The document compares the goals and attributes of a passenger rail system versus using the transportation corridor as a multi-modal path without rail for Santa Cruz County. Some key points discussed are that a passenger rail system would have higher capital and operating costs, take longer to implement, and face more funding risks than a non-rail transportation corridor. A non-rail corridor could accommodate more daily trips as a bike/pedestrian path, have fewer environmental impacts, lower safety costs, and see greater economic benefits from eco-tourism.
“You are the master of your own destiny. Use your strengths well. They are the keys to your destiny and your success in life. Once you know yourself and take action to realize your dreams, you can unlock the doors to your own potential.”
~Neil Somerville
Mississippi Gulf Coast Rail Revival: NCITEC White Paper Background - CAITWaheed Uddin
Major problems with Mississippi Gulf Coast cities include the following: high congestion on highways during peak hours, increased volume of commercial traffic and safety risks to other auto motor traffic, high level of vehicle emissions, and lack of public transportation options for the underserved. Coastal communities face extreme traffic congestion during hurricane evacuations, which is a major hurdle for federal, state and local emergency management agencies.
The primary objective of this project and white paper is to propose sustainable rail strategies for serving commuters transportation to major employers and patrons/visitors to casinos, beaches, and other places of tourist attraction within the coastal highway corridors.
The proposed commuter rail framework integrates intercity passenger rail service with local economies. Passenger rail/commuter intercity rail service is evaluated for East-West (E-W) Coastal corridor south of I-10 and North-South (N-S) Corridor along east of US-49 on the existing freight rail corridors. Technical feasibility and economic competitiveness evaluation are presented, which show that breakeven can be achieved within 6-7 years considering only direct revenues.
Economic Ecosystems - Mass Transit In The North BayJoshua Dopkowski
As the San Francisco Bay Area has grown and evolved, the demands for commuter rail transit and freight transportation has increased significantly in the North Bay counties of Marin, Sonoma and Napa. We address the needs and propose a solution to the current problems stemming from a lack of adequate rail transportation.
“You are the master of your own destiny. Use your strengths well. They are the keys to your destiny and your success in life. Once you know yourself and take action to realize your dreams, you can unlock the doors to your own potential.”
~Neil Somerville
Mississippi Gulf Coast Rail Revival: NCITEC White Paper Background - CAITWaheed Uddin
Major problems with Mississippi Gulf Coast cities include the following: high congestion on highways during peak hours, increased volume of commercial traffic and safety risks to other auto motor traffic, high level of vehicle emissions, and lack of public transportation options for the underserved. Coastal communities face extreme traffic congestion during hurricane evacuations, which is a major hurdle for federal, state and local emergency management agencies.
The primary objective of this project and white paper is to propose sustainable rail strategies for serving commuters transportation to major employers and patrons/visitors to casinos, beaches, and other places of tourist attraction within the coastal highway corridors.
The proposed commuter rail framework integrates intercity passenger rail service with local economies. Passenger rail/commuter intercity rail service is evaluated for East-West (E-W) Coastal corridor south of I-10 and North-South (N-S) Corridor along east of US-49 on the existing freight rail corridors. Technical feasibility and economic competitiveness evaluation are presented, which show that breakeven can be achieved within 6-7 years considering only direct revenues.
Economic Ecosystems - Mass Transit In The North BayJoshua Dopkowski
As the San Francisco Bay Area has grown and evolved, the demands for commuter rail transit and freight transportation has increased significantly in the North Bay counties of Marin, Sonoma and Napa. We address the needs and propose a solution to the current problems stemming from a lack of adequate rail transportation.
Presentation by Marcelo E. Lascano Kežic of the University of San Martin, Buenos Aires and the University of Buenos Aires.
Delivered on 6 March 2014 to an audience at the Institute for Transport Studies (ITS) University of Leeds .
www.its.leeds.ac.uk/research/themes
Urban transportation system meaning ,travel demand functions with factors, design approaches & modeling , types of mass transit system with advantages -disadvantages or limitations , opportunities in mass transport , integrated approach for transit -transportation system
RV 2014: Complete Streets- From Policy to Implementation by James Cromar and ...Rail~Volution
Complete Streets: From Policy to Implementation (Completely) AICP CM 2
2 HOUR SESSION
How can you make your complete streets policy a success? How do you translate complete streets into real benefits for the people who are walking, biking and taking public transportation? How do you promote accessibility and connectivity for all -- including people with disabilities -- through design and planning? Hear regional, city and international perspectives from policy to implementation during this complete complete streets workshop.
