01206841

Component

http://www.trb.org/Publications/Blurbs/163903.aspx

Between 1980 and 2005, 16 U.S. metropolitan areas opened rail transit systems. Most of the rail lines were applications of light rail concepts and technology. These metropolitan areas joined 10 others whose systems predate the recent rail transit renaissance. Some of these rail transit metropolises have enjoyed increased riding habit and/or service productivity in recent years, while others have experienced stagnant or declining riding habit and/or service productivity. The term riding habit refers to ridership (passenger miles) per capita while service productivity refers to load factor (passenger miles per vehicle mile). The purpose of this paper is to explain why some metropolitan areas with rail transit have experienced performance success and others have not. A specific focus of the paper is to better understand the role that systems planning decisions have played in rail transit success or failure. This paper examines the transit development history of 10 mid-sized U.S. metropolitan areas that adopted rail transit during the past 30 years: Atlanta, Georgia; Dallas–Fort Worth, Texas; Denver, Colorado; Miami, Florida; Minneapolis–St. Paul, Minnesota; Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; Portland, Oregon; Sacramento, California; Salt Lake City, Utah; and San Diego, California. Planners in these metropolitan areas have followed different conceptualizations for how rail investments serve larger transit development goals. Such conceptualization is called systems planning, and the authors demonstrate that it matters in subsequent transit performance. All 10 metropolitan areas have become increasingly decentralized over the past century in employment as well as residential location, and urban decentralization has posed significant challenges for transit planners. Some planners have by design or inadvertently used rail transit investments to increase the usefulness of the overall transit network in reaching decentralized destinations. Others have used rail transit to provide superior service to the regional central business district (CBD) in competition with bus services also serving the CBD. The authors hypothesize that the decision to either decentralize service to reach dispersed destinations or focus service on the CBD accounts for the variation in transit system performance across the 10 metropolitan areas.

01206823

English

pp 31-47

2010-7

Transportation Research Circular

Joint International Light Rail Conference: Growth and Renewal

Web

Figures; Maps; References (32) ; Tables (3)

Central business districts; Decentralization; Decision making; History; Light rail transit; Metropolitan areas; Passenger miles; Planning; Ridership; Systems analysis

Conceptual framework; System performance

Atlanta Metropolitan Area; Dallas-Fort Worth Metropolitan Area; Denver Metropolitan Area; Miami Metropolitan Area; Pittsburgh Metropolitan Area; Portland Metropolitan Area (Oregon); Sacramento Metropolitan Area; Salt Lake City Metropolitan Area; San Diego Metropolitan Area; Twin Cities Metropolitan Area (Minnesota)

Planning and Forecasting; Public Transportation; Railroads; I72: Traffic and Transport Planning

TRIS, TRB

Oct 6 2010 11:21AM

• Adapting Established Safety Outreach to Light and Commuter Rail Systems
• Best Practices for the Effective Integration of Historic Trolley and Modern Urban Rail Transit Systems
• Bus Rapid Transit as a Precursor of Light Rail Transit?
• Civil Information Modeling and Building Information Modeling
• Comparative Performance of Los Angeles’ Transit Modes
• Development and Application of Structural Design Standards for Safety of Light Rail Cars and Streetcars
• Effect of Fuel Price Increases on U.S. Light Rail Ridership, 2002–2008: Results and Implications for Transit Operation and Policy
• Energy Efficiency of Light Rail Versus Motor Vehicles
• Light Rail Transit and Climate Change Policy
• Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority Eastside Extension Light Rail Transit Project: Cultural Influence in Station Site Selection for the Boyle Heights–Mariachi Plaza Station
• Modifications to Light Rail Vehicles for Improved Compatibility in Collisions with Automobiles
• New Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Authority P2550 LRV: Energy-Saving Techniques
• Newark Light Rail Extension to Broad Street Station: Traffic and Transit Operations Interface Issues
• NJT–NLR Broad Street Extension: Experiences and Lessons Learned from NJT–NLR Rehabilitation of the Penn Station Loop Track and Main Line Special Track Work
• Noncontact Ultrasonic Guided-Wave Detection of Rail Defects
• Route 100: The Future in Motion
• Status of North American Light Rail Transit Systems: Year 2009 Update
• The Importance of Connecting Light Rail and Destinations
• The Role of Transit in Mitigating Climate Change
• The Santa Ana and Garden Grove Streetcar Project Concept: Assessing the Viability, Exploring the Potential, and Evaluating the Feasibility
• Toward an Operating Doctrine for Shared-Use Railways
• Track Geometry for Light Rail Systems
• Transportation Overlay District in the Valley of the Sun