 ton-miles per gallon
37.8 million annual tons per lane
5.0 cents per ton-mile
1.45 fatalities per billion ton-miles; 36.4 incidents per billion ton-miles
* Incidents include all non-fatal injuries and property damage accidents.
Source: Brown, T.A. and A.B. Hatch (2002), "The Value of Rail Intermodal to the U.S. Economy," 29H28H28Hhttp://www.aar.org/pubcommon/documents/govt/brown.pdf
Arizona State Rail Plan
10 Arizona State Rail Plan
March 2011
The highest percentage of inbound rail traffic originates in New Mexico. In addition to New Mexico; Texas, California, Wyoming, and Iowa are the other top origin states for rail traffic to Arizona, with coal and building materials representing the highest percentage of inbound product.
Waste or Scrap Metals represented 26 percent of commodities flowing out of Arizona in 2005. Primary metal products; or stone products; farm products; and chemicals were the other top commodities flowing via rail out of Arizona.
Figure 2 - 2005 Distribution of Rail Traffic in Arizona (by weight)
Source: ADOT. 2007. Arizona Multimodal Freight Analysis Study, Technical Memorandum #1: Analysis of Freight Dependent Industries.
Figure 3 - 2030 Distribution of Rail Traffic in Arizona (by weight)
Source: ADOT. 2007. Arizona Multimodal Freight Analysis Study, Technical Memorandum #1: Analysis of Freight Dependent Industries.
Figure 4 - 2050 Distribution of Rail Traffic in Arizona (by weight)
Source: ADOT. 2007. Arizona Multimodal Freight Analysis Study, Technical Memorandum #1: Analysis of Freight Dependent Industries.
Arizona Department of Transportation
Arizona State Rail Plan 11
March 2011
Figure 5 - Inbound Rail Traffic – Intermodal
Source: ADOT. 2008. Statewide Rail Framework Study, Technical Report #2: Economic Analysis of Rail Freight and Passenger Rail Demand Forecasts.
Outbound Rail Freight
Outbound traffic is a minor portion of rail freight, with less than three million tons in the base year (2005). Primary metal products (copper) and freight of all kinds/mixed shipments account for half of the commodity value. Most of this rail traffic is low value and is shipped in carload units. The rail shipments of empty containers occur due to the imbalance of inbound rail freight over outbound. Figure 6 illustrates the expected growth in outbound intermodal rail traffic.
Figure 6 - Outbound Rail Traffic – Intermodal
Source: ADOT. 2008. Statewide Rail Framework Study, Technical Report #2: Economic Analysis of Rail Freight and Passenger Rail Demand Forecasts.
2.4.2 Freight Demand (2030 & 2050)
The rail forecasts have been developed based on data for years 2005, 2010, 2020, and 2030 provided by TRANSEARCH. Values for all years are in 2005 constant dollars. Freight demand forecasts are based on a similar industrial composition in the future.
Distribution of Rail Traffic
Freight traffic is expected to grow significantly by 2030 and 2050. However, the percentage share of inbound, outbound, and through traffic is not expected to change. Figures 3 and Figure 4 illustrate the projected directional distribution of rail freight for the years 2030 and 2050. The data show that directional distribution of rail freight will generally be the same as in 2005, unless capacity expansions are completed that allow for a redistribution of freight flows. In 2030, 76 percent of rail traffic will travel through Arizona, rising slightly to 77 percent in 2050. Inbound traffic will decrease from 21 percent in 2005 and 2030 to 20 percent in 2050. Intrastate and outbound percentages will also change only slightly.
Regular upgrades will have to be made to the State's rail infrastructure to keep up with the growing demand for freight rail. Freight rail will also continue to function inefficiently with inbound freight far exceeding the outbound freight volumes.
Inbound Rail Freight
Inbound rail freight is projected to double by 2030 and triple by 2050. Coal and petroleum will make up more than half of the inbound shipments, with coal primarily coming from New Mexico and Wyoming in carload unit trains.
Figure 5 illustrates the expected growth in inbound intermodal rail traffic (Intermodal freight uses different modes of conveyance in conjunction, such as ships, aircraft, trucks, etc).
Arizona State Rail Plan
12 Arizona State Rail Plan
March 2011
Through Rail Freight
Through traffic will remain the dominant rail freight flow, representing over 75 percent of rail movements in Arizona. Most of the through traffic includes either a California origin or destination, indicating the dominance of the ports of Los Angeles/Long Beach (POLA/POLB) with regard to containerized freight between the U.S. and Asia.
