DOCSLIB.ORG

120.7 RR2 Task 120 Rapidride Standard and Toolkit

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
120.7 RR2 Task 120 Rapidride Standard and Toolkit Exhibit 3 Section 6 RFP 1006-19-LCP RapidRide 2 - Kit of Parts Parametrix ENGINEERING. Pl.ANNING. ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES 719 2ND AVENUE, SUITE 200... I SEATTLE,.... WA 98104 I P 206.394.3700 TRANSMITTAL TO: Vic Stover DATE: November 5, 2018 King County MetroTransit PROJECT NUMBER: 234-1521-226 201 South Jackson St. PROJECT NAME: E00471E17 Planning and Seattle, WA 98104 Design Services for Rapid Ride Expansion THESE ARE: 0 PER YOUR REQUEST SENT VIA: 0 U.S. MAIL 0 EXPRESS SECOND DAY 0 FOR YOUR INFORMATION 181EMAIL 0 COURIER 181 FOR YOUR REVIEW AND APPROVAL 0 FTP 0 HAND DELIVERY/PICK UP 181FOR YOUR FILES 0 GROUND SERVICE 0 INTEROFFICE MAIL 0 FOR YOUR ACTION 0 EXPRESS OVERNIGHT WE ARE TRANSMITTING THE FOLLOWING MATERIALS: Deliverable 120.7 Final Rapid Ride Standard and 120.8 Rapid Ride implementation toolkit, in accordance with Contract E004 71E17, Task 120. COMMENTS: Please contact Tom Brennan (503-228-2152) or Mark Yand (360-850-5326) with any questions. Thank you Sincerely, cc: project file; Chester Knapp, Mark Yand, Tom Brennan Alicia McIntire, Deputy Project Manager Exhibit 3 Section 6 RFP 1006-19-LCP RapidRide 2 - Kit of Parts RAPIDRIDE EXPANSION PROGRAM | DRAFTRAPIDRIDE STANDARD King County Metro RapidRide Expansion Program Standards and Implementation Guidance November 2018 | 1-1 Exhibit 3 Section 6 RFP 1006-19-LCP RapidRide 2 - Kit of Parts RAPIDRIDE EXPANSION PROGRAM | RAPIDRIDE STANDARDS King County Metro TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Introduction ....................................................................................................................................................................................... iv Standard Categories, Cost Implications, and Partner Commitment Requirements ................................................................................. viii Relationship Between Standards and Goals .......................................................................................................................................... x 1. Station Spacing and Location in the Right-of-Way ................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Station Spacing ........................................................................................................................................................................ 1-2 1.2 Station Location at Intersections ............................................................................................................................................... 1-4 1.3 Bus Zone Location in the Right-of-Way ....................................................................................................................................... 1-6 1.4 In-Lane Stopping ....................................................................................................................................................................... 1-9 2. Service Levels ....................................................................................................................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Span of Service ......................................................................................................................................................................... 2-2 2.2 Frequency ................................................................................................................................................................................. 2-3 3. Service Management ............................................................................................................................................................ 3-1 3.1 On-Time Performance ................................................................................................................................................................ 3-2 3.2 Headway Management .............................................................................................................................................................. 3-4 3.3 Crowding/Load Management .................................................................................................................................................... 3-5 3.4 Actively Managed Fallbacks ....................................................................................................................................................... 3-7 3.5 Stopping Policy ......................................................................................................................................................................... 3-8 4. Transit Supportive Strategies: Speed and Reliability ............................................................................................................... 4-1 4.1 Bus Lanes and HOV Lanes ......................................................................................................................................................... 4-5 4.2 Transit Signal Priority ................................................................................................................................................................. 4-6 4.3 Traffic Control Tools and Roadway Modifications ........................................................................................................................ 4-9 4.4 Transit Priority Enforcement Programs ..................................................................................................................................... 4-10 4.5 Speed and Reliability Partnerships ............................................................................................................................................ 4-1 5. Fare Payment and Enforcement ............................................................................................................................................. 5-1 5.1 Fare Payment: ORCA and Mobile Payment ................................................................................................................................. 5-2 5.2 On-Board Cash Payment ............................................................................................................................................................ 5-4 5.3 All-Door Boarding ...................................................................................................................................................................... 5-5 5.4 Fare Enforcement ...................................................................................................................................................................... 