Moderator: Richard Weaver, AICP, Director of Planning, Policy and Sustainability, American Public Transportation Association; Chair, National Complete Streets Coalition, Washington, DC
Joseph Iacobucci, Sam Schwartz Engineering, DPC, Chicago, Illinois
Stefanie Seskin, Deputy Director, National Complete Streets Coalition, Smart Growth America, Washington, DC
Dan Gallagher, AICP, Transportation Planning Manager, Charlotte Department of Transportation, Charlotte, North Carolina
James Cromar, Director of Planning, Broward Metropolitan Planning Organization, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida
Tony Hull, Independent Transportation Consultant, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Gregory Thompson, Chair, Light Rail Transit Committee of TRB, Tallahassee, Florida
Roxana Ene, Project Manager, Broward Metropolitan Planning Organization, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida
Presentation by Marcelo E. Lascano Kežic of the University of San Martin, Buenos Aires and the University of Buenos Aires.
Delivered on 6 March 2014 to an audience at the Institute for Transport Studies (ITS) University of Leeds .
www.its.leeds.ac.uk/research/themes
Urban transportation system meaning ,travel demand functions with factors, design approaches & modeling , types of mass transit system with advantages -disadvantages or limitations , opportunities in mass transport , integrated approach for transit -transportation system
RV 2014: Complete Streets- From Policy to Implementation by James Cromar and ...Rail~Volution
Complete Streets: From Policy to Implementation (Completely) AICP CM 2
2 HOUR SESSION
How can you make your complete streets policy a success? How do you translate complete streets into real benefits for the people who are walking, biking and taking public transportation? How do you promote accessibility and connectivity for all -- including people with disabilities -- through design and planning? Hear regional, city and international perspectives from policy to implementation during this complete complete streets workshop.
Moderator: Richard Weaver, AICP, Director of Planning, Policy and Sustainability, American Public Transportation Association; Chair, National Complete Streets Coalition, Washington, DC
Joseph Iacobucci, Sam Schwartz Engineering, DPC, Chicago, Illinois
Stefanie Seskin, Deputy Director, National Complete Streets Coalition, Smart Growth America, Washington, DC
Dan Gallagher, AICP, Transportation Planning Manager, Charlotte Department of Transportation, Charlotte, North Carolina
James Cromar, Director of Planning, Broward Metropolitan Planning Organization, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida
Tony Hull, Independent Transportation Consultant, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Gregory Thompson, Chair, Light Rail Transit Committee of TRB, Tallahassee, Florida
Roxana Ene, Project Manager, Broward Metropolitan Planning Organization, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida
Supported by The Rockefeller Foundation, this ebook highlights a dozen of CityLab's favorite stories from the 2014 series on how Americans will travel tomorrow.
The second Discussion Paper in the Paradise Project series, Moving About Paradise compares area coverage and travel times under the Quickway Proposal, the innovative community-based transit plan, and under the SANDAG 2050 transit plan. The Quickway Proposal extends rapid transit access to many more people, connects to many more jobs and other destinations, and saves considerable travel time, in addition to better supporting regional growth and climate change goals.
Back in 2015, the U.S. Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT), under the leadership of Secretary Anthony Foxx, has
leveraged nearly $350 million in public and private funds for smart city and advanced transportation technologies. Building on
Beyond Traffic 2045, the Smart City Challenge provided a spark for cities looking to revolutionize their transportation systems
to help improve people’s lives. Through the Smart City Challenge, the Department committed up to $40 million to one winning
city. In response, cities leveraged an additional $500 million in private and public funding to help make their Smart City visions
real. And, in October 2016, Secretary Foxx announced an additional $65 million in grants to support community-driven
advanced technology transportation projects in cities across America, including 4 of the finalists in the Smart City Challenge.
By challenging American cities to use emerging transportation technologies to address their most pressing problems, the
Smart City Challenge aimed to spread innovation through a mixture of competition, collaboration, and experimentation.
But the Smart City Challenge was about more than just technology. We called on mayors to define their most pressing
transportation problems and envision bold new solutions that could change the face of transportation in our cities by meeting
the needs of residents of all ages and abilities; and bridging the digital divide so that everyone, not just the tech-savvy, can be
connected to everything their city has to offer.
