Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 3
Summary 3
Research insights and conclusions are tempered by first-hand experience gleaned from
preparation of an FRA Waiver Petition and direct involvement in all aspects of initiating a
shared-track operation.
Findings
Alternative Approaches to New Starts
Major investment studies for shared-track systems should reflect trade-offs between the
shared-track alternative and other investments that might equally serve mass-transit needs.
At a planning level, four types of alternatives are distinguished:
· The "Nonrail" Alternative: represents the status quo or nonrail investments including
carpooling facilities, bus route rationalization, transit priority lanes, or bus rapid transit
investments.
· The "Separate System" Alternative: requires construction of dedicated track for non-
compliant rail vehicles. The service uses a new right-of-way, shares a right-of-way (but
not track) with conventional trains, or uses a highway alignment.
· The "Compliant Vehicle" Alternative: can establish commuter rail service on a rail-
road. Modernization of signal systems and infrastructure, and new passenger facilities
are required. Railroad equipment can share track without restrictions. However, high
platforms could cause clearance issues for freight equipment. Downtown street run-
ning also may be precluded.
· The "Shared-Track" Alternative: entails seeking special FRA approval to allow light rail
vehicles (noncompliant) to share track with conventional railroad equipment. The infra-
structure requirement can be similar to the compliant alternative, but the resulting ser-
vice would be more flexible. Light passenger rail cars can continue off-the-rail alignment
onto city streets. Low floor cars avoid conflicts between freight and passenger operations.
There are two methods of operations:
a. Temporal separation is possible where all freight activity can be constrained to a short
overnight period without adversely impacting freight operations; and
b. Concurrent operations are required where most freight activity can be moved into the
overnight period with some overlap in the fringes of the service day. Occasional mid-
day moves may occur in response to shipper needs.
Planners and stakeholders can use the "Alternatives Analysis" process to evaluate the pri-
mary advantages and disadvantages of a proposed shared-track system (shown in Table 1).
Business Model
If the advantages lead to the selection of a shared-track alternative, then the business
model should guide the subsequent decision making. While there is no standard business
model for shared-track operations, there are features and attributes that nearly all shared-
track operators exhibit summarized in Table 2.
Business Case
The business model parameters then can be incorporated and quantified in the business
case. In an exercise for this report, the team's research indicates that shared-track methods may
reduce the capital development costs for rail transit system by 40% to 66% when compared
OCR for page 4
4 Shared Use of Railroad Infrastructure with Noncompliant Public Transit Rail Vehicles: A Practitioner's Guide
Table 1. Shared-track advantages and disadvantages.
Advantages Disadvantages
Increase accessible passenger market; public Conflicts with growth in freight traffic.
transportation available in new, less served Temporal separation can be a "zero-sum"
areas game, with winners and losers
Potential for route extensions, connections and Capacity limitations, not suitable for high
passenger growth. Flexibility for test services density, high volume passenger movements
"Walkability" to and from stations Stations require parking and improved
highway access; and generate traffic
Downtown distribution Noise generated by horn warnings when trains
traverse grade crossings
Lower cost than light rail Increase in noisy freight movements that will
likely shift to night
Quieter and with lower emissions than A lightly used freight line must exist. The
traditional commuter rail concept is applicable in selective circumstances
Induced growth may be economically Existing freight corridor may not be optimally
beneficial to locality placed to generate ridership. Growth may be
induced where inappropriate or constrained by
other factors. Ridership may be induced rather
than mode shifted
Shorter, faster trains A cooperative freight partner is required
Viable in "edge cities" and suburban Extended and complex bureaucratic process;
neighborhoods success not assured
Additional utilization of an existing railroad Requires added systems and technology to
asset protect passenger traffic from freight-based
accidents
Reduced social disruption construction Route will likely include a large number of
relocation, and environmental disturbance by grade crossings. Realistic or not, concern is
using existing facility increased with noncompliant vehicles
Disparate speeds and weight, structural
incompatibility of vehicles increases risk
Each incremental change requires approval
from the FRA
Table 2. Business model for shared-track.
Business Issue Transit Agency Freight Railroad
Track Ownership Purchase, improve, and assumes Sell and relinquishes control
control
Track Maintenance Pays all costs and defines Identify needs for continued freight
standards subject to FRA service
regulation
Track Access Manages freight and passenger Perpetual and exclusive trackage
schedule interactions rights, subject to per-use fee
Liability Assumes all risks over-and-above Provides suitable insurance for own
the old status quo employees and operations
Capital Financing Uses traditional public transit Pays for freight-specific
financing mechanisms improvements on an incremental
basis
Incident & Leads the incident site and Assists as necessary if freight
Emergency recovery effort equipment is involved
Management
Operating Rules Maintain railroad-like rules for Coordinate with transit agency and
both freight and passenger FRA to identify rules necessary to
operations preserve and operate freight service
Employee Training Trains transit employees and Trains freight employees for
provides cross-training where operation on transit territory
needed
Breakdown Retrieves disabled passenger Quickly retrieves disabled freight
Recovery equipment and evacuates equipment to allow resumption of
passengers transit service
Labor Laws Avoids rail labor laws Operates under railroad labor laws
Command and Combined command-and-control system with either temporal separation
Control or "fail-safe train separation"