5-6 6. Safety, Comfort, and Security ................................................................................................................................................ 6-1 6.1 Lighting ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 6-2 6.2 Stop and Station Security .......................................................................................................................................................... 6-3 6.3 Universal Access and Design ..................................................................................................................................................... 6-5 6.4 Weather Protection .................................................................................................................................................................... 6-7 7. Service Integration ................................................................................................................................................................ 7-1 7.1 Zone Length and Bus Bays at Stations Served by Multiple Routes ............................................................................................... 7-2 7.2 Integration with Other Public Transit ........................................................................................................................................... 7-3 7.3 Connective Wayfinding .............................................................................................................................................................. 7-5 7.4 Transportation Network Company and For-Hire Vehicle Integration ............................................................................................. 7-7 8. Passenger Facilities and Customer Information ...................................................................................................................... 8-1 8.1 Station Types, Configuration, and Elements ............................................................................................................................... 8-2 8.2 Platform Design ........................................................................................................................................................................ 8-5 8.3 Passenger Loading Zone ............................................................................................................................................................ 8-6 8.4 Bus Door Delineation ................................................................................................................................................................ 8-8 8.5 Bike Parking at Stations ...........................................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • MEMORANDUM of AGREEMENT to Implement a Regional Reduced Fare Permit for Senior and Disabled Persons
    MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT To Implement a Regional Reduced Fare Permit for Senior and Disabled Persons This agreement is entered into as of the August 30, 2017, by and between Clallam Transit System, the City of Everett (Everett Transit), Grays Harbor Transit, Thurston County Public Transportation Benefit Authority (Intercity Transit), Jefferson Transit Authority (Jefferson Transit), King County Department of Transportation – Metro Transit Division (King County Metro), King County Marine Division (King County Water Taxi), Kitsap County Public Transportation Benefit Area (Kitsap Transit), Pierce County Ferries, Pierce County Public Transportation Benefit Area (Pierce Transit), Snohomish County Public Transportation Benefit Area Corporation (Community Transit), Washington State Department of Transportation – Ferries Division (Washington State Ferries), Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority (Sound Transit), Mason County Public Transportation Benefit Area Authority (Mason Transit Authority), Skagit Transit, and Whatcom Transportation Authority hereinafter called the “parties.” Section 1. Purpose and Changes from Prior Agreement: The purpose of this agreement is to set forth the requirements for and implementation of the Regional Reduced Fare Permit (RRFP) established in memoranda of agreement dated May 17, 1982, August 8, 1984, August 8, 1987, September 8, 1994, December 1, 2000, September 1, 2002, February 3, 2003, August 1, 2009, December 1, 2012, and June 1, 2015. This agreement supersedes these 10 prior agreements. Grays Harbor Transit has been added to this agreement as a party , including amendments to Attachments 1 and 2. Section 7 - Eligibility Certification - has been modified from the agreement dated June 1st, 2015 to indicate that photo identification is required to be provided during eligibility determination. Section 5 – Cost of Regional Reduced Fare Permit – has been changed to indicate that issuing agencies can charge any amount up to $3 for permanent, temporary, and replacement RRFP cards.
    [Show full text]
  • Agenda (9:45) A
    Transportation Policy Board Thursday, November 12, 2020 • 9:30 AM – 11:30 AM Virtual Meeting via Teleconference The meeting will be streamed live over the internet at www.psrc.org ******************************************************************************************************* PUBLIC NOTICE: In accordance with the Governor’s proclamations 20-25.7 and 20-28.11, the PSRC’s offices are closed to the public and no in-person meetings are permitted. The current Open Public Meetings Act waiver is scheduled to expire on November 9. Should any major changes to current guidance occur, this meeting may be rescheduled. The public is encouraged to follow the meeting via live stream at https://www.psrc.org/boards/watch-meetings or listen by phone at 1-888-475-4499, Meeting ID: 993 9174 0720, Passcode: 209081. Members of the public may submit comments via email to [email protected] up to one hour before the meeting and comments will be provided to Board members electronically during the meeting. Comments received after that deadline will be provided to Board members after the meeting. ******************************************************************************************************* 1. Call to Order (9:30) - Mayor Becky Erickson, Chair 2. Communications and Public Comment 3. Report of the Chair 4. Director's Report 5. Consent Agenda (9:45) a. Approve Minutes of Transportation Policy Board Meeting held October 8, 2020 6. Discussion Item (9:50) a. Regional Equity Strategy Update -- Charles Patton, PSRC 7. Discussion Item (10:15) a. Regional Transportation Plan Outreach -- Gil Cerise and Maggie Moore, PSRC 8. Discussion Item (10:30) a. Specialized Transportation Services Outreach -- Gil Cerise and Jean Kim, PSRC 9. Discussion Item (10:45) a.
