DOCSLIB.ORG

Transpo Transcript.Indd

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

October 2013 Using Technology to Improve Transportation: All Electronic-Tolling and Beyond Transcript Introduction customer-facing and most customer- Underinvestment has put pressure on focused of all government services. STEVE POFTAK: Thanks to all of transportation providers to improve service. Trust in government is another aspect Fiscal pressures have limited the resources you for coming today and joining us. available to make those improvements. of transportation. And technology is a I’d also like to thank our partners who Technology off ers the opportunity to way for us to show our customers that leverage smaller investments by improving have put this together: Joseph Giglio customer services, enhancing operating we can improve their experience. from the Center for Strategic Studies effi ciencies, and increasing revenue. at the D’Amore-McKim School of I think the gold standard in our To explore the potential of new technologies to make transportation Business at Northeastern University business is giving more time back work more effi ciently, faster, and safer, the and Greg Massing at the Rappaport to people. Whether it’s standing on conference “Using Technology to Improve Transportation: All-Electronic Tolling and Center for Law and Public Service at a platform at Alewife or standing in Beyond” was held on May 7, 2013 at the Suffolk University. line at the Registry of Motor Vehicles, Suff olk University Law School. it is giving people more time back. Here in Massachusetts, we’ve just The Conference was co-sponsored by The Technology holds tremendous promise Rappaport Institute for Greater Boston, The gone through another round of Center for Strategic Studies at the D’Amore- to accomplish these goals that we have legislative and executive branch McKim School of Business at Northeastern in transportation. University, and The Rappaport Center for discussions, debates, and votes Law and Public Service at Suff olk University on transportation funding; surely, The Registry of Motor Vehicles is, Law School. B this won’t be the last. Funding is after the Department of Revenue, It featured a keynote address from MassDOT a means to an end. But we’d like the Commonwealth’s second-largest Secretary Rich Davey and two panel discussions. Biographies of the presenters to pivot that conversation today to revenue generator, through registry and panelists are located at the end of the talk about technology. How do we fees and/or taxes. We serve just about transcript. defi ne customer service? How do we everybody in the Commonwealth. © 2013 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College. The contents refl ect the improve our service for people who We have been improving our online views of the authors (who are responsible use and depend on our transportation transactions over the last several years. for the facts and accuracy of the research herein) and do not represent the offi cial system? Today, we’ll about funding, The online wait time is zero minutes. views or policies of the Rappaport Institute but we’ll also talk about how we can One in three of our customers in for Greater Boston, The Center for Strategic Studies, or The Rappaport Center for Law use technology to improve customer Massachusetts who is at a branch can and Public Service. service. conduct his or her transactions online instead. Keynote Address: Technology Massachusetts will be the fi rst in the and Transforming the Customer nation to roll out a “My RMV,” like Experience Rappaport Institute for Greater Boston an Internet banking account. You will Harvard Kennedy School RICH DAVEY, Secretary and Chief be able to see all of your transactions 79 John F. Kennedy Street Cambridge, MA 02138 Executive Offi cer, Massachusetts DoT and how you’ve been interacting with government. The goal is to 617-495-5091 Why is technology important? First, www.hks.harvard.edu/centers/rappaport transportation is the broadest form make it easier to interact with the of government service: it is the most department. Using Technology to Improve Transportation Technology is being deployed to improve Bridge by the end of 2013, and then rolling it services and create effi ciencies. We are very out statewide over the next couple of years. excited to be the fi rst transit agency in the In the process of this transition, labor has United States to roll out mobile ticketing, certainly been a challenge for us. We’ve been which has been introduced on our commuter working very closely with our partners in rail system. In the last four months, we’ve labor. Unfortunately in Massachusetts, the already had $5 million in sales. toll collector has been held up unfairly as a Also, we are