Intermodal freight currently makes up approximately 70 percent of through rail tonnage, and is projected to grow to about 80 percent by 2050. Figure 7 illustrates the expected growth in intermodal through rail traffic.
Figure 7 - Through Rail Traffic – Intermodal
Source: ADOT. 2008. Statewide Rail Framework Study, Technical Report #2: Economic Analysis of Rail Freight and Passenger Rail Demand Forecasts.
Long-Range Economic Vision of Arizona and Impact on Freight Movement
If Arizona achieves the growth expected to occur in the core Sun Corridor Megapolitan region, the State's economy will undergo massive expansion. Although forecasts are not available for individual sectors where employment growth will occur, on a preliminary basis the six major sectors which are being targeted for growth in the State are:
• Microelectronics industry
• Medical/biotechnology industry
• Aerospace and military support industries
• Renewable energy industry
• Global transportation logistics industry
• Niche agricultural industry
Almost 75 percent of employment growth will occur in the Sun Corridor Megapolitan. Some of the industrial sectors highlighted above, such as the aerospace/military support and renewable energy industries, can take advantage of available freight rail infrastructure. Attracting these industries to the State will provide an additional market for freight rail. Industrial growth will result in new demand for office and residential building space and lead to more substantial urban development surrounding these industrial areas.
Passenger Demand
Passenger rail service in Arizona is currently limited to Amtrak's Southwest Chief and Sunset Limited/Texas Eagle trains, which connect Chicago and New Orleans to Los Angeles, and three tourist trains – Grand Canyon, Verde Canyon and Copper Spike.
This section describes the existing passenger rail services in Arizona, and 2050 passenger demand estimates for potential Arizona passenger rail corridors. Other rail systems such as the Phoenix Metro Light Rail and Tucson Streetcar are not itemized in this report and are part of local transit programs.
Existing Passenger Rail in Arizona
Two Amtrak long-distance trains currently serve Arizona: the Southwest Chief and Sunset Limited/Texas Eagle. Both trains are designed to serve long distance, overnight markets and do not serve Arizona during optimal times of day. While the Sunset Limited/Texas Eagle is described to provide service between the Phoenix and Tucson metropolitan areas, it operates during late night hours, and the "Phoenix" station is located in Maricopa, about 35 miles south of downtown Phoenix limiting the attractiveness of intercity travel.
Arizona Department of Transportation
Arizona State Rail Plan 13
March 2011
2050 Passenger Demand Forecasts
Passenger rail forecasts were developed for both intercity rail service and commuter rail service on the following segments:
• Intercity rail
– –Phoenix–Tucson
– –Phoenix–Yuma
– –Tucson–Nogales
– –Phoenix– Flagstaff–Winslow
– –Phoenix–Los Angeles
– –Phoenix–San Diego
– –Phoenix–Las Vegas
• Commuter rail
– –Metropolitan Phoenix (Maricopa Association of Governments [MAG] region, with possible Pinal County extension)
– –Metropolitan Tucson (Pima Association of Governments [PAG] region)
– –Metropolitan Flagstaff
Intercity Passenger Rail
2050 Intercity Rail Passenger Estimates
One of the key determinants of ridership is the population served by a rail corridor. For this study, the potential market was defined by population within 25 miles of potential rail stations along a corridor. Past experience in providing ridership and revenue support to Amtrak and in completing other intercity rail studies has shown this to be a good measure of market size, and thus a predictor of rail ridership potential.
2008 Population (in thousands)
2050 Population (in thousands)
Phoenix-Los Angeles
Phoenix-San Diego
Phoenix-Las Vegas
Source: ADOT Statewide Rail Framework Study, 2010
Comparable Intercity Rail Passenger Corridors
In order to confirm ridership estimates for corridors without existing forecasts, it is helpful to compare similar corridors and consider ridership, corridor population, corridor length, and service frequency associated with existing rail passenger corridors.
Table 4 provides a summary of the comparable corridors. The corridors represent a wide range of length, service frequency, population served, and regions of the country.
