DOCSLIB.ORG

The Land Use and Rapid Transportation Nexus in the Massachusetts Bay Jennifer Folz Clemson University, [email protected]

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Land Use and Rapid Transportation Nexus in the Massachusetts Bay Jennifer Folz Clemson University, Jenny.Folz@Gmail.Com Clemson University TigerPrints All Theses Theses 5-2013 The Land Use and Rapid Transportation Nexus in the Massachusetts Bay Jennifer Folz Clemson University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://tigerprints.clemson.edu/all_theses Part of the Transportation Commons Recommended Citation Folz, Jennifer, "The Land Use and Rapid Transportation Nexus in the Massachusetts aB y" (2013). All Theses. 1597. https://tigerprints.clemson.edu/all_theses/1597 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses at TigerPrints. It has been accepted for inclusion in All Theses by an authorized administrator of TigerPrints. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Land Use and Rapid Transportation Nexus in the Massachusetts Bay _______________________________________________________ A Thesis Presented to the Graduate School of Clemson University _______________________________________________________ In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of City and Regional Planning _______________________________________________________ by Jennifer Anne Folz May 2013 _______________________________________________________ Accepted by: Dr. Eric Morris, Committee Chair Dr. Barry Nocks Dr. Tim Green ABSTRACT Throughout the last several decades a growing emphasis has been placed on creating sustainable places through innovative planning practices. Urban designers, researchers, planners, and policy makers have continuously examined the land use transportation nexus in order to develop methods to efficiently guide transit funding to encourage alternate modes of travel. The United States is in the middle of a paradigm shift in generational behaviors. Baby boomers are downsizing and according to the Urban Land Institute are looking for more location-efficient residences. Similarly, Generation Y’s attitudes are focused on living and working in close proximity. They are also waiting longer to obtain driver’s licenses and are instead looking for alternate modes of travel. This study looks at the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority’s rapid transit system through the scope of a linear regression analysis using 2010 rapid transit ridership data, 2010 Census data, 2006-2009 American Community Survey estimates, and 2011 employment data. This thesis examines previously researched themes and provides a new look at the transportation / land use nexus. It concludes that neither an increase in population density nor an increase in job density increase transit ridership. Instead, the physical built environment has the most influence over transit ridership in the Massachusetts Bay. When streets are dense and highly connected, access to transit ii is more convenient, causing people’s mode choice to shift from single-occupancy vehicles. Governing bodies and transit agencies in the Massachusetts’ Bay should create a close collaboration between municipalities, counties, and transit agencies if the MBTA wants to increase ridership levels on their rapid transit system. Land development regulations and zoning ordnances should encourage dense, well- connected streets and a high degree of land use mixing in areas where transit investments are likely to occur. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to give many thanks to my thesis committee members Dr. Eric Morris, Dr. Barry Nocks, and Dr. Tim Green for their extensive time, expertise, and guidance over the past year. I appreciate all their support and patience provided and am proud to have had them a part of this thesis. I would also like to thank the very patient Aaron Monson for all his positive motivation, barista and chef skills, and his detailed eye at proofreading. Many thanks. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................................. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ......................................................................................................................... iv LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................................................... vii LIST OF TABLES ....................................................................................................................................... ix CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................... 1 CHAPTER TWO: THE LAND USE AND RAPID TRANSIT NEXUS ................................................. 4 THE D’S: DENSITY, DESIGN, DIVERSITY, DEMOGRAPHICS, DESTINATION ACCESSIBILITY, AND DISTANCE TO TRANSIT ................................................................................................................................... 4 Density ......................................................................................................................................................................... 6 Design ........................................................................................................................................................................ 12 Diversity .................................................................................................................................................................... 18 Destination Accessibility ................................................................................................................................... 22 Distance to Transit .............................................................................................................................................. 24 Demographics ........................................................................................................................................................ 27 Self-Selection .......................................................................................................................................................... 28 LITERATURE REVIEW CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................... 31 CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY ................................................ 35 RESEARCH PROBLEM AND QUESTION ............................................................................................................... 35 AREA AND UNIT OF ANALYSIS............................................................................................................................. 36 DATA SOURCES ...................................................................................................................................................... 