giving people information that wasteful government position. The challenge they can use to make their commute decisions. is in actually saying, “We’re going to have We are moving to real time traffi c information a meaningful transition for our employees in the Commonwealth. For example, we use to either work in government or outside of signs to convey real time information such as government.” That would open the door to “5 miles, 6 minutes.” The applications for this rolling out a signifi cant customer improvement. information are endless. You will be able to Policymakers of the future know that electronic download an application on your iPhone to see tolling can allow for things like congestion what traffi c looks like, including the traffi c’s pricing, which seems to be a no-brainer. If we actual speed and how long it will take to go decide to toll other roads, we will be able to from point A to point B. We are also working deploy the technology very quickly and easily. with the developer community on the transit By the way, it also gives traffi c information and side to create an app that will tell you the can provide us with a wealth of other data. best route to downtown Boston, given current We are rethinking how we are going to deploy conditions. this technology across the state. Having toll We are rethinking how we are booths at interchanges is crazy: that’s where going to deploy this technology you want the least bottleneck. In Massachusetts, you will likely see a tolling scheme that tolls across the state. Having toll per mile. Vehicles will go under a gantry every booths at interchanges is crazy: 10 or 15 miles and not pay at an interchange. that’s where you want the least After Boston, our two largest cities, Springfi eld bottlenecks. and Worcester, have had economic challenges. However, if you are in Worcester and you want to stay in Worcester but you want to use the We are putting up static signs along the routes Massachusetts Turnpike, you have to pay. The to Cape Cod. The signs give people specifi c, same is true for Springfi eld. Juxtapose that with real time information about travel times from some other cities and towns in the eastern part point A to point B. This is part of a statewide of state, where the economy is a little better project that we’re rolling on our most used and we are not charging. We are going to even arterials: the Cape, Route 6, Route 3, and the that out and make it a little fairer for commerce Massachusetts Turnpike between Exit 9 and across the state. downtown Boston. I would like to take some time to discuss safety The Fast Lane is fi nally here. The legal speed and security and the role technology can play. limit through the Fast Lane is fi fteen miles Obviously, everybody is doing cameras. But an hour: that is not fast. We are moving to there are things the MBTA is doing that I want all-electronic tolling, piloting it on the Tobin 2 Using Technology to Improve Transportation to mention. The MBTA is considered a Tier 1 more evidence of how we are using technology target by Homeland Security. Not only have to improve the system. we been in a heightened state of vigilance, I would like to discuss a couple of we have also been a laboratory for security technological areas that, as an industry, we improvements in and around the system. We should be thinking about. The fi rst is how move 1.4 million people a day on our transit people pay for services. With due respect to system, the fi fth largest in the country. We have the Charlie Card system we have here, which some old tunnels, obviously. The Blue Line is, in its own right, fairly forward thinking: it tunnel was built in the 1920s, for example. Air is already or almost obsolete. What you see in fl ow analysis determined that it’s possible that WMATA and other transit agencies are obsolete chemical or biological weapons could be used systems. We can’t be building proprietary in a subway system, such as happened in Japan systems that our customers can’t use easily. with the sarin attack. Whether it’s near-fi eld technology, Q-codes, We’ve been working with the Department of or barcodes, we need to be thinking about how Homeland Security for the last nineteen months people are going to pay in the future and make to understand the airfl ows in our tunnels. We it easy for our customers to pay. The T spends will be better prepared to know how we can 75 cents per Charlie Card — and about $3 million a year or every other year — buying It is often said in transportation Charlie Cards. We are looking for a way to “tap that we are “information-rich, and go” with a credit card.
Recommended publications
  • Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20554 Application of Comcast Corporation, General Electric Company

    Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20554 Application of Comcast Corporation, General Electric Company

    Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20554 Application of Comcast Corporation, ) General Electric Company and NBC ) Universal, Inc., for Consent to Assign ) MB Docket No. 10-56 Licenses or Transfer Control of ) Licenses ) COMMENTS AND MERGER CONDITIONS PROPOSED BY ALLIANCE FOR COMMUNICATIONS DEMOCRACY James N. Horwood Gloria Tristani Spiegel & McDiarmid LLP 1333 New Hampshire Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 879-4000 June 21, 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. PEG PROGRAMMING IS ESSENTIAL TO PRESERVING LOCALISM AND DIVERSITY ON BEHALF OF THE COMMUNITY, IS VALUED BY VIEWERS, AND MERITS PROTECTION IN COMMISSION ACTION ON THE COMCAST-NBCU TRANSACTION .2 II. COMCAST CONCEDES THE RELEVANCE OF AND NEED FOR IMPOSING PEG-RELATED CONDITIONS ON THE TRANSFER, BUT THE PEG COMMITMENTS COMCAST PROPOSES ARE INADEQUATE 5 A. PEG Merger Condition No.1: As a condition ofthe Comcast­ NBCU merger, Comcast should be required to make all PEG channels on all ofits cable systems universally available on the basic service tier, in the same format as local broadcast channels, unless the local government specifically agrees otherwise 8 B. PEG Merger Condition No.2: As a merger condition, the Commission should protect PEG channel positions .,.,.,.. ., 10 C. PEG Merger Condition No.3: As a merger condition, the Commission should prohibit discrimination against PEG channels, and ensure that PEG channels will have the same features and functionality, and the same signal quality, as that provided to local broadcast channels .,., ., ..,.,.,.,..,., ., ., .. .,11 D. PEG Merger Condition No.4: As a merger condition, the Commission should require that PEG-related conditions apply to public access, and that all PEG programming is easily accessed on menus and easily and non-discriminatorily accessible on all Comcast platforms ., 12 CONCLUSION 13 EXHIBIT 1 Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C.
  • Tolling and Transponders in Massachusetts

    Tolling and Transponders in Massachusetts

    DRIVING INNOVATION: TOLLING AND TRANSPONDERS IN MASSACHUSETTS By Wendy Murphy and Scott Haller White Paper No. 150 July 2016 Pioneer Institute for Public Policy Research Pioneer’s Mission Pioneer Institute is an independent, non-partisan, privately funded research organization that seeks to improve the quality of life in Massachusetts through civic discourse and intellectually rigorous, data-driven public policy solutions based on free market principles, individual liberty and responsibility, and the ideal of effective, limited and accountable government. This paper is a publication of the Center for Better Government, which seeks limited, accountable government by promoting competitive delivery of public services, elimination of unnecessary regulation, and a focus on core government functions. Current initiatives promote reform of how the state builds, manages, repairs and finances its transportation assets as well as public employee benefit reform. The Center for School Reform seeks to increase the education options available to parents and students, drive system-wide reform, and ensure accountability in public education. The Center’s work builds on Pioneer’s legacy as a recognized leader in the charter public school movement, and as a champion of greater academic rigor in Massachusetts’ elementary and secondary schools. Current initiatives promote choice and competition, school-based man- agement, and enhanced academic performance in public schools. The Center for Economic Opportunity seeks to keep Massachusetts competitive by pro- moting a healthy business climate, transparent regulation, small business creation in urban areas and sound environmental and development policy. Current initiatives promote market reforms to increase the supply of affordable housing, reduce the cost of doing business, and revitalize urban areas.
  • RAPPAPORT POLICY BRIEFS Instituterappaport for Greater Boston INSTITUTE Kennedy Schoolfor of Government, Greater Harvard University Boston June 2008

    RAPPAPORT POLICY BRIEFS Instituterappaport for Greater Boston INSTITUTE Kennedy Schoolfor of Government, Greater Harvard University Boston June 2008