The Rockefeller Foundation and the Pratt Center for Community Development have coalesced around a transit solution called Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)—a high-performance system that combines the permanence, speed, and reliability of rail, with the flexibility of buses, at a fraction of the cost of a subway system. In the Foundation and Pratt’s report, Mobility and Equity for New York’s Transit-Starved Neighborhoods: The Case for Full-Featured Bus Rapid Transit, BRT is discussed as an affordable, reliable, and practical way of getting outer borough residents from point A to point B.
Solid waste collection routing optimization: The city of Virginia beach storyKevin Callen
The City of Virginia Beach is the largest city in Virginia,
with a population of nearly 450,000. The City
encompasses approximately 307 square miles, of which
248 square miles is land area and the rest water or
wetlands. The City self- performs residential solid waste
collection for approximately 122,000 customers. The
northern sector of the City is devoted to more urban uses,
while the southern area generally remains rural. Solid
waste services include weekly automated residential
household pickup, weekly manual yard waste collection,
and scheduled bulky waste pickup. The City contracts
with a private company to collect and process single
stream recyclables on an every other week basis.
My final project for IDEO U's course From Ideas To Action. Here I present my project for using aerial gondolas in San Francisco as a means of public transit.
What is the point of small housing associations.pptxPaul Smith
Given the small scale of housing associations and their relative high cost per home what is the point of them and how do we justify their continued existance
Jennifer Schaus and Associates hosts a complimentary webinar series on The FAR in 2024. Join the webinars on Wednesdays and Fridays at noon, eastern.
Recordings are on YouTube and the company website.
https://www.youtube.com/@jenniferschaus/videos
This session provides a comprehensive overview of the latest updates to the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (commonly known as the Uniform Guidance) outlined in the 2 CFR 200.
With a focus on the 2024 revisions issued by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), participants will gain insight into the key changes affecting federal grant recipients. The session will delve into critical regulatory updates, providing attendees with the knowledge and tools necessary to navigate and comply with the evolving landscape of federal grant management.
Learning Objectives:
- Understand the rationale behind the 2024 updates to the Uniform Guidance outlined in 2 CFR 200, and their implications for federal grant recipients.
- Identify the key changes and revisions introduced by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in the 2024 edition of 2 CFR 200.
- Gain proficiency in applying the updated regulations to ensure compliance with federal grant requirements and avoid potential audit findings.
- Develop strategies for effectively implementing the new guidelines within the grant management processes of their respective organizations, fostering efficiency and accountability in federal grant administration.
Russian anarchist and anti-war movement in the third year of full-scale warAntti Rautiainen
Anarchist group ANA Regensburg hosted my online-presentation on 16th of May 2024, in which I discussed tactics of anti-war activism in Russia, and reasons why the anti-war movement has not been able to make an impact to change the course of events yet. Cases of anarchists repressed for anti-war activities are presented, as well as strategies of support for political prisoners, and modest successes in supporting their struggles.
Thumbnail picture is by MediaZona, you may read their report on anti-war arson attacks in Russia here: https://en.zona.media/article/2022/10/13/burn-map
Links:
Autonomous Action
http://Avtonom.org
Anarchist Black Cross Moscow
http://Avtonom.org/abc
Solidarity Zone
https://t.me/solidarity_zone
Memorial
https://memopzk.org/, https://t.me/pzk_memorial
OVD-Info
https://en.ovdinfo.org/antiwar-ovd-info-guide
RosUznik
https://rosuznik.org/
Uznik Online
http://uznikonline.tilda.ws/
Russian Reader
https://therussianreader.com/
ABC Irkutsk
https://abc38.noblogs.org/
Send mail to prisoners from abroad:
http://Prisonmail.online
YouTube: https://youtu.be/c5nSOdU48O8
Spotify: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/libertarianlifecoach/episodes/Russian-anarchist-and-anti-war-movement-in-the-third-year-of-full-scale-war-e2k8ai4
Jennifer Schaus and Associates hosts a complimentary webinar series on The FAR in 2024. Join the webinars on Wednesdays and Fridays at noon, eastern.