37 DEPENDENT VARIABLE ........................................................................................................................................ 41 Riders ......................................................................................................................................................................... 41 INDEPENDENT VARIABLES .................................................................................................................................. 47 Density Variables:................................................................................................................................................. 47 Design Variables: .................................................................................................................................................. 51 Destination Variables ......................................................................................................................................... 54 Distance to Transit Variables ......................................................................................................................... 56 Demographic Variables ..................................................................................................................................... 60 LINE-SPECIFIC VARIABLE .................................................................................................................................... 66 CHAPTER FOUR: SETTING ................................................................................................................. 68 HISTORY OF TRANSPORTATION IN THE MASSACHUSETTS BAY .................................................................... 68 MASSACHUSETTS BAY RAPID TRANSIT SYSTEM ............................................................................................. 72 CHAPTER FIVE: FINDINGS .................................................................................................................. 87 STATISTICAL TESTS OF THE MODEL .................................................................................................................. 87 Correlations............................................................................................................................................................. 90 OLS REGRESSION OF LNRIDERS .......................................................................................................................... 94 CHAPTER SIX: IMPLICATIONS FOR THE MBTA .......................................................................... 97 CHAPTER SEVEN: LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH .................................................. 106 DATA COLLECTION LIMITATIONS .................................................................................................................... 106 FURTHER
Load more

Recommended publications
  • IMC/BC/RM/SA FY08 Annual Meeting Boston, Massachusetts ~ April 15-17, 2008
    IMC/BC/RM/SA FY08 Annual Meeting Boston, Massachusetts ~ April 15-17, 2008 Pre-Registration In addition to registering on Trainex, please go to http://r1notes3/OSRR/Meeting.nsf/Agenda?OpenForm to complete the additional meeting registration form. This will assist the Boston team with planning the meeting activities. Login with your Notes ID and password. Meeting Location The IMC/CB/RM/SA FY 08 Annual Meeting is being held at the John F. Kennedy Federal Building located at Government Center. 55 New Sudbury Street Boston, MA 02203 Room E275-C (2nd floor of the low-rise portion of the building) GSA Mgr’s. Number: 617-565-1086 The meeting is located just about where this arrow is. There are employee entrances on both sides of the low rise depending from which direction/hotel you are traveling. Any US Government ID should work at employee entrances. However, at the EPA Region 1 offices, all non-EPA Region 1 employees must pass through security as visitors. The address is: One Congress Street. Climate The average temperature in Boston during April is 56 degrees. Temperatures range from the low 40s to mid 50s. If you wish to check for an up-to-date, five-day weather forecast before leaving for the meeting, click on http://weather.yahoo.com/forecast/USMA0045.html . Bringing a coat is advisable. Transportation Boston’s Logan International Airport is approximately 2.5 miles (15-20 minutes) from Government Center and hotel areas. Taxi -- $20 - $25 Subway -- $1.70/trip See http://www.mbta.com for more details. Take free Massport Bus (either 22, 33, or 55) from your terminal to the Subway Airport Station (Blue Line).
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Transit Administration Region V Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI)
    Federal Transit Administration Region V RED-PURPLE BYPASS PROJECT IN THE CITY OF CHICAGO, ILLINOIS Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) A. Introduction This document provides the basis for a determination by the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT), Federal Transit Administration (FTA), of a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for the Red‐Purple Bypass Project. This determination is made in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, 42 United States Code (U.S.C.) § 4332(2)(c); FTA’s implementing procedures (23 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] § 771.121); Section 4(f) of the USDOT Act of 1966, 49 U.S.C. § 303; and the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, 54 U.S.C. § 300101 et seq. FTA, as the federal lead agency, and Chicago Transit Authority (CTA), as the local project sponsor, jointly prepared the Environmental Assessment (EA) and Section 4(f) Evaluation to describe potential impacts on the human and natural environment and historic integrity that may result from the Red‐Purple Bypass Project on the CTA Red and Purple lines. The EA was prepared pursuant to 23 CFR § 771.119 and issued by FTA on May 19, 2015. This FONSI is prepared by FTA pursuant to 23 CFR § 771.121., and incorporates by reference the EA and other cited documentation. B. Existing Conditions Figure 1 is a map of the project limits. The Red‐Purple Bypass Project area is approximately 5 miles north of downtown Chicago, in the Lakeview community area. The project area, just north of Belmont station, includes the existing junction where three CTA rail lines, the Red, Purple, and Brown lines, converge at an existing flat junction (known as Clark Junction), mainline Red and Purple line tracks extend north to Newport and Cornelia Avenues, and the Brown Line branch extends west to approximately Seminary Avenue.