    RAPPAPORT POLICY BRIEFS InstituteRAPPAPORT for Greater Boston INSTITUTE Kennedy Schoolfor of Government, Greater Harvard University Boston June 2008 Reducing Youth Violence: Lessons from the Boston Youth Survey By Renee M. Johnson, Deborah Azrael, Mary Vriniotis, and David Hemenway, Harvard School of Public Health In Boston, as in many other cities, aggressive behavior, assault, weapon Rappaport Institute Policy Briefs are short youth violence takes an unacceptably carrying, feelings of safety, and overviews of new scholarly research on important issues facing the region. This high toll. Reducing the burden of gang membership. It also inquired brief reports on the results of the Boston youth violence is a priority for the about risk and protective factors for Youth Survey 2006 (BYS), an in-school survey of Boston high school youth conducted City’s policymakers, civic leaders, violence (e.g., alcohol and drug use, biennially by the Harvard Youth Violence Prevention Center in collaboration with the and residents. To date, however, depressive symptoms, family violence, City of Boston. More information is available little information has been available developmental assets, academic at www.hsph.harvard.edu/hyvpc/research/. about the prevalence, antecedents and performance, perceptions of collective Renee M. Johnson impacts of youth violence in Boston. effi cacy within one’s neighborhood), Renee M. Johnson is a Research Associate at the Harvard School of Public Health and The Boston Youth Survey (BYS) and health behaviors (e.g., nutrition Core Faculty at the Harvard Youth Violence and physical activity). Although 1,233 Prevention Center. addresses this gap in knowledge. It is Deborah Azrael students took the survey, the analytical an in-school survey of Boston high Deborah Azrael is a Research Associate at the school students conducted by the sample includes only the 1,215 who Harvard School of Public Health.
  • Boston Bound: a Comparison of Boston’S Legal Powers with Those of Six Other Major American Cities by Gerald E

    Boston Bound: a Comparison of Boston’S Legal Powers with Those of Six Other Major American Cities by Gerald E

    RAPPAPORT POLICY BRIEFS Institute for Greater Boston Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University December 2007 Boston Bound: A Comparison of Boston’s Legal Powers with Those of Six Other Major American Cities By Gerald E. Frug and David J. Barron, Harvard Law School Boston is an urban success story. It cities — Atlanta, Chicago, Denver, Rappaport Institute Policy Briefs are short has emerged from the fi nancial crises New York City, San Francisco, and overviews of new and notable scholarly research on important issues facing the of the 1950s and 1960s to become Seattle — enjoy to shape its own region. The Institute also distributes a diverse, vital, and economically future. It is hard to understand why Rappaport Institute Policy Notes, a periodic summary of new policy-related powerful city. Anchored by an the Commonwealth should want its scholarly research about Greater Boston. outstanding array of colleges and major city—the economic driver This policy brief is based on “Boston universities, world-class health of its most populous metropolitan Bound: A Comparison of Boston’s Legal Powers with Those of Six Other care providers, leading fi nancial area—to be constrained in a way Major American Cities,” a report by Frug and Barron published by The Boston institutions, and numerous other that comparable cities in other states Foundation. The report is available assets, today’s Boston drives the are not. Like Boston, the six cities online at http://www.tbf.org/tbfgen1. asp?id=3448. metropolitan economy and is one of are large, economically infl uential the most exciting and dynamic cities actors within their states and regions, Gerald E.
  • Hitching a Ride: Every Time You Take a Drive, the Government Is Riding with You, 39 J

    Hitching a Ride: Every Time You Take a Drive, the Government Is Riding with You, 39 J