    [Show full text]
  • 2016 Washington State Public Transportation Plan
    2016 WASHINGTON STATE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION PLAN Washington State Public Transportation Plan CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 7 LETTER FROM ACTING SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION 9 TITLE VI NOTICE TO PUBLIC AND THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA) INFORMATION 10 KEY T HEMES OF THE WASHINGTON STATE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION PLAN 12 INTRODUCTION 13 THE STATE’S INTEREST IN PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION 14 PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION TO MEET OUR STATE'S AND RESIDENTS' DIVERSE NEEDS 17 CHAPTER 1: PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION TODAY IN WASHINGTON STATE 19 USE OF THE TERM PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION IN THIS DOCUMENT 19 EXAMPLES OF MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION 20 DEMOGRAPHIC TRENDS 22 AREAS OF POVERTY MAP 30 ECONOMIC TRENDS 34 PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AND THE ENVIRONMENT 35 TRENDS IN TECHNOLOGY AND PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION 36 CONCLUSION 39 CHAPTER 2: A DECISION-MAKING FRAMEWORK FOCUSED ON SYSTEM PERFORMANCE AND MULTIMODAL INTEGRATION 41 THE STATE ROLE IN PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION 42 MOVING TOWARD AN INTEGRATED SYSTEM: PRACTICAL SOLUTIONS 43 CASE STUDIES 45 DEVELOPING PERFORMANCE MEASURES FOR PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION 49 EXAMPLES OF CURRENT REPORTING: 50 AN APPROACH TO SYSTEM PERFORMANCE 51 CHAPTER 3: GOALS AND ACTION STRATEGIES 53 GOAL 1: THRIVING COMMUNITIES 57 GOAL 2: ACCESS 66 GOAL 3: ADAPTIVE TRANSPORTATION CAPACITY 72 GOAL 4: CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE 78 GOAL 5: TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM GUARDIANSHIP 83 CONCLUSION 88 2 WSDOT | June 2016 | www.wsdot.wa.gov/transit Washington State Public Transportation Plan Executive Summary EXECUTIVE SUMMARY VISION: All transportation partners in Washington state will work together to provide a system of diverse and integrated public transportation options. People throughout the state will use these options to make transportation choices that enable their families, communities, economy and environment to thrive.
    [Show full text]
  • Motion No. M2020-69 Funding Agreement for Capped Contribution for Rapidride C Line Improvements
    Motion No. M2020-69 Funding Agreement for Capped Contribution for RapidRide C Line Improvements Meeting: Date: Type of action: Staff contact: System Expansion Committee 11/12/2020 Recommend to Board Don Billen, Executive Director, Board 11/19/2020 Final action PEPD Cathal Ridge, Executive Corridor Director- Central Corridor Chris Rule, HCT Project Manager – Central Corridor Proposed action Authorizes the chief executive officer to execute an agreement with the City of Seattle and King County to reimburse the City of Seattle for $1,730,000 and King County Metro for $2,800,000 to provide a total funding contribution of $4,530,000 for bus speed and reliability improvements to the RapidRide C Line serving West Seattle to South Lake Union. Key features summary • This action authorizes Sound Transit to enter into an inter-local agreement with the City of Seattle and King County to reimburse the City and County for costs of up to $4.53 million for speed and reliability improvements to the RapidRide C Line. • The Sound Transit 3 (ST3) System Plan includes a capped capital contribution of $65 million for bus capital enhancements to design and construct transit priority improvements that improve speed and reliability for the Madison BRT project and the RapidRide C and D Lines. • In 2018 the Sound Transit Board established the RapidRide C and D Improvements project and approved an initial study of potential improvements performed by the West Seattle and Ballard Link Extensions project team. • In September the Board of Directors moved that staff bring forward an agreement for a limited near- term authorization for RapidRide C Line improvements pending a more comprehensive program realignment.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020-2025 Transit Development Plan