    [Show full text]
  • TCRP Report 102 – Transit-Oriented
    TRANSIT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH TCRP PROGRAM REPORT 102 Transit-Oriented Sponsored by Development in the the Federal United States: Transit Administration Experiences, Challenges, and Prospects TCRP OVERSIGHT AND PROJECT TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE 2004 (Membership as of January 2004) SELECTION COMMITTEE (as of January 2004) OFFICERS CHAIR Chair: Michael S. Townes, President and CEO, Hampton Roads Transit, Hampton, VA J. BARRY BARKER Vice Chair: Joseph H. Boardman, Commissioner, New York State DOT Transit Authority of River City Executive Director: Robert E. Skinner, Jr., Transportation Research Board MEMBERS MEMBERS KAREN ANTION MICHAEL W. BEHRENS, Executive Director, Texas DOT Karen Antion Consulting SARAH C. CAMPBELL, President, TransManagement, Inc., Washington, DC GORDON AOYAGI Montgomery County Government E. DEAN CARLSON, Director, Carlson Associates, Topeka, KS RONALD L. BARNES JOHN L. CRAIG, Director, Nebraska Department of Roads Central Ohio Transit Authority DOUGLAS G. DUNCAN, President and CEO, FedEx Freight, Memphis, TN LINDA J. BOHLINGER GENEVIEVE GIULIANO, Director, Metrans Transportation Center and Professor, School of Policy, HNTB Corp. Planning, and Development, USC, Los Angeles ANDREW BONDS, JR. BERNARD S. GROSECLOSE, JR., President and CEO, South Carolina State Ports Authority Parsons Transportation Group, Inc. SUSAN HANSON, Landry University Prof. of Geography, Graduate School of Geography, Clark University JENNIFER L. DORN JAMES R. HERTWIG, President, Landstar Logistics, Inc., Jacksonville, FL FTA HENRY L. HUNGERBEELER, Director, Missouri DOT NATHANIEL P. FORD, SR. ADIB K. KANAFANI, Cahill Professor of Civil Engineering, University of California, Berkeley Metropolitan Atlanta RTA RONALD F. KIRBY, Director of Transportation Planning, Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments CONSTANCE GARBER HERBERT S. LEVINSON, Principal, Herbert S. Levinson Transportation Consultant, New Haven, CT York County Community Action Corp.
    [Show full text]
  • 1975 Charles River Pathway Plan
    CHARLES RIVER PATHWAY PLAN COVER: Artist’s view of the Charles River c. 1900 1 Mayor Theodore D. Mann City Hall Newton, Massachusetts Dear Mayor Mann: We, the Chairman of the Newton Conservation Commission and the City of Newton Planning Director, submit herewith the "CHARLES RIVER PATHWAY PLAN" as prepared by Planning Consultant, William D. Giezentanner. We are most grateful to you and James M. Salter, Chief Administrative Officer, for the interest you have shown in the project's funding, and we value your assistance with the plan's presentation to Newton residents. We are indebted to the following agencies and groups for their contributions to and interest in the completed planning study: the Ford Foundation, the Newton Planning Department staff, members of the Conservation Commission, the Metropolitan District Commission, Aldermanic City Planning Committee, the Aldermanic Finance Committee and the entire membership of the Board of Aldermen; Charles River Watershed Association, Inc., Newton Conservators, Inc., Newton Historic District Study Committee, Newton Upper Falls Improvement Association, American Legion Nonantum Post 440, Chestnut Hill Garden Club, Woman's Club of Newton Highlands, Upper Falls Senior Citizens Group; the News-Tribune, Newton Graphic, Newton Times, Newton Villager and Transcript. We believe that with the substantial citizen interest and participation in this planning venture, in terms of both time and money, the forecast is excellent that the CHARLES RIVER PATHWAY PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS will be accomplished. 2 CHARLES RIVER PATHWAY PLAN Prepared for: NEWTON CONSERVATION COMMISSION By William D. Giezentanner with a Grant from the Ford Foundation July 1975 The studies for this project were carried out under the general supervision of the Newton Conservation Commission and the Newton Planning Department and were financed by a grant from the Ford Foundation matched with an appropriation by the City of Newton Board of Aldermen.