    UIC Law Review Volume 39 Issue 4 Article 9 Summer 2006 Hitching a Ride: Every Time You Take a Drive, the Government is Riding With You, 39 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1499 (2006) Benjamin Burnham Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.uic.edu/lawreview Part of the Administrative Law Commons, Constitutional Law Commons, Fourteenth Amendment Commons, Fourth Amendment Commons, Legislation Commons, Privacy Law Commons, State and Local Government Law Commons, and the Transportation Law Commons Recommended Citation Benjamin Burnham, Hitching a Ride: Every Time You Take a Drive, the Government is Riding With You, 39 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1499 (2006) https://repository.law.uic.edu/lawreview/vol39/iss4/9 This Comments is brought to you for free and open access by UIC Law Open Access Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in UIC Law Review by an authorized administrator of UIC Law Open Access Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. HITCHING A RIDE: EVERY TIME YOU TAKE A DRIVE, THE GOVERNMENT IS RIDING WITH YOU BENJAMIN BURNHAM* I. SMOOTH SAILING At the end of a long hard work week, you decide to skip out of the office a half-hour early on Friday to get a jump start on the weekend. At 4:27 p.m., you hastily finish up some last minute work, pack up your briefcase, and with a quick glance over your shoulder, you are out the door at exactly 4:30 p.m. You get into your car and onto the highway to start your half-hour commute home.
  • Tolling U.S. Highways and Bridges, 2017

    Tolling U.S. Highways and Bridges, 2017

    Tolling U.S. Highways and Bridges Robert S. Kirk Specialist in Transportation Policy August 4, 2017 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov R44910 Tolling U.S. Highways and Bridges Summary The Federal-Aid Road Act of 1916 (39 Stat. 355), which provided federal funds to states for highway construction, included the requirement that all roads funded under the act be “free from tolls of all kinds.” Following the funding of the Interstate System in 1956, the “freedom from tolls” policy was reaffirmed (23 U.S.C. §301). Although the provision still exists, exceptions to the general ban on tolls now cover the vast majority of federal-aid roads and bridges. New roads, bridges, and tunnels may be tolled, and most existing roads, bridges, and tunnels may be tolled if they are reconstructed or replaced. Yet growth in the extent of toll facilities has been slow, and some new toll projects have struggled financially. The failure, beginning in 2008, of federal highway user taxes and fees to provide sufficient revenues to fund the surface transportation program authorized by Congress has renewed interest in expanding toll financing. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects that annual highway revenues, mostly from motor fuels taxes, will fall an average of $20 billion short of the amount needed to sustain the current federal surface transportation program between FY2021 and FY2025, and some Members of Congress see an expansion of tolling as a way to reduce the need for federal expenditures on roads. Congress could achieve an expansion of tolling in several ways. At one extreme, it could simply encourage tolling pilot projects on Interstate System highways, of which relatively few have been implemented to date.
  • Toll Facilities in the United States

    Toll Facilities in the United States

    TOLL FACILITIES IN THE UNITED STATES Bridges - Roads - Tunnels - Ferries June 2005 Publication No: FHWA-PL-05-018 Internet: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ohim/tollpage.htm Table of Contents History and Current Policy .......................................................................................................... iv Data Explanation ........................................................................................................................... xi Fact Sheet ..................................................................................................................................... 1 Toll Mileage Trends ..................................................................................................................... 2 Table T-1: Part 1, Interstate System Toll Bridges and Tunnels in the United States ........................... 3 Part 2, Non-Interstate System Toll Bridges and Tunnels in the United States ................... 4 Part 3, Interstate System Toll Roads in the United States .................................................. 9 Part 4, Non-Interstate System Toll Roads in the United States ......................................... 13 Part 5, Vehicular Toll Ferries in the United States ............................................................ 17 Table T-2, Other Proposed Toll Facilities .................................................................................. 21 Appendix ....................................................................................................................................
  • Technology Scan for Electronic Toll Collection Our Mission

