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 41
Analysis and Modeling 41
erally quite low, and the sale price is primarily a function of the corridor's real estate value. This
value depends on many local factors and would be beyond the scope of this Guidebook to sug-
gest methodologies to estimate a fair purchase price. In most cases, the track and signal systems
(if any) have to be completely replaced. The rail freight operator usually is given permanent
access to the corridor to provide ongoing service, subject to time-of-day restrictions so that
freight operations do not interfere with the proposed passenger operation.
Directly Fund Infrastructure Improvements. Commuter rail agencies can directly fund
infrastructure improvements sufficient to provide the capacity consumed by the passenger rail
service, plus any signaling and track quality improvements required for passenger service. This
approach would be used where the host railroad is willing to accommodate the passenger ser-
vice but requires that existing capacity for freight operations is preserved, including maintaining
spare capacity for future freight growth. A freight railroad may also require that capacity is main-
tained at specific times of day, depending on the type of freight traffic using the corridor. In other
instances, the commuter and freight railroads have agreed on a combined package of invest-
ments, with costs shared, to serve passenger service requirement as well as anticipated freight
traffic growth. Every case is different and must be worked out in negotiations. There are several
examples of this approach, such as improvements on Norfolk Southern Railway and CSX in
Northern Virginia for the Virginia Railway Express (VRE) commuter services into Washington,
D.C. Often the improvements are not a one-time investment but are a series of projects imple-
mented as required by passenger and freight traffic growth.
Purchase a Permanent Easement. A permanent easement can be purchased for a speci-
fied commuter rail service (number of trips, schedule, journey time, etc.). This option has two
sub-options:
· Acquire an easement to construct a separate commuter rail line parallel to a freight line within
the existing railroad ROW. This option is selected when it is not technically feasible or is very
difficult for the commuter rail service to share track with the freight operation, and lateral
space exists within the existing ROW. The commuter rail agency is responsible for construct-
ing the commuter tracks, signal systems, stations, etc. This option has been used for the Gold
commuter rail line in Denver and the Front Runner service north from Salt Lake City. As with
outright purchase of a rail corridor, price will depend on local circumstances.
· Purchase a permanent easement to operate commuter rail service on the tracks of the host rail-
road for a lump sum. The easement seller guarantees access for a specified number of passenger
rail trips to specified schedules and trip times and is responsible for making infrastructure invest-
ments to honor this agreement. This option bundles the cost of access with the cost of infrastruc-
ture improvement. Because of the bundling, and the permanence of the agreement, it may be
difficult to compare the lump sum payment with alternative estimates of access and infrastruc-
ture improvement costs, and to justify the payment to funding agencies. The primary example
of this approach is the Sounder commuter service northward from Seattle.
As well as these two sub-options, access and infrastructure improvement costs can be con-
verted into a per-train-mile usage cost to be paid as incurred. This approach was used for the
Sounder service between Seattle and Tacoma in Washington State. Hybrid arrangements are also
possible, using some mix of public funding of infrastructure improvements, a one-time capital
payment, and ongoing per-mile charges.
3.3.2 Estimating Capital Costs
The majority of corridor access arrangements, whether for Amtrak intercity or commuter
service, place the responsibility for funding and implementing corridor infrastructure improve-
ments on the passenger rail agency developing the service. It is assumed that the passenger rail