    [Show full text]
  • Comparative Analysis of Coffee Franchises in the Cambridge-Boston Area
    Comparative Analysis of Coffee Franchises in the Cambridge-Boston Area May 10, 2010 ESD.86: Models, Data, and Inference for Socio-Technical Systems Paul T. Grogan [email protected] Massachusetts Institute of Technology Introduction The placement of storefronts is a difficult question on which many corporations spend a great amount of time, effort, and money. There is a careful interplay between environment, potential customers, other storefronts from the same franchise, and other storefronts for competing franchises. From the customer’s perspective, the convenience of storefronts, especially for “discretionary” products or services, is of the utmost importance. In fact, some franchises develop mobile phone applications to provide their customers with an easy way to find the nearest storefront.1 This project takes an in-depth view of the storefront placements of Dunkin’ Donuts and Starbucks, two competing franchises with strong presences in the Cambridge-Boston area. Both franchises purvey coffee, coffee drinks, light meals, and pastries and cater especially well to sleep-deprived graduate students. However, Dunkin’ Donuts typically puts more emphasis on take-out (convenience) customers looking to grab a quick coffee before class whereas Starbucks provides an environment conducive to socializing, meetings, writing theses, or studying over a longer duration. These differences in target customers may drive differences in the distribution of storefronts in the area. The goal of this project is to apply some of the concepts learned in ESD.86 on probabilistic modeling and to the real-world system of franchise storefronts and customers. The focus of the analysis is directed on the “convenience” of accessing storefronts, determined by the distance to the nearest location from a random customer.
    [Show full text]
  • Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority Contract Specifications For
    Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority Contract Specifications for Green Line Security Upgrades Green Line D Branch Fiber Optic Cable Installation IFB CAP XX-14 Volume 1 of 2 May, 2014 Jacobs Engineering 343 Congress Street Boston, MA 02210 Green Line Security Upgrades CONTRACT SPECIFICATIONS TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION NO. OF PAGES DIVISION 1: GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 01010 Summary of Work 16 DIVISION 2: SITE WORK 02100 Site Preparation 4 02221 Demolition 7 02298 Temporary Pedestrian Facilities 3 02300 Earthwork 15 02513 Bituminous Concrete Pavement 16 02650 Existing Site Utilities 5 DIVISION 3: CONCRETE 03300 Cast-In-Place Concrete 19 DIVISION 4: MASONRY 04800 Masonry 17 DIVISION 5: METALS 05500 Miscellaneous Metals 12 DIVISION 9: FINISHES 09900 Painting 16 DIVISION 16: ELECTRICAL 16050 Basic Materials and Methods for Electrical Work 11 16195 Electrical Indentification 5 16450 Grounding 4 16749 Fiber Optic Cable Systems 8 16826 Communications Cable Routing Systems 7 16844 Communications System Junction Boxes 2 16876 Communications Grounding of Equipment 2 16898 Communications Systems Tests 20 GREEN LINE SECURITY CS-ii UPGRADES 2014 APPENDIX A Green Line - Pictures of Existing Conditions 12 GREEN LINE SECURITY CS-iii UPGRADES 2014 SECTION 01010 SUMMARY OF WORK PART 1 - GENERAL 1.1 GENERAL DESCRIPTION A. This Section specifies the procurement, installation, testing, and certification of a 72-strand and a 12-strand singlemode outside plant fiber optic cable system, including all ancillary equipment for a complete and functional installation, on the MBTA Green Line D Branch. As shown on the Contract Drawings, and as required herein, the 72-strand fiber optic cable shall be properly routed to, and terminate in, each of the following stations: Kenmore, Fenway, Longwood, Brookline Village, Brookline Hills, Beaconsfield, Reservoir, Chestnut Hill, Newton Centre, Newton Highlands, Eliot, Waban, Woodland, and Riverside.