    Technology Scan for Electronic Toll Collection Our Mission

    Research Report KTC-08-15/SPR359-08-1F KENTUCKY TRANSPORTATION CENTER TECHNOLOGY SCAN FOR ELECTRONIC TOLL COLLECTION OUR MISSION We provide services to the transportation community through research, technology transfer and education. We create and participate in partnerships to promote safe and effective transportation systems. OUR VALUES Teamwork Listening and communicating along with courtesy and respect for others. Honesty and Ethical Behavior Delivering the highest quality products and services. Continuous Improvement In all that we do. Research Report KTC-08-15/SPR359-08-1F Technology Scan for Electronic Toll Collection by Joseph D. Crabtree, Ph.D., P.E. Candice Y. Wallace and Natasha J. Mamaril Kentucky Transportation Center College of Engineering University of Kentucky Lexington, Kentucky in Cooperation with The Kentucky Transportation Cabinet and The Federal Highway Administration The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors, who are responsible for the facts and accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the University of Kentucky, the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet, or the Federal Highway Administration. June 2008 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No KTC-08-15/SPR359-08-1F 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date Technology Scan for Electronic Toll Collection June 2008 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) Joseph D. Crabtree, Candice Y. Wallace, and 8. Performing Organization Report No. Natasha J. Mamaril KTC-08-15/SPR359-08-1F 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Kentucky Transportation Center College of Engineering 11. Contract or Grant No.
  • How Massachusetts Can Stop the Public-Sector Virus by Thomas A

    How Massachusetts Can Stop the Public-Sector Virus by Thomas A

    March 2011 How Massachusetts Can Stop the Public-Sector Virus By Thomas A. Kochan (MIT Sloan School of Management) America is in the early stages of what are these the causes or convenient This Policy Brief is based on remarks could be the largest labor protest of scapegoats and targets? made by Professor Thomas A. Kochan our lifetime. Starting in Wisconsin, at “Collective Bargains: Rebuilding and Let me be clear about the deeper issue Repairing Public Sector Labor Relations the battle over public-sector wages, at stake in these debates that give them in Diffi cult Times,” a Boston 101 event on benefi ts, and collective bargaining February 23, 2011. A full video of the event such a viral character. Wisconsin’s can be found at http://www.hks.harvard. rights is now spreading like a virus to governor would strip employees of edu/centers/rappaport/events-and-news/ Indiana, Ohio, New Jersey, and God audio-and-video-clips/collective-bargains- their rights to collective bargaining rebuilding-and-repairing-public-sector- knows where next. So, like exposure and make it essentially impossible labor-relations-in-diffi cult-times. to any virus, we have two questions for any union to represent its Thomas A. Kochan on our mind: Will we get it here in Thomas A. Kochan is the George M. Bunker members in a stable and responsible Professor at MIT Sloan School of Massachusetts? Is there a treatment fashion. In doing so, he is attacking a Management. He is also co-Director at the that makes us immune and stops it MIT Institute for Work and Employment fundamental human right, the freedom Research.
  • Toll Collection Technology and Best Practices (0-5217-P1)

    Toll Collection Technology and Best Practices (0-5217-P1)

    0-5217-P1 Toll Collection Technology and Best Practices Authors: Dr. Khali Persad Dr. C. Michael Walton Shahriyar Hussain Project 0-5217: Vehicle/License Plate Identification for Toll Collection Applications AUGUST 2006; REVISED JANUARY 2007 Performing Organization: Sponsoring Organization: Center for Transportation Research Texas Department of Transportation The University of Texas at Austin Research and Technology Implementation Office 3208 Red River, Suite 200 P.O. Box 5080 Austin, Texas 78705-2650 Austin, Texas 78763-5080 Project conducted in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration and the Texas Department of Transportation. Abstract: In this research product, tolling practices and technologies are Keywords: No. of Pages: presented. Likely developments and enhancements are reviewed, along Tolling, tolling practice, with potential tie-ins to other Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) electronic toll collection, 38 deployments. Ultimately, this research project will develop tolling technology. recommendations for vehicle identification/registration systems with the potential to link the tolling function to other desirable transportation system management functions. Table of Contents Introduction................................................................................................................................... 1 Section 1: Tolling Practice............................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Objectives of Tolling .............................................................................................................1
  • Interstate System Toll Bridges and Tunnels in the United States (In Operation, Under Construction, and Financed As of January 1, 2013) Table T-1, Part 2

    Interstate System Toll Bridges and Tunnels in the United States (In Operation, Under Construction, and Financed As of January 1, 2013) Table T-1, Part 2