Table 3 - Summary of Population Served by Potential Rail Passenger Corridors in 2050
Based on demand forecasts, the Phoenix-Los Angeles and Phoenix-Tucson corridors offer the highest ridership potential
Arizona State Rail Plan
14 Arizona State Rail Plan
March 2011
Amtrak Service
Endpoint Markets
2008 Annual Ridership (in thousands)
Length (miles)
Weekday Round Trips
2008 Population (in thousands)
Lincoln Service
Chicago-St. Louis
Pacific Surfliner
Los Angeles-San Diego
Missouri River Runner
Kansas City-St. Louis
Source: ADOT Statewide Rail Framework Study, 2010
2050 Intercity Rail Passenger Estimates
Table 5 summarizes Arizona corridors, the service assumptions, the 2050 ridership, and the source of the estimate.
Length (mi)
Assumed Service
2050 Annual Ridership (in thousands)
Source of Original Estimate
5-7 daily round trips
1,600 to 1,900
1998/2007 High Speed Rail Study - Sketch model
7 daily round trips
450 to 800
2007 Response to Executive Order - $2007-2 *(2008-2)
Tucson - Nogales
7 daily round trips
500 to 800
2007 Response to Executive Order - $2007-2 *(2008-2)
Phoenix-Flagstaff- Winslow
3-5 daily round trips
150 to 300
2007 Response to Executive Order - $2007-2 *(2008-2)
Phoenix-Los Angeles
6-12 daily round trips
1,800 to 4,400
ADOT Statewide Rail Framework Study, 2010
Phoenix-San Diego*
6-12 daily round trips
300 to 600
ADOT Statewide Rail Framework Study, 2010
Phoenix-Las Vegas
6-12 daily round trips
950 to 1,900
ADOT Statewide Rail Framework Study, 2010
*Note: Phoenix–San Diego estimates represent the increment above Phoenix-Yuma ridership
Sources noted in table.
Table 4 - Summary of Comparable Amtrak Service
Table 5 - Summary 2050 Intercity Rail Annual Passenger Estimates
Arizona Department of Transportation
Arizona State Rail Plan 15
March 2011
Based on the analysis, the Phoenix–Los Angeles corridor offers the highest potential ridership, as it serves the largest population of all the corridors. While the Phoenix–San Diego estimates may appear low, they represent the additional incremental ridership over the Phoenix–Yuma corridor, which is part of the Phoenix-San Diego route. Taking both estimates into account brings the Phoenix–Yuma-San Diego potential annual ridership to between 750,000 and 1.4 million.
The ridership estimates in Table 5 represent the impact of the corridors individually. If service were implemented in more than one of these corridors, with connections between them, there would be potential for higher system-wide ridership.
Commuter Rail
Three potential commuter rail corridors were identified: Metro Phoenix, Metro Tucson, and Metro Flagstaff. Ridership forecasts are available for all these services except Flagstaff. This section provides a high-level overview of the service characteristics assumed, where available, for each system. Outside Phoenix few detailed studies have been conducted.
• Metropolitan Phoenix Commuter Rail
– –Source: 2010 MAG Commuter Rail System Study
– –Corridors: Four potential corridors: BNSF Grand Avenue Line, UPRR Tempe/West Chandler Branch, UPRR Southeast Mainline and UPRR Yuma West Line
– –2030 Service Assumptions: 30-minute peak headway, 60-minute off-peak headway
• Metropolitan Tucson Commuter Rail
– –Source: 2007 Arizona Public Transportation Program Response to Executive Order #2007-02 (#2008-02)
– –Corridors: None specified
– –2030 Service Assumptions: 15+ one-way trips per day
• Metropolitan Flagstaff Commuter Rail
– –Source: ADOT Statewide Rail Framework Study, 2010
– –Corridors: Williams–Flagstaff-Winslow
– –2030 Service Assumptions: 10-15 one-way trips per day
Comparable Commuter Rail Corridors
As in the intercity corridor analysis described above, a high-level analysis approach was developed to provide order-of-magnitude estimate of commuter rail ridership in the three corridors. The approach provides estimates for Flagstaff and Tucson. The method considers the relationship between daily ridership and central business district employment. Since the analysis was applied to cities with relatively low employment compared to other cities with commuter rail service, only cities with a central business district employment of less than 100,000 were initially considered, as Table 6 shows.
Daily Ridership
Central Business District Employment
Salt Lake City
San Diego
Dallas/Fort Worth
Miami/Fort Lauderdale
Sources: APTA Commuter Rail Public Transportation Ridership Report (March 2009), Demographia U.S. Central Business Districts, 2000 Data on Employment and Transit Work Trips (June 2006), Flagstaff central business district employment estimated from 2000 Census Transportation Planning Package.