    [Show full text]
  • South County Commuter Rail Operations Plan
    SOUTH COUNTY COMMUTER RAIL SERVICE OPERATIONS PLAN PROVIDENCE TO WESTERLY, RI JULY 2001 RHODE ISLAND DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION South County Commuter Rail Service Rhode Island Department of Transportation Operations Plan Providence to Westerly, RI Prepared by: Edwards and Kelcey, Inc 95 Cedar Street, Suite 101 Providence, RI 02903 In Association With: Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade and Douglas, Inc One State Street Providence, RI 02908 July 2001 RIDOT South County Commuter Rail TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY......................................................... ES-1 Introduction ............................................................... ES-1 SECTION 1.0 OPERATIONS PLAN..................................................1-1 1.1 Operational Overview............................................1-1 1.2 Facilities Overview ..............................................1-7 1.3 Introduction to Service Alternatives ................................1-12 1.4 Stand-Alone Commuter Service (Alternative 1) ......................1-14 1.5 CDOT Service Extension (Alternative 2)............................1-18 1.6 MBTA Service Extension (Alternative 3) ...........................1-19 SECTION 2.0 SERVICE OPTIONS, OPERATING ASSUMPTIONS AND COSTS .............2-1 2.1 Introduction ....................................................2-1 2.2 Alternatives 1A and 1B: Rhode Island DOT Stand-Alone Service (Pawtucket or Westerly Layover Facility) ........................................2-2 2.3 Alternative 2: Shore Line East Service Extension......................2-5
    [Show full text]
  • Transit-Focused Development
    T R A N S I T C O O P E R A T I V E R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M SPONSORED BY The Federal Transit Administration TCRP Synthesis 20 Transit-Focused Development A Synthesis of Transit Practice Transportation Research Board National Research Council TCRP OVERSIGHT AND PROJECT TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE 1997 SELECTION COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN OFFICERS MICHAEL S. TOWNES Peninsula Transportation District Chair: JAMES W. VAN LOBEN SELS, Director, California Department of Transportation Commission Vice Chair: DAVID N. WORMLEY, Dean of Engineering, Pennsylvania State University Executive Director: ROBERT E. SKINNER. JR, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council MEMBERS SHARON D. BANKS MEMBERS AC Transit LEE BARNES EDWARD H. ARNOLD, President & CEO, Arnold Industries, Inc Barwood, Inc SHARON D. BANKS, General Manager, Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District, Oakland, California GERALD L. BLAIR BRIAN J. L. BERRY, Lloyd Viel Berkner Regental Professor, Bruton Center for Development Studies, Indiana County Transit Authority University of Texas at Dallas SHIRLEY A. DELIBERO LILLIAN C. BORRONE, Director, Port Department, The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (Past New Jersey Transit Corporation Chair, 1995) ROD J. DIRIDON DAVID BURWELL, President, Rails-to-Trails Conservancy International Institute for Surface E. DEAN CARLSON, Secretary, Kansas Department of Transportation Transportation Policy Study JAMES N. DENN, Commissioner, Minnesota Department of Transportation SANDRA DRAGGOO JOHN W. FISHER, Director, ATLSS Engineering Research Center, Lehigh University CATA DENNIS J. FITZGERALD, Executive Director, Capital District Transportation Authority LOUIS J. GAMBACCINI DAVID R. GOODE, Chairman, President, and CEO, Norfolk Southern Corporation SEPTA DELON HAMPTON, Chairman & CEO, Delon Hampton & Associates DELON HAMPTON LESTER A.
    [Show full text]
  • Subway Spaces As Public Places: Politics and Perceptions of Boston's T
    Subway Spaces as Public Places: MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE Politics and Perceptions of Boston's T OF TEC HNO10LOGY by JUN 3 0 2011 Holly Bellocchio Durso Submitted to the Department of Urban Studies and Planning ARCHIVES in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degrees of Bachelor of Science in Planning and Master in City Planning at the MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY June 2011 @2011 Holly Bellocchio Durso. All Rights Reserved. The author hereby grants to MIT the permission to reproduce and to distribute publicly paper and electronic copies of the thesis document in whole or in part. Author C Department of Urban Studies and Planning May 19, 2011 Certified by Associate Professor Annette M. Kim Department of Urban Studies and Planning Thesis Supervisor Accepted by Professor Joseph Ferreira Chair, MCP Committee r Department of Urban Studies and Planning Subway Spaces as Public Places: Politics and Perceptions of Boston's T by Holly Bellocchio Durso Submitted to the Department of Urban Studies and Planning on May 19, 2011 in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degrees of Bachelor of Science in Planning and Master in City Planning ABSTRACT Subways play crucial transportation roles in our cities, but they also act as unique public spaces, distinguished by specific design characteristics, governed by powerful state-run institutions, and subject to intense public scrutiny and social debate. This thesis takes the case of the United States' oldest subway system-Boston's T-and explores how and why its spaces and regulations over their appropriate use have changed over time in response to public perceptions, political battles, and broader social forces.
