DOCSLIB.ORG

Guidelines for Incorporating a Bus Rapid Transit Scenario Into the Analysis of Texas Highway Corridors (0-5668-1)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Guidelines for Incorporating a Bus Rapid Transit Scenario Into the Analysis of Texas Highway Corridors (0-5668-1) Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government 3. Recipient’s Catalog No. FHWA/TX-09/0-5668-1 Accession No. 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date Guidelines for Incorporating a Bus Rapid Transit Scenario into October 2008; Revised July 2009 the Analysis of Texas Highway Corridors 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Randy B. Machemehl, R.L. Kelvin Cheu, Hongchao Liu 0-5668-1 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Center for Transportation Research 11. Contract or Grant No. The University of Texas at Austin 0-5668 3208 Red River, Suite 200 Austin, TX 78705-2650 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Texas Department of Transportation Technical Report Research and Technology Implementation Office September 2007–August 2008 P.O. Box 5080 Austin, TX 78763-5080 14. Sponsoring Agency Code 15. Supplementary Notes Project performed in cooperation with the Texas Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration. 16. Abstract Many corridors in the Texas State highway system are facing increasing congestion while having severe right-of- way limitations. The best form of congestion relief may not be additional highway lanes and/or grade separations. The best solution may be the introduction of a higher capacity transit system. Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) has been increasingly regarded as a cost-effective solution for improving mobility and alleviating congestion in urban transportation networks. Our research was aimed at providing TxDOT with comprehensive guidelines for planning and designing BRT that allows development of a BRT scenario in the traditional alternatives analysis. Specifically, this research developed a decision procedure to help TxDOT engineers/MPO planners decide the role of BRT as an integral part of existing/future transportation systems. The research team included identification and evaluation of analysis tools and methods for measuring the effectiveness/impact of BRT. Design criteria was developed for BRT concepts, including possible street re-alignment, geometric considerations, right-of-way acquisition, signal preemption, dedicated/shared busways on major state arterials, as well as integration of BRT into existing and future managed lanes (HOT/HOV). A BRT planning and design case study for El Paso, Texas and Austin, Texas was completed. 17. Key Words 18. Distribution Statement Bus Rapid Transit, BRT, Highway Corridors No restrictions. This document is available to the public through the National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161; www.ntis.gov. 19. Security Classif. (of report) 20. Security Classif. (of this page) 21. No. of pages 22. Price Unclassified Unclassified 164 Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed page authorized Guidelines for Incorporating a Bus Rapid Transit Scenario into the Analysis of Texas Highway Corridors Randy B. Machemehl R.L. Kelvin Cheu Hongchao Liu CTR Technical Report: 0-5668-1 Report Date: October 2008; Revised July 2009 Project: 0-5668 Project Title: Comprehensive Planning and Design Guidelines for Incorporating a Bus Rapid Transit Scenario to the Analysis of Texas Highway Corridors Sponsoring Agency: Texas Department of Transportation Performing Agency: Center for Transportation Research at The University of Texas at Austin Project performed in cooperation with the Texas Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration. Center for Transportation Research The University of Texas at Austin 3208 Red River Austin, TX 78705 www.utexas.edu/research/ctr Copyright (c) 2008 Center for Transportation Research The University of Texas at Austin All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America Disclaimers Author's Disclaimer: The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors, who are responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official view or policies of the Federal Highway Administration or the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT). This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. Patent Disclaimer: There was no invention or discovery conceived or first actually reduced to practice in the course of or under this contract, including any art, method, process, machine manufacture, design or composition of matter, or any new useful improvement thereof, or any variety of plant, which is or may be patentable under the patent laws of the United States of America or any foreign country. Notice: The United States Government and the State of Texas do not endorse products or manufacturers. If trade or manufacturers' names appear herein, it is solely because they are considered essential to the object of this report. Engineering Disclaimer NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION, BIDDING, OR PERMIT PURPOSES. Project Engineer: Randy B. Machemehl Professional Engineer License State and Number: Texas No. 41921 P. E. Designation: Research Supervisor v Acknowledgments The authors would like to express sincere appreciation to Mr. Eduardo Calvo, TxDOT Project Director and Mr. Richard Skopik, TxDOT Program Coordinator, El Paso District Office, and Mr. Duncan Stewart, Research Engineer, RTI, for their active interest and participation in this project. Products This report contains Product 1, guidelines for incorporating a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) scenario into the analysis of Texas highway corridors. vi Table of Contents Chapter 1. Review of Bus Rapid Transit Concepts ................................................................... 