Recordings are on YouTube and the company website.
https://www.youtube.com/@jenniferschaus/videos
ZGB - The Role of Generative AI in Government transformation.pdfSaeed Al Dhaheri
This keynote was presented during the the 7th edition of the UAE Hackathon 2024. It highlights the role of AI and Generative AI in addressing government transformation to achieve zero government bureaucracy
Passenger Rail vs. Multi-Modal Transportation Corridor
1.
Passenger Rail vs. Transportation Corridor without Rail
The recently published Passenger Rail Feasibility Study Draft Report considers the viability of passenger rail for
Santa Cruz County. This is an important regional project that merits close scrutiny to ensure the publicly-owned
transportation corridor right-of-way is being put to its highest and best use to serve the community. Here is an
alternative vision of using the corridor as a multi-modal transportation corridor without rail.
ATTRIBUTE PASSENGER RAIL1
TRANSPORTATION
CORRIDOR
WITHOUT RAIL
GOAL 12
: Provide a convenient, competitive
and accessible travel option
Rail ridership max forecast/Ride Your Bike To Work 5,500 per day3
7,000 per day4
Probable ridership/probable bicyclist trips 2,700 per day5
3,500 per day6
“Last mile” (e.g. stations too far from home, business)
7
+20-30 minutes8
No issue
Ticket cost $5.00 roundtrip Free
Probable timeframe to complete ~20 years9
~8 years10
GOAL 2: Enhance communities and the
environment, support economic vitality
Ease traffic congestion: projected number of cars
removed from Highway 111
TBD TBD
Diesel locomotives12
, 60 trains p/day13
: train horns at
40 grade crossings14
and increased freight usage15
Increased noise, pollution,
traffic
None
2,400 grade crossings p/day (60 trains x 40 grade
crossings)
Yes No
Parking accommodations Not budgeted, will impact
costs, local neighborhoods
Limited
Public safety: High costs to implement adequate
safety measures along the railway
Yes No
Impact to residential property values along railway Detrimental Improved16
Eco-tourism, enhanced economic development Few examples Many examples17
Recreational asset / healthy lifestyle Limited Excellent
Takes advantage of new technologies Limited18
Robust19
GOAL 3: Develop a rail system that is cost
effective and financially feasible
Capital Costs $176M20
$68M21
Annual Operating & Maintenance (30 yrs) $420M22
($14M per year) $10M23
($320K per year)
Unbudgeted costs24
$ Tens of Millions Minimal
Funding risks25
Many Limited
Santa Cruz has the money to build it No26
Yes27
2.
1
Sources:
Statistics
and
costs
(including
both
capital
and
O&M
costs)
in
this
column
include
Passenger
Rail
according
to
Scenario
G1
in
Passenger
Rail
Feasibility
Study
(PRFS),
May
2015
2
Goals
stated
here
are
from
the
PRFS
3
See
Scenario
G
and
G1
in
PRFS
p.98
4
Source:
“State
of
Cycling”
Santa
Cruz
County
2015
data
of
7,000
participants
in
last
3
years
Bike
to
Work/School
Days
5
Based
on
analysis
of
comparable
rail
project
–
San
Diego
County’s
SPRINTER
–
actual
ridership
is
7,800
vs.
initial
feasibility
forecasted
ridership
of
16,000;
Sources:
http://web1.ctaa.org/webmodules/webarticles/articlefiles/North_County_SPRINTER.pdf
and
http://www.gonctd.com/wp-‐content/uploads/2013/08/012313-‐SPRINTERFactSheet.pdf.
It
is
also
worth
noting
that
North
San
Diego
County
has
almost
4x
the
population
of
Santa
Cruz
County
(U.S.
Census
Bureau).
6
Data
from
other
cities
shows
that
when
a
safe
alternative
for
bikes
is
provided,
usage
spikes.
In
Minneapolis,
MN
bicyclists
increased
81%
on
protected
bike
lanes.
Source
http://www.planetizen.com/node/73269.
Bicycling
is
a
popular
workstyle
in
Santa
Cruz
which
as
the
2nd
highest
rate
of
bike-‐to-‐work
trips
in
the
state;
RTC
2014
bike
ridership
count
for
Santa
Cruz
County
was
2,503
(one-‐time
annual
count).
7
Most
mass
transit
fails
due
to
what
urban
planners
call
the
first-‐
and
last-‐mile
problem.
You'd
like
to
commute
on
public
transit,
but
it's
unlikely
that
you
live
or
work
close
enough
to
a
station
to
walk.