Phoenix, Tucson, and Flagstaff's central business district employment are lower than in any of the comparison cities, so the two smallest cities, Albuquerque and Salt
Table 6 - Summary Selected Commuter Rail Corridors
Arizona State Rail Plan
16 Arizona State Rail Plan
March 2011
Lake City (also the cities with the most recent commuter rail opening dates), were given primary consideration.
2050 Commuter Rail Estimates
Table 7 provides commuter rail daily ridership forecasts. Since commuter rail is oriented to serving workers, the 2050 original estimates are based on employment growth rates between the original forecast year and 2050. Estimates in the Phoenix metropolitan area were developed by MAG. In metropolitan Tucson, the estimates were produced using a high-level market assessment.
2050 Daily Ridership
Original Analysis Method
West Valley - Phoenix - East Valley
17,980 (2030 estimates)
2010 MAG Commuter Rail System Study
2007 Response to Executive Order #2007-02 (#2008-02)
ADOT Statewide Rail Framework Study, 2010
Source: ADOT Statewide Rail Framework Study, 2010; 2010 MAG Commuter Rail System Study; 2007 Response to Executive Order #2007-02 (#2008-02)
2.5 Positive Train Control
Positive Train Control (PTC) is a developing technology which is capable of preventing train-to-train collisions, derailments due to over-speeding, and casualties or injuries to roadway workers (e.g., maintenance-of-way workers, bridge workers, signal maintainers) operating within their limits of authority as a result of unauthorized incursion by a train. PTC is also capable of preventing train movements through a switch left in the wrong position. PTC systems vary widely in complexity and sophistication based on the level of automation and functionality they implement, the system architecture utilized, the wayside system upon which they are based (i.e., non-signaled, block signal, cab signal, etc.), and the degree of train control they are capable of assuming.
Table 7 - Summary Commuter Rail Passenger Estimates
The Rail Safety Improvement Act (RSIA) of 2008 mandates that interoperable PTC systems be installed on most passenger-rail routes and lines used to move certain hazardous materials by December 2015. Closed passenger-rail systems, such as light-rail, rapid transit and subway systems, will not be required to adopt PTC. Freight railroads which meet certain criteria must install the system even if no passenger trains share their tracks.
The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) issued the final PTC implementation rule in January 2010 which require all passenger rail lines, freight rail lines which share tracks with passenger service and Class I railroads (for routes carrying more than 5 million gross tons of freight and presence of Hazardous materials traffic during 2008) to submit PTC Implementation Plans, accompanied or preceded by PTC Development Plans.
An early version PTC system has been in operation on Amtrak's Northeast Corridor between Washington and Boston, however this system would not meet the current federal requirements. BNSF and UPRR have PTC installed on short segments of their track for testing purposes. New Jersey Transit is installing a Speed Enforcement System on its commuter lines. However, no true PTC systems as envisioned in the FRA implantation plan are active at the time of this report publication.
Arizona Department of Transportation
Arizona State Rail Plan 17
March 2011
2.6 Purpose and Background of the State Rail Plan
The purpose of the Arizona State Rail Plan is:
• To inform Arizonans on the benefits of rail transportation and its importance to a sustainable state economy.
• To ensure the State's eligibility for federal rail funding programs, most notably those authorized by the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008.
• To establish a long-range vision for the State's passenger and freight rail systems, along with goals and objectives for the year 2030.
• To serve as a reference document on railroad facilities, services and conditions.
• To recommend a prioritized long-range program of investment projects.
• To provide the rail element of the State's Long Range Transportation Plan creating a comprehensive and multimodal plan.
The Arizona State Rail Plan is an integral part of a multimodal long-range planning process. In 2007, at the direction of the Governor's Office and the State Transportation Board (STB), ADOT began work on a long-range (year 2050) transportation planning vision for Arizona known as the Building a Quality Arizona - Statewide Transportation Framework Study (STFS). After considering three alternative scenarios for the future of the statewide multimodal transportation system, ADOT and its local partners assembled the best elements into a single recommended scenario. The recommended scenario includes an intercity passenger rail network, as well as a comprehensive program of roadway and bus transit improvements. It also identifies very broad corridors for the study of future high-speed rail connections. The STB accepted the study in January 2010 as a basis for further planning, especially the State Long Range Transportation Plan.