1 1.1 What Does a BRT System Look Like? ..................................................................................1 1.2 Corridor Selection for BRT Implementation .........................................................................5 1.3 Summary ................................................................................................................................9 Chapter 2. Investigating Incremental Effects of Typical BRT Elements and Combinations............................................................................................................................... 11 2.1 Identifying BRT Elements and Corridor Characteristics .....................................................11 2.2 Table Structure .....................................................................................................................12 2.3 U.S. Systems Data ...............................................................................................................12 2.4 Non U.S. Systems Data ........................................................................................................13 2.5 Analysis and Results ............................................................................................................14 2.6 Shelter and Stations .............................................................................................................15 2.7 ITS Technology Applied to BRT .........................................................................................16 2.8 Transit Oriented Development (TOD) .................................................................................17 2.9 Vehicle Design, Capacity and Comfort ...............................................................................17 2.10 Environmental Benefits .....................................................................................................18 2.11 Safety .................................................................................................................................19 2.12 Other Elements and Characteristics ...................................................................................19 2.13 Summary ............................................................................................................................20 Chapter 3. Assessing Transit ITS and Advanced Bus Technologies for BRT Applications ................................................................................................................................. 23 3.1 Advanced Communication Systems ....................................................................................24 3.2 Potential ITS/IVI Technologies ...........................................................................................25 3.3 Transit Industry Challenges .................................................................................................27 3.4 Initiatives in BRT—ITS .......................................................................................................28 3.5 Review of Sensor Technology .............................................................................................29 3.6 Research Done by PATH .....................................................................................................31 3.7 Technology Assessment ......................................................................................................32 3.8 Transit Signal Priority Systems ...........................................................................................34 3.9 Automatic Vehicle Location (AVL) ....................................................................................35 3.10 Summary ............................................................................................................................36 Chapter 4. Estimating Costs for Major BRT System Elements ............................................. 37 4.1 Running
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Transit Service Design Guidelines
    Transit Service Design Guidelines Department of Rail and Public Transportation November 2008 Transit Service Design Guidelines Why were these guidelines for new transit service developed? In FY2008 alone, six communities in Virginia contacted the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation about starting new transit service in their community. They and many other communities throughout Virginia are interested in learning how new transit services can enhance travel choices and mobility and help to achieve other goals, such as quality of life, economic opportunity, and environmental quality. They have heard about or seen successful transit systems in other parts of the state, the nation, or the world, and wonder how similar systems might serve their communities. They need objective and understandable information about transit and whether it might be appropriate for them. These guidelines will help local governments, transit providers and citizens better understand the types of transit systems and services that are available to meet community and regional transportation needs. The guidelines also help the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation (DRPT) in making recommendations to the Commonwealth Transportation Board for transit investments, by 1) providing information on the types of systems or services that are best matched to community needs and local land use decisions, and 2) ensuring that resources are used effectively to achieve local, regional, and Commonwealth goals. Who were these guidelines developed for? These guidelines are intended for three different audiences: local governments, transit providers and citizens. Therefore, some will choose to read the entire document while others may only be interested in certain sections.