So
even
if
public
transit
is
available,
commuters
often
stay
in
their
cars
because
the
alternative-‐the
hassle
of
driving,
then
riding,
then
getting
to
your
final
destination-‐is
inconvenient,
or
too
time
consuming.
Source:
http://magazine.good.is/articles/convenience-‐is-‐
king
8
http://media.metro.net/projects_studies/sustainability/images/path_design_guidelines_draft
_november_2013.pdf
9
Proposition
116
funds
used
to
buy
the
current
rail
ROW
were
granted
in
1990.
22
years
later
(2012)
the
rail
ROW
was
purchased
from
Union
Pacific
and
now
3
years
later
(2015)
we
have
the
first
Passenger
Rail
Feasibility
Study.
With
very
little
of
the
$176M
capital
cost
needed
to
build
the
passenger
rail
budgeted
or
readily
available,
many
years
of
design
and
engineering
work
ahead,
plus
environmental
review,
many
regulatory
issues
(PUC,
STB,
Coastal
Commission,
etc.),
potential
lawsuits,
24
bridges
in
need
of
repair,
and
an
RTC
with
no
experience
building
or
operating
a
passenger
rail
service,
one
quickly
gets
to
the
20
year
estimate
noted
here.
As
an
example,
San
Diego
did
their
Feasibility
Study
for
the
SPRINTER
passenger
rail
project
in
1990
and
the
first
train
ran
in
2008.
10
Since
the
Monterey
Bay
Sanctuary
Scenic
Trail
Master
Plan
was
published
in
November
2013
–
less
than
2
years
ago
–
already
approximately
8
miles
or
25%
of
the
trail
is
funded
with
construction
moving
forward
on
several
segments.
11
It
is
incumbent
on
the
Santa
Cruz
County
RTC
to
survey
actual
commuters
on
Hwy
1
to
understand
who
they
are
and
what
their
needs
are,
and
whether
passenger
rail
or
bike
would
3.
be
viable
alternatives
for
them
(e.g.
contractors,
landscapers,
and
others
who
depend
on
their
truck
to
carry
equipment
are
not
likely
to
take
the
train
or
bike).
12
See
pg.
26
and
pg.
94
of
PRFS
13
See
pg.
98
of
PRFS
14
Under
the
Train
Horn
Rule
(49
CFR
Part
222),
locomotive
engineers
must
begin
to
sound
train
horns
at
least
15
seconds,
and
no
more
than
20
seconds,
in
advance
of
all
40
public
grade
crossings
(p.79
of
PRFS).
Source:
https://www.fra.dot.gov/Page/P0104
15
Statement
by
Iowa
Pacific,
the
current
rail
operator,
that
they
are
“actively
looking
for
new
freight
customers”.
Source:
6/4/15
RTC
meeting
16
Source:
Analysis
of
Economic
and
Social
Impact
of
Trail
Development,
Johnson
City,
TN
Rail
Trail
Report,
Chapter
6:
“Dedicated
multi-‐use
trails
provide
communities
with
a
valuable
amenity
that
translates
into
increased
housing
values.
According
to
the
National
Association
of
Homebuilders,
trails
are
consistently
ranked
one
of
the
most
important
community
amenities
by
prospective
homebuyers,
above
golf
courses,
parks,
security,
and
others.”
See
www.nahb.com.
Another
study
of
over
90,000
U.S.
home
sales
found
that
improved
walking
conditions
correlated
with
higher
housing
prices
in
13
of
the
15
housing
markets
studied,
controlling
for
other
factors
that
influence
housing
value.
The
results
showed
that
houses
in
walkable
neighborhoods
have
property
values
$4,000
to
$34,000
higher
than
houses
in
areas
with
average
walkability.
Source:
Cortright,
J.
(2009).
Walking
the
Walk:
How
walkability
raises
housing
values
in
U.S.
cities.
17
Source:
www.railstotrails.org,
“From
Trail
Towns
to
Trail-‐Oriented
Development
(TrOD):
Trails
and
Economic
Development”
18
The
train
is
essentially
19th
century
technology
dressed
up
with
more
modern
(but
still
noisy
and
polluting)
diesel
engines.
There
are
40
grade
crossings
which
will
need
to
accommodate
60
trains
per
day
(see
p.ix
of
PRFS),
which
will
further
stall
already
badly
clogged
auxiliary
roads.