The 2009 Statewide Rail Framework Study (SRFS) began as an outgrowth of the STFS. The SRFS, which covers both freight and passenger rail, built a foundation for the State Rail Plan by identifying benefits and needs, developing strategic rail investment opportunities, and recommending implementation pursuits for the State of Arizona. A concluding matrix divided proposed rail improvement actions into immediate (2010), near-term (2010 to 2015) and long-term (beyond 2050) timeframes.
As elements of a comprehensive planning process known as "Building a Quality Arizona" (BQAZ), both the STFS and the SRFS embody the BQAZ guiding principles for transportation investment:
• Improve mobility and accessibility.
• Support economic growth.
• Promote sustainable development.
• Protect natural resources.
• Ensure safety and security.
The State Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) is a twenty five-year, fiscally constrained plan to guide State transportation investments in all modes, and is intended to establish the future allocation of ADOT resources. Arizona statutes require ADOT to update the plan every five years, with the next LRTP due in 2011. The Arizona State Rail Plan will provide input on rail priorities for the LRTP, and will be updated based on FRA requirements.
The State Rail Plan completes the work program initiated in the SRFS, relying on the stakeholder input described in Appendix A. The appendix also lists related Arizona rail studies and plans.
2.7 Compliance with United States Code, Section 22102
This SRP puts Arizona in compliance with the requirements of the United States Code, Section 22102.
Arizona State Rail Plan
18 Arizona State Rail Plan
March 2011
2.8 Updates to this Rail Plan
This rail plan should be updated on a regular schedule as required by FRA, which is coordinated with the State's long range planning activities. The plan should be amended to reflect any changing conditions related to rail operations within the State.
The contents of this rail plan represent the vision for the state at the time of its completion, however this document should be thought of as a living document which should be updated or modified as implementation of various rail strategies are completed or revised.
This document should be thought of as a living document which should be updated or modified as implementation of various rail strategies are completed or revised.
Arizona Department of Transportation
Arizona State Rail Plan 19
March 2011
This page intentionally left blankChapter 3. Issues and Opportunities
Arizona's freight and passenger rail system faces a variety of issues and challenges. Arizona's government can play a role in helping to resolve some of these issues, in cooperation with the railroads and other stakeholders. This chapter focuses on the major issues and accompanying opportunities to enhance the role of railroads in the multimodal State transportation system. The description of each issue is followed by one or more related opportunities.
Chapter 3 is divided into three sections. The first discusses Arizona's future passenger rail network, including opportunities ranging from high-speed and intercity rail to regional commuter rail and the enhancement of tourist railroad corridors. The second and longest section is devoted to issues of the State's freight railroad network, including the two Class I railroads as well as short lines. The last section presents issues and opportunities regarding rail safety. Subsequent chapters bring together these elements to form a long-range statewide rail transportation plan for several corridors opportunities, with projects that address many aspects of rail freight service, passenger rail opportunities, and safety for each.
3.1 Passenger Rail System Issues and Opportunities
Arizona could benefit from developing a comprehensive passenger rail system that would include coordinated systems of interstate, intercity (including High Speed), and regional commuter rail service. Passenger rail is a transportation alternative that can help travelers avoid congestion on highways and air travel. Intercity passenger rail provides mobility options for tourists and residents. Passenger Rail can provide a convenient, efficient mode of travel, where riders can work, relax, and travel between employment cores, avoiding the need to drive to outlying airports or wait in long security lines or the need for travel by car. In addition, increased transit options can save money by reducing the amount of money spent on gas, vehicular maintenance, parking, and contributing to more location efficient housing choices. Opportunities for an integrated statewide passenger rail system are illustrated in Figure 8.
In 1827, the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad was chartered to run from Baltimore to the Ohio River in Virginia. It was the first westward bound railroad in America. Today, Arizona is served by two Class I railroads; BNSF Railway and Union Pacific Railroad.
Arizona State Rail Plan 21
March 2011
This page intentionally left blank23
Figure 8 - Integrated Statewide Passenger Rail System
This page intentionally left blank3.1.1 Intercity Passenger Rail System
Opportunity Statement
An intercity passenger rail (ICR) system that connects
many of Arizona's population and job centers would
create and support focused growth paterns and
sustainable development within the Sun Corridor,
enhancing mobility choices. Improvement to Amtrak
services in Arizona will provide another element of a
statewide passenger rail system, providing improved
interstate passenger service to the largest cities in
By 2050, both population and employment in Arizona are
projected to more than double from their 2005 levels.