    [Show full text]
  • The Relationship Between Safety, Capacity, and Operating Speed on Bus Rapid Transit
    THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SAFETY, CAPACITY, AND OPERATING SPEED ON BUS RAPID TRANSIT NICOLAE DUDUTA,EMBARQ CLAUDIA ADRIAZOLA-STEIL,EMBARQ DARIO HIDALGO, EMBARQ LUIS ANTONIO LINDAU,EMBARQ PAULA MANOELA DOS SANTOS, EMBARQ EMAIL FOR CORRESPONDENCE: [email protected] This is an abridged version of the paper presented at the conference. The full version is being submitted elsewhere. Details on the full paper can be obtained from the author. The Relationship between Safety, Capacity, and Operating Speed on Bus Rapid Transit DUDUTA, Nicolae; ADRIAZOLA-STEIL Claudia; HIDALGO, Dario; LINDAU, Luis Antonio; SANTOS, Paula Manoela; THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SAFETY, CAPACITY, AND OPERATING SPEED ON BUS RAPID TRANSIT CASE STUDY: TRANSOESTE BRT, RIO DE JANEIRO Nicolae Duduta1, Claudia Adriazola-Steil1, Dario Hidalgo1, Luis Antonio Lindau2, Paula Manoela dos Santos2 1: EMBARQ – the WRI Center for Sustainable Transport, 10 G St. NE Suite 800, Washington DC, 2: EMBARQ Brasil, Rua Luciana de Abreu, 471/801 90570-060 Porto Alegre/RS, Brazil Email for correspondence: [email protected] th 13 WCTR, 2013 – Rio de Janeiro, Brazil 1 The Relationship between Safety, Capacity, and Operating Speed on Bus Rapid Transit DUDUTA, Nicolae; ADRIAZOLA-STEIL Claudia; HIDALGO, Dario; LINDAU, Luis Antonio; SANTOS, Paula Manoela; ABSTRACT There is a growing body of research on the traffic safety aspects of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) corridors in Latin American cities. The findings suggest that some BRT design features – such as center lane configurations, left turn prohibitions, and signalized mid-block pedestrian crossings with refuge islands – can significantly improve safety on the corridors where BRTs operate. However, there is still a gap in knowledge about how the different safety features might impact the operational performance of the BRT.
    [Show full text]
  • When the Wheels on the Bus Stop Going Round and Round: Occupational Injuries, Illnesses, and Fatalities in Public Transportation
    February 2015 errata On May 28, 2015, a correction was made to paragraph four under “BLS survey of occupational injuries and illnesses” in this article. The sentence, as originally published, incorrectly identified the cost of security cameras on buses as $18,000 per camera rather than per bus. When the wheels on the bus stop going round and round: occupational injuries, illnesses, and fatalities in public transportation Injuries and illnesses to bus drivers endanger not only their lives but also the lives of their passengers. In 2013, approximately 5,780 transit and intercity bus drivers experienced a days-away-from-work injury or illness while on the job. This article explores occupational injuries, illnesses, and fatalities to bus drivers and urban transit workers and examines how individual transit systems are collecting and analyzing their own employee safety data. The findings reveal that mass transit systems have taken steps to protect their employees from harm on the job and that injuries and illnesses to bus drivers and urban transit workers have declined in recent years. In October 2012, a Washington (DC) Metropolitan Area Gina Dowdell Hunter Transit Authority (WMATA) bus driver was hospitalized after [email protected] a rock was thrown through an open window and hit her Gina Dowdell Hunter is an economist in the Office 1 head while she was driving. In August 2013, a gunman of Safety, Health and Working Conditions, U.S. rushed on to a King County metro bus in downtown Seattle Bureau of Labor Statistics. and shot the driver during rush hour.2 These sorts of violent attacks involving bus drivers endanger not just the bus drivers but the passengers as well.