    NON - INTERSTATE SYSTEM TOLL BRIDGES AND TUNNELS IN THE UNITED STATES (IN OPERATION, UNDER CONSTRUCTION, AND FINANCED AS OF JANUARY 1, 2013) TABLE T-1, PART 2 HPMS Financing or State Name of Facility Toll ID Operating Authority From Alabama Alabama River Parkway 1 Alinda Roads, LLC North Bypass in Montgomery Alabama Black Warrior Parkway 2 Alinda Roads, LLC US - 82 in Northport Alabama Emerald Mountain Expressway 3 Alinda Roads, LLC Wares Ferry Rd, Montgomery County Alaska Whittier (Anton Anderson Memorial) 5 AK DOT Portage, AK California Antioch (John A. Nedjedly) 12 BATA Contra Costa County California 7/ San Mateo-Hayward 13 BATA San Mateo, CA California 7/ Dumbarton 14 BATA Palo Alto, CA California 7/ Golden Gate 15 Golden Gate Brdg, Hwy & Trans Dist San Francisco, CA Florida Card Sound 31 Monroe Cnty Miami-Dade County, FL Florida Mid-Bay 32 Mid-Bay Brdg Auth (& FL Dept of Transportation) Niceville, FL Florida Pinellas Bayway System 33 FL Dept of Trans St. Petersburg, FL Florida Pensacola Beach Brdg (Bob Sykes) 34 Escambia County BOCC Gulf Breeze, FL Florida Broad 36 Town of Bay Harbor Islands North Miami, FL Florida Rickenbacker (SR-913) 37 Miami-Dade County Miami, FL Florida Venetian Causeway 314 Miami-Dade County Miami, FL Florida Sanibel 40 Lee County Sanibel, FL Florida Cape Coral 41 Lee County Cape Coral, FL Florida Midpoint Memorial 42 Lee County Cape Coral, FL Florida Garcon Point 43 Santa Rosa Bay Brdg Auth & FL Dept of Transportation Garcon Point Florida Gasparilla Bridge 318 Gasparilla Island Bridge Authority Boca Grande Florida Hammock Dunes Parkway Bridge 300 Dunes Community Development District Palm Coast Illinois - Indiana Wabash Memorial 69 Indiana Department of Transportation New Haven, IL Illinois - Indiana St.
  • Land-Use Planning in the Doldrums: Growth Management in Massachusetts’ I-495 Region

    Land-Use Planning in the Doldrums: Growth Management in Massachusetts’ I-495 Region

    LAND-USE PLANNING Land-Use Planning in the Doldrums: Growth Management in Massachusetts’ I-495 Region By Christina Rosan and Lawrence Susskind (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) September 2007 RAPPAPORT Institute for Greater Boston Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University Land-Use Planning in the Doldrums Authors Christina Rosan is currently a Postdoctoral Fellow in urban planning at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). She received her Ph.D. in Urban and Regional Planning from MIT in September 2007. Her dissertation compares metropolitan governance and local land-use planning in Boston, Denver, and Portland. Christina was a Rappaport Public Policy Fellow in the Summer of 2005. Lawrence Susskind is Ford Professor of Urban and Environmental Planning at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, director of the Public Disputes Program at Harvard Law School, and founder of the Consensus Building Institute. Acknowledgements The authors wish to thank the Rappaport Institute for Greater Boston for funding this research. In particular, we would like to thank David Luberoff, Executive Director of the Rappaport Institute for Greater Boston, for all his edits and comments to this work. We also would like to thank Phil Primack, Martha Rounds, and Molly Wilson-Murphy for their editing assistance. We want to express our appreciation to David Fairman and Ona Ferguson at the Consensus Building Institute, and Marina Psaros, a former MIT student, for all their help in organizing this research effort and preparing the case studies. We also want to acknowledge former and current MIT students, Pankaj Kumar, Jiawen Yang, and Ye Ding, who helped conduct some of the initial research for the cases.