Agenda - Council - 02/24/1981 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

pragmatic; it is to seek funding from the sources with the highest probability of contributing to project implementation cost. The approaches are not necessarily mutually exclusive. The Board takes the position that both the parties contributing to rail/community conflicts and those who will benefit from resolutiOn of the conflicts should participate financially. These parties include all levels of government, the railroad, and rail users. To facilitate progress in this study, however, the Board is pursuing the pragmatic approach. To assist the Board in its search for funding, existing funding sources were identified and evaluated as to their potential uses for the demonstration projectS. Those that appeared most likely to provide fundin$ within a period of time consistent with the study schedule were recommended to the Board as sources that should be investigated- The results of this effort are presented in Exhibit 8. The exhibit identifies the programs or agencies that fund the types of projects selected for demonstration. Comments on the chances of obtaining funding for the demonstration projects from these programs and agencies also are presented, l__/ Essentially, it was found that the federal-aid highway programs are the best public source of demonstration project funding. Many projects are eligible for funding under these programs, including grade crossing i~provements, highway/street improvementS, fencing, and emergency medical service improvements. (The funds are not available for improve- ments or actions that are solely rail oriented, such as siding relocations 1/ Although certain of the funding sources presented in Exhibit 8 were not -- pursued for demonstratiOn project funding, they may provide funding for actions designed to resolve rail/community conflicts in other 27