    [Show full text]
  • Comparison Between Bus Rapid Transit and Light-Rail Transit Systems: a Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Approach
    Urban Transport XXIII 143 COMPARISON BETWEEN BUS RAPID TRANSIT AND LIGHT-RAIL TRANSIT SYSTEMS: A MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION ANALYSIS APPROACH MARÍA EUGENIA LÓPEZ LAMBAS1, NADIA GIUFFRIDA2, MATTEO IGNACCOLO2 & GIUSEPPE INTURRI2 1TRANSyT, Transport Research Centre, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Spain 2Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture (DICAR), University of Catania, Italy ABSTRACT The construction choice between two different transport systems in urban areas, as in the case of Light-Rail Transit (LRT) and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) solutions, is often performed on the basis of cost-benefit analysis and geometrical constraints due to the available space for the infrastructure. Classical economic analysis techniques are often unable to take into account some of the non-monetary parameters which have a huge impact on the final result of the choice, since they often include social acceptance and sustainability aspects. The application of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) techniques can aid decision makers in the selection process, with the possibility to compare non-homogeneous criteria, both qualitative and quantitative, and allowing the generation of an objective ranking of the different alternatives. The coupling of MCDA and Geographic Information System (GIS) environments also permits an easier and faster analysis of spatial parameters, and a clearer representation of indicator comparisons. Based on these assumptions, a LRT and BRT system will be analysed according to their own transportation, economic, social and environmental impacts as a hypothetical exercise; moreover, through the use of MCDA techniques a global score for both systems will be determined, in order to allow for a fully comprehensive comparison. Keywords: BHLS, urban transport, transit systems, TOPSIS.
    [Show full text]
  • Attacks on Bus Operators and Passengers
    Sensitive But Unclassified Material For Official Use Only Attacks on Bus Operators and Passengers Special Report Prepared by the ST, PT and OTRB ISACs May 4, 2015 Purpose In light of recent violent incidents targeting transit operators in numerous areas around the globe, the Surface Transportation (ST), Public Transportation (PT), and Over the Road Bus (OTRB) ISACs are providing this special report for your general security awareness. The application of any standards or guidance discussed herein is strictly voluntary. The practices implemented by rail, transit, and OTRB systems may be either more or less restrictive than any recommended practices or guidance given in this document. In some cases, federal and/or state regulations govern portions of public transit systems’ operations. In those cases, government regulations should take precedence over the information or guidance provided herein. Organizations should consult their own Agency’s/Organization’s policies and guidance before taking any actions based on the information presented in these documents. This document supplements guidance and analysis already provided in daily reports produced by the ST, PT, & OTRB ISACs. Of note, the last page of this report lists references for additional information. To contact an ST and PT ISAC analyst please call 866-784-7221, or email [email protected]. To contact an OTRB ISAC analyst please call 877-847-5510, or email [email protected] 1 Sensitive But Unclassified Material For Official Use Only Introduction The security of transit system and interstate bus operators has become an increasing concern for many metropolitan areas. Some attribute the perceived rise in attacks against operators as an artifact of increased reporting, but when that element of information is factored into the analysis, there still appears to be a notable surge in violent behavior targeting transit workers; particularly against bus drivers, who may remain the most vulnerable.
    [Show full text]
  • Transit Element
    Town of Cary Comprehensive Transportation Pllan Chapter 6 – Introduction At the time of the 2001 Comprehensive Transportation Plan, the Town of Cary had no bus service other than Route 301 operated by the Triangle Transit Authority (TTA). Since then, Cary has expanded its transit Transit services considerably, with a new local fixed-route service for the public and demand-responsive paratransit for seniors and persons with disabilities. TTA has added routes as well. As the Town’s Element population continues rising and travel demand increases, the Town plans to expand its local service, capturing riders coming from and going to planned residential and commercial developments. Situated amidst the Research Triangle of Raleigh, Durham, and Chapel Hill, Cary is served today by multiple transit providers. Fixed route bus services within Cary are provided by C-Tran and TTA. C-Tran, Wake Coordinated Transportation Services (WCTS), and the Center for Volunteer Caregiving provide demand-responsive paratransit services. WCTS also provides rural general public transit via its TRACS service program; however, services are not provided for urban trips within Cary. Amtrak operates daily train service. This chapter describes current fixed-route transit and paratransit conditions, projected growth in the Town, and proposed future service changes. C-Tran Overview C-Tran is the Town of Cary’s sponsored transit service which originated as a door-to-door service for seniors and disabled residents in 2001. In July 2002, door-to-door services were expanded
