A few questions about the Unified Corridor Study (UCS) Step 2 results
Why is the RTC trying to approve this so quickly during the winter holiday season?
Does the public understand how the Progressive Rail contract has been tied to the UCS?
Why are we aiming for 2035 rather than focusing on solutions that we could afford to implement sooner?
Why are protected bicycle lanes on Soquel/Freedom not part of every scenario?
Should we be optimizing intersections for bicycle and pedestrian safety rather than cars?
Why isn’t there a scenario designed to go “all-in” on active transportation?
Where is the data for the cost between “trail-only” and “rail-with-trail”?
Why are the user rates for “trail-only” and “rail-with-trail” modeled to be similar?
How and when has this data been verified?
Why has “trail-only” been tied to HOV on Highway 1?
Why does the study assume there would be federal and state funding for a train but not HOV?
Why does the study consider major transit solutions on the rail corridor but not Highway 1?