Growth of the Sun Corridor (Figure 9) will lead to increased
transportation demand for both passengers and goods.
It will not be possible to accommodate growth and
avoid trafic congestion by improving roadways alone, so
passenger rail should become a key component of the
Sun Corridor transportation system.
Currently, I-10 is the only high-capacity connection
between the Phoenix and Tucson metropolitan areas,
limiting modal choices and incapacitating trafic in the
event of an incident on the highway. Similarly, I-17 from
Phoenix and I-19 from Tucson provide key connections
with other growing communities in the Sun Corridor.
The intent of a multimodal spine is to create a corridor
of parallel transportation modes that pass through the
center of the Sun Corridor, consisting of ICR, freeways
with express buses, and possibly High Speed Rail
(HSR). Such a system would provide travelers a range
of transportation choices. From this multimodal spine,
ancillary multimodal transportation systems could branch
of and serve local communities.
Potential Actions:
99 Implement an ICR system for the Sun Corridor,
starting with the Phoenix to Tucson section.
Plan future extensions to Northern Arizona
and Nogales.
99 Partner with Amtrak to provide service to
the Phoenix metropolitan area, potentially
reopening and rehabilitation of the UPRR
Wellton Branch, or using a route along the
Arizona and California Railroad.
99 Partner with Amtrak to improve exisitng
service for the Sunset Limited/Texas Eagle
route (UPRR), and consider expanded service
between Arizona and the Los Angeles Basin.
99 Partner with Amtrak to improve exisitng
service for the Southwest Chief route (BNSF),
including consideration of separate trains
connecting Los Angeles with the Grand
Canyon Railway.
The intent of a multimodal
spine is to create a corridor
of parallel transportation
modes that pass through
the center of the Sun
Corridor. From this
multimodal spine, ancillary
multimodal transportation
systems could branch
of and serve local
Arizona Department of Transportation
Arizona State Rail Plan 25
March 2011
Figure 9 - Sun Corridor Megapolitan Region
Arizona State Rail Plan
26 Arizona State Rail Plan
March 2011
The two Amtrak lines serving Arizona are the Southwest Chief and combined Sunset Limited/Texas Eagle. Both of these routes primarily serve long-distance tourist travel, with service frequency ranging from daily (Southwest Chief) to three times a week (Sunset Limited/Texas Eagle).
The Arizona Amtrak routes use track owned and operated by freight railroads. They share track with freight operations and are subject to delays caused by other rail traffic. The Southwest Chief traverses the northern portion of the State on the BNSF Transcon Corridor, which is double-tracked across Arizona. The Sunset Limited/Texas Eagle traverses the southern portion of the State on the UPRR Sunset Route, which is approximately 43% double tracked, and UPRR is planning to double-track the remaining corridor throughout Arizona.
In 2008, about 88,000 passengers boarded Amtrak trains in Arizona. Flagstaff had by far the most boardings (40,000), followed by Tucson (15,000), Kingman (10,000), and Williams Junction (8,000). Maricopa, the closest station to the Phoenix metropolitan area, had 6,400 boardings.
Amtrak provides direct service to Tucson but not the Phoenix metropolitan area. In 1996, UPRR suspended service on the Wellton Branch between Roll and Palo Verde, which ended Amtrak service to Phoenix and Tempe. The 81-mile segment required significant maintenance and upgrades, for which Amtrak was not prepared to finance. Since 1996, Amtrak has used the Sunset Route through Maricopa, approximately 30 miles south of Phoenix, where it established a new station. In 1995, the Phoenix and Tempe stations had approximately 35,000 combined passenger boardings on the Sunset Limited, in contrast to the 6,400 boardings at Maricopa in 2008. There is currently no connecting bus service from the Maricopa station to the Phoenix area.
Table 8 compares existing Amtrak passenger rail service in Arizona with service in five neighboring states. California accounts for the overwhelming majority of trains and riders in these states. Most California intercity riders use the state's three corridor services (Capitol, Pacific Surfliner and San Joaquin) rather than its four long-d
Click tabs to swap between content that is broken into logical sections.