    [Show full text]
  • Pennscore Operator Training Manual
    O P E R A T O R T R A I N I N G M A N U A L April, 2002 PennSCORE Operator Training Manual This manual was the brainchild of, and was originally prepared by, Dave Kilmer of Red Rose Transit Authority as part of the PennSCORE program. The manual is designed to be used by transit systems in PA for training new bus operators. It is also designed as a tool for PennSCORE graduates to use in training. This manual is generic, which means that the material contained herein can be used in many different transit environments. Information specific to a particular system, such as route descriptions, needs to be added in the appropriate sections. These sections contain notes suggesting the addition of system-specific information. Places where other training resources might be appropriate are also noted. These resources are typically videos, many of which were used in the PennSCORE program—all are available from PennTRAIN Comments and suggestions from Jim Parks and Dennis Fuge, Cambria County Transit Authority (CamTRAN), are greatly appreciated. They took the generic manual and added system-specific material for use at CamTRAN. A copy of their version is also available from PennTRAIN as an example of how this manual can be adapted for local use. Copies of this manual are available from PennTRAIN. For more information contact Cindy Conaway at 800-847-0333, [email protected]. ii PennSCORE Operator Training Manual TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 What is PennScore?.........................................................................................................................................2 1.2 History of System Name (insert brief History)................................................................................................2 1.3 Training Outline ..............................................................................................................................................3 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Virginia Administrative Code
    Virginia Administrative Code Chapter 70 - REGULATIONS GOVERNING multifunction school activity buses. These vehicles PUPIL TRANSPORTATION are not approved for transporting students to and from school or school-related activities. Part I Definitions "School bus" means any motor vehicle other than a station wagon, automobile, truck, or commercial bus that is (i) designed and used primarily for the 8VAC20-70-10. Definitions. transportation of pupils to and from public, private, The following words and terms when used in this or religious schools, or for the transportation of chapter shall have the following meanings unless the pupils who are physically handicapped to and from a context clearly indicates otherwise: sheltered workshop; (ii) painted yellow with the words "School Bus" in black letters of a specified "Classroom instruction" means training provided by size on the front and rear; and (iii) equipped with a qualified driver instructor through lectures, warning devices prescribed in § 46.2-1090 of the demonstrations, audio-visual presentations, Code of Virginia. A yellow school bus may have a computer-based instruction, driving simulation white roof provided such vehicle is painted in devices, or similar means. Instruction occurring accordance with regulations and specifications of the outside a classroom is included if it does not involve Department of Education. actual operation of a school bus and its components by the student. "Specially equipped bus" means a school bus designed, equipped, or modified to accommodate "Color-black" means federal standard No. 595, black. students with special needs. "Color-yellow" means national school bus yellow "Type A school bus" means a conversion bus School Bus Manufacturers Technical Council constructed utilizing a cutaway front-section vehicle (SBMTC) color standard 008.
    [Show full text]
  • North Dakota
    NORTH DAKOTA SCHOOL BUS DRIVER’S GUIDE MARCH 2015 EDITION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION Kirsten Baesler, STATE SUPERINTENDENT Bismarck, North Dakota 58505-0440 2 A MESSAGE FROM THE SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION Over 40,000 students are transported each day to North Dakota schools in school buses. The safety of these students and the efficiency of a district's transportation program depends on the dedicated men and women who accept the important responsibility of driving our school buses. This publication is the thirteenth edition of the handbook for North Dakota school bus drivers. We hope that this handbook answers many questions and gives school bus drivers the necessary guidelines to perform effectively and efficiently. Driving a school bus involves much more than merely driving a vehicle on the highways. The school bus driver must also be responsible for the safety and welfare of children, must be teacher by example, must promote good public relations, and must understand how to properly use and care for the school bus, a complex and expensive piece of equipment. The purpose of this guide is to provide each school bus driver with the basic information needed to develop the skills, attitudes, and knowledge that result in safe and efficient driving. It is my sincere hope that each of North Dakota's school bus drivers will study and properly apply the information presented in this guide to assure a safer transportation program for our students. Driving a school bus is one of the most important jobs we have in our school systems. You carry our state’s most precious resource.