    2020 - 2025 TRANSIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN Wheaton Way Transit Center Grand Opening Nov. 2019 Photo By All American Marine Table of Contents Contents Glossary 3 Section I: Organization 3 Section II: Physical Plant 6 Section III: Service Characteristics 7 Section IV: Service Connections 10 Section V: Activities in 2019 12 Section VI: Proposed Action Strategies, 2020 – 2025 14 Section VII: Capital Planning 16 Section VIII: Operating Data, 2019 – 2025 17 Section IX: Operating Revenues and Expenditures, 2019 – 2025 19 Section X: Transit System Vision Map 20 Appendix I: Routed System Map 21 Appendix II: Equipment & Facilities Asset Inventory 22 Appendix III: Fleet Inventory 23 Appendix IV: SK Ride Service Area Map 24 Appendix V: Kingston Ride Service Area Map 25 Appendix VI: Kingston Fast Ferry Commuter Service Area Map 26 Kitsap Transit 60 Washington Avenue, Suite 200, Bremerton, WA 98337 Date of Public Hearing: September 1, 2020 Pursuant to RCW 35.58.2795 2 Glossary ACCESS – Kitsap Transit’s ADA demand ORCA – One Regional Card for All regional response bus service fare payment card used on Puget Sound area transit systems and WSF ADA – Americans with Disabilities Act PSNS – Puget Sound Naval Shipyard APC – Automatic Passenger Counters ROW – Right of Way AVL – Automatic Vehicle Locator RRFP – Regional Reduced Fare Permit ORCA BTC – Bremerton Transportation Center Card for qualified persons to ride for reduced cost at ½ the normal fare. CRA – Comprehensive Route Analysis TAM – Transit Asset Management Plan CTR – Commute Trip Reduction TIP – Transportation Incentive Program for DOD – Department of Defense Department of Navy employees to help reduce their daily contribution to traffic DSHS – Department of Social and Health congestion and air pollution, as well as Services expand their commuting alternatives.
    [Show full text]
  • Washington State Ferries: Update on Ferry Vessel Noise in the Salish Sea
    Western Washington University Western CEDAR 2018 Salish Sea Ecosystem Conference Salish Sea Ecosystem Conference (Seattle, Wash.) Apr 6th, 10:45 AM - 11:00 AM Washington State Ferries: update on ferry vessel noise in the Salish Sea Richard Huey Washington State Ferries, United States, [email protected] Leslie James British Columbia Ferries, Canada, [email protected] Greg Peterson British Columbia Ferries, Canada, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://cedar.wwu.edu/ssec Part of the Fresh Water Studies Commons, Marine Biology Commons, Natural Resources and Conservation Commons, and the Terrestrial and Aquatic Ecology Commons Huey, Richard; James, Leslie; and Peterson, Greg, "Washington State Ferries: update on ferry vessel noise in the Salish Sea" (2018). Salish Sea Ecosystem Conference. 508. https://cedar.wwu.edu/ssec/2018ssec/allsessions/508 This Event is brought to you for free and open access by the Conferences and Events at Western CEDAR. It has been accepted for inclusion in Salish Sea Ecosystem Conference by an authorized administrator of Western CEDAR. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Salish Sea Ferries Vessel Noise Update Washington State and British Columbia Ferries Rick Huey, WSF Biologist Leslie James, BCF Environmental Manager Greg Peterson, BCF Technical Director WSF/BCF • WSF – 22 vessels – 20 routes – 19 terminals • BCF – 35 vessels – 26 routes – 47 terminals Thousands of Sailings/Year • 57 Ferries = 70% of the Salish Sea Noise Budget • Average noise level of 185 dB WSF Vessel Noise Studies • Data Analysis/Collection: • Phase I - Analyze existing noise data for 2 vessel classes. • Phase II – Collect and analyze remaining 5 vessels classes.