    [Show full text]
  • The New Real Estate Mantra Location Near Public Transportation
    The New Real Estate Mantra Location Near Public Transportation THE NEW REAL ESTATE MANTRA LOCATION NEAR PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION | MARCH, 2013 1 The New Real Estate Mantra Location Near Public Transportation COMMISSIONED BY AMERICAN PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ASSOCIATION IN PARTNERSHIP WITH NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS PREPARED BY THE CENTER FOR NEIGHBORHOOD TECHNOLOGY MARCH 2013 COVER: MOCKINGBIRD STATION, DALLAS, TX Photo by DART CONTENTS 1 Executive Summary 3 Previous Research 6 Findings 8 Phoenix 12 Chicago 17 Boston 23 Minneapolis-St. Paul 27 San Francisco 32 Conclusion 33 Methodology THE NEW REAL ESTATE MANTRA LOCATION NEAR PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION | MARCH, 2013 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Authors: Center for Neighborhood Technology Lead Author: Sofia Becker Scott Bernstein, Linda Young Analysis: Center for Neighborhood Technology Sofia Becker, Al Benedict, and Cindy Copp Report Contributors and Reviewers: Center for Neighborhood Technology: Peter Haas, Stephanie Morse American Public Transportation Association: Darnell Grisby National Association of Realtors: Darren W. Smith Report Layout: Center for Neighborhood Technology Kathrine Nichols THE NEW REAL ESTATE MANTRA LOCATION NEAR PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION | MARCH, 2013 Executive Summary Fueled by demographic change and concerns over quality of life, there has been a growing interest in communities with active transportation modes. The recession added another dimension to these discussions by emphasizing the economic impli- cations of transportation choices. Housing and transportation, the two economic sectors mostly closely tied to the built environment, were both severely impacted by the economic downturn. There has been a growing effort among planners, real estate professionals, and economists to identify not only the economic benefits of alternative transportation modes in and of themselves, but also the impact that they have on housing prices and value retention.
    [Show full text]
  • Analysis of the Short-Turning Strategy on High-Frequency Transit Lines Gordon T. Coor
    Analysis of the Short-Turning Strategy on High-Frequency Transit Lines by Gordon T. Coor B.A. Environment, Technology, and Society Clark University, 1988 SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL AND ENVIROMENTAL ENGINEERING IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE IN TRANSPORTATION AT THE MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY FEBRUARY 1997 © 1997 Massachusetts Institute of Technology All rights reserved Signature of Author: - Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering October 23, 1996 Certified by: %F ... -- Nigel H. M. Wilson Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering S Thesis Supervisor Accepted by: Joseph M. Sussman Chairman, Departmental Committee on Graduate Studies GF TECHiNOL '' ; JAN 2 9 1997 L1BRAFiiES Analysis of the Short-Turning Strategy on High-Frequency Transit Lines by Gordon T. Coor Submitted to the department of Civil and Environmental Engineering on October 23, 1996 in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Transportation Abstract Short-turning is a real-time control intervention in which a transit vehicle is removed from service at some point short of its destination and returned to service in the opposite direction. By skipping a section of its route in this way, the transit vehicle can recover lost time and fill a gap in service. In this thesis, a model is developed to simulate short-turning on a rail transit line with high-frequency service. In this model train dwell times, and hence headways, vary as a function of total passenger boardings and alightings. Passenger loads are dependent on vehicle headways. Inputs to this model include passenger arrival rates and passenger alighting proportions for each station on the line, average interstation running times, and initial sequences of train headways.
    [Show full text]
  • Recommendations for Transportation Demand Management Town of Brookline
    TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM TO: Todd Kirrane DATE: January 9, 2018 Transportation Administrator Brookline Transportation Division FROM: Pete Stidman HSH PROJECT NO.: 2017054 Howard Stein Hudson SUBJECT: Final Brookline TDM Recommendations Recommendations for Transportation Demand Management Town of Brookline Introduction In the interest of improving the commute for Town employees, reducing congestion, and lowering parking demand, the Town of Brookline’s Transportation Department asked Howard Stein Hudson (HSH) to recommend effective and context sensitive Transportation Demand Management (TDM) tactics to help Town employees drive less often. While a wide variety of TDM tactics have been used across the nation with varying degrees of success, the task of this memorandum is, to the best of our knowledge and capabilities, recommend the most effective tactics for Brookline’s workforce, and how to implement them. To understand the commuting challenge each individual employee of the Town faces, HSH gathered data on existing parking conditions, the major transit routes that serve Town locations, and the major road and bikeways that employees map use. We mapped full time employees home ZIP codes related to their workplaces, and surveyed them on their current commuting habits, as well as their own ideas on how they might change them. The investigation reveals a variety of parking conditions—but generally parking is free and in many cases amply provided for, a transit system that aligns with some but not all employee desire lines, and a workforce that overwhelmingly drives to work. Over 35% of employees live within four (4) miles (easy biking distance) and 20% are within two (2) miles (maximum walking distance).
    [Show full text]