    [Show full text]
  • ABQ RIDE 2014 Title VI Program
    Richard J. Berry Mayor Bruce Rizzieri Mayor Director ABQ RIDE 2014 Title VI Program City of Albuquerque Transit Department July 2014 ABQ RIDE 2014 Title VI Program Overview As a recipient of financial assistance from the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), the City of Albuquerque Transit Department (“ABQ RIDE”) follows the requirements of the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Title VI regulations. The requirements are described in FTA’s Circular C 4702.1B, “Title VI Requirements and Guidelines for Federal Transit Administration Recipients” issued October 1, 2012. In keeping with those requirements and their specified update schedule, this 2014 Title VI Program describes ABQ RIDE’s program to comply with these regulations and replaces ABQ RIDE’s previous 2011 program. ABQ RIDE operates the Albuquerque metropolitan area's primary operator of fixed route bus service, as well as complementary paratransit service. The department’s service area is 235 square miles, home to a population of about 662,000 people (2010 Census). With a fleet of 157 buses, the department operates 40 fixed routes, including twenty-one “local” routes with all-day service, sixteen “commuter” routes with service only during peak times, and three “Rapid Ride” routes with frequent service, limited stops, and distinctive vehicles and stations. ABQ RIDE operates several routes under contract to two other governmental entities that fund their operations, the County of Bernalillo and the Rio Metro Regional Transit District. Total ridership on all fixed routes was 12.9 million trips in FY2013. ABQ RIDE’s paratransit operations (“Sun Van”) use a fleet of 70 unleaded gasoline- powered cut-away vans.
    [Show full text]
  • Advanced Urban Transit Technologies Market Testing Final Report
    Advanced Urban Transit Technologies – Worldwide Market Testing Report summarising the feedback received through the Market Testing March 2020 £69.6 Billion GVA A region packed with ambition and untapped potential In partnership with: Institute for Transport Studies Table of Contents 1. PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT ................................................................................................................................. 4 Who is undertaking the Market Testing? .................................................................................................................. 5 What Happens Next? ................................................................................................................................................ 5 2. BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT ........................................................................................................................... 6 This report ................................................................................................................................................................. 7 3. SUMMARY OF KEY MESSAGES ........................................................................................................................... 8 4. FEEDBACK ON DISCUSSION AREA 1A ................................................................................................................12 Illustrative Quotes from Respondents ..................................................................................................................... 12 Points raised
    [Show full text]
  • Albuquerque Rapid Transit Receive Federal Subsidies? by D
    Policy Brief July 2015 Throwing Taxpayers Under the Bus Should Albuquerque Rapid Transit Receive Federal Subsidies? By D. Dowd Muska Introduction In August, the City of Albuquerque will request funding from the Federal Transit Administration’s “Small Starts” subsidization program. The application will seek revenue to cover 80 percent of the costs for the first phase of Albuquerque Rapid Transit (ART), a planned system that will combine “many features of rail transit with the flexibility of buses.”1 As currently envisioned, ART’s initial segment will run along a “10-mile stretch along Central Avenue … from Louisiana to Coors.” Planners hope to extend the route “as far as Tramway to the east and Unser to the west, with another route up Louisiana to Uptown.”2 Calling it “the next logical step in public transportation,” Albuquerque Mayor Richard Berry believes that ART “can be done for pennies on the dollar compared to light rail and trolleys.”3 Attractions would include include regular service, efficient ticketing, “prioritized signaling at intersections,” and single-level boarding.4 But there are reasons to doubt the rosy claims of ART’s proponents. Herewith, seven reasons why Washington should view the city’s funding request skeptically. 1. Is Rapid Ride Inadequate? From a ridership perspective, ART is a project in search of a purpose. ABQ Ride, the city’s bus system, has seen surging demand in recent years. Between the 2005 and 2014 fiscal years, total boardings rose by 77.9 percent.5 The bulk of the growth was “directly attributable to the addition of the 766, 790, and 777 Rapid Ride routes in 2004, 2007, and 2009, respectively,” and all three express lines “predominately operate on Central Avenue.”6 Rapid Ride features “60-foot long, articulated buses that accommodate up to 86 passengers.” The vehicles are “are loaded with new technology,” including WiFi, automatic announcements, “a global positioning system to aid in the transit applications that help passengers locate their bus in real time,” and state-of-the art security cameras and microphones.
    [Show full text]