    [Show full text]
  • UNECE Tram and Metro Statistics Metadata Introduction File Structure
    UNECE Tram and Metro Statistics Metadata Introduction This file gives detailed country notes on the UNECE tram and metro statistics dataset. These metadata describe how countries have compiled tram and metro statistics, what the data cover, and where possible how passenger numbers and passenger-km have been determined. Whether data are based on ticket sales, on-board sensors or another method may well affect the comparability of passenger numbers across systems and countries, hence it being documented here. Most of the data are at the system level, allowing comparisons across cities and systems. However, not every country could provide this, sometimes due to confidentiality reasons. In these cases, sometimes either a regional figure (e.g. the Provinces of Canada, which mix tram and metro figures with bus and ferry numbers) or a national figure (e.g. Czechia trams, which excludes the Prague tram system) have been given to maximise the utility of the dataset. File Structure The disseminated file is structured into seven different columns, as follows: Countrycode: These are United Nations standard country codes for statistical use, based on M49. The codes together with the country names, region and other information are given here https://unstats.un.org/unsd/methodology/m49/overview/ (and can be downloaded as a CSV directly here https://unstats.un.org/unsd/methodology/m49/overview/#). City: This column gives the name of the city or region where the metro or tram system operates. In many cases, this is sufficient to identify the system. In some cases, non-roman character names have been converted to roman characters for convenience.
    [Show full text]
  • Streetcar Plan Posters
    WELCOME Welcome! The purpose of this open house is to present draft recommendations from the Bicycle Master Plan and the Streetcar System Plan to the public. City sta! and citizen volunteers are here to present the material and to answer questions. The room is divided into three sections: one for the Bicycle Master Plan, one for the Streetcar System Plan, and one called “Integration Station,” where we tie the two concepts together. Refreshments and child care services are also available. The bicycle and streetcar networks will play a key role in Portland’s future. Together, they will reduce reliance on the automobile for daily tasks, they will reinforce urban land use patterns, and they will help the City achieve its goals to combat climate change. This is the beginning of a transportation transformation. WHY PLAN? PORTLAND HAS A HISTORY OF SUCCESSFUL LONG-RANGE PLANNING In 1904, landscape architect John C. Olmsted produced a report for the City Among the parks that resulted from the Olmsted Plan are Holladay Park, Irving Parks Board. The plan served as a blueprint for development of the highly Park, Mt. Tabor (shown above), Overlook Park, Rocky Butte, Sellwood Park, valued park system we enjoy today. Washington Park, and several others. Interstate MAX Opened 2004 Airport MAX Hillsboro MAX Opened 2001 Opened 1998 Portland Streetcar Opened 2001 MAX to Gresham Opened 1986 Clackamas MAX Opens fall 2009 Westside Express Service Opened Feb. 2009 In 1989, three years after the "rst MAX line opened from downtown to Gresham, 20 years later the regional rail system is well on its way to being constructed as planners laid out a vision for a regional rail system.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Meeting Presentation 130826.Pptx
    Proposed Long-Term Streetcar Network Study Overview/Purpose § Examine the feasibility of streetcar service in Saint Paul § Determine where it would work best § Determine where to start 2 What is Streetcar Service? Consists of many elements: Vehicles Stops Right-of-Way Short Stop Spacing Fare Payment New Development Streetcar Vehicles • Modern, vintage, or replica of vintage streetcar • Usually single vehicle Modern Streetcar, Toronto Modern Streetcar, Portland Modern Streetcar, Seattle Modern Streetcar, Tacoma Vintage Streetcar, Memphis Historic Replica Streetcar, New Orleans Streetcars in the Street • Usually operate in mixed-traffic • But can also operate in exclusive rights-of-way Portland Streetcar Seattle Streetcar Tucson Streetcar (Planned) San Francisco F-Line Portland Streetcar Kansas City Streetcar (Planned) Streetcar Route Length & Stop Spacing • Short lengths; focus on shorter more local trips • Frequent stops; approximately every two blocks 2.8 miles 2.1miles Portland Streetcar Kansas City Streetcar (Planned) Streetcar Stops Smaller scale/less elaborate than LRT stations Portland Streetcar Stop Seattle Streetcar Stop Toronto Streetcar Stop Future Westgate Light Rail Station, St. Paul Economic Development Patterns Streetcar Light Rail • Linear economic development • Nodal economic development South Lake Union Streetcar, Seattle The Lyric near the future Raymond Ave Station, St. Paul Construction Impacts Streetcar Light Rail • Lower impact • Greater impact • Faster construction • Longer construction First Hill Streetcar construction,
    [Show full text]