19
A
multi-‐modal
transportation
corridor
can
take
advantage
of
new
and
emerging
technologies:
electric
bicycles,
new
battery
technologies,
solar
powered
bike
paths,
electric
powered
jitneys,
etc.
These
technologies
in
combination
with
new
emerging
transportation
technologies
(digitized
smart
buses,
electronic
carpooling,
transportation
services
like
Uber
and
Lyft,
and
even
electric
and
clean
gas
driverless
cars
where
passengers
can
spend
time
on
non-‐
driving
activities)
could
optimize
Highway
1
and
auxiliary
roads
and
reduce
traffic
congestion.
See
http://cleantechnica.com/2015/05/29/dutch-‐solar-‐bike-‐path-‐pleases-‐many/
20
Scenario
G1
capital
&
construction
costs
$176M
(see
p.
x
of
PRFS).
It
should
be
noted
that
rail
transit
projects
typically
cost
about
40
to
50
percent
more
than
projected,
with
some
projects
costing
double
the
original
projections
and
very
few
costing
less
than
20
percent
more
than
the
projections.
Source:
Dept
of
Transportation
reports
summarized
on
http://ti.org/antiplanner/?p=10036
21
Source:
Monterey
Bay
Sanctuary
Scenic
Trail
(MBSST)
according
to
the
MBSST
Network
Master
Plan,
February
2014;
estimates
are
based
on
total
costs
minus
rail
infrastructure
not
needed
for
a
trail
only
implementation.
22
Source:
p.x
of
PRFS
for
Scenario
G1
4.
23
Source:
p.
7-‐16
of
MBSST
Master
Plan
“The
estimated
annual
cost
for
maintenance
of
the
MBSST
Network
as
described
in
Table
7.1
will
be
approximately
$6,000-‐$10,000
per
mile
per
year.”
Max:
$320,000
per
year
24
Costs
for
auto
parking
infrastructure,
to
acquire
adjacent
properties/easements
along
railway
to
allow
for
width
accommodation
in
narrow
areas,
and
to
implement
“Quiet
Zones”
are
not
included
in
the
Study
or
the
above
costs.
Nor
is
inflation.
25
Sources
of
funding
for
capital
and
O&M
costs
are
tenuous,
may
be
unreliable
(e.g.
state
and
federal
grants).
See
p.xi
of
PRFS.
Rail
project
implementation
predicated
on
successful
passage
of
1/2
cent
County-‐wide
sales
tax
measure
in
November
2016.
However,
of
approximately
$15M
-‐
$17M
per
year
to
be
generated
IF
the
1/2
cent
sales
tax
measure
is
passed,
current
projections
show
$86M
over
30
years
being
available
for
rail
subsidies,
which
is
approximately
$3M
per
year,
well
short
of
the
needed
subsidy
of
$12M
per
year
(which
is
the
$14M
annual
O&M
cost
minus
15%
in
revenues,
aka
“farebox
recovery
rate”
expected
from
ticket
sales).
For
more
on
farebox
recovery
rates
see
pgs
111-‐112
of
PRFS.
26
Most
capital
costs
are
projected
to
be
sourced
from
federal
and
state
grants.
Only
25%
of
the
annual
Operating
and
Maintenance
costs
(at
best)
are
funded,
and
that
is
ONLY
IF
the
1/2
cent
sales
tax
is
passed
in
2016.
If
more
of
those
funds
are
used
to
subsidize
rail,
it
will
crowd
out
funds
expected
to
be
available
for
road
maintenance,
pedestrian
improvements,
buses,
bike
paths,
senior
transportation
and
other
public
transportation
priorities.
27
Approximately
8
miles
of
the
32
mile
trail
already
have
funds
available
or
committed,
and
are
on
a
timeline
to
be
built
in
the
next
2
-‐
3
years.
There
are
also
public,
non-‐profit
and
private
donors
that
have
indicated
interest
in
the
project.
The
amount
to
be
raised
is
manageable
given
the
funding
already
sourced
and
the
indications
of
interest
from
multiple
parties
and
sectors.
28
When
combining
the
current
estimated
capital
costs
with
the
30
years
of
operation
and
maintenance
costs,
this
is
the
percentage
that
a
transportation
corridor
without
rail
would
cost
vs.
implementing
passenger
rail.