  • The Path to Partnership: How Cities and Transit Systems Can Stop
    The Path to Partnership: How Cities and Transit Systems Can Stop Worrying and Join Forces Introduction In order to keep and attract riders, transit must be frequent, fast, and reliable. Maintaining frequent, fast, and reliable service in the congested conditions of most American cities requires prioritizing street level transit above automobile traffic, through measures like bus lanes, queue jumps, and signal priority. Relative to large capital projects, bus priority measures provide immediate improvements in travel time and reliability at a small fraction of the cost, and can be accomplished overnight with the right combination of paint, light duty street installations, and enforcement. The projects profiled in this study, including a bus lane in Everett, MA, New York City’s Select Bus Service, and Seattle’s Rapid Ride have seen travel time savings of 10-30%. While on-street transit improvements can be done quickly and cheaply, they aren’t necessarily easy to accomplish. Getting them done usually requires two things: · Political will and leadership from mayors, transit system managers and board members, and other leaders who must be willing to defend potentially controversial street and service changes like removing on-street parking spaces for a bus lane, or eliminating bus stops that are too close together. · Structuring transit agencies and city street agencies to more quickly and effectively deliver on-street transit projects. This may mean forging new relationships and decision-making processes, gathering new data, hiring for different skills, and figuring out new ways to prioritize projects. 2 Transit street projects can be tough to get done when there’s no history of doing them.
    [Show full text]
  • Kent Station Parking and Access Improvements Project
    Attachment B Noise Technical Analysis Memorandum Kent Station Parking and Access Improvements Noise Technical Analysis Memorandum 401 South Jackson Street Seattle, WA 98104-2826 September 2019 Table of Contents 1.0 Noise Technical Analysis ........................................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Fundamental Concepts of Noise ............................................................................................................................ 3 3.0 Fundamental Concepts of Vibration ..................................................................................................................... 7 4.0 Regulatory Setting ....................................................................................................................................................... 8 5.0 Environmental Setting ............................................................................................................................................. 14 6.0 Noise and Vibration Impact Analysis ................................................................................................................. 17 7.0 References ..................................................................................................................................................................... 26 Appendix A Noise Measurements List of Figures Figure 1. FTA Noise Impact Guidelines .........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • How to Win Back America's Transit Riders
    Who’sDrew to add cover On Board 11 Charts done 2019 How to Win Back America’s Transit Riders TransitCenter works to improve public transit in ways that make cities more just, environmentally sustainable, and economically vibrant. We believe that fresh thinking can change the transportation landscape and improve the overall livability of cities. We commission and conduct research, convene events, and produce publications that inform and improve public transit and urban transportation. For more information, please visit www.transitcenter.org. Publication Date: February 2019 1 Whitehall Street, 17th Floor, New York, NY 10004 www.TransitCenter.org @transitcenter Facebook.com/transitctr Who’s On Board 2019 How to Win Back America’s Transit Riders Acknowledgments Steven Higashide and Mary Buchanan of TransitCenter are the authors of this report. David Bragdon and Tabitha Decker provided additional writing and editorial review. The authors are grateful for thoughtful review from Evelyn Blumenberg, Nicholas Klein, Alan Lehto, Tom Mills, Michelle Poyourow, Jarrett Walker, Aaron Weinstein, and TransitCenter’s Jon Orcutt and Hayley Richardson. Resource Systems Group (RSG) served as the lead research consultant, conducting focus groups, developing the survey questionnaire, and analyzing survey results. The authors gratefully acknowledge RSG’s project manager Ben Cummins. Greg Spitz and Alex Levin of RSG and Jed Lam of Aeffect also contributed to the research. The authors thank Emily Drexler of the Chicago Transit Authority for assistance with recruiting for focus groups, as well as Linda Young and Preeti Shankar of the Center for Neighborhood Technology for providing AllTransit data. Contents Executive Summary 1 All Transit Ridership is Local 6 Findings 14 